Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem to his mother’s brothers, and spoke with them and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying, “Please speak in the ears of all the men of Shechem, ‘Is it better for you that all the sons of Jerubbaal, who are seventy persons, rule over you, or that one rule over you?’ Remember also that I am your bone and your flesh.”
His mother’s brothers spoke of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words. Their hearts inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, “He is our brother.” They gave him seventy pieces of silver out of the house of Baal Berith, with which Abimelech hired vain and reckless fellows who followed him. He went to his father’s house at Ophrah, and killed his brothers the sons of Jerubbaal, being seventy persons, on one stone; but Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left, for he hid himself.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 4, 5 To practice with his kinsfolk for the attaining of…
To practice with his kinsfolk for the attaining of the kingdom.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–5 Jdg 9:1 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went…
Jdg 9:1 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,
Ver. 1. And communed with them.] What might be the likeliest means of effecting his design. Ambition rideth without reins; and like the crocodile, groweth as long as it liveth. These uncles of his might haply advise him, whom they saw thirsting after sovereignty, as Calvus once did Vatinius, Perfrica frontem, et digniorem te dic, qui Praetor fieres, quam Catonem. {a} Set a good face upon it, and say that thou better deservest the office than ever Cato did.
Read full note →
And with all the family.] Who haply were leading men, and might do much with that people.
{a} Quintilian.
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 On vv2–5 He supposeth that
He supposeth that
the sons of Jerubbaal would take that government which their father modestly refused, and that the multitude of his sons would occasion horrible divisions, and confusions, and contests about the sovereign power; all which they might avoid by choosing him king; and so they might enjoy the monarchy which they had long and oft desired.
Read full note →
Your bone and your flesh; your kinsman, of the same tribe and city with you; which will be no small honour and advantage to you.
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 On v1 We are here told by what arts Abimelech got…
We are here told by what arts Abimelech got into authority, and made himself great. His mother perhaps had instilled into his mind some towering ambitious thoughts, and the name his father gave him, carrying royalty in it, might help to blow up these sparks; and now that he has buried his father nothing will serve his proud spirit but he will succeed him in the government of Israel, directly contrary to his father's will, for he had declared no son of his should rule over them. He had no call from God to this honour as his father had, nor was there any present occasion for a judge to deliver Israel as there was when his father was advanced; but his own ambition must be gratified, and its gratification is all he aims at. Now observe here,
I. How craftily he got his mother's relations into his interests. Shechem was a city in the tribe of Ephraim, of great note. Joshua had held his last assembly there. If that city would but appear for him, and set him up, he thought it would go far in his favour. There he had an interest in the family of which his mother was, and by them he made an interest in the leading men of the city. It does not appear that any of them had an eye to him as a man of merit, who had any thing to recommend him to such a choice, but the motion came first from himself. None would have dreamed of making such a one king, if he had not dreamed of it himself. And see here, 1. How he wheedled them into the choice, Jdg 9:2, Jdg 9:3. He basely suggested that Gideon having left seventy sons, who made a good figure and had a good interest, they were designing to keep the power which their father had in their hands, and by a joint-influence to reign over Israel. "Now," says he, "you had better have one king than more, than many, than so many. Affairs of state are best managed by a single person," Jdg 9:2. We have no reason to think that all or any of Gideon's sons had the least intention to reign over Israel (they were of their father's mind, that the Lord should reign over them, and they were not called of him), yet this he insinuates to pave the way to his own pretensions. Note, Those who design ill themselves are commonly most apt to suspect that others design ill. As for himself, he only puts them in mind of his relation to them (verbum sapienti - A word to the wise is sufficient): Remember that I am your bone and your flesh. The plot took wonderfully. The magistrates of Shechem were pleased to think of their city being a royal city and the metropolis of Israel, and therefore they inclined to follow him; for they said, "He is our brother, and his advancement will be our advantage." 2. How he got money from them to bear the charges of his pretensions (Jdg 9:4): They gave him seventy pieces of silver; it is not said what the value of these pieces was; so many shekels are less, and so many talents more, than we can well imagine; therefore it is supposed they were each a pound weight: but they gave this money out of the house of Baal-berith, that is, out of the public treasury, which, out of respect to their idol, they deposited in his temple to be protected by him; or out of the offerings that had been made to that idol, which they hoped would prosper the better in his hands for its having been consecrated to their god. How unfit was he to reign over Israel, because unlikely to defend them, who, instead of restraining and punishing idolatry, thus early made himself a pensioner to an idol! 3. What soldiers he enlisted. He hired into his service vain and light persons, the scum and scoundrels of the country, men of broken fortunes, giddy heads, and profligate lives; none but such would own him, and they were fittest to serve his purpose. Like leader like followers.
Read full note →
II. How cruelly he got his father's sons out of the way.
1. The first thing he did with the rabble he headed was to kill all his brethren at once, publicly and in cold blood, threescore and ten men, one only escaping, all slain upon one stone. See in this bloody tragedy, (1.) The power of ambition what beasts it will turn men into, how it will break through all the ties of natural affection and natural conscience, and sacrifice that which is most sacred, dear, and valuable, to its designs. Strange that ever it should enter into the heart of a man to be so very barbarous! (2.) The peril of honour and high birth. Their being the sons of so great a man as Gideon exposed them thus and made Abimelech jealous of them. We find just the same number of Ahab's sons slain together at Samaria, Kg2 10:1, Kg2 10:7. The grand seigniors have seldom thought themselves safe while any of their brethren have been unstrangled. Let none then envy those of high extraction, or complain of their own meanness and obscurity. The lower the safer.
2. Way being thus made for Abimelech's election, the men of Shechem proceeded to choose him king, Jdg 9:6. God was not consulted whether they should have any king at all, much less who it should be; here is no advising with the priest or with their brethren of any other city or tribe, though it was designed that he should reign over Israel, Jdg 9:22. But, (1.) The Shechemites, as if they were the people and wisdom must die with them, did all; they aided and abetted him in the murder of his brethren (Jdg 9:24), and then they made him king. The men of Shechem (that is, the great men, the chief magistrates of the city), and the house of Millo (that is, the common-council, the full house or house of fulness, as the word signifies), those that met in their guildhall (we read often of the house of Millo, or state-house in Jerusalem, or the city of David, Sa2 5:9; Kg2 12:20), these gathered together, not to prosecute and punish Abimelech for this barbarous murder, as they ought to have done, he being one of their citizens, but to make him king. Pretium sceleris tulit hic diadema - His wickedness was rewarded with a diadem. What could they promise themselves from a king that laid the foundation of his kingdom in blood? (2.) The rest of the Israelites were so very sottish as to sit by unconcerned. They took no care to give check to this usurpation, to protect the sons of Gideon, or to avenge their death, but tamely submitted to the bloody tyrant, as men who with their religion had lost their reason, and all sense of honour and liberty, justice and gratitude. How vigorously had their fathers appeared to avenge the death of the Levite's concubine, and yet so wretchedly degenerate are they now as not to attempt the avenging of the death of Gideon's sons; it is for this that they are charged with ingratitude (Jdg 8:35): Neither showed they kindness to the house of Jerubbaal.
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 On vv1–5 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem,…
And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem, unto his mother's brethren,.... It seems that though the mother of Abimelech lived at Shechem, he was taken and brought up in his father's house at Ophrah, where he was when he died; and from hence he came to Shechem, to pay a visit to his uncles there; whether his mother was now living, is not certain:
and communed with them; about the death of his father, the state of his family, and the government of Israel:
Read full note →
and with all the family of the house of his mother's father; that descended from his grandfather, the several branches of them, and of the family, the heads of them at least:
saying, as follows.
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 On vv1–5 Abimelech usurps the government at Shechem, ver. 1-6. Jotham's…
Abimelech usurps the government at Shechem, ver. 1-6. Jotham's parable, ver. 7-21. Strife between Abimelech and the Shechemites, ver. 22-41. The slaughter of the Shechemites, ver. 42-49. The death of Abimelech, fulfilling Jotham's curse, ver. 50- 57.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1–5 Abimelech is made king; and, to secure himself tn…
CHAPTER IX
Abimelech is made king; and, to secure himself tn the kingdom,
Read full note →
slays his brethren; Jotham, the youngest only escapes, 14.
Jotham reproves him and the Shechemites by a curious and
instructive parable, 7-21.
Abimelech having reigned three years, the Shechemites, headed
by Gaal the son of Ebed, conspire against him, 22-29.
Zebul, governor of the city, apprises Abimelech of the
insurrection, who comes with his forces, and discomfits Gaal,
30-40.
Abimelech assaults the city, takes, beats it down, and sows it
with salt, 41-45.
Several of the Shechemites take refuge in the temple of
Baal-berith; Abimelech sets fire to it, and destroys in it
about one thousand men and women, 46-50.
He afterwards besieges and takes Thebez; but while he is
assaulting the citadel, a woman threw a piece of millstone
upon his head, and killed him. Thus God requited him and the
men of Shechem for their wickedness, and their ingratitude to
the family of Gideon, 51-57.
NOTES ON CHAP. IX
Verse 1. Abimelech - went to Shechem] We have already seen that Abimelech was the son of Gideon, by his concubine at Shechem. His going thither immediately after his father's death was to induce his townsmen to proclaim him governor in the place of his father. Shechem was the residence of his mother, and of all her relatives.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 4, 5 Jdg 9:1-3. Abimelech went to Shechem unto his mother’s…
Jdg 9:1-3. Abimelech went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren — That is, her relations; and communed with them — To try if he could engage them to favour and aid the design he had conceived to usurp the government of Israel, in direct opposition to his father’s will, who had declared no son of his should rule over them. His mother had, probably, instilled into his mind some ambitious thoughts, and the name his father had given him, carrying royalty in its meaning, might help to blow up these sparks, and excite him to take the steps here mentioned. He had no call from God to this office and honour, as his father had, nor was there any present occasion for a judge to deliver Israel, as there was when his father was advanced; but his own ambition must be gratified, and that is all he aims at. That all the sons of Jerubbaal reign over you — He wickedly insinuates, though perhaps without any ground for it, that the sons of Jerubbaal were ambitious of the kingdom which their father refused; and therefore prays them to consider what horrible divisions and confusions it would make, if so many were permitted to pretend to the government, and how much better it would be to choose one from among the rest; pointing them (in the next words) to himself. Remember, I am your bone and your flesh — Your kinsman, of the same tribe and city with you; which will be no small honour and advantage to you. Shechem was a city in the tribe of Ephraim, of great note. Joshua had held his last great meeting of the representatives of the tribes there. And no doubt Abimelech thought if that city would but declare for him, and abet his design, it would be a great step toward ensuring the success of it. They said, He is our brother — And his advancement will be to our advantage. They were pleased to think of their city becoming a royal city, and the metropolis of Israel, and therefore were easily persuaded to what they believed would serve their interest.
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 On vv1, 2, 3, 5 We are not told how soon after the death…
We are not told how soon after the death of Gideon these events happened. There must have been time for the apostacy and establishment of Baal-worship, and for the development of ill-will between Abimelech and his brethren.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 5 Abimelech was encouraged to contend with his brethren as…
Abimelech was encouraged to contend with his brethren as he saw the indifference which the people shewed for them, and as he was of a bold enterprising temper. (Calmet)
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 On v1 The Usurped Rule Of Abimelech, The Fratricide And Thorn-bush…
FIFTH SECTION
The Usurped Rule Of Abimelech, The Fratricide And Thorn-bush King.
Read full note →
__________________
The election and coronation of Abimelech. Jotham’s parable.
Jdg_9:1-21.
1And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with [spake unto] them, and with [unto] all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying, 2Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men [lords]1 of Shechem, Whether [Which] is better for you, either [omit: either] that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign [rule] over you, or that one reign [rule] over you?2 remember also that I am your bone and your flesh. 3And his mother’s brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men [lords] of Shechem all these words: and their hearts inclined to follow [inclined after] Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. 4And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain [lit. empty, i. e. loose, worthless] and light [wanton, reckless] persons, which [and they] followed him. 5And he went unto his father’s house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone: notwithstanding, yet [and only] Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself. 6And all the men [lords] of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo [all Beth-millo], and went and made Abimelech king, by the 7plain [oak] of the pillar [monument]3 that was in [is near] Shechem. And when [omit: when] they told it to Jotham, [and] he went and stood in [on] the top of mount Gerizim, and lifted up his voice, and cried, and said unto them, Hearken unto me, ye men [lords] of Shechem, that God may hearken unto you.4 8The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive-tree, Reign thou over us. 9But the olive-tree said unto them, Should I leave my fatness,5 wherewith by me they honour God and Man_1:6 and go to be promoted 10[go to wave] over the trees? And the trees said to the fig-tree, Come thou, and reign over us. 11But the fig-tree said unto them, Should I forsake5 my sweetness, 12and my good fruit, and go to be promoted [to wave] over the trees? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou, and reign over us. 13And the vine said unto them, Should I leave5 my wine [must], which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted [to wave] over the trees? 14Then said all the trees unto the bramble 15[thornbush], Come thou, and reign over us. And the bramble [thornbush] said unto the trees, If in truth [i. e. in good earnest] ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust [take shelter] in my shadow: and [but] if not, let fire come out of the bramble [thornbush], and devour the cedars of Lebanon. 16Now therefore, if ye have done truly and sincerely, in that ye have made Abimelech king, and if ye have dealt well with Jerubbaal and his house, and have done unto him according to the deserving of his hands: 17(For my father fought for you, and adventured his life far,7 and delivered you out of the hand of Midian: 18And ye are risen up against my father’s house this day, and have slain his sons, three score and ten persons, upon one stone, and have made Abimelech, the son of his maid-servant, king over the men [lords] of Shechem, because he is your brother:) 19If ye then have dealt truly and sincerely with Jerubbaal and with his house this day, then rejoice ye in Abimelech, and let him also rejoice in you: 20But if not, let fire come out from Abimelech, and devour the men [lords] of Shechem, and the house of Millo [and Beth-millo]; and let fire come out from the men [lords] of Shechem, and from the house of Millo [from Beth-millo], and devour Abimelech. 21And Jotham ran away, and fled, and went to Beer, and dwelt there, for fear of Abimelech his brother.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Jdg_9:2.—בַּעֲלֵי: used interchangeably with אַנְשֵׁי, cf. Jdg_9:46 with 49; 2Sa_21:12, with Jdg_2:4-5. See also Jdg_20:5, and Jos_24:11. Dr. Cassel: Herren; De Wette, and many others, Bürger, “citizens.”—Tr.]
[2 Jdg_9:2.—The E. V. unnecessarily departs from the order of the Hebrew, and thereby obscures the antithesis which is primarily between “seventy” and “one,” and secondarily between “sons of Jerubbaal” and “your bone and flesh,” thus: “Which is better for you, that seventy men, all sons of Jerubbaal, rule over you, or that one man rule over you? Remember, also,” etc.—Tr.]
[3 Jdg_9:6.—Keil: “The explanation of אֵלוֹן מֻצָּב is doubtful. מֻצָּב, anything ‘set up,’ is in Isa_29:3 a military post [garrison], but may also mean a monument, and designates here probably the great stone set up (Jos_24:26) under the oak or terebinth near Shechem (cf. Gen_35:4).” De Wette also renders: Denkmal-Eiche, “monument-oak.”—Tr.]
[4 Jdg_9:7.—Dr. Cassel translates: “and may God hear you.” This is very well, but hardly in the sense in which he takes it, see below. Whether we translate as in the E. V., or as Dr. Cassel, the realization of the second member of the address must be regarded as contingent upon that of the first.—Tr.]
[5 Jdg_9:9; Jdg_9:11; Jdg_9:13.—הֶחֳדַלְתִּי אֶת־דִּשְׁנִי. According to Ewald (Gram., 51 c.) הֶחֳדַלְתִּי is a contracted hiphil form (for הַהֶתֶדַלתִּי), the second ה being dropped in order to avoid the concurrence of too many gutturals, and the resulting הַחֲד׳ (cf. Ges. Gr. 22, 4) being changed into הֶחֳד׳ in order to distinguish the interrogative particle more sharply. Others regard it as hophal (see Green, 53, 2, b). But as there are no traces anywhere else of either of these conjugations in this verb, it is commonly viewed as a simple kal form = הֶחָדַלְתִּי. Keil seeks to explain the anomalous vowel under ח by saying that “the obscure o-sound is substituted for the regular a in order to facilitate the pronunciation of successive guttural syllables.” Dr. Cassel renders: “Have I then lost [better: given up] my fatness?” But as the notion of futurity must manifestly be contained in the following וְהָלַכְתִּֽי, the ordinary rendering, “Should I give up?” is preferable.—Tr.]
[6 Jdg_9:9.—אֲשֶׁר־בִּי יְכַבְּדוּ אֱלֹהים וַאְנָשִׁים: “which God and men honor (esteem) in me.” Compare Jdg_9:13. Dr. Cassel renders as the E. V.—Tr.]
[7 Jdg_9:17.—וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ אֶת־נַפְשׁוֹ מִנֶּגֶד: literally, “cast his life from before (him); cf. the marginal reading of he E. V.: i. e. “disr garded his own life.”.—Tr..]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
Jdg_9:1. Shechem was a chief city in Ephraim cf. Jos_24:1). That tribe still continued to be jealous of the consideration to which under Gideon Manasseh had attained. Though Gideon was now dead, the ephod was still in Ophrah, and the house of Gideon continued to hold a certain degree of authority. The narrative distinguishes between the sons of Gideon and Abimelech. While Jdg_8:30 stales that Gideon had seventy sons by “many wives” (נָשִׁים), Jdg_9:31 remarks that the mother of Abimelech was a concubine (פִּילֶגֶשׁ) in Shechem.8 Just this son, an Ephraimite on his mother’s side, bore the name of Abimelech, “My Father is King.” The origin of that lust after power, which manifests itself in his wild and ambitious heart, is thus psychologically explained.
