Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 3:13
And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees.
13. Ammon and Amalek ] Moab and Ammon appear in alliance against Israel in 2Ch 20:1; Psa 83:6 f. includes Amalek also. The Amalekites were Bedouin of the deserts S. of Palestine, in the N. of the Sinaitic peninsula, cf. Num 13:29 and ch. Jdg 1:16 n., Jdg 6:3. The Dtc. editor generalizes the invasion (‘and smote Israel ’); perhaps he also enlarges the forces of the enemy.
the city of palm trees ] i.e. Jericho, see Jdg 1:16. The district was once famous for its palms, balsam woods, and gardens (cf. the glowing description of Josephus, War iv. 8, 3); now ‘a dozen isolated palms represent the splendid groves of the past,’ Bliss in DB. ii. 581. At this period the possession of Jericho enabled Eglon to pursue his conquests W. of the Jordan; the city evidently commanded the district; later on it belonged to the kingdom of David, 2Sa 10:5. But according to Jos 6:24-26 JE Jericho was burnt to the ground and laid under a curse by Joshua, while 1Ki 16:34 records the rebuilding of the city and the fulfilment of the curse in the time of Ahab. We must reconcile as best we can these conflicting statements.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The children of Ammon (Bent-Ammon), almost always so spoken of from their ancestor Ben-ammi Gen 19:38, seem to be under the leadership of the king of Moab, as do also the Amlekites: this is perhaps the strengthening spoken of in Jdg 3:12. In Judg. 6 the combination is Midianites, Amalekites, and children of the East, or Arab tribes. In the narrative of Jephthahs judgeship, the Ammonites alone are mentioned; but with a reference to the Moabites, and as if they were one people Jdg 11:24. The Amalekites appear as the constant and bitter foes of the Israelites (Exo 17:8 notes and references); and the naming a mountain in Ephraim, the mount of the Amalekites Jdg 12:15 is probably a memorial of this joint invasion of Moabites and Amalekites, and marks the scene either of their occupation, or of some signal victory over them.
The city of palm trees: i. e. Jericho Jdg 1:16, having been utterly destroyed by Joshua, and not rebuilt until the time of Ahab Jos 6:24-26; 1Ki 16:34, can only have existed at this time as an unwalled village, – like Jerusalem after its destruction by Nebuzaradan, until Nehemiah rebuilt its waits – and like its modern representative er-Riha, a village with a fortress for the Turkish garrison. This occupation of Jericho should be compared with the invasion in Jdg 10:9, where two out of the three tribes named, Benjamin and Ephraim, are the same as those here concerned, and where Jdg 10:7 the Philistines are coupled with the Ammonites, just as here Jdg 3:31 the Philistines are mentioned in near connection with the Moabites. See Introduction.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 13. The city of palm trees.] This the Targum renders the city of Jericho; but Jericho had been destroyed by Joshua, and certainly was not rebuilt till the reign of Ahab, long after this, 1Kg 16:34. However, as Jericho is expressly called the city of palm trees, De 34:3, the city in question must have been in the vicinity or plain of Jericho, and the king of Moab had seized it as a frontier town contiguous to his own estates. Calmet supposes that the city of palm trees means En-gaddi.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
i.e. Jericho, as may be gathered from Deu 24:3; Jdg 1:16; 2Ch 28:15. Not the city, which was demolished, but the territory belonging to it. Here he fixed his camp, partly for the admirable fertility of that soil; and partly because of its nearness to the passage over Jordan, which was most commodious, both for the conjunction of his own forces, which lay on both sides of Jordan; and to prevent the conjunction of the Israelites in Canaan with their brethren beyond Jordan; and to secure his retreat into his own country, which therefore the Israelites prevented, Jdg 3:28.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek,…. Either the Lord gathered them to Eglon, inclined them to enter into a confederacy with him, to assist in the war against Israel; or the king of Moab got them to join with him in it, they being his neighbours, and enemies to Israel, and especially Amalek:
and went and smote Israel; first the two tribes and a half, which lay on that side Jordan Moab did, whom it is reasonable to suppose he would attack first; and having defeated them, he came over Jordan:
and possessed the city of the palm trees; Jericho, as the Targum, which was set with palm trees; see De 34:3; not the city itself, for that was destroyed by Joshua, and not rebuilt until the time of Ahab; but the country, about it, or, as Abarbinel thinks, a city that was near it; here Josephus says t he had his royal palace; it is probable he built a fort or garrison here, to secure the fords of Jordan, and his own retreat; as well as to keep up a communication with his own people, and prevent the tribes of the other side giving any assistance to their brethren, if able and disposed to do it.
t Antiqu. l. 5. c. 4. sect. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(13) The children of Ammon.They were closely allied with the Moabites by affinities of race and character. (Gen. 19:37-38.) We find them united with Moab against Jehoshaphat in 2Ch. 20:1. (See Jdg. 11:24.) It has been supposed that Chepharhaammonai (Jos. 18:24), or the village of the Ammonites, is a memorial of this conquest (Stanley, Jewish Church, ii. 316).
Amalek.The wild desert clans, which are united under this name, had been from the first the bitterest enemies of Israel. They had attacked the sick and feeble of their rearguard in the wilderness, and, after the battle of Rephidim, had called down on themselves the internecine anger of Israel (Exo. 17:8-16; Deu. 25:17), which finally found expression in the reign of Saul (1Sa. 15:2-8). They are first mentioned in Gen. 14:7, and it is probable that there was a tribe of Amalekites older than those descended from Eliphaz.