Jdg_9:2-3. For they said, He is our brother. Abimelech, when he turned to Shechem with his criminal plans, was perfectly acquainted with the vain-glorious lust after power indulged in by the Ephraimites. He knew that it irritated them, to hear of the “rule of the seventy sons of Gideon.” Gideon, it is true, desired no dominion, nor could his sons exercise it; but the centre of distinction was nevertheless at Ophrah, in his house, where the ephod was. The negotiations into which Abimelech now enters with Shechem are very instructive. They show, first, that the distinction which the ephod conferred on the house of Gideon, although it implied no claim to dominion, properly speaking, was yet the very thing which, by exciting envy, became a snare to that house; and, secondly, that Shechem, as Gideon’s heir, will nevertheless not surrender this distinction, but desires to transfer it to one of its own people. The narrative is throughout of a tragic cast. Precisely those things which should exhort to greatness and faithfulness, are shamefully metamorphosed by sin into incentives to treason and mischief. In the hearts of the “lords of Shechem,” no voice of truth or justice raises itself against the unnatural plan of Abimelech. They convict him not of falsehood, by pointing out that his brothers do not exercise dominion, but support his project, because he is their brother, and by him they will rule. It is manifest that the whole of Shechem is morally depraved. As Abimelech, so his kindred; and as they, so all the Shechemites were disposed.
Jdg_9:4-5. And they gave him seventy silver-pieces out of the house of Baal-berith. Israel was forbidden to enter into covenant (berith) with the nations round about (cf. Jdg_2:2). The first symptom of apostasy among them, was always the inclination to remove the barriers between themselves and their heathen neighbors. The concessions required to make the establishment of covenant relations possible, were altogether one-sided: it was always Israel, and Israel only, that surrendered any part of its faith. The worship of a Baal-berith was the symbol of fellowship with the heathen, whereby the command to make no covenants was violated. His temple was the point of union for both parties. The support of Abimelech in his undertaking came from all the worshippers of Baal-berith; for was it not directed against the house of Jerubbaal, the declared enemy of Baal? Such being its character, it had moreover a proper claim on the treasures of the temple of Baal-berith. What a disgrace, when the son of the “Baal-vanquisher” takes money from the temple of that same Baal, for the purpose of murdering his brothers! What a victory of Satan over the youthful votary of ambition! And cheap enough was the price of blood. The idle rabble who hired themselves as body-guard to Abimelech, received a silver-piece, i. e. a shekel, for the head of each of Gideon’s sons. However vague the impression we get of a piece of money in that age by computing its equivalent in our coin, it is nevertheless frightful to think how little it cost (scarcely more than half a dollar), to procure the performance of the most horrible deed.
And he slew his brethren. Abimelech is a perfect type of the tyrant, as he frequently appears in Greek history, continental and insular, and also, in more recent times, on Italian soil. Machiavelli (Prince, ch. viii.) says, that “whoever seizes a crown, unjustly and violently, must, if cruelty be necessary, exercise it to the full at once, in order to avoid the necessity of beginning it anew every day.” In support of this maxim, he refers, first to Agathocles, and then to the petty tyrant of Fermo, Oliverotto, who in order to become master of the city, caused his uncle, who was also his foster-father, friend, and benefactor, to be traitorously slain at a banquet.—Only one escaped, the youngest, Jotham by name. The confession of Jehovah, which this name of his youngest son implies, evidences the constant piety and faithfulness of Gideon, and confirms our conjecture that not he, but Shechem, invented the name Abimelech.
Jdg_9:6. And all the lords of Shechem held an assembly. Gideon’s sons being murdered, an election of a king now takes place. As the electors, so their king. The noble undertaking had succeeded; the house of Gideon was destroyed. What a contrast! After the glorious victory over Midian, Gideon, though urgently besought by the men of many tribes, will not consent to continue to be even their imperator; now, the Shechemites raise the assassin of his brothers to the dignity of a king! A kingship like that of the heathen cities on the coast, with no law, but with plenty of blood, without the oil of consecration, but steeped in sin, is thus violently and vain-gloriously set up by Shechem and its fortress (Beth-Millo9); and that too, with a reckless hardihood as great as that which characterized the preliminary murders, in a spot consecrated by sacred memories. There where Joshua, before he died (Jos_24:25-26), made a covenant with the people on God’s behalf, where he had solemnly bound them to the observance of the law, and where they had promised to obey God alone,—there, at the great stone, set up by Joshua under the oak, two apostate, self-seeking cities, stained with murder and unbelief, elect a son of Jerubbaal, who suffered himself to be bought in the interest of Baal, to be their king! For the coronation, the narrative tells us, took place “עִם אלוֹן מֻצָּב, at the monument-oak, near Shechem.”10 And though nothing further is said about the place, it may nevertheless be inferred, from the connection and the tragic character of the occurrence, that the narrator, in bringing its locality to the mind of the reader, designs to make the shameful character of the transaction more strikingly evident, just as throughout this passage he constantly writes Jerubbaal, not Gideon, in order to render more prominent the contrast between these servants and that great victor of Baal.11
Jdg_9:7. And they told it to Jotham. While the preparations for the coronation are in progress, tidings of them are brought to Jotham, the last scion of the stock of Gideon. What shall he do? The whole nation is fallen into listlessness and inactivity. The horrible massacre has called forth no rising. Even those tribes who had perhaps heard of it, but took no part in it, continue quiescent. Sin has dulled every nerve of courage and gratitude. The son of the hero still receives intelligence; a few helpers are with him in his flight; a few others perhaps sigh with him in secret: but beyond this, he is alone. The spirit, however, of his father, has not left him. While below they crown the fratricide, he appears above, on the rock, like an impersonation of conscience. So the modern poet, with like grandeur of conception, makes Tell appear on the rock above the tyrant. Jotham’s arrow, however, is not sped from the fatal bow, but from a noble spirit. It is the arrow of parabolic discourse, dipped in personal grief and divine retribution, that he sends down among them. Mount Gerizim was the mount of blessing (Deu_27:12); but through the sin of Shechem, it becomes, in the parable of Jotham, a mount of judgment. Its present name, already borne in the Middle Ages, is el Tûr (the Mountain). It rises to a height of eight hundred feet above the present Nâblus (Rob. ii. 276). Jotham probably appeared on some projecting point, near enough to be heard, and distant enough to be not easily caught.12Hearken unto me, he says, and may God hear you. He wishes them to hear his parable, as he desires God (Elohim) to hear the coronation rejoicings that rise up from the valley.
Jdg_9:8-21. The parable belongs to the most remarkable productions of Israelitish life, not only on account of its political significance, but also for what may be called its literary character. Fable and so-called apologue are of oriental, non-Israelitish, as also non-Grecian, origin. They spring from a pantheism in which trees and animals furnished symbols for expressing the popular ideas. Although rooted in the religious vivification of nature, their employment was nevertheless brought to maturity by the pressure of social necessities. In the East, fable and tale were always the weapons of mind against violence and tyranny (cf. my Eddischen Studien, p. 15). They furnished the people with individual consolation against general misery. In their original appearance among the Greeks also, they fail not to exhibit this character. In the same way, Jotham speaks to the tyrants of Shechem in this popular language, which all understand. He does not speak like a prophet, for he is none, and Baal has stopped the ears of his auditors. He does not even speak of the power and mighty deeds of Jehovah, from whom his own name is derived. He speaks of “Elohim” and his retributions—of the Deity in the general sense in which the heathen also acknowledge him. He speaks altogether in their language, popularly, with popular wisdom. But what a difference between the moral strength which justifies Jotham to put forth his parable, and (for instance) the motives of the Greek Archilochus. There we hear the wounded vanity of a rejected suitor; here, one solitary voice of indignation and truth against the tyrant and murderer. By this moral motive, Jotham elevates the parable to the level of the divine word, and furnishes the first illustration of how a popular form of discourse, the offspring of directly opposite principles, could be employed for moral purposes, and (in the parables of Christ) become a medium for the highest doctrines and mysteries. Jotham gives a parable and points out its application (from Jdg_9:16 onward); but also apart from the latter, the narrative conveys an independent political idea with a force which has scarcely been equaled by any subsequent expression of it. It manifests a political consciousness so mature, as to surprise one who looks at the apparently simple and common-place relations of the time and people.
The trees will have a king. No reason is given, but the history of Israel, to which reference is had, furnishes one. People felt that in the dangers of war, one common leadership was important. They supposed that their frequent sufferings at the hands of Moab and Midian, were owing to defects in their form of government. They would have a king, in order to be able, as in their folly they think they shall be, to dispense with obedience to the commands of God. Gideon says: God is your Ruler. The apostate people will fill his place with a king, and think that in their selection, they act in accordance with the will of God.
Offers of kingly dignity are seldom refused. Solon, properly speaking, never received a tender of royalty; and Otto, Duke of Saxony, the father of Henry I. was already too old to bear such a burden (as Widukind says, Ipse vero quasi jam gravior annis recusabat imperii onus). The good trees, however, notwithstanding their strength, will not be elected; they deem the species of royalty which is offered them, too insignificant to warrant the sacrifice of what they already possess. The olive tree, fig tree, and grape-vine, enjoy sufficient honor, happiness, and distinction, not to prefer this sort of coronation to their present activity. They will rather continue in a condition which secures their personal worth, than go to “wave over the trees.” It is a beautiful image of popular favor, uncertain, unequal, affected by every wind, which is afforded by the branches of trees, never at rest, always waving. The proffered royalty is dependent on popular favor. It is a royalty which must bend to every breeze, if it would avoid a fall. For they to whom the office is offered, are too noble to use the means necessary to maintain their authority when popular favor deserts them. They must first have lost their nobility of nature, before they can follow the call now made to them. It was a noble king of recent times, who, from similar motives, strenuously resisted to accept what was offered him.
It is very significant that this doctrine proceeds from Jotham, the son of Gideon. He has his eye of course, on the refusal of the crown by his father; only he brings the negative side of that refusal into special prominence. He makes it evident that even then the fickle and discordant character of popular favor and popular will was thoroughly apprehended. But one needed to be the son of a divinely called hero, to be able to set forth with cutting force the unprincipled conduct of revolutionary malcontents. Against a true kingship, as afterwards established in Israel, and which in its idea forms the highest perfection of the theocracy, Jotham says nothing. The people that applies to Samuel for a king, is a very different one from these criminal Shechemites, who attempt to get a king in opposition to God. These latter, for this reason, can only use a king who has nothing to lose, and is worthy of them: whose fit symbol is the thorn-bush. Sin loves arbitrariness; therefore they deserve a tyrant. The thorn-bush is the type of persons who, after they have accepted power offered by bloody hands, are qualified to preserve it by bloody means.
The æsthetic beauty of the parable is also to be noted. Trees afford the best representation of a republic; each tree has its own sphere of action, and no one is in a position to exercise any special influence over the others. Whoever among them would attempt this in the character of king, must, so to speak, leave the soil in which he is planted, and hover over them all. Their will would then be for him, what otherwise the nourishing earth is for all. Any productive tree would thereby lose its fruit. For the unfruitful thorn-bush alone, the office would involve no loss. The fable is especially beautiful as typical of Israelitish relations. The tribes are all equal. Like the trees, they all receive their strength from God. If they withdraw themselves from Him, in order to crown the thorn-bush, they will experience that which issues from the thorn-bush—namely, fire.
The profound significance of the parable is inexhaustible. Its truth is of perpetual recurrence. More than once was Israel in the position of the Shechemites; then especially, when He whose kingdom is not of this world, refused to be a king. Then, too, Herod and Pilate became friends. The thorn-bush seemed to be king when it encircled the head of the Crucified. But Israel experienced what is here denounced: a fire went forth, and consumed city and people, temple and fortress.
And they said to the olive-tree. The olive tree is already a king among trees in his own right; hence, Columella calls it “the first among trees.” His product is used to honor both “God and man.” His oil consecrates “kings and priests,” and feeds the light that burns in the sanctuary of God. The olive tree is the symbol of peaceful royalty; its leaf and branch are signs of reconciliation and peace: hence, Israel in its divine glory is compared to the “beautiful olive tree” (Hos_14:6).
Denying the request of the trees, the olive tree says: “Have I then lost (הֶחֳדַלְתִּי, an unusual form, which with Keil I regard as a simple Kal) my oil, that I should wave over the trees?” Has Israel then lost its life of peace in God, its sacred anointing through God’s servants, its pious light and life in God’s law? Has it grown poor as to its God, that it must suffer itself to be governed by heathen arts? The product of the olive tree and the deeds of Abimelech stand in the sharpest contrast with each other.
The same result follows an application to the fig tree. This also is a symbol of that divine peace which fills the land when God governs. The ancients believed that if a wild, untamed bullock were fastened to a fig tree, he would become quiet and gentle (Plutarch, Symposion, lib. vi. quæst. 10). Athens, on similar symbolical grounds, had a sacred fig tree as well as olive tree. In Scripture, especially, the fig tree appears as a symbol of holy peace, as the prophet Micah says (Jdg_4:4): “They shall sit every man under his vine and fig-tree, and none shall make them afraid.” So Jotham makes the fig tree say suggestively: Have I then—Israel—lost the possibility of sitting in the peace of God? Was there not an abundance of rest and happiness during forty years under Gideon? shall I surrender all that in order to fall into the arbitrariness of sin? For it can act like Shechem only when the peace of God no longer exists; but, in that case, it withers away, like the fig tree rebuked by Christ, and ceases to bring forth fruit.
The same is true of the grape-vine. The oriental vine attains the height of elms and cedars, and affords a grateful shade. Hence it is the widely-diffused symbol of government, as that which gives peace and comfort. “The mountains,” says the Psalmist (Psa_80:11), “are covered with the shadow of it.” A golden vine canopied the throne of the Persian monarch. Vines of gold were frequently presented to kings in recognition of their sovereignty (cf. my essay, Der Goldene Thron Salomo’s, in Wiss. Bericht, l. p. 124). A celebrated golden vine, mention of which is made by Tacitus also, stood in the temple at Jerusalem. The Mishna says of it: At the entrance to the temple porch there stood a golden vine, trained on poles; whenever any one consecrated anything, he consecrated it as “leaf” or “grape.” Elieser b. R. Zadok related, that once it was so vast, that 300 priests were necessary to take it away (Mishna, Middot. iii. 8).
The olive tree said that with him God and men were “honored;” the vine expresses the same thing when he speaks of the “joy” which “God and men” find in him. Usually all that is said of wine is, that “it makes glad the heart of man;” it is, however, also over wine, and wine only, that the “blessing of God” is pronounced,13 and Melchizedek, as “priest of the Most High God,” brings “bread and wine” (Gen_14:18). Nevertheless, the phrase “ God and men,” is probably to be regarded as proverbial, and as signifying that wine cheers all persons, not excepting the highest and noblest. Since the Middle Ages, we [Germans] use the expression Gott und die Welt—God and the world—in a similar manner. Hartmann von Aue (in his Iwein, 9:262) says: Verlegeniu müezekeit ist gate und der werlte leit (mouldering idleness is offensive to God and the world).
The transition from the shade-giving vine to the thorn-bush presents us with a very striking contrast. It is indeed in connection with the thorn-bush, that the narrative displays its nicest shading. While the trees say מָלְכָה to the olive tree, and מָלְכִי to the fig tree and vine, unusual forms of the imperative which convey, as it seems to me, the idea of a respectful petition, they address the thorn-bush in common style: מְלָךְ עָלֵינוּ. When it comes to calling on the thorn-bush to be king, the respect which was felt for the olive tree and his compeers, has no longer any place. It may also be remarked that the shady vine is often at no great distance from the thorn-bush. Not unfrequently, even at this day, fertile wine-hills in the holy land, rejoicing also in olive and fig trees, are hedged in by thorn-bushes (cf. Rosenmüller, Morgenland, on Pro_15:19).
And the thorn-bush, said: If you really anoint me king over you. There lies in this the sharpest censure for the trees. The thorn-bush itself can scarcely believe that its election as king is honestly meant (בֶּאֱמֶת). Equally striking is it, that Jotham makes the thorn-bush speak of the trees as wishing to “anoint” him. Anoint with what? With oil. But the “oil tree” has already refused to be king over such subjects! The idea is: they anoint with oil, the symbol of peace, while they have murder and the opposite of peace in their hearts.—The thorn-bush declares his readiness to give them all he has. They are at liberty to shelter themselves in his shadow. But he gives no protection against the sun, and his branches are full of thorns. In case of disobedience and apostasy, he will cause fire to go forth, and without respect of persons consume all rebels, even the cedars of Lebanon. For these are his only arts and abilities—to prick and to burn. Æsop has a fable (No. 8) which teaches a similar moral, albeit playfully weakened. It treats of the “Fox and the Thorn-bush.” The fox, to save himself from falling, lays hold of the thorn-bush, and gets dreadfully torn by the sharp needles. In answer to his outcry, the thorn-bush says: How canst thou hope to lay hold of me, who am accustomed only to lay hold of others.
Jotham’s application in Jdg_9:16 forms a perfect parallel to the speech of the thorn-bush in Jdg_9:15. A minute explanation, that the Shechemites are the trees; that the heroes who heretofore benefited Israel (not merely Gideon, nor as the Rabbis think, Othniel and Barak only), correspond to the olive tree and his equals; and that the thorn-bush means Abimelech, is altogether unnecessary. The scene which he delineates, is it not transpiring before him in the valley below? All he needs to do, is to call their attention to the certainty that the threatening of the thorn-bush will be fulfilled on them; for that is yet future.
As the thorn-bush says to the trees, “If you honestly anoint me king,” so Jotham, with crushing irony, says to the people: If now you have acted honestly and sincerely in making Abimelech king. The heathen, as well as the worshippers of the true God, believed that good or evil deeds are recompensed by good or evil results. Even when the Persian Oroetes unlawfully murders the tyrant Polycrates, and afterwards perishes himself in a similar manner, Herodotus (iii. 128) remarks: “Thus did the avenging spirits of Polycrates the Samian overtake him.” It was maintained that the tyrant Agathocles had perished on the same day in which he had committed his horrible treason against his confederate Ophellas. This belief, prevalent even among heathen, pointed out the most vulnerable side of conscience. Though they turn away from the altar of Jehovah, they will not be able to escape the law of Elohim, who is even now listening to their loud acclamations. If they think—such is the bitter irony of Jotham’s indignant heart—that the collective trees (Jdg_9:14, כָּל הָעֵצִים) an mean it honestly, when they anoint a thorn-bush, then they also, perhaps, acted “honestly and sincerely” when they called Abimelech their king, slew the house of the hero who regarded not his own life to save them, and crowned the murderer, the son of the bondwoman. Such “honesty and virtue” will not fail of their appropriate recompense. The words of the thornbush will be fulfilled. The sequel will show the reward. Israel will then perceive the enormity of that which in its present state of moral prostration it allows to pass unchallenged. If such a horrible deed can be deemed “good,” he repeats—and the repetition marks the intensity of his grief—then may you rejoice in Abimelech, as now down there in the valley you (hypocritically) shout for joy; but if not, then may you experience what it means to have the thorn-bush for king! Then will sin dissolve what sin began; crime will dissever what treason bound together. Then will fire from the thorn-bush consume the sinful trees, and fire from the trees the tyrannical king. Thus he spake, and thus they heard. But sin and excitement drowned the voice of conscience. The friendship between them and their king, and the joy they felt in him, were yet young. Israel kept silence, and Jotham, the hero’s son, fled to Beer. Where this place lay, cannot be determined. Probably in the south—near the desert, which would afford the fugitive security against Abimelech’s persecution. Of Jotham, nothing more is known; but from amidst the tragedy which throws its dark shadows over the house of his father, his discourse sounds forth, an imperishable call to repentance, addressed to the world in the language of the world, and an admonisher to kings and nations of the certainty of retribution.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Abimelech the Fratricide. Gideon doubtless excelled in power all previous Judges; the deliverance wrought out by him surpassed all previous deliverances. This fact perhaps helps to explain the greatness of the shadow that fell upon the land after his death. The story of Abimelech displays before us a terrible contrast to the government of Gideon. It exhibits strength attended by the most abominable lust after power, energy with ungodliness, victorious talents with utter criminality. Such was the contrast offered by Abimelech with the memory of his father, in whom strength was united to humility, energy to piety, and victory to righteousness. The history of Abimelech teaches that sin (1) forgets good deeds; and (2) inspires misdeeds; but also, (3) that one abomination punishes another, even to destruction. If Gideon had not taken a concubine, this misery would not have come upon Israel! Why did he take her, and from Shechem, a city whose character he must have known! Why did he allow her son to be called “My Father is King!” The little weaknesses of a great man, become the great temptations of small men. Against the murderous fury of sin, there is no protection. The true sons of Gideon were peaceable. They were sons of a hero, but not trained to bloodshedding (Jdg_8:20). They had among them the ephod, reminder of Gideon’s victory. They were related to Abimelech, related more closely than the Shechemites; for they were his brothers, and brothers by such a father: but it availed them nothing. “Piety,” says the great poet (Goethe), “is a close bond, but ungodliness still closer.” The hand once lifted up to murder, does not spare its own brothers. Bloodthirstiness beclouds both eye and heart. It makes no distinction. Thus, sin lies lurking at the door, until its victim bids it enter. Abimelech’s conduct has found imitators among Christians. The murderous deeds committed since his day, some of them at the bidding of church authorities, lie like a blood-cloud over the face of history. Only the love of Jesus Christ can penetrate through it, with the sunbeam of his reconciliation.
Abimelech was tyrant, and Jotham must flee. The bloody knife reigns and the spirit which speaks in parables and lives in faith is banished. But Abimelech comes to shame, smitten by a desperate woman (Jdg_9:53), while Jotham’s parable, like a winged arrow, pierces all fratricides, from Abimelech down to Richard III. of England. While Abimelech, a false king, passed on, burdened by a load of hatred, Jotham spent his life, as befitted a mourner, in a profound quiet. Seb. Schmidt says, that “God knows how to give peace and safety to those who innocently become fainthearted, although men fail to espouse their righteous causes.” Such is the preaching of the word of God concerning the world’s condition, (1) when a Gideon reigns; (2) when an Abimelech rules. The government of the faithful is the salvation of all; and likewise sin is the destruction of men, not excepting those who commit it. There is a judgment. God is not mocked.
Starke: Those are ignoble souls, who seek to reach an office, not through their own gifts and virtues, but through the favor and influence of their friends.—The same: To lift one’s self up by unlawful and sinful means, is sure to bring a curse. The same: Good men are all alike in this, that they do what is godly and righteous, because they know well that there is but one godliness and one righteousness.—The same: The unity of bad men can speedily be changed, by the judgment of God, into enmity and mutual destruction.—Gerlach: Jotham stands forth like a warning prophet, who interprets coming events before they occur, and who is at the same time a sign that the Lord has not left the faith of Gideon unrewarded, notwithstanding the terrible judgment that overtakes his house.
[Bp. Hall: Those that are most unworthy of honor, are hottest in the chase of it; whilst the consciousness of better deserts bids men sit still, and stay to be either importuned or neglected. There can be no greater sign of unfitness, than vehement suit. It is hard to say whether there be more pride or arrogance in ambition.—The same: The Shechemites are fit brokers for Abimelech: that city which once betrayed itself to utter depopulation, in yielding to the suit of Hamor, now betrays itself and all Israel in yielding to the request of Abimelech.—The same: Natural respects are the most dangerous corrupters of all elections. What hope can there be of worthy superiors in any free people, where nearness of blood carries it from fitness of disposition? Whilst they say, “He is our brother,” they are enemies to themselves and Israel.—The same: Who would not now think that Abimelech should find a hell in his breast, after so barbarous and unnatural a massacre? and yet, behold, he is as senseless as the stone upon which the blood of his seventy brethren was spilt. Where ambition hath possessed itself thoroughly of the soul, it turns the heart into steel, and makes it incapable of a conscience. All sins will easily down with the man that is resolved to rise.—Henry: Way being thus made for Abimelech’s election, the men of Shechem proceed to choose him king. God was not consulted, there was no advising with the priest, or with their brethren of any other city or tribe, though it was designed he should rule over Israel.—Scott: If parents could foresee their children’s sufferings, their joy in them would be often turned into lamentations; we may therefore be thankful that we cannot penetrate futurity, and are reminded to commit those whom we most love into the hands of the Lord, and to attend to our present duty, casting our care upon Him, respecting ourselves and them.—Bush: The general moral of Jotham’s parable is, (1.) That weak and worthless men are ever forward to thrust themselves into power, while the wise and good are more prone to decline it. (2.) That they who unduly affect honor, and they who unjustly confer it, will prove sources of misery to each other.—Kitto: There are indeed legitimate objects of the highest ambition, and of the most exalted aspirations. Crowns and kingdoms lie beneath the feet of him who pursues with steady pace his high career toward the city of the Great King, where he knows there is laid up for him a crown of glory that fadeth not away—a crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will bestow upon all that love his appearing.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][Jdg_9:2.—בַּעֲלֵי: used interchangeably with אַנְשֵׁי, cf. Jdg_9:46 with 49; 2Sa_21:12, with Jdg_2:4-5. See also Jdg_20:5, and Jos_24:11. Dr. Cassel: Herren; De Wette, and many others, Bürger, “citizens.”—Tr.]
[2][Jdg_9:2.—The E. V. unnecessarily departs from the order of the Hebrew, and thereby obscures the antithesis which is primarily between “seventy” and “one,” and secondarily between “sons of Jerubbaal” and “your bone and flesh,” thus: “Which is better for you, that seventy men, all sons of Jerubbaal, rule over you, or that one man rule over you? Remember, also,” etc.—Tr.]
[3][Jdg_9:6.—Keil: “The explanation of אֵלוֹן מֻצָּב is doubtful. מֻצָּב, anything ‘set up,’ is in Isa_29:3 a military post [garrison], but may also mean a monument, and designates here probably the great stone set up (Jos_24:26) under the oak or terebinth near Shechem (cf. Gen_35:4).” De Wette also renders: Denkmal-Eiche, “monument-oak.”—Tr.]
[4][Jdg_9:7.—Dr. Cassel translates: “and may God hear you.” This is very well, but hardly in the sense in which he takes it, see below. Whether we translate as in the E. V., or as Dr. Cassel, the realization of the second member of the address must be regarded as contingent upon that of the first.—Tr.]
[5][Jdg_9:9; Jdg_9:11; Jdg_9:13.—הֶחֳדַלְתִּי אֶת־דִּשְׁנִי. According to Ewald (Gram., 51 c.) הֶחֳדַלְתִּי is a contracted hiphil form (for הַהֶתֶדַלתִּי), the second ה being dropped in order to avoid the concurrence of too many gutturals, and the resulting הַחֲד׳ (cf. Ges. Gr. 22, 4) being changed into הֶחֳד׳ in order to distinguish the interrogative particle more sharply. Others regard it as hophal (see Green, 53, 2, b). But as there are no traces anywhere else of either of these conjugations in this verb, it is commonly viewed as a simple kal form = הֶחָדַלְתִּי. Keil seeks to explain the anomalous vowel under ח by saying that “the obscure o-sound is substituted for the regular a in order to facilitate the pronunciation of successive guttural syllables.” Dr. Cassel renders: “Have I then lost [better: given up] my fatness?” But as the notion of futurity must manifestly be contained in the following וְהָלַכְתִּֽי, the ordinary rendering, “Should I give up?” is preferable.—Tr.]
[6][Jdg_9:9.—אֲשֶׁר־בִּי יְכַבְּדוּ אֱלֹהים וַאְנָשִׁים: “which God and men honor (esteem) in me.” Compare Jdg_9:13. Dr. Cassel renders as the E. V.—Tr.]
[7][Jdg_9:17.—וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ אֶת־נַפְשׁוֹ מִנֶּגֶד: literally, “cast his life from before (him); cf. the marginal reading of he E. V.: i. e. “disr garded his own life.”.—Tr..]
[8]Jotham, also, speaks of Abimelech, with special contempt, as the “son of the slave-woman” (Jdg_9:18).
[9][Keil: “Millo is unquestionably the name of the fortress or citadel of the city of Shechem, the same with the Tower of Shechem in Jdg_9:46-49. The word מִלּוֹא (Millo), as also the Chaldee מִלֵּיהָא, ‘filling,’ signifies a tampart formed of two walls, the space between which is filled up’ with rubbish. There was also a Millo at Jerusalem, 2Sa_5:9 1Ki_9:15. ‘All the house of Millo,’ are all the inhabitants of the citadel, the same who in Jdg_9:46 are spoken of as ‘all the citizens of Migdol or the Tower.’ ” Bertheau: “The high plateau of Mt. Gerizim, by which the city (Shechem) is commanded, seems to offer the most suitable site for this Millo, as it also did for later fortifications (Rob. ii. 277, 278, comp. p. 294). This location of the fortress, at some little distance from the city, which lay in the narrow valley, would explain the distinction constantly maintained in our chapter between the inhabitants of Shechem and the house, i.e. population, of Millo or the Tower.”—Tr.]
[10] מֻצָּב is most probably to be taken as מַצֵּבָה or מַצֶּבֶת.
[11][Kitto (Daily Bible Illustrations: Moses and the Judges, p. 365]:—“It will occur to the reader to ask what right the people of Shechem had to nominate a king, by their sole authority. In the first place, it must be remembered that the land had formerly been governed by a number of petty kings, ruling over some strong town and its immediate district and dependent villages; and it is likely that the Shechemites claimed no more than to appoint Abimelech as such a king over themselves, assuming that they for themselves, whatever might be the view of others, had a right to choose a king to reign over them. Besides, Shechem was one of the chief towns of Ephraim; and that proud and powerful tribe always claimed to take the leading part in public affairs, if not to determine the course of the other tribes—except, perhaps, of those connected with Judah in the south. It was under the influence of this desire for supremacy, that the revolt against the house of David was organized in that tribe, and resulted in the establishment of the separate kingdom for the ten tribes, in which Ephraim had the chief influence. Indeed, that establishment of a separate monarchy was accomplished at this very place where Abimelech is now declared king. Taking all this into account, it may seem reasonable to conclude that the Shechemites had the support of the tribe in this transaction, or might at least reckon with reasonable confidence upon its not being withheld. Then, again, a king chosen at Shechem, and supported by this powerful tribe, might reasonably calculate that the other tribes would soon give in their adhesion, seeing that, in the time of his father their monarchical predilections had been so strongly manifested.”—Tr.]
[12][Cf. Thomson, The Land and the Book, ii. 209.—Tr.]
[13][The third cup at the Passover meal was called the “Cup of Blessing,” because it was accompanied by a prayer of praise and thanksgiving. Cf. 1Co_10:16.—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 On vv2, 4, 5 Whether is better for you, either that all the…
Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, . . . or that one reign over you--a false insinuation, artfully contrived to stir up jealousy and alarm. Gideon had rejected, with abhorrence, the proposal to make himself or any of his family king, and there is no evidence that any of his other sons coveted the title.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 5 ABIMELECH’S USURPATION, Jdg_9:1-6.
ABIMELECH’S USURPATION, Jdg_9:1-6.
1. Abimelech — Son of Gideon by his concubine, who lived in Shechem.
Read full note →
Jdg_8:31. His mother’s family evidently possessed great influence in the city.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 5 1. Shechem] now Nâblus (the Roman Flavia Neapolis), 30…
1. Shechem] now Nâblus (the Roman Flavia Neapolis), 30 miles N. of Jerusalem, 5 miles S.E. of Samaria, situated in a narrow, fertile valley, at the entrance to which rise the two mountains, Ebal on the N. and Gerizim (Jdg_9:7) on the S. The town lies on the watershed (1870 ft.) between the Mediterranean and the Jordan basins, hence perhaps its name, shoulder. Easily dominated from the heights on either side, it could never defend itself against attack (Jdg_9:44 f.); but it had the great advantage of lying close to the crossing of the two main routes which traverse the country from N. to S. and from E. to W.; this accounts for the highway robbery in lawless times (Jdg_9:25, cf. Hos_6:9). The ancient Canaanite city is often mentioned in the patriarchal stories (Gen_12:6 J, Gen_33:18 P, Gen_33:19-20 E, Gen 33:34 J and P, Gen_37:12 ff. J): how and when it passed into Israelite possession cannot be learnt with certainty, for the traditions differ; thus Gen_48:22 E does not agree with Gen_33:19 E, Jos_24:32 E; and while Jos_24:1; Jos_24:25-26; Jos_24:32 implies that the town was entirely Israelite before the death of Joshua, the present narrative shews that it was still largely Canaanite.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 5 (1) And Abimelech.—This narrative of the rise and fall…
(1) And Abimelech.—This narrative of the rise and fall of Abimelech, “the bramble king,” is singularly vivid in many of its details, while at the same time material facts are so briefly touched upon that parts of the story must remain obscure. The general bearing of this graphic episode is to illustrate the slow, but certain, working of Divine retribution. The two main faults of the last phase of Gideon’s career had been his polygamy and his dangerous tampering with unauthorised, if not idolatrous, worship. The retribution for both errors falls on his house. The agents of their overthrow are the kinsmen of his base-born son by a Canaanite mother. Abimelech seems to have taken his first steps very soon after Gideon’s death. Doubtless he had long been secretly maturing his plans. The narrative bears on its surface inimitable marks of truthfulness. We can trace in the character of Abimelech a reflection of his father’s courage and promptitude, overshadowed by elements which he must have drawn from his maternal origin.
Unto his mother’s brethren.—His Canaanite kith and kin, who doubtless had great influence over the still powerful aboriginal element of the Shechemite population.
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 On vv1–5 The son of Jerubbaal. Throughout this chapter Gideon is…
The son of Jerubbaal. Throughout this chapter Gideon is spoken of by the name of Jerubbaal. There must be some cause for this. The simplest and most probable cause is that this whole history of Abimelech is taken from some other source than the preceding chapters. And a considerable difference in the style of the narrative, which is feebler and more obscure, seems to bear out this inference. Went to Shechem. This revolt from the house of Gideon in favour of Abimelech seems to partake of the nature of an Ephraimite rising against the supremacy of Manasseh. It was doubtless galling to the pride of the great tribe of Ephraim (Jud_1:8:1, 2 12:1-6) that Ophrah of the Abi-ezrites should be the seat of government, and Gideon"s ephod the centre of religion for the tribes of Israel. And so they seem to have taken advantage of Gideon"s death, and of Abimelech"s connection with Shechem, to make a league with the Hivite inhabitants of Shechem (see vers. 27, 28) to set up Abimelech as king, and to restore the worship of Baal, under the title of Baal-berith, (Jud_1:8:33 9:4, 27, 46) at Shechem for all Israel to resort to.
Vers. 1-6. Self-aggrandisement.
Read full note →
If we study the characters of men famous either in profane or sacred history with a view not merely to their capacity, but to their moral worth, we shall observe one very marked distinction between them. Some, the few, evidently used their great powers and their great opportunities with entire disinterestedness, with singleness of purpose to promote God"s glory and the happiness and welfare of their country, and not in any wise for self-aggrandisement. Such men, for example, as Moses, and Joshua, and Samuel, though they wielded all the power of the state, were entirely above the littleness of self-seeking. They had each a great mission, and they fulfilled it to the utmost of their ability with unswerving fidelity; they had each a weighty task entrusted to them, and they executed it with unflagging perseverance; but the idea of enriching themselves, or exalting their own families, seems never to have entered into their heads, or, at all events, never to have influenced their conduct. We can say the same of a few great names in profane history. It was true to a certain extent of Charlemagne; it was true pre-eminently of Alfred the Great; it was true of some of the early patriots of Rome, like Scipio Africanus, or Cincinnatus; of Washington, of Pitt, and of the Duke of Wellington. But in the bulk of the great men of history we cannot help seeing that the motive force which called forth their energies and stimulated their powers was ambition, the lust of conquest, the desire of wealth and greatness in a word, self-aggrandisement. The career of such men of might as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Louis Quatorze, Napoleon Buonaparte, whatever eminent qualities of head or heart they may have displayed, gave unmistakable signs that they were really pursuing their own greatness as the end of their performances in the cabinet or in the field. We may trace the same distinction between men who have filled much less important places in the world. Compare, for example, Dunstan with Wolsey. The first, though we may think him mistaken, pursued a disinterested purpose with concentrated energy; the second had constantly in view the royal favour or the Papal throne. A comparison of Gideon and Abimelech presents the same sharp contrast. Gideon was roused by the call of God to seek his country"s deliverance from a galling yoke, and to restore the worship of the true God in his native land. With the self-devotion of a Hofer, and the unflinching enthusiasm of a Luther, he gave himself to his double task, and accomplished it at the risk of his life without a thought of himself or any selfish ends. Abimelech, seeking power for himself, pretended to have in view the people"s interest, and, to secure their favour, restored an abominable idolatry. His kingdom, founded in bloodshed, abetted by falsehood, and fostered by a base and cruel policy, had no end or motive but self-aggrandisement. There is exactly the same difference in the characters and conduct of men in the commonest affairs of every-day life. Some men have high aims, and pursue them by righteous paths. Others have selfish ends, and pursue them in unscrupulous ways. Be it ours to aim at doing the will of God in the commonest as well as in the greatest actions of our lives. Let us steadily set before us the thing that is right as the end which we are to seek. Let us consider that our powers, be they great or small, are given to us that in the exercise of them we may give God glory and do good to man. Without calculation of selfish interests let us follow God"s call, devote ourselves to do his good pleasure, seek our neighbour"s welfare, and trust to God"s loving-kindness to order for us what seems best to his godly wisdom. In so doing we shall be meet for the kingdom of God.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR. Vers. 1-6. Ambitious usurpation.
Nothing shows the extent and significance of Gideon"s influence so much as the anarchy that followed his death. The presence of one may check, restrain, direct, etc. in a degree wholly inexplicable until its removal. The retrogression of peoples how difficult to comprehend! Sometimes a single individual (at most a few) concentrates in himself all the highest tendencies of his time, the only original of what appears a common possession. The weakness mental, spiritual, political, and religious of the nation now reveals itself. A time like that following upon Gideon"s judgeship tries men and declares their real motives. Of the usurpation now attempted, notice
I THE AIM. Worthy men seek to emulate the moral and intellectual excellence of the great deceased; unworthy, merely to succeed to their office and to enjoy their honours. It was a splendid opportunity which now presented itself to carry on, and to higher issues, the work initiated by Gideon. Instead of this, personal aggrandisement is the all-absorbing aim. Unscrupulous advantage is taken of the interregnum in the judgeship. And the more utterly base appears the project, inasmuch as it is not only what Gideon enjoyed that is sought, but what he rejected, as considering himself unworthy.
II THE SPIRIT.
1. Irreligious. No betaking of himself to the oracle; no recognition of God as Supreme Arbiter and Judge-maker.
2. Immodest. Personal fitness is not questioned, nor is the superior qualification of others considered.
3. Selfish. The rights of others are trampled upon, human blood is spilled like water, and the nation is regarded only as a corpus vile for political experiments and ambitious aims.
III THE MEANS AND METHODS. Arguments. Falsehood and sophistry. The alternatives presented is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? are not real. Charging others with the same aims as his own. Appeals not to the nation"s sense of right, but to expediency, and kinship, etc: Its occasion is the misfortune and weakness of others. Its instrumentality, unhallowed gold and a mercenary soldiery. Its method, a series of wrongs culminating in murder.
IV THE. SUCCESS. Apparently sudden, complete, absolute; really hollow, involving constant distrust and fear, and ever new outrages, and having in itself the elements of ultimate judgment. 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 On v1 Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal.
Jdg_9:1-22
Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal.
Read full note →
The election of the usurper to be king
I. Contrasts in the history of Gods own people. After Gideon--Abimelech!
II. The best of fathers may have the worst of sons.
III. useful purposes are served in recording a wicked mans life in the book of God.
1. The record is given as a curse, and not as a blessing.
2. Such a record illustrates the truth of Gods testimony respecting human character.
3. It shows by practical example the frightfully evil nature of sin when allowed to develop itself unchecked.
4. Wicked deeds recorded are beacons set up to warn us from the rocks and whirlpools of sin.
IV. God can bring accusers against the wicked when they fancy themselves most secure. (J. P. Millar.)
Abimelech, the adventurer
Abimelech is the Oriental adventurer, and uses the methods of another age than ours; yet we have our examples, and if they are less scandalous in some ways, if they are apart from bloodshed and savagery, they are still sufficiently trying to those who cherish the faith of Divine justice and providence. How many have to see with amazement the adventurer triumph by means of seventy pieces of silver from the house of Baal or even from a holier treasury. He in a selfish and cruel game seems to have speedy and complete success denied to the best and purest cause. Fighting for his own hand in wicked or contemptuous hardness and arrogant conceit, he finds support, applause, an open way. Being no prophet, he has honour in his own town. He knows the art of the stealthy insinuation, the lying promise, and the flattering murmur; he has skill to make the favour of one leading person a step to securing another. When a few important people have been hoodwinked, he too becomes important, and success is assured. The Bible, most entirely honest of books, frankly sets before us this adventurer, Abimelech, in the midst of the judges of Israel, as low a specimen of success as need be looked for; and we trace the well-known means by which such a person is promoted. His mothers brethren spake of him, etc. That there was little to say, that he was a man of no character, mattered not the least. The thing was to create an impression, so that Abimelechs scheme might be introduced and forced. So far he could intrigue and then, the first steps gained, he could mount. But there was in him none of the mental power that afterwards marked Jehu, none of the charm that survives with the name of Absalom. It was a jealousy, pride, ambition, he played, as the most jealous, proud, and ambitious; yet for three years the Hebrews of the league, blinded by the desire to have their nation like others, suffered him to bear the name of king. And by this sovereignty the Israelites who acknowledged it were doubly and trebly compromised. Not only did they accept a man without a record, they believed in one who was an enemy to his countrys religion--one, therefore, quite ready to trample upon its liberty. This is really the beginning of a worse oppression than that of Jabin or of Midian. It shows on the part of Hebrews generally, as well as those who tamely submitted to Abimelechs lordship, a most abject state of mind. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
Ambition destroys the finer feelings of men
The love of power and supremacy absorbed, consumed Napoleon. Before this duty, honour, love, humanity, fell prostrate. Josephine, we are told, was dear to him; but the devoted wife, who had stood firm and faithful in the day of his doubtful fortunes, was cast off in his prosperity to make room for a stranger, who might be more subservient to his power. He was affectionate, we are told, to his brothers and mother; but his brothers, the moment they ceased to be his tools, were disgraced; and his mother, it is said, was not allowed to sit in the presence of her imperial son. He sometimes softened, we are told, by the sight of the field of battle strewn with the wounded and dead. But if the Moloch of his ambition claimed new heaps of slain to-morrow it was never denied. With all his sensibility he gave millions to the sword with as little compunction as he would have brushed away so many insects which had infested his march. (H. E. Channing.)
The trees went forth . . . to anoint a king.
The parable of the trees
This Divine parable is full of interest. It is the oldest complete example of a parable blending with literal history. It was spoken by Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon, to expose the unworthy conduct of the Israelites, and to arrest them in their course. The olive, the vine, and the fig-tree, in the metaphorical application, would be his father, his brethren, and himself, none of whom would be king. The bramble would be Abimelech, who would either reign or destroy, and who would in the end, as the parable teaches, introduce so wretched a system as to entail upon himself and people mutual destruction. And so it happened. And such is the eternal law. He whose throne is reached through falsehood and blood, who has no foundation of virtue and right and worth to rest upon, must continue to cement with fresh crime the edifice he has reared, and so to add to the fire of vengeance that is secretly gathering around him, until at length some additional blow breaks the cover under which it has been smouldering, and it bursts upon the wicked tyrant and destroys, as it was with this Abimelech, both reign and life. Such is the lesson yielded by this parable in its letter, as a warning against that destructive ambition which has so often desolated the earth, in ancient and in modern times. Before quitting this part of the subject, allow me to call your attention to the difference between metaphor and correspondence. Metaphor is a certain likeness which is perceived by the mind, between two natural things, which have in other respects no connection with one another. Correspondence is the analogy which exists between two things, one spiritual and the other natural, and which answer to one another in all their uses and in all respects. We might go further, and attempt to show that in all cases of true and complete correspondences the spiritual is to the natural as the cause to the effect, the soul to the body; but upon this we cannot now enlarge. We have dwelt upon the parable as a metaphor. The olive-tree stands in this respect for Gideon. Like him, it was most valuable and honoured, and like him it would not reign. In other respects there was no connection or relation between them, and both were natural visible objects. We come now to the spiritual sense of the parable, and to bring this out we must employ, not metaphor, but correspondence. Perceptions, or acknowledged principles of truth or error, grow up in the mind like trees in the soil, and answer to trees in all their progress. Instruction is like seed. Instruction in Divine things is the seed of all that is great and good in the soul. The seed, the Divine Saviour said, is the Word of God (Luk_8:11). If we watch the reception and growth of knowledge in the mind, until it becomes a clear and enlarged view, and at length a productive principle, we shall discern the closest analogy to the progression of a tree from seed to fruit. In our text, however, we have not only the subject of trees in general placed before us, but three trees especially are singled out as valuable, but declining to reign--the olive, the fig-tree, and the vine: and one as worthless determined to rule or to destroy--the bramble. Let us examine these singly; and first, the olive. It is the tree most esteemed in Eastern countries, and especially in Palestine. Its wood yields a precious gum, its fruits are delightful and nutritious, and its oil, which is as it were the essence of the fruit pressed out, is used in food, also to give light, and as holy oil in the offerings of worship. As trees correspond to truths perceived as principles in the mind, the most worthy tree will correspond to the most valuable principle, that is, the wisdom which teaches love to the Lord. This principle when it has grown up in the soul, and given us to know the true character of our heavenly Father, shows us that He is not only loving, but love itself, infinite love unutterably tender, unchangeably merciful, good to all, whose tender mercies are over all His works. This is the celestial olive-tree which yields the oil, honoured both by God and man. It is of the olive-tree corresponding to the interior wisdom which conjoins the soul and its God together, and through which holy love descends, that we are informed in our text it refused to be king over the trees. The Divine Word teaches us by this that the spirit of rule is opposed to the spirit of love. Love desires to aid, to serve, to bless, but not to rule. If placed in positions of government and responsibility, it accepts them that it may minister, not that it may reign. If it were to enter into the desire of ruling it would lose its fatness; or, in other words, its richness and its joy. The fig-tree is next brought under notice. It was one of the most common fruit trees in Palestine, growing often on the wayside. It corresponds therefore to that natural perception which teaches the ordinary virtues of daily life. But even the common virtues of life, to be genuine, must be separated from the love of dominion. It is not always so. But unless this is really the case, there is no sweetness in doing good. Our good in fact is not good, but self in a disguise. A person will sometimes be liberal in his support of charities. He will profess the utmost sympathy for the poor. He will be generous in his support of public institutions for education and general improvement. His fig-tree seems to hear fine fruit, and yet it is quite possible that the love of applause, the desire to be paid by the suffrages of his fellow-citizens, being given to confer upon him political power, may be his aim. And if so, his figs have no sweetness, and are not good fruit. And oh, what is the applause of men compared with the sweetness of heaven? What are fruits worth if they are only gilded dust? (Jer_24:8). Such, then, is the lesson conveyed in the reply of the fig-tree spiritually understood. Should we leave the sweetness of heavenly virtue, and the real goodness of works which will abide the scrutiny of eternity, for the empty pageantry of place and power, sought only from the love of rule, and entailing bitterness here, and misery hereafter? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou and reign over us. Vines correspond to the truths of faith. The Church, especially as to its principles of faith, is commonly called in the Scriptures a vineyard. The reason is, no doubt, that the influence of principles of true faith is to the mind what wine is to the body--it strengthens the exhausted and cheers the weary. There are more that be with us than all that be against us: why then should we faint or despair? A God of love has created and prepared us for our work. His creation consists of innumerable channels, through which His benevolence descends. Loving friends are around, and a heaven of love before us. All things cheer us on. The mountains run down with new wine. The vine, in our text, speaks of its wine as cheering God and man. And when we perceive that wine is the emblem of encouraging truth, we appreciate the force of the Divine words. For when man is cheered by truth and saved, God rejoices with him. But the vine intimates that, if she sought to be ruler over the trees, she would leave her wine. Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? And so it is. If any one, by means of heavenly truth seeks dominion, his truth ceases to be saving. It is poison, not wine, to him. We come now, however, to a plant of very different character, and you will find the reply quite different. Then said all the trees to the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us. The reply takes it for granted that he is willing, and expresses his determination either to rule or destroy. This bramble is a low bushy tree with strong thorns, and whose wood is of a fiery nature easily set in flames. It is the emblem of the lust of dominion, which is also essentially unbelieving. The ambitious man believes in nothing but himself and his cunning. Everything which will contribute to his earthly aggrandisement is welcome; but he hates what will not come down to his level. Let us hear him. If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust in my shadow: and, if not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon. What an extraordinary invitation was that! The olive, the vine, the fig-tree, the lofty cedar, and all the noble trees of the forest, were to come and put themselves under the shadow of this contemptible shrub! How ridiculous an idea! Yet it is paralleled, in all respects, by the demands of ambition. It will deign to lend its protection to Divine things, only they must be subservient, and it must be chief. This principle in politicians makes religion an instrument of state policy; the ministers of religion a superior kind of police. But woe to the religion which stoops to it. It loses its own native life and vigour: it leaves its oil, and its figs, and its wine. The principle in an ambitious priest uses all the semblances of earnest piety to attain his selfish ends. He cares, however, nothing for them in themselves. That which he cannot bend to his selfish rule he burns to destroy. He says, like this miserable plant, If not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon. He burns with the mad rage of frenzy against whatever will not stoop to gratify his insane whim to rule over all things. From the whole of this Divine lesson we may gather the most invaluable impressions. We cannot too strongly imbue ourselves with the conviction that all heaven breathes humility, and everything heavenly is humble. The moment any sacred principle is turned to a selfish purpose, it loses its richness, its sweetness, its holiness, and worth. Love becomes flattery, virtue hypocrisy, faith deception. Oh let us shun this awful, desolating, soul-destroying sin. And, on the contrary, let us attend to Him who is at once the humblest and the highest. Bring often to mind the impressive and beautiful scene, when, surrounded by His disciples, He took a little child, and placed it in the midst of them. It was the day following that of the grand scene of the Transfiguration. (J. Bayley, Ph. D.)
The parable of Jotham
I. Its intention and success. When William Penn was carrying on negotiations with the Indians he used to gain their respect and attention by exhibiting to them his skill as a swordsman. This was an acquirement which the red man could appreciate. So Jotham here clothes the truths he wishes to utter in the form of parable, and gains the attention of the men of Shechem by his skilful use of imagery.
II. The contents of the parable. In it we have the national life of Israel set forth under the similitude of the natural life of the tree. In the kingdom of trees we notice--
1. The individuality of each tree.
2. The diversities of size, and form, and worth, found among them.
3. The manifest dependence of some trees upon others.
III. The teaching which underlies it. The parable implies that there were men in Israel at this time who possessed the qualifications necessary to a good ruler set forth in the excellences peculiar to the trees mentioned. But these men, the most fitted to rule, refused to do so because there is no honour in ruling where excellence is held in dishonour. They were in the soil of private life, which was congenial to their nature, and to be transplanted to a soil in which only a bramble could flourish, would be to lose their power of imparting light and sweetness. The nation, the city, or the congregation in which a bramble is held in estimation is not the soil in which to plant an olive-tree, a vine, or a fig-tree.
Lessons:
1. The honour of a leader depends, not upon the fact that he is chosen to rule, but upon who chooses him.
2. It is the man who gives honour to the position, and not the position which gives honour to the man.
3. In choosing a position in the world, we should be most solicitous to obtain that which will be favourable to the development of our character, and that in which character will be appreciated.
4. The ruler of a nation is a mirror in which is reflected the character of the people.
5. The true leaders of men have resources within for themselves, and therefore for others. Such men can afford to remain in obscurity, their mind is to them kingdom, they are their own society. (A London Minister.)
The parable of the trees
(to Young Men):--This parable of Jotham is, it is supposed, the very oldest in existence. We reach here, in a literary sense, almost to the source of fictitious writing. It is a question sometimes put to religious teachers, Do you object to works of fiction? For myself I can answer at once. I do not. If I did I should condemn perhaps all the peoples that ever lived, simple and cultured alike. In the snow hut of the Laplanders, in the warm wooden house of the Norse peasant, in the sunny islands of the Southern Sea, and all through the burning East, genius has in this way expressed itself, and men have been pleased and improved by its ministries. But question me further. Ask me if I object to much of the sensational literature of the day, and I answer, I do; not because it is fictitious, but because of the evil in more or less degree which it contains, and because it is sorry nourishment for human minds or hearts. To return to Jothams parable. The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them. There must have been a good deal of talk among them before it came to that, much wagging of arboreous tongues, twittering of leaf, and groaning of branch. They did not need a king. But the procession has started. We must follow and make part of it, if we want to see and hear.
I. Now there is a halt before an olive-tree. And they said to the olive-tree, Reign thou over us. A splendid offer, to be the anointed king over the whole vegetable world! We listen to hear the reply, couched in the deprecating, cautious phraseology usual in such cases. No such answer is given; but a clear, distinct refusal of the proffered honour. Should I leave my fatness? etc. Must I tear up my roots from the kindly soil where I have had my home for a thousand years, and cease to receive the secret but willing ministries of the earth, and close up the channels along which they have come? Must I shake the hard grain of my body by locomotion, and have my leaves withered in a triumphal progress, and see my berries grow scant and shrivelled, and produce no more oil for God or man, and all this that I may be a king? Wise olive-tree! Keep thy roots where they have struck and spread! Build up in concentric rings, as the years come and go, the hard pile of the serviceable wood! Store the secret fragrance! Distil the precious oil for many uses! Give men the annual harvest and God the continual glory of thy growing! Can we miss the lesson? Usefulness is better than honour. Usefulness, if it be of the higher kind, is attained through long growing and long striving. But when it is attained, when there is a normal, regulated usefulness flowing steadily out of a mans life, when he serves God and man where he is and by what he is, the offer of promotion ought to carry with it some very strong and clear enforcements to induce him to think of acceptance.
II. Here is a fig-tree by the wayside. It belongs to an old and most respectable family. It traces its pedigree up to Eden. It leads a useful life, and yet it has much less to give up and leave than the olive. But no! The fig-tree has not much, but it has something substantial and good. It has beautiful leaves of deep shining green, and better still--for the fig-tree makes no mention of its leaves--it has figs which carry in them a wonderful sweetness when they are fully ripe. Sweetness is the one quality which the fig-tree felt that it possessed. There is in some human souls a sweetness which imparts a fig-tree flavour to the whole life. When you meet one who possesses this gift moving about among rough ways and persons, consider that you see something far more than merely pleasant, something of exceeding value to the world.
III. Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou and reign over us. Surely there will be no refusal now! The vine cannot stand alone, it needs to be propped. It will leap at the offer of a throne, up which to climb and on which to hang its nodding clusters. It can only do one thing: it can bear clusters of grapes. Ah! but that one thing is of force and value enough to keep the vine steady under temptation. Should I leave my wine, etc. As there are some human lives with sweetness in them as their main element, so there are some with this brighter, racier quality, which cheers and animates the spirits of others. Be a vine if you can be nothing more; distil and distribute the wine of life.
IV. Now, at length, we go to the coronation. The trees have found a king. Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou and reign over us. Accepted as soon as offered! The bramble needs no time for deliberation. It accepts the crown at once. Look at the bramble or spiky thorn of Palestine with its long straggling branches. It has no fatness to leave, like the olive-tree; no sweetness, like the fig-tree; no clusters, like the vine. It casts no shadow, like the oak. It has nothing but sharp, piercing spikes, and of these it has abundance; every branch is full of them--and yet hear how the mean creature speaks! If in truth ye anoint me king over you--as if it were the most natural thing in the world that they should; as if it were thinking of its ripe baskets of fruit, and of the weary pilgrims it had sheltered. if in truth ye anoint me king! Think of it, in presence of them all! The cedar, nodding his dark plumes; the oak, with castled strength of stem and branch; the beech, in its sylvan beauty; the palm-tree, with its cylindrical stem and feathery leaves, and bounteous burden of dates; and the fir-tree and the pine-tree and the box together; and those that have declined the honour--to all these it says, Come and put your trust in my shadow! The unbounded impudence of this address is remarkable, and would be amusing if it were not connected with peril to the whole arboreous kingdom. This peril the bramble knows, and has the art to hold it out in audacious menace. If not, think of it well. You have gone too far to go back, you are now in my power; and that the noblest among you shall feel the first, in case of the least show of opposition. Society, in all its sections, is full of bramble men, who are striving for every sort of personal elevation and advantage. By the picture in this parable I want you to scorn the principles they act upon; and to despise the honours and advantages they win! (A. Raleigh, D. D.)
Jothams parable
We find instruction in the parable by regarding the answers put into the mouth of this tree and that when they are invited to wave to and fro over the others. There are honours which are dearly purchased, high positions which cannot be assumed without renouncing the true end and fruition of life. One for example, who is quietly and with increasing efficiency doing his part in a sphere to which he is adapted, must set aside the gains of long discipline if he is to become a social leader. He can do good where he is. Not so certain is it that he will be able to serve his fellows well in public office. It is one thing to enjoy the deference paid to a leader while the first enthusiasm on his behalf continues, but it is quite another thing to satisfy all the demands made as years go on and new needs arise, When any one is invited to take a position of authority he is bound to consider carefully his own aptitude. He needs also to consider those who are to be subjects or constituents, and make sure that they are of the kind his rule will fit. The olive looks at the cedar and the terebinth and the palm. Will they admit his sovereignty by and by though now they vote for it? Men are taken with the candidate who makes a good impression by emphasising what will please and suppressing opinions that may provoke dissent. When they know him, how will it be? When criticism begins, will the olive not be despised for its gnarled stem, its crooked branches and dusky foliage? The fable does not make the refusal of olive and fig-tree and vine rest on the comfort they enjoy in the humbler place. That would be a mean and disbonourable reason for refusing to serve. Men who decline public office because they love an easy life find here no countenance. It is for the sake of its fatness, the oil it yields, grateful to God and man in sacrifice and anointing, that the olive-tree declines. The fig-tree has its sweetness, and the vine its grapes to yield. And so men despising self-indulgence and comfort may be justified in putting aside a call to office. The fruit of a personal character developed in humble, unobtrusive natural life is seen to be better than the more showy clusters forced by public demands. Yet, on the other hand, if one will not leave his books, another his scientific hobbies, a third his fireside, a fourth his manufactory, in order to take his place among the magistrates of a city or the legislators of a land, the danger of bramble supremacy is near. Next a wretched Abimelech will appear; and what can be done but set him on high and put the reins in his hand? Unquestionably the claims of Church or country deserve most careful weighing, and even if there is a risk that character may lose its tender bloom, the sacrifice must be made in obedience to an urgent call. For a time, at least, the need of society at large must rule the loyal life. The fable of Jotham, in so far as it flings sarcasm at the persons who desire eminence for the sake of it and not for the good they will be able to do, is an example of that wisdom which is as unpopular now as ever it has been in human history, and the moral needs every day to be kept full in view. It is desire for distinction and power, the opportunity of waving to and fro over the trees, the right to use this handle and that to their names, that will be found to make many eager, not the distinct wish to accomplish something which the times and the country need. Those who solicit public office are far too often selfish, not self-denying, and even in the Church there is much vain ambition. But people will have it so. The crowd follows him who is eager for the suffrages of the crowd, and showers flattery and promises as he goes. Men are lifted into places they cannot fill, and after keeping their seats unsteadily for a time they have to disappear into ignominy. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
Forms of usefulness in life
What special advantages of life, what particular forms of usefulness and comfort, Jotham had in view, if he had any, in choosing these particular trees, it is not easy to say. But it is obvious that he meant in a general way to point out that there are two or three functions, or employments, or ways of spending life, so much worth a mans while continuing, that he is wise in refusing to abandon them for the sake of what may seem a better position. It is very desirable that men should see the advantages of their own position, for nothing is more enervating than a craving after change, and nothing more delusive than the fancy that almost any other position would be better than our own. The fatness which the olive was not disposed to forsake in exchange for high position, may very naturally be supposed to symbolise the usefulness which belongs to many obscure positions in life. If we are filling a place that somebody must fill, if we are doing work which some one must do, then we should be cautious how we seek change. Moreover, in the life of most of us, the usefulness of our daily occupation is by no means the whole measure of our usefulness. We are mixed up in life with persons who are entangled in difficulties, who are full of faults, who are needing help: wherever we go, in whatever occupation we spend our time, we find this to be the case; and he is a happy man who can disentangle the sinner from the meshes of his sin and pluck his feet out of the net, who can let some tempted person have the strengthening influence of his society, who can give advice that saves from misery or loss. Again, many lives are soured and rendered wretched to all connected with them, because it is not recognised that sweetness is that to which they are specially called. The fig-tree did not think it was a necessary of life; it did not flatter itself men could not live without figs; but it was modestly and reasonably conscious that by bearing figs year after year it did add an element of a most desirable kind to the life of man. Taking the mere word of the fable, the sweetness of the fig, every one knows what a blessing in a household is even one sweet temper, one disposition that is not ruffled, that does not take offence, that does not think every one else in the wrong, that does not vaunt itself, but is quiet, reasonable, patient, meek. Peremptoriness is not always equivalent to efficiency. Any one who has tried to catch an unbridled horse in a field knows how little persuasive power there is in violent language. The assumption of a tone of authority or infallibility defeats the ends of persuasion quite as certainly as the admission of a tone of entreaty destroys the authority of one who should rightfully command. But a third lesson for individuals in private life, which we gather from this fable, is how contemptible a thing is display and worldly honour, and what is called style. People will not be content to live comfortably, to be moderate in their expenses, quiet in their ways; but must be doing as other people do, must commit the same extravagancies, even though they have really no taste for them; must deny themselves the enjoyments they prefer, that they may seem to enjoy themselves like their neighbours; bind themselves religiously to do many troublesome things, for no other reason whatever than that it is expected of them. The consequence is that the spirit becomes false, and the life is worn out by useless forms and meaningless labour; the useful services which might be rendered are neglected, and time cannot be found for them. In conclusion, Jotham shall not have spoken this parable in vain for us if we carry away from its perusal the settled conviction that in life there is something better than mere show or the mere attainment of the rewards accorded by the world to its successful men. The real value of human life does not lie on the surface; lies, indeed, so deep that very many people never see it at all. There are circumstances so afflicting and straitened, so very tormenting and hampering, that we are apt to think we do well if only we do not cry out and let all the world know how we suffer; but there is a better thing to do always, and that is, to set ourselves with patience and humble self-crucifixion to think of others and do our best for them. In the worst circumstances, in circumstances so perplexing we know not how to act, there always remains some duty we are aware of, some kind and loving thing we can do, and by doing which other duties become clearer. (Marcus Dods, D. D.)
The olive-tree said . . . Should I leave my fatness?--
The refusing of leadership
I. The varieties which God has made among men.
II. The temptations to which we are exposed to be untrue to our distinctive nature and position.
III. The evil which would arise from our going out of our true place to obtain a vulgar power.
IV. The wise conduct of some in resisting the injurious temptations addressed to them.
V. Those who refuse formal rule may be kings in their spheres notwithstanding--nay, all the more.
VI. The worlds king is often the bramble after all. (W. Morison, D. D.)
The faithful olive-tree
The fable teaches that temptations will come to us all, however sweet, or useful, or fruitful, even as they came to the fig, the olive, and the vine. These temptations may take the shape of proffered honours; if not a crown, yet some form of preferment or power may be the bribe.
I. Apparent promotions are not to be snatched at. The question is to be asked, Should I? Let us never do what would be unbecoming, unsuitable, unwise (Gen_39:9). Emphasis is to be laid on the I. Should I? If God has given me peculiar gifts or special grace, does it become me to trifle with these endowments? Should I give them up to gain honour for myself? (Neh_6:11). A higher position may seem desirable, but would it be right to gain it by such cost? (Jer_45:5). It will involve duties and cares. Go up and down among the trees implies that there would be care, oversight, travelling, etc. These duties will be quite new to me; for, like an olive, I have been hitherto planted in one place. Should I run into new temptations, new difficulties, etc., of my own wanton will? Can I expect Gods blessing upon such strange work? Put the question in the case of wealth, honour, power, which are set before us. Should we grasp at them at the risk of being less at peace, less holy, less prayerful, less useful?
II. Actual advantages are not to be trifled with. Should I leave my fatness? I have this great boon, should I lightly lose it? It is the greatest advantage in life to be useful both to God and man: By me they honour God and man. We ought heartily to prize this high privilege. To leave this for anything which the world can offer would be great loss (Jer_18:14; Jer_2:13). Our possession of fatness meets the temptation to become a king. We are happy enough in Christ, in His service, with His people, and in the prospect of the reward. We cannot better ourselves by the move; let us stay as we are. We may also meet it by the reflection that the prospect is startling: Should I leave my fatness? For an olive to do this would be unnatural: for a believer to leave holy living would be worse (Joh_6:68). That the retrospect would be terrible: leave my fatness. What must it be to have left grace, and truth, and holiness, and Christ? Remember Judas. That even an hour of such leaving would be a loss. What would an olive do even for a day if it left its fatness? That it would all end in disappointment; for nothing could compensate for leaving the Lord. All else is death (Jer_17:13). That to abide firmly and reject all baits is like the saints, the martyrs, and their Lord; but to prefer honour to grace is a mere bramble folly.
III. Temptation should be turned to account. Let us take deeper root. The mere proposal to leave our fatness should make us hold the faster to it. Let us be on the watch that we lose not our joy, which is our fatness. If we would not leave it, neither can we bear that it should leave us. Let us yield more fatness, and bear more fruit: he who gains largely is all the further removed from loss. The more we increase in grace the less are we likely to leave it. Let us feel the more content, and speak the more lovingly of our gracious state, that none may dare to entice us. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The fig-tree said . . . Should I forsake my sweetness?--
Self-fulfilment
There was to the fig-tree no excellency like that of meeting adequately its own ends and of fulfilling its own inborn purpose. The fig-tree was not created to be a king among the trees. That was not its selected part or its appointed task. The oak and the cedar might be great in strength, the ash and the willow might be exalted for beauty, but in its own way of being great the fig-tree had a dignity all its own; measured by what it was meant to be and by what it was meant to do it might rest, secure for all time of usefulness and of honour. The real measure of the success or failure of each life is thoroughly and exactly the measure of its self-fulfilment. Centuries afterwards a Greek philosopher laid hold of this same principle, and he gave to it a more philosophical interpretation, a profounder application to the life of man; but Aristotle did not teach the lesson of it more finely, he did not illustrate it more happily, than had been done before in this passage. The measure of the success or failure of each life is thoroughly and exactly the measure of its self-fulfilment. As with the fig-tree, it is the excellency of man to live and to be fruitful in those powers which are distinctly his own; to be rational because he alone is truly rational; to be moral because he alone is moral; to be spiritual because he alone within the earth is breathed upon from a higher world, and hears with a deeper hearing a music and a song which hath not been uttered, Nature and God alike ask of man not the life of the tree or of the brute or of the angel, but the life of man as man. For man to turn from the culture of that rational and moral life which is distinctively his own, for man to yield his own peculiar task, for him to forsake the high inheritances of rational freedom and of moral purpose, is to tear from his own experience, to cut from out his history, the very justification of his existence in the world. Let him look well to that. It is not his life to be merely strong. When we look for strength we will not look to him. We will not look for strength to man, but to the deep-settled hills laid strong and sure among the rocks; to the wild waters of the flood as they beat and scream in their ruin of the land; to the winds of heaven as they fall sharply upon the sea; to the great fish within the deep; to the huge beast within the forest; to a thousand things in earth and sky; but we will not look for strength to man. Nor is it mans life or womans to be merely beautiful. When we look for beauty we will not look to man, but we will look far out upon some deep blue quiet of the hills, to the unfolding glories of the new day, to the sweet radiance of those tears which the dying night has left upon the flowers; we will look to corals of the sea, to diamonds from the under-world, to the waving shadows of the forest and the fields. To these we will look for beauty, but not to man. Let man keep and wear the graces which as man are his; let woman be dowered in those beauties which are all and peculiarly her own; but let that motive die within us which has no task for man or woman but those sad and empty services of flesh, those weak apparent shows of lust or ease or wealth. Oh, for men whose first and thorough task will be that of being men! Oh, for women whose souls and hearts are set deeply in the purpose of being and of serving under womans name in those causes which are all her own, among those dignities and sanctities which make with men her queenliness and saintliness for ever! If there is need to-day for a humanity which is human--for manly men, for womanly women, for childlike children--there is need also for a churchly Church. Institutions as well as individuals have their primary uses and their distinctive life. The Church, too, if she is to continue among men, must act truly and deeply from her own powers, must be strong in a Churchs spirit, instinct and eager with the Churchs mission. The life of the Church may have its social aspect, it may have in a sense its business aspect, it has been forced to have in certain quarters an aspect which is purely political; but the measure of her exclusive and especial triumphs along lines like these is exactly the measure of mans detestation of her cause. The Church, to be the Church, must be primarily and essentially religious. There are individual Churches which are not successful in any sense, but the Church which is successful in the life God sends her out to live, that Church which in a religious sense is a success must be a success in all senses and for all wise and honourable work. (E. G. Murphy.)
The bramble said.--
Bramble rule; or, the people and their leaders
I. That the people have a conscious want of leaders, and they are not particular in their choice of them.
1. The people in every age have needed leaders in every department of life--mercantile, artistic, political, and especially religious. The uncultured masses have ever been ignorant, credulous, servile.
2. And they are conscious of their want. This arises from--
(1) An instinctive faith that there is somewhere an unpossessed good for them.
(2) A consciousness that they are incapable of reaching it themselves.
(3) A conviction that there are members of the race superior to themselves,
3. That the people are not particular in their choice of leaders. They do not generally follow the greatest men. Men of inferior capacity and uncultivated nature are scarcely qualified to appreciate the highest form of greatness. Great men to them are masters whom they martyr.
II. That inferior men are often more ready to assume the responsibility of leadership than great ones. The greater a man is, the less taste he has for a conventional greatness, the greater resources he has in himself, and more disposed is he to work in the glorious realms of principles than amidst the din of social parties. Great men build their own thrones, and establish their own empires.
III. That leadership in the hands of inferior men is ever fraught with mischief.
1. Small men can do great mischief.
2. The higher the office they reach, the greater the mischief they can effect.
Learn--
1. The sad condition of the world.
2. The transcendent worth of the gospel. Christ is just the Leader needed. (Homilist.)
Pulpit brambles; or, a vacant Church making a choice of a minister
1. Jothams parable is full of interest.
(1) On account of its antiquity. First on record.
(2) The spirit of its delivery. Full of the humorous.
(3) The sarcasm it contains. The satiric is a most useful gift to the Christian teacher, when guided by the hand of wisdom.
2. The principle contained in the parable is, that the highest places ought to be occupied by the best of men, and that the bramble people should never be allowed to occupy a position of greatness.
3. From Jothams parable the following remarks are suggested--
(1) That it is a time of great responsibility to Churches when making choice of a minister. Christ spent a night in prayer before He ordained His apostles.
(2) That Churches sometimes show a great want of shrewdness in their choice of a minister.
(3) That Churches ought to keep a view to the practical in giving a call to a minister.
(4) That very often we find the most insignificant ministers are the most ready to accept invitations from large Churches.
(5) That a stated ministry is advantageous to Churches.
(6) That great evils follow in the choice of unsuitable ministers.
(7) That Churches will never reach their true position while their pulpits are filled with brambles.
Conclusion--
1. That the ministerial life is one of great sacrifice.
2. That most frequently the ministerial brambles are blessed with unanimous calls.
3. That the men of small talent, almost without exception, are full of vanity.
4. That the great force of the bramble pulpit is in destruction.
5. Some of our large Churches have frequently been deservedly punished when they have lost their old minister. (Homilist.)
King Bramble and his subjects
Why were the trees so willing to enthrone Bramble? The trees argued: If we make Bramble king, he will never find fault, and never dare chide us for shortcomings--he is so puny and worthless compared with us. So men reason, all over the globe. Do you know why men possessing just as much good common-sense as you have, still cling to idols in heathen lands? Many of them know as well as we do that their idols are worthless. Why keep them? Because with these for gods, they make religion as base and sensual as they desire. But we need not search heathen lands. In our own midst are people who serve King Bramble rather than King Jesus.
I. The bramble of intemperance. Do you suppose that any boy ever starts out in life with the intention of being a drunkard? He who yields in the least degree is in danger of being overpowered and ruined by this King Bramble.
II. Bramble of mammon. Just enough affords more happiness than too much.
III. Most dangerous bramble of all is self. We all need to pray for deliverance from the evil which is in our own hearts. One of the most cunning devices by which Satan entraps men is that of making them worship themselves rather than God. (A. F. Vedder.)
The bramble
1. How proud the bramble was! Come and put your trust in my shadow. Are boys and girls proud? I think so. And yet they have no more reason to be proud than the foolish bramble. They are entirely dependent on the bounty of a gracious Providence, and He hates pride. But why are we proud? We cannot boast of our clothes--these are given to us by animals. Why, what is more beautiful than the butterfly, that flits about in the sunshine, or the tiny flower growing by the roadside? Both insect and flower appear in better coats than we.
2. Another thing we may notice about the bramble--its insufficiency for shelter. It said to all the trees: Come, put your trust in my shadow. The lesson to be learnt from this parable is the folly of false trust. The Bible in many places warns us against false trusts. It warns us against trusting ourselves. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool. Some trust in riches. This is not safe. For riches sometimes take to themselves wings and fly away; moreover, they profit not in the day of wrath. Then in whom shall we trust? In the Lord, for we read: It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in princes. We should trust in Him for our salvation. There is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.
3. Then, the weakness of the bramble reminds us of its insufficiency for defence. Such a plant could easily be trodden down. The careless ox cannot crush the cedar, or the olive, or the fig-tree so easily as it can crush the bramble. A defence indicates the existence of enemies. You and I have enemies, and it is necessary that we should be guarded against them. They are round us--on every hand. Jesus Christ is not only a shelter, but a defence.
4. The bramble reminds us of sin. Sin is like a thorn. It pierces, it irritates, it wounds. (H. Whittaker.)
Misleading self-judgments
Many are misled, because they judge themselves too much by the impression they make upon those around them. To them, in that sense, vox populi is vox Dei. If they are popular in their own circle, they think proportionately well of themselves. But this is manifestly an empirical judgment. It depends very much on the circle to which we belong; on the mental and moral attainments of those in it; on the natural affection they cherish towards us, which predisposes them in our favour; and on the ideal they hold generally of character and worth. A solid is buoyant in a liquid in proportion as it is light, and the liquid heavy, floating or sinking according as it is heavier or lighter, bulk for bulk, than the liquid it is in. And similarly we may judge of a mans moral and intellectual weight by the kind of society he floats in. The company which will buoy up one man will not sustain another, and in light, frivolous society, a silly, empty fellow may successfully keep on the surface, inflated only with his own self-conceit. In judging ourselves by the opinions of those around us, therefore, let us ask what their opinions are worth, and how far they are determined by principles which will decide eternal destiny. (A. Rowland, B. A.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v1
ABIMELECH MADE KING
Jdg_9:1-21
Read full note →
CRITICAL NOTES.—
Jdg_9:1. And Abimelech.] Some little time may have elapsed after Gideon’s death, so that the air was again filled with tendencies to idolatry. Before certain acts can be done, the times must be ripe for them. Abi signifies “my father,” Melech “a king.” The name was probably given by the mother, who was probably a woman of energetic or aspiring spirit, if it is her character that we see reflected in her eon. Probably, being an only son, she wished to make the most of the situation for him; and as her husband, though not de jure, was yet de facto king over the land, she determined to keep this fact as a mark before the eyes of her son day by day in his being always addressed by the words, “My father was a king.”
Son of Jerubbaal.] How strange! that the man who earned the proud title of being the destroyer of Baal, should have a son who promised to be the most zealous supporter of Baal’s interests in the land!
Went to Shechem.] A historical city, and one of the chief cities of Ephraim, from its central position and the many attractions of its situation. Here God first appeared to Abraham when he arrived in Canaan, and here Abraham first raised the altar (Genesis 12); near this both Abraham and Jacob lie buried; between the two hills on which the city was built all Israel were assembled to hear the law read, in its blessings and curses, when they first entered the land of promise; here Israel’s greatest captain most solemnly called on the people to stand firm by their covenant with Jehovah with his dying breath; and this was the place, and the well of Sychar the spot, where the Saviour’s ever memorable conversation with the woman of Samaria took place. It is one of the oldest towns of Palestine.
The house of his mother’s father.] Blood is thicker than water. Abimelech reckoned it better to have a surrounding of relatives than of general acquaintances.
Jdg_9:2. Men of Shechem.] Not the inhabitants generally, but the leading men—בְַעַלֵי, the heads, those who had a standing in the town, either as regards property and therefore owners, or as regards guildry and so citizens—the guildry or burgesses. Hence we read elsewhere of “the men of Jericho,” “the men of Keilah,” etc. Or the reference may be to the Israelites, as opposed to the Canaanites.
Reign over you. He assumes that the people wished some one to be their king, and also that the thirst for rule was in the breasts of all Gideon’s sons as well as in his own.
I am your bone and your flesh.] This is a subtle argument; it implies two things—
(1) that he was of the same kindred with them (Gen_29:14, 2 Samuel 6), but also
(2) “I have Ephraimite blood flowing in my veins, so that if you elect me to be king you will be giving Ephraim the sovereignty, and Manasseh shall no longer rule. Shechem will be the royal city, and Orphah will be eclipsed.”
Jdg_9:3. For they said, “He is our brother.”] Abimelech had read well the dominating sentiment in the hearts of his people, for the bait at once took. They knew that the story about the brothers wishing to reign over them was false, but the pill was too temptingly gilded to be refused. They raised the shout at once for Abimelech.
Jdg_9:4. 70 pieces of silver] or shekels—the shekel being two shillings of our money. This was all the price at which each head of Gideon’s sons was valued! The money was given by the worshippers of Baal-berith, and doubtless was given willingly, when it was hinted that the use to be made of it was to destroy utterly the house of him who had destroyed Baal. Temple treasures were indeed often applied to political purposes [Bertheau]. 1Ki_15:18; 2Ki_18:15-16. Small sum indeed, yet such soldiers might be got for trifling wages.
Vain and light persons] Vain means either those who were fond of dash and show, like Absalom’s fifty men, who ran before him (2 Samuel 16), men who would not bear the yoke of any steady employment in the occupations of life, or men of no worth of character, and kept lounging about ready for any dark or foul deed that might come in their way. Light persons of no principle or conscience, unscrupulous desperadoes. These are sometimes called “Men of Belial” (2Sa_20:1; 1Ki_21:10).
5. Slew his brethren] in cold blood. They had committed no crime, but the usurper feared lest they should one day disturb him in his unlawful possession of the throne. Thus did Jehoram, the unworthy son of the good Jehosaphat (2Ch_21:4). So did Jehu to the 70 sons of Ahab (2Ki_10:7), Athaliah to the seed royal of Judah (2Ki_11:1), Baasha to the house of Jeroboam (1Ki_15:29), and Zimri to the house of Baasha (1Ki_16:11-12). Timour, on his conquest of Persia, destroyed the whole male family of the king. At the conquest of Bagdad he is said to have made a pyramid of 90,000 human heads. Even in modern Persia, it is said, until quite of late, to have been the custom for the new king either to kill, or to put out the eyes of all his brothers and near male relatives. Abimelech did indeed live in a barbarous age, and a sterner code prevailed then than now, yet we dare not do less than brand his conduct on this occasion as the atrocious act of an inhuman monster. Dim as was the light which the Israelitish religion shed on the value of human life compared with that which we now enjoy, it was sufficient to teach its worshippers to ostracise such a man, and put him beyond the pale of human fellowship. This system of wholesale murder of the innocents is one of the natural results of polygamy, and the lust of power.
Jdg_9:6. House of Millo] not family as some make it, but fortress. It was in fact a large rampart or castle. Its walls were filled in with stones and earth. We hear of something similar in 2Sa_5:9, also 1Ki_9:15; 1Ki_9:24; 2Ki_12:20 (see also Jdg_9:46). The house of Millo, means probably those who garrisoned the fortress.
Gathered together and made Abimelech king.] The ruling class in Shechem, or the citizens, and those who belonged to the fortress, assembled. We hear of no dissentients, though such a dark tragedy had just been perpetrated, but, on the contrary, this assembly are unanimous in electing the man whose hands were reeking with the blood of so many of his brethren to be their king, that is to occupy the most exalted post of honour they could give him. What a picture of the times in even God’s Israel! If anything could add to the frightful depravity of this whole transaction, it is to be told, that all this happened on, or around, the spot where stood the oak of the pillar (not “the plain of the pillar”) or monumental stone under the oak, which Joshua set up as a witness of the solemn covenant, which the people entered into to take Jehovah alone to be their God (Jos_24:1; Jos_24:26-27—comp. also Gen_25:4). As to the custom of holding councils under wide-spreading oaks in olden times, see Pict. Bible in loco. That the men of Shechem aided Abimelech in this slaughter of Gideon’s family is manifest from Jdg_9:24.
Jdg_9:7. On the top of Mount Gerizim.] This hill stood on the south-west side of Shechem as a huge rock, about 800 feet above the valley below. The town, however, was not built at the bottom of the valley, but on one of the shoulders of the hill, and therefore not so far distant, but that a person speaking from the top of the rock might be heard by those in the town. The facilities for a person being heard, who might speak from the height to those below, were greatly increased by the fact, that there was another rock-hill immediately opposite, called Mount Ebal, which threw back the sound and sent it downwards (see Pict. Bible). (1Sa_26:13; 2Sa_2:25-26.)
Jotham was told all that had taken place. The cruel blow aimed at Gideon’s house called forth no protest. It was clear that Israel had fallen again into an idolatrous stupor. Every nerve of gratitude was deadened. Steps were taken to make the usurper king. He has only a few spirits left who are likeminded with himself, but the spirit of his father is still in him. The instinct of self-preservation is strong in him, but he will speak one firm and faithful word ere he disappear from view. He chooses his time and place—the rock Gerizim, and the coronation-day of Abimelech. There, as the impersonation of conscience, he suddenly appears to the masses below to warn them of the heavy retribution, which such high-handed sins must bring down on their heads at no distant day. The speaker appeared, probably, on some projecting crag, near enough to be heard, yet distant enough to be not easily caught. The fact that he was supposed to be killed, while now he appears suddenly with a message of vengeance on his lips, at the supreme moment of the coronation, must have staggered all but the conscience-hardened in that guilty multitude.
This address ought to be called a fable, not a parable, for that never transgresses the limits of actual occurrences. [Douglas.] It is the oldest of all known fables, and was spoken 700 years before the days of Æsop, the most ancient of heathen fabulists. A similar one, though more brief, occurs in 2Ki_14:9. Compare also the Agrippan fable, in Livy, Book 2, chap. 30, as to the rebellion of the members of the body against the belly. Of parables there are examples in 1Ki_20:39-40, and especially 2Sa_12:1-4; and 2Sa_14:5-11. This was the most ancient instruction of any, for oftentimes it was only in this veiled form that wholesome truths could be conveyed to the ears of men of power, or those of the unreasoning multitude. Evils were thus reproved, and the multitude was admonished.
In this fable two things are put in contrast, and thus a severe censure is passed on the conduct of both Abimelech and his friends. The high character of Gideon’s sons who had been slain, and the strong pretensions they might have put forward, while yet they stood quietly in the background, are contrasted with the rough character and worthless pretensions of the illegitimate son.
Jotham we believe spoke this message from God, so that we are to regard it as the fruit of Divine inspiration (see Adam Clarke at end of chap. 9; see also Dr. Cassel on chap. 9).
Jdg_9:8. The trees went forth.] This states the matter in hand. The trees are supposed to want a king, and they go first to those that might respectably wear the dignity of the office. They begin with the olive, but the olive declines.
Jdg_9:9. My fatness … they honour God and man.] It has excellent qualities, the one specially referred to here being its oil-producing power. This oil is used to consecrate both kings and priests; it also feeds the light that burns in the sanctuary of God. Thus it honours both God and man. Its leaf and branch are also signs of reconciliation and peace. Strong are the claims of the olive to reign, but it aspires not to that distinction. “Should I give up my vocation in bearing oil, that I might wave over the trees!”
Jdg_9:11. Promoted over the trees.] The fig-tree is also invited and also declines. The word “promoted” means to shake, or be shaken. It seems to refer to the instability of royalty or worldly greatness, and the many cares and distractions that attend it.
Jdg_9:13. That cheereth God and man.] This is hyperbolical language. The wine may be said to give delight to God, because He was always well pleased with the offerings of His people when they were presented in a right spirit, and in the appointed way. The hin of wine as a drink-offering came up with a sweet savour unto the Lord (Num_15:7; Num_15:10). The purport of these verses is, that should these trees—the olive, the fig, and the vine—comply with the request made, and occupy themselves with waving their branches over the other trees, it would take them away from the far more useful occupation of producing oil, and figs, and grapes.
Jdg_9:14. The bramble.] The largest of thorns, with dreadful spikes like darts. It bears no fruit, has no leaves, and casts no shadow under which one might shelter himself from the burning heat of the sun. It is indeed not a tree, but a mere shrub, prickly, barren, base, and good for nothing, save to burn or kindle a fire. It is the symbol of a worthless man, who lives only to do harm. At the moment that Jotham was speaking, these trees filled the valley in profusion, and the brambles in large numbers were climbing up among the rocks.
Jdg_9:15. The thornbush said to the trees, etc.] Thorns easily catch fire. If you do truly anoint me to be your king, then put your trust in my shadow. Spoken ironically, for shadow it has none. It refers to the hard character of Abimelech’s rule. It must be a real submission. If not, the alternative will be that the bramble shall set fire to the other trees, not even excepting the noblest of them all—the cedars of Lebanon. For the most worthless man can do much harm to the most distinguished. He will have no mercy on rebels.
Jdg_9:16. If ye have done truly and sincerely, etc.] Acted honestly and fairly with Jerubbaal and his house, then take your fill of joy over your newly made king, though it is only a thornbush you have got. This is said with a caustic irony and also with a bitter personal grief.
Jdg_9:20. But if not.] If you have not acted fairly and properly by that house, then, as a righteous consequence, let fire break out between you mutually, from Abimelech to devour the men of Shechem, and from these again to destroy Abimelech. There is a recompense which is meet for compacts which are entered into over falsehood, robbery, the shedding of innocent blood, and the exalting of false gods to the place of the true and only Jehovah.
Jdg_9:21. Beer.] A place supposed to have been in the tribe of Benjamin. Jotham is not heard of more, but his words now spoken will not die till the end of time. It was something of the spirit of his father that spoke in him. How truly his words came to pass, the parties concerned on both sides knew to their dire experience, ere they were three years older. Abimelech began his reign, not on principles of truth and honour, justice and uprightness, but with open rebellion against Israel’s Divine King, with assassination of those he was bound most sacredly to love, and with the fixed resolution to gain his own aggrandisement at whatever cost or ruin to those around him. With such a beginning, the end must be truly disastrous; nor was it long delayed.
MAIN HOMILETICS.—Jdg_9:1-21
THE ELECTION OF THE USURPER TO BE KING
I. Contrasts in the history of God’s own people.
This chapter, though a long one, contains a miserable history. Apart from names, it looks like the career of a roving bandit, who, setting the laws of God and man alike at defiance, could commit with cool barbarity the most unnatural crimes, to gratify an inordinate lust of power. Yet the first line reminds us that Abimelech, the actor in this tragedy, was the son of Jerubbaal. What a deplorable sequel to the glorious sun-setting recorded at the close of the previous chapter! The “gold has become dim indeed, and the most fine gold is changed.” As the gloomiest of nights sometimes follows the brightest of days, so does the short and reckless career of this unprincipled young man follow the long and honourable course of life of Israel’s greatest hero. In passing from the one chapter to the other, it seems as if we had dropped all at once, from the highest pinnacle of Solomon’s temple, which overlooked all the glories of that matchless building, and had fallen down among the dead bones, the disgusting offal, and many abominations of the valley of Hinnom, which required the constant action of fire to prevent the atmosphere from being poisoned.
Striking contrasts occur also at different intervals in the history of this people, both before and after this period. One occurs in comparing the generation that conquered Canaan under Joshua, in the exercise of a strong faith in their covenant God, with the degenerate generation of their descendants, who could not drive out the Canaanites, from the want of that faith, but permitted them to dwell among them, and, ere long, they intermarried with the idolaters, and became as they were. We have another case, in the few thousands who followed the guilty king of Israel, trembling through the land in the days of Saul, compared with the lion-like host that gathered around David shortly afterwards, and went on conquering and to conquer.
The contrast of such a history as that of Abimelech following that of so excellent a man as Gideon, teaches several lessons, such as—
(1.) It was a punishment on the people for their misimprovement of so just a rule as that of Gideon. To have had such a man bearing rule among them, and placed at the top of society for so long a time, was a great privilege conferred by the God of Providence on His chosen people. But they seem to have had no eye to see the Divine mercy extended to them. They did not realise that there was any favour being shown to them; when at last God withdrew His Gideon, and sent them an Abimelech. Between these the people soon found, to their bitter experience, there was the difference between an angel of light, and a demon of darkness.
(2.) The thoroughly corrupt state of the people of God apart from renewing grace. Israel was really no better in character before God than the members of any other nation. “By nature they, too, were children of wrath, even as others.” There was “in them the same evil heart of unbelief, departing from the living God.” The renewing grace of God alone made the difference. “What, then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise; for we have already proved, both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin.” (See also Eph_2:3.) It was but a few centuries before this when Job wrote these words, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.” And Bildad responded, “How can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman?” And it was but a few generations subsequent to this when David wrote thus, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Create in me a clean heart, renew a right spirit within me.” (Psa_40:12; Eze_36:26-27.)
These Israelites proved that when Gideon was no more, and the only remaining barrier removed out of the way, they could run on headlong in the old idolatrous course as before, keeping pace with any of the Canaanite nations themselves. As for Abimelech, we believe, were all the habitations of these native idolaters searched to find a character worse than his fellows, it would have been impossible to discover a monster in human form more detestable than we have in this son of Jerubbaal. And as for the people in general, we never read of any generation among them growing up in righteousness and the fear of God, as an essential part of their character, to whom, therefore, it was unnatural to be guilty of sin. There was no generation of Israel without their sins against the God of Israel. Had there been so, how meaningless to them would have been the elaborate ceremonial of their sanctuary service!
(3.) God’s mercy is not like man’s in the measure of its forbearance. Were but half the provocation which men are giving every day to God to be given to each other, they would instantly bring down on the heads of the transgressors the full vials of their wrath. Man’s patience is so soon exhausted; God’s patience is like Himself, inexhaustible (Mal_3:6). That patience is not even exhausted when He leaves the sinner, or when He proceeds to inflict on him the sentence of doom. His course usually is, to wait long enough till mercy has had full display, and till it be shown that He is not willing that any should perish, but rather come to repentance, and live; but if that long and patient dealing is made in vain, a time must come, when reasons of righteousness and wisdom require that sin be dealt with as it deserves, and that justice be allowed to take its course. Yet patience is not properly exhausted.
(4.) The deep debt of gratitude every saved man owes to the grace of God. It was a wise habit of the good John Bradford to say, when he saw any very striking personification of human wickedness in the worst of men around him—“There goes John Bradford, but for the grace of God.” And well might any believer in the doctrine of renewing grace have said, when he saw this wicked young man going on in a career of unbridled sin—“There goes I, myself, but for the grace of God.” Meaning that he, too, has a wicked heart by nature, and that it requires to be made the subject of God’s renewing grace, ere it become fit for entering the holy world above. For we are to judge character, not by the measure of its present development, but by the direction it is taking. The development is now rapidly going on, and ere long it will reach a point or degree in wickedness, which at one time would have astonished the man himself, could he have foreseen it. Thus it was with Hazael, when the prophet foretold him of the atrocities, of which he would one day be guilty towards the people of God. “Is thy servant a dog,” he exclaimed, when the prophet held up to him the picture of his future deeds, “that he should do this thing?” He was at that time horrified at the thought of perpetrating such cruelties; yet, some years afterwards, as his wicked character became developed, he showed by the fact, that he could do all that the prophet predicted.
To every saved man who enters the world of perfect purity and bliss, it will be made clear, as with a thousand sunbeams, that it is not to any supposed goodness of his own, or to any worth in his own works, that he owes his admission to that bright home. All the outbreaks of depravity of which he has been conscious, from day to day during his whole life, and these occurring in the face of every possible restraint, will be as so many strong lights to flash on him the conviction, that it is by grace alone that he is saved—that salvation is not the thing which he deserves, but that which God is loving enough through Christ to give.
II. The best of fathers may have the worst of sons. This is another truth suggested by the paragraph (see pp. 95, 96).
(1.) No good father can impart his renewed nature to his son. What the father is by nature, he may, and does, more or less, convey to his son. The conditions of his body, its healthy or sickly state, whether it is strong or weak, its character in other respects, the father’s temperaments, his likeness, his natural dispositions and tendencies, his constitutional peculiarities, with other features, but above all his fallen spiritual condition, both in his depraved desires and affections, and in his liability to condemnation as a guilty being—these the parent confers more or less on the child. “Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image” (Gen_5:3). It is not said “after God’s likeness and in His image,” as in the case of Adam himself (chap. 5). To grant the renewed nature is a thing in God’s special gift; and so we are expressly informed, that all who become “sons of God” are made so directly by God Himself. They are “born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (Joh_1:13). Not indeed without the use of means, for we are expressly told in the previous verse, that it is those who “receive Christ and believe in His name,” that are honoured with the privilege of being made sons of God (comp. also Gal_4:4-6; Joh_3:5).
(2.) A good father may often neglect the training of his child. The child of a pious parent, though he derive no advantage directly in his natural birth, is yet open to many advantages otherwise—in respect of example, of superintendence and training, of prayers many and sincere, of special promises, and mixing with the fellowship of the righteous, to which might be added a fuller and more regular enjoyment of the means of grace. Thus a good man may have the formation of his son’s character in a great measure in his own hands; that is, so far as means are concerned.
Yet we often know that, as a matter of fact, a pious father sometimes neglects the proper upbringing of his son; as did Eli, when “his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not;” and as did David, when he “never said to Adonijah, what doest thou?” If the tree, when it is young, is permitted to grow up crooked and misshapen, it will remain crooked and misshapen during its whole existence. So is it with the child, “Trained up in the way that it should go, when it is of mature age, it will not depart from it.” But, if neglected as to training and the use of means, the result desired cannot be expected, even if many prayers from a godly father should be laid on the altar. Thus it was with Absalom, and thus it was with Abimelech.
3. A perverse son may receive a wicked training away from his pious father’s eye. Thus it was apparently with Abimelech. His mother seems to have had most to do with his training, and she was a Canaanite and idolater. He would naturally be kept separate from the other sons, who were all children of Israelitish mothers, and must have regarded Abimelech as a son of the bondwoman. Thus he was cradled in an idolatrous circle in reality, though this was concealed from the public eye by the fact that Gideon was his father, and that, during the season of his youth he lived in his father’s house. Naturally also, he would attract to himself idolatrous companions, of whom there were only too many everywhere, notwithstanding all that Gideon could do to reduce the number. These were the circumstances that determined the general aspect of his religious character. His natural force of action, selfwilledness, and towering ambition would do all the rest. Hence we have in him one of the worst characters in Scripture history. We do not find in the picture one single redeeming element, and there is scarcely a single element of wickedness awanting.
4. The course of Gideon’s son was one of unmitigated wickedness.
(1.) He begins with casting off all fear of God. “Conscience must be either satisfied or seared, if a man would act with thorough decision,” says a wise thinker. Abimelech chose the latter course; and, as the most effectual way to sear it, he would not recognise the existence of the true God at all.
(2.) He dares to usurp the sacred seat which was reserved for Jehovah alone, in being king over His chosen people. Had this been merely a vacant secular throne, like one of those on which any of the other kings of the earth sat, it had even then been an act of impertinent presumption, when there were 70 persons, of far more legitimate title than he possessed, ready to occupy it if necessary. But the act becomes one of daring irreverence, when, without warrant, and in the face of a direct prohibition from the jealous Jehovah, he thrusts himself into the holiest office on earth, except that of the High Priest alone, if indeed that is to be excepted.
(3.) Self-aggrandisement was his only object. He could not assign a single reason of right or of merit for what he had done. On the contrary, his character was so full of blemishes, that to exalt him to a throne was the last thought that would have occurred to other minds, had he not made the suggestion himself. Self-worship is the meanest of all kinds of idolatry, and for a man to push himself forward to occupy the first place, when he ought to take the last, only exposes his memory to infamy in the future. Yet with him every sacred interest was cast to the winds to gratify an inordinate ambition.
(4.) His first step to accomplish his purpose is falsehood. He insinuates that Gideon’s sons were, each and all, ambitious to become king in Israel, and that matters had gone so far that the men of Israel must make their choice—the fact being, that in no breast save his own was any such thought cherished.
(5.) His second step is to hire money from the headquarters of idolatry to serve his wicked purposes (Jdg_9:4). “This was like going to the forge of Satan to find means to kill the servants of Jehovah” (Trapp).
(6.) His third step was to make bosom friends of the vilest of characters. If a man is to be judged by the company he keeps, what can we think of the son of the noblest man in Israel choosing for his associates the desperadoes of society! In place of saying, as a true son of Gideon ought to do, “Gather not my soul with sinners, &c.,” we see him looking about for characters vile enough to assist him in accomplishing his Satanic devices.
(7.) His fourth step, and the darkest of all, is to commit murder wholesale on the family of his father. As if it were a light thing to take the life of one brother, another, and another follow, until 70 lives are taken—all sons of his father, and every son he had—every one of them innocent, and an utter stranger to the thought of aspiring to the crown of Israel! How expensive is the work of sin! Blood must flow in streams, and the nearest relatives must be sacrificed, ere its ends can be attained!
(8.) Finally, he gets himself elected King by an apostate city, in the interests of idolatry. The Shechemites utter no protest against the hydra-headed crime, but rather strengthen the perpetrator’s hands for its commission, and even regard it as a recommendation for their suffrages, that he had destroyed the house of him who had destroyed Baal. Say not that a man’s religious belief has nothing to do with the colour of his conduct. Like king, like people!
Examples of more decidedly opposite characters are not to be found in the Book of God, than those of Gideon and his son Abimelech. They are wide as the poles asunder. We can hardly imagine how such a son could be reared under such a paternal roof. But it forms a palpable condemnation of Gideon’s sin, in having married a Canaanite.
III. Useful purposes are served in recording a wicked man’s life in the Book of God.
It might be said, such a record would only be a blur on the page. And it might farther be objected, that, as the name of the wicked is destined to rot, it seems inconsistent with this to inscribe it in the book of true immortality. But—
1. The record is given as a curse and not as a blessing. Gladly would the wicked man hail the announcement that his deeds were not to be recorded. It would be accepted by him as a valuable boon, that his name were allowed to lie in perpetual oblivion. But God puts a brand on it, and holds it up to the execration of all coming time. It was so with Cain, when a mark was set upon him; so with Ahaz, when the finger was pointed emphatically to his sin (2Ch_28:22); so with Jezebel, Pharaoh, Judas, etc. Their names go down to posterity, with a character of infamy indelibly stamped on them. Thus they are made a mark for perpetual hissing to the whole world of men in after times. Gladly would the wicked dead continue to lie in their graves if they could, when the great voice is heard, “Let the earth and sea give up their dead.” For when they awake it will be “to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan_12:2). How beautiful is the reverse experience of those who accept of the Saviour, and trust in His glorious redemption—“your sins and iniquities will I remember no more.” The man is blessed “whose sin is covered” (Psa_32:1).
2. Such a record illustrates the truth of God’s testimony respecting human character. It is put down “that God may be justified when He speaks, and clear when He judges.” Has He said that “the heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked;” in this dark history is the proof—has He said, “there is no fear of God before the wicked man’s eyes,” “his mouth is full of cursing, deceit, and fraud, etc.” (Psa_10:7-11); in such a history as that here set down we see it all realised.
3. It shows by practical example the frightfully evil nature of sin when allowed to develop itself unchecked. It is a frightful thing for a creature to give up his Creator, as all sin implies. The consequences cannot fail to be of the most serious character. There must be a fearful perversion of his moral nature, in abandoning a fellowship so pure, in despising a friendship so essential to his happiness, in violating an authority so sacred, and in wantonly forsaking the infinitely Good One. The immediate effect must be to come under the Divine frown, and to lose the Divine image. According to the excellence of the object despised, so must be the deep-rootedness of the evil disposition in the heart that rejects it. And as the law of progress applies to character, the longer this disposition is cherished, or the more unreservedly it is brought into exercise, it must become more and more inveterate. “Sin becomes exceeding sinful,” and more and more sinful (Rom_7:13).
In Abimelech we see sin developing itself unchecked. He throws the reins on his lusts, especially his lust of power, and we see before us a monster rather than a man. For here there is everything to shock the moral sense. An exhibition is made of what sin naturally leads to, when allowed to operate without restraint. It turns man into an evil spirit, it makes a fearful wreck of our moral nature. This illustrates the greatness of the deliverance wrought by the Saviour, when “He gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.”
4. Wicked deeds recorded are beacons set up, to warn us off from the rocks and whirlpools of sin. They show that a course of sin is like sailing among sunk rocks, or falling under the destructive sweep of a vortex. The full malignity of sin is not to be told in words, but has to be seen in acts. It is a headlong rush, a maddening rage, “a possession of seven devils,” a bursting through all bounds, a rampant and reckless career of treading under foot the sacred commands of the Most High—as seen in the chapter of life here recorded. Abimelech is a finger post set up in God’s Providence, with the words inscribed, “Beware of the broad road that leadeth to destruction!” When allowed full scope, it becomes so virulent, that almost every word in the vocabulary which is expressive of an evil quality would be required to tell its many sides and degrees of evil. It is venomous and baneful, a desolating scourge, a withering blight. It is savage in its conceptions against the innocent, and merciless in carrying its designs into execution. It is a destructive force marring and crushing everything that comes in its way—corrupting, corroding and polluting whatever is most fertile and beautiful in God’s world.
All this exhibited in actual life is a most emphatic testimony, that “the end of these ways is death,” and carries in its bosom the warning, “Avoid the evil way, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away.”
IV. God can bring accusers against the wicked when they fancy themselves most secure.
On the very coronation day, when this vile aspirant to the throne of Israel had just got the consummation of all his wishes gratified, and saw himself hailed by the thousands of one of the chief cities of the land as their king, suddenly a messenger from Jehovah appears on the scene with the language of solemn warning on his lips. It was as if the very rocks were made to cry out against such hideous wickedness. Had his heart been less hard, Abimelech could, like Herod after the murder of John (Mar_6:16), have exclaimed—“This is one of my brothers whom I have put to death.” Standing on an eminence among the rocks which overhung the valley, one of the seventy sons, all of whom were supposed to have been massacred, appears, as if risen from the dead, to act the part of an accusing conscience. The occasion was so strong, that the very Mount of Blessing (Gerizim, where Jotham stood) must for once thunder out a curse, against the perpetrators of the awful deeds, which had that day culminated in the unheard of act, of an impious mortal rushing forward to occupy the throne which, of all others, was reserved for the God of Israel alone!
Thus did God meet Adam, on the very day when he sinned, and hid himself among the trees of the garden. Thus suddenly was Haman caught in a snare by that very queen who had honoured him by inviting him to a special banquet, where none but the king, queen, and Haman were present. At the moment when his proud wishes were being gratified to the full, his fall came swiftly—in the twinkling of an eye, from a hand that he least of all expected. So did Ahab encounter Elijah, at the very moment he entered to take possession of that long-coveted vineyard of Naboth. At the moment, when the man, who tried to crush the Church of God in its infancy, was receiving honours from the people as a god, “the angel of the Lord smote him, and he was eaten of worms and gave up the ghost” (Act_12:21-23; Job_20:23; Hab_2:11; 2Ki_5:26; Jos_7:18-21).
V. Silent nature is full of lessons of wisdom for irrational men. It needs only a Jotham to bring them out, and apply them. Long before our poet told us in words, there were—
“Tongues in trees, books in the running brooks,
Sermons in stones, and good in everything.”
“Ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee—or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee,” etc. (Job_12:7-9). If the fable (which this paragraph is supposed to be) be the work of fancy, or a narrative woven by fancy from the elements of nature, in order to press home some important truth, it is not the less instructive; for nature is in all its aspects essentially a teacher. It not only contains illustrations of spiritual truth, happy but accidental likenesses of it, but its very framework is so constructed, as to furnish emblems to the eye of sense of the great spiritual meaning which lies in the background. The world of spirit which is unseen, and which existed before the material world, repeats itself in that world; so that, what we see in nature is the counterpart of what exists in the realm of spirits. It bears witness for that realm, and shadows it forth. Man’s body is so fashioned, as to shadow forth in its curves and features and noble upright form, especially too in its expression of the countenance, the higher qualities of his spirit. In some sense, “the things of earth are the copies of things in heaven.” The objects in the mart, by the wayside, or in the field, are instruments through which man is educated to know much more of God. “This entire visible world, with its kings and subjects, parents and children, sun and moon, sowing and harvest, light and darkness, life and death, is a mighty parable—a great teaching of supersensuous truth, a help at once to our faith, and our understanding.”
LESSONS TAUGHT US BY THE TREES
1. Humility. None of the really good trees aspire to have a distinction above the others. They are content to remain in the place where their Creator has put them. The lofty and umbrageous tree does not boast itself above those that are small and tender, but rather flings its arms around them to shelter them.
2. Sense of responsibility. Each tree feels it has an office to fulfil, which is specially given to it to do, and which it must not leave undone.
3. Obedience and submission. There is no rebellion among the trees, against the authority of Him who appointed them their places, and assigned them their duties. That which is scantily laden, or bears a more common sort of fruit, does not murmur because it is not covered with rich clusters; but each seems content to bear that which is expected of it. It is obedient and submissive.
4. Mutual good-will. No tree wishes to despoil another tree of its glory. There is no joining together of those that are less favoured, against those that are renowned for fertility and beauty. There is neither a strife for precedence, nor do the others show jealousy, if any one is likely to have the precedence. So ought it to be among men of all classes, but especially among those who form the Church of God. All should feel they have the same nature, are trees planted by the same hand, watered by the same clouds, and warmed by the same sun; and so, being united by many ties in common, should grow peaceably together as one vineyard of the Lord of Hosts.
5. Entire dependence of each on the provision God has made for it. It is but in a secondary manner, that any one tree derives benefit from another. One may to some extent protect another from the fury of the blast, or contribute to it somewhat of heat. But all the primary conditions of health and strength to any tree, belong to the soil in which it is placed, to the air around it, to the sun that shines upon it, and to the rain or dew that falls upon it. Its root must be fastened in the soil, and on that everything depends in the first instance. The soil must be sufficient and rich in order to a luxuriant growth. The rain and dew must fall copiously, and the sun must send forth heat. In the spiritual vineyard these conditions are essentially required. Fellow Christians may in many ways be helpful to each other, but each one is dependent, for all that is primary, on God alone. Each one is rooted by God’s own hand in Christ, and built up in him; it is from Him that the rain and due of spiritual influences come down; and it is he who causes the Sun of Righteousness to arise with warmth and healing in his beams (Gal_1:15-16; Col_2:6-7; Hos_14:5; Hos_14:3-4; Mal_4:2). The great practical lesson taught by the trees therefore is, that the Christian’s primary duty is to look after his relations to his God, and see that these are all right, for it is on that that all which is essential to his growth depends.
VI.—To be useful is better than to reign.
All the good trees gave it as a reason for their refusal to wave their tops over the other trees, that they had each a useful vocation to fulfil, and, that the fulfilment of that vocation was a far more important thing, than to reign over others. To reign, is to live for the glorification of one’s self; to be useful, is to be a fountain head from which blessings might flow out to others. All the objects of Nature seem to say, we exist not for ourselves, but for the benefit of others around us. The sun shines not for itself, but to enlighten and warm the planets that revolve around him. The clouds float in the firmament, not on their own account, but to distil their watery treasures on the thirsty ground. The birds sing among the branches, and fill the grove with melody, to give delight to many a listening ear. The flowers put forth their blossom, and convey a pleasing sense of view to the eye; while the trees and shrubs grow, and wave their branches in the breeze, not on their own account, but to glorify Him who created them, for the gracefulness of their form, the richness of their hues, the sweet fragrance they emit, or the excellent fruit they bear.
It is the law also for all true Christians—“None of us liveth to himself,” &c., “Ye are the salt of the earth,” “Ye are the light of the world.” And the rule they have to follow is, “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Rom_14:7-8; Mat_5:13-14; Act_20:35) He who lives to do good to others around him, and especially to advance the cause of God on the earth, has the consciousness that he lives not in vain, that he is not a cypher but a valuable integer in society, that he is spending the talents given to him to a profitable account—with the two gaining other two—that he has thought more of God’s glory while passing through the world than of his own, and that his place will be missed when he is gone.
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.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 Jdg 9:8-15
Jdg 9:8-15
I. From the answer of the olive tree we learn that usefulness is better than honour. Usefulness, if it be of the higher kind, is attained through long growing and long striving. But when it is attained, when there is a normal regulated usefulness flowing steadily out of a man’s life, when he serves God and man where he is and by what he is, the offer of promotion ought to carry with it some very strong and clear enforcements to induce him to think of acceptance.
Read full note →
II. Notice, next, the answer of the fig tree. Sweetness is the one quality which the fig tree felt that it possessed. There is in some human souls a sweetness which imparts a fig tree flavour to the whole life. When you meet one who possesses this gift moving about among rough ways and persons, consider that you see something far more than merely pleasant, something of exceeding value to the world.
III. The vine can do only one thing—it can bear clusters of grapes. But that one thing is of force and value enough to keep the vine steady under temptation. "Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?" As there are some human lives with sweetness in them as their main element, so there are some with this brighter, racier quality, which "cheers" and animates the spirits of others. Be a vine if you can be nothing more; distil and distribute the wine of life.
IV. Society, in all its sections, is full of bramble men, who are striving for every sort of personal elevation and advantage. By the picture in this parable I want you to scorn the principles they act upon, and to know that, by God’s grace, you stand on a moral elevation far above them.
A. Raleigh, From Dawn to the Perfect Day, p. 132.
The youngest son of Gideon, Jotham, seems to have inherited the hereditary wit of the family, so conspicuous in Gideon and in his father. He must also have inherited his father’s cool courage and daring; a courage which enabled him to collect his thoughts in the midst of imminent danger, and to utter them in circumstances which would have caused the voice of most men to tremble.
I. The fable requires little explanation. It was meant to be, and it is, self-interpreting. We see, too, that it is a felicitous condensation of the principle which regulates the acceptance of many of the high honours and rewards of life. It will not do for every one to say with the fig tree, should I forsake my sweetness and my good fruit, and go to be promoted over the trees? It is important to recognise on the one hand, that we cannot decline all honour, and ought not to shrink from advancement in life; and on the other hand, we must recognise that it may be humility, but it may also be selfish love of ease, which prompts us to say, Should I leave my fatness and my sweetness and go to be promoted over the trees?
II. A still wider application of the fable will occur to any one who carefully reads it. For what strikes the reader most is perhaps the sagacious contentment of the olive, the fig, and the vine—a contentment and dread of change, which reproach us for our restlessness and craving to be always bettering ourselves. (1) The "fatness" which the olive was not disposed to forsake in exchange for high position, may very naturally be supposed to symbolise the unselfishness which belongs to many obscure positions in life. (2) Again, many lives are soured and rendered wretched to all connected with them, because it is not recognised that sweetness is that to which they are specially called. Few seem to understand the power of sweetness in persuading men, or, if they understand it, cannot control or humble themselves to use it.
III. A third lesson which we gather from this fable is how contemptible a thing is display and worldly honour, and what is called style. There is something better in life than mere show or the mere attainment of the rewards accorded by the world to its successful men. The real value of human life does not lie on the surface, lies indeed so deep that many people never see it at all. If a man will only humbly accept what comes to him, and strive to do good as he has opportunity, he will not lack the blessing of God, but will be like the vine that cheereth God and man.
M. Dods, Israel’s Iron Age, p. 61.
References: Jdg 9:8-15.—S. Cox, Expositor’s Notebook, p. 64; S. Goebel, The Parables of Jesus, p. 9; Parker, vol. vi., p. 51. Jdg 9:48.—Ibid., p. 166; S. Baring-Gould, Village Preaching for a Year, p. 270.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 The Story of Abimelech
The Story of Abimelech
This chapter breaks the regular order of the book, since Abimelech is not thought of as a judge, and the Canaanites are not here regarded as oppressors. The story, however, throws a valuable light on the way in which Israel fell into unfaithfulness, when free from the yoke of foreign oppression.
Read full note →
1-6. The rise of Abimelech.
1. As being born out of regular wedlock, Abimelech would be brought up at first in his mother's family, and reckoned as belonging to it (Jdg_9:2). It seems to have been of considerable position in Shechem. Shechem] still, as in Genesis 34, chiefly Canaanitish, in spite of being Joseph's burial-place (Jos_24:32). Threescore and ten pieces of silver] between seven and eight pounds sterling.
4. Vain] worthless: hired mercenaries of no character.
5. On one stone] as if they had been sacrificial animals (1Sa_14:33.).
6. Millo] apparently a Shechemite family, or a town near Shechem (Jdg_9:20). The word has a different meaning in 1Ki_9:15; 2Ki_12:20. King] Abimelech is no Israelite king, but simply the ruler over the single city of Shechem; nothing implies that the Hebrews recognised this royalty. Plain] RV 'oak': cp. Gen_35:4; Jos_24:26; 1Sa_11:15. Pillar] like the 'asherah,' a regular feature of a Canaanite shrine.
7-21. Jotham's parable and flight.
7. Gerizim] Shechem lies between Gerizim (nearly 3,000 ft. high) on the S. and Ebal on the N.
8-15. Jotham's Fable. Its connexion with the moral which Jotham wishes to point is somewhat loose, and perhaps it was a popular story; but it sufficiently expresses Jotham's hatred and contempt; feelings which find further vent in the sarcasm of the prayer in 16-20. Cp. the fable of Jehoash in 2Ki_14:9. The fruit-trees render the real service; the bramble desires the empty honour.
21. Beer] not known. The name means 'Well' (cp. Beer-sheba).
22-33. The Conspiracy of Gaal.
22. Over Israel] at most over the Manassites who were connected with the Canaanites of Shechem.
23. God sent] cp. 1Sa_16:14 and 1Ki_22:19. For the general attitude which regards God as the source of good and evil alike, cp. Amo_3:6; Job_2:10. This evil spirit, however, obviously comes as an inevitable retribution upon Abimelech, in fulfilment (as the writer means to imply) of Jotham's curse (Jdg_9:57).
25. The main eastern and northern roads both pass through Shechem. Since Abimelech probably took toll from the merchants who used them, these highway robberies would injure his treasury and his reputation alike.
26. Gaal is introduced quite abruptly; Jdg_9:26-41 are really in parenthesis: the main narrative is continued at Jdg_9:42. Ebed means 'slave'; probably the name was Obed, 'servant' (of God).
27. Made merry] RV 'held festival': see on Jdg_21:21. Gaal seizes his opportunity at this time of excitement.
28. Him] in each case Abimelech. The son of Jerubbaal] and therefore no true Shechemite. For serve, etc., it would make better sense to read 'Ye are servants of the men of Hamor,' etc. Hamor] cp. Gen_33:19.
29. And he said] we should read (continuing Gaal's speech) 'and I would say.' Gaal is not interviewing Abimelech (Jdg_9:30), who is at Arumah (Jdg_9:41).
31. Privily] RV 'craftily,' or as RM 'at Tormah,' which perhaps stands for Arumah.
32. The field] the usual expression for the open country: cp. Jdg_9:36.
33. The whole atmosphere reeks with intrigue and cruelty: an eloquent comment on the Canaanite character.
34-49. The Conspiracy is stamped out.
35. The entering of the gate] the usual meeting-place. Gaal does not suspect that Zebul has discovered his plot, and is not on his guard.
37. Plain of Meonenim] lit. 'oak of the soothsayers.' Cp. Gen_12:6; Jdg_4:5. Trees in Palestine often served as landmarks; a conspicuous tree is still regarded as endowed with sanctity.
38. Zebul now throws off the disguise.
41. Arumah] is unidentified. Gaal has awakened no real enthusiasm; but neither has Abimelech.
42. The main narrative is continued from Jdg_9:25.
45. To 'sow with salt' (Deu_29:23) is to make utterly desolate.
46. The tower of Shechem] This appears to be a place outside Shechem (perhaps like Millo, Jdg_9:20), whose inhabitants fear a fate similar to that of Shechem itself. Hold] a rare word for 'hiding place,' as in 1Sa_13:6 here, perhaps, meaning some strong and spacious chamber in the temple. The god Berith] RV 'El-berith': see on Jdg_8:33.
48. Zalmon] probably a neighbouring hill. The hill in Psa_68:14 is thought to be E. of Jordan in the Hauran range.
50-57. The Death of Abimelech.
50. Thebez] 13 m. NE. of Shechem.
51. Top] RV 'roof,' which would probably be flat, with a parapet.
53. A piece of a millstone] RV 'an upper millstone,' detachable from the lower; such stones weighed about 27 pounds. The mill is of course worked by hand. All to brake] RV 'brake.' 'To brake 'is really one word, meaning 'smashed' or 'broke in.'
54. Armourbearer] op. 1Sa_14:6; 1Sa_31:4. The king's attendant has just time to give him a mortal wound.
55. Men of Israel] see on Jdg_9:22. The Israelites have supported Abimelech against their common foes.
56. Rendered] RV 'requited.'
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 CHAPTER 9 Abimelech the King and His Wickedness
CHAPTER 9 Abimelech the King and His Wickedness
1. The murder of Gideon’s sons (Jdg 9:1-6)
Read full note →
2. Jotham’s parable (Jdg 9:7-21)
3. Scenes of strife and destruction of Shechem (Jdg 9:22-49)
4. Abimelech’s end (Jdg 9:50-57)
The story of Abimelech is intensely interesting in its typical meaning. Abimelech was the offspring of an unlawful union: the son of Gideon and the concubine in Shechem. He was half Israelite and half Canaanite. Abimelech means “my father was king”; he claims therefore supremacy, lordship over the people Israel on the basis of succession. His father had refused that honor; the bastard offspring claims it. He gains his object by a conspiracy and by murdering the sons of his father, with the exception of Jotham, who hid himself And this domineerer over the people bears the name of the Philistine kings.
This illustrates perfectly that corrupt system of Christendom which is half Christian and half heathenish--Rome. It is like Abimelech--a bastard system. She is called in Revelation “Jezebel,” the heathen woman who was married to an Israelitish king. Rome claims apostolic succession through Peter, who disclaimed any preeminence, but rather warned against “lording over God’s heritage.” Ecclesiastical assumption to control and govern the people of God, so prominent in corrupt Christendom, is dearly indicated in Abimelech’s act of putting himself forward as king. And the murderous spirit of Abimelech is there likewise.
Jotham (Jehovah is perfect), the youngest son of Gideon, is the witness against it. He uttered a parable from Gerizim. The olive, the fig-tree and the vine refused to reign over the trees. The bramble becomes king to devour with fire the cedars of Lebanon. He applied the parable to Abimelech, who had been made king.
“The tendency of man’s heart is to make another king than God, to put leaders in His place, and thus to destroy the use and blessing for which the olive, the fig, the vine, the various gifts of God, are given. But just those who are really worthiest will most surely refuse to leave their spheres of happy service, their sweetness, and their fruit, to go to ‘wave over,’--flutter idly in the wind over the trees. Thus royalty comes naturally to the thorn-bush, which need give up nothing, but which has thus nothing in its gift but thorns,--such as, indeed, the men of Succoth (chapter 8:16) were taught with. But worse would come than this--the fire of God’s wrath, which, from this side and from that, would destroy both king and people” (Numerical Bible).
Three years later the prediction in Jotham’s parable comes true; fire came out from Abimelech and devoured the men of Shechem; and fire came out from Shechem and devoured Abimelech. It was God who sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem. Then there is the revolt of Gaal, (loathing), the son of Ebed (servitude), and he opposed Abimelech. Something similar came to pass in Christendom. On account of the domineering rule of Rome there was the revolt against her. The overthrow of the ecclesiastical oppressor was attempted. But Gaal’s attempt fails. He is overcome. Abimelech and his officer Zebul are victorious. The revolt has failed. Even so today Rome is gaining, and those who “protested” once against her wickedness, now are following her pernicious ways once more. Abimelech’s end was brought about by a piece of a millstone which a woman cast on him, and a young man thrust him through with a sword and he died. It was a fearful end in judgment. Even so it is written of Babylon, the mother of harlots, Rome. “And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more.” ... “And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth” (Rev 18:21; Rev 18:24).
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v1 Abimelech Becomes King
Abimelech Becomes King
v. 1. And Abimelech, the son of Jerubbaal, by his concubine, Jdg 8:31, went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, all her nearest relatives, and communed with them and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,
Read full note →
v. 2. Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? He presumes that the position of judge in Israel is hereditary, and craftily suggests that it would be of advantage to have only one man in that office rather than many. Remember also that I am your bone and your flesh, for he, through his mother, was a blood-relative of the citizens of Shechem. These two points he wanted them to consider carefully.
v. 3. And his mother’s brethren, acting upon the suggestion of Abimelech, spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words; and their hearts, those of all the Shechemites, inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. They permitted themselves to be led astray by his perversion of the facts.
v. 4. And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver (barely $45) out of the house of Baal-berith, for as idolaters they were opposed to Jerubbaal and his family, who had abolished idolatry wherever his influence extended, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, a body-guard from the idle rabble, the town-bums, easily enough converted into thugs, which followed him.
v. 5. And he went unto his father’s house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren, the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone, dragging them forth for a formal slaughter; notwithstanding yet Jotham, the youngest son of Jerubbaal, was left; for he hid himself.
v. 6. And all the men of Shechem, after this bloody deed, gathered together, and all the house of Millo, the name of the fort or citadel of Shechem, and went and made Abimelech king by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem, at the great stone, set up by Joshua under the oak, Jos 24:25-26. Thus the followers of Baal, thugs and murderers, had triumphed over the followers of the true God. It is always a heavy chastisement in both Church and State if the enemies of the Lord obtain the power.
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 On vv1, 3, 5 Jerub Baal
Jerub Baal
This is another name for Gideon. See how you translated this in Judges 6:32.
Read full note →
Please say this, so that all the leaders in Shechem may hear, 'Which is better for you, that all seventy sons of Jerub Baal rule over you, or that just one rule over you?'
This has a quotation within a quotation. A direct quotation can be stated as an indirect quotation. AT: "Please ask the leaders of Shechem if they would rather have all seventy sons of Jerub Baal rule over them, or if they would rather have just one of his sons rule over them." (See: Quotes Within Quotes and Direct and Indirect Quotations)
seventy
"70" (See: Numbers)
I am your bone and your flesh
Here "your bone and your flesh" represents being someone's relative. AT: "I am a member of your family" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
Abimelech
Shechem
clan
rule
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.