The city of palm trees.No doubt Jericho. (See Jdg. 1:16.) The verb possessed by no means implies that the whole city was necessarily re-built, still less that it was fortified. The palace of king Eglon was probably a wooden structure.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
13. And he gathered Not the Lord, but Eglon gathered unto himself, (see Sept.,) and went and smote, and possessed. Ammon was an incestuous child of Lot by his younger, as Moab was by his elder, daughter. These two nations were intimately related through their entire biblical history. The Ammonites cannot be very exactly located. They seem to have been migratory and predatory, like the modern Bedouins, and hence ready to join the Moabites in a war with Israel. See on Jos 12:2.
Amalek A nomadic tribe occupying the peninsula of Sinai and the wilderness stretching away to the hill country of Southern Palestine. They dwindled into a band of robbers, and were destroyed by David at Ziklag. 1Sa 30:16-19. See more on Jdg 6:3; Gen 14:7; Exo 17:8.
The city of palm trees Jericho was so called because of the groves of palms in its vicinity. See on Jos 2:1. According to Josephus, the course of Eglon’s conquest was first to gain dominion over the eastern tribes, a portion of whose land had been wrested from his ancestors, then to make a sudden incursion into Western Palestine, establishing his headquarters at Jericho, the key of the whole country. Here, according to Josephus, he built a royal palace, and at this place he was assassinated by Ehud.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And he gathered to him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and he went and smote Israel and possessed the city of the palm trees.’
This city of the palm trees must have been Jericho, for the champion raised up was a Benjaminite. Thus the territory of Reuben and Gad was affected, and a part of Benjamin. Whether it was Yahweh Who arranged the confederacy, or the king of Moab, or both, the result was the same. Ammon and Moab were situated side by side in Transjordan and regularly acted together, for they were brother tribes, so much so that they had jointly come under Yahweh’s judgment (Deu 23:3-6). Amalek were at least partly Bedouin and fairly widespread.
“And went and smote Israel and possessed the city of the palm trees.” Presumably first the Reubenites and part of Gad, and then part of Benjamin. It probably did not affect the other tribes. Jericho had not been rebuilt, but there may have been a temporary settlement on it, or a guardpost. But the surrounding area was very attractive. It guarded the Jordan crossing. This was presumably the outer limit of their depredations.
Why then did the tribal confederation not come to their aid? They may themselves have been involved with their own protection against marauding enemies and unable to leave their own area. Or it may simply indicate a weak period in the tribal confederacy when they were not prepared to do so because of the weakness of their dedication to Yahweh. Possibly the threat was not seen as too great compared with other threats. The Philistines themselves probably presented a constant greater threat as they sought to expand their newly won territories.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
EXPOSITION
Jdg 3:13
The children of Ammon. The technical name of the Ammonite people (see Gen 19:38; Deu 2:19, Deu 2:37; Jdg 10:6, Jdg 10:11, Jdg 10:17, etc.). Sometimes, however, they are called Ammon, or Ammonites (see Deu 23:3; 1Sa 11:11, etc.). Amalek, or the Amalekites, were the hereditary enemies of Israel (see Exo 17:8-16; Jdg 5:14; Jdg 6:3, Jdg 6:33; Jdg 7:12; 1Sa 15:2, etc.). The Amalekites appear, from Gen 36:12, to have been a branch of the Edomites, and the latest mention of them in the Bible finds a remnant of them in the neighbourhood of Mount Seir in the days of Hezekiah (1Ch 4:41-43). The city of palm trees, i.e. Jericho, as Deu 34:3; Jdg 1:16. Jericho was the first city in Canaan which any one crossing the fords of the Jordan would come to (see Jos 2:1; Jos 6:1, etc.). Though no longer a fenced city, it was important from the fertility of the plain, and from its commanding the fords.
Jdg 3:15
Left-handed. It was a peculiarity of the warriors of the tribe of Benjamin to be left-handed (see Jdg 20:16; 1Ch 12:2). A left-handed man wearing no sword or dagger on his left side, and using his right hand for other purposes, would naturally throw a man off his guard. Thus Joab took Amasa by the beard with his right hand to kiss him, and then smote him with the sword in his left hand (2Sa 20:10). A deliverer. Hebrew, a saviour (Jdg 3:9). A present, i.e. their tribute.
Jdg 3:19
The quarries. It is uncertain whether this is the meaning of the Hebrew word. Its common meaning is images, as Deu 7:25, and elsewhere.
Jdg 3:20
For himself alone. It seems to have been Eglon’s habit to sit quite alone in this summer parlour for coolness sake, his attendants waiting in the adjoining antechamber. On this occasion he appears to have dismissed them from the antechamber, for greater privacy, while Ehud spake to him.
Jdg 3:22
The haft, etc. Ehud, feeling the necessity of killing Eglon at one blow, plunged the dagger into his body with such force that the handle went in with the blade, and he was unable to draw it out. Leaving it, therefore, buried in his fat, he went out at once into the parshedon, or antechamber, for so it is best to render the last words of the verse, and thence into the misederon, the outer porch, having first locked the door of the summer chamber. The words parshedon and misederon occur only here, and the former is very variously rendered.
Jdg 3:24
Covereth his feet, i.e. is asleep (see 1Sa 24:3). The servants, finding the door locked, and all quiet within, coneluded that he was taking his siesta in the heat of the day.
Jdg 3:26
The quarries. See above, Jdg 3:19. Seirath, or rather has-seirah, is not known as the name of a place. It seems to mean the rough or woody district, the forest in the hill country of Ephraim, where there was good shelter to hide in.
Jdg 3:27
He blew a trumpet. Like Alfred in the marshes of Somerset, he gathered a host around him in the shelter of the forest; and then, full of faith in his Divine mission, “strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might,” dashed down boldly into the plain, and, seizing the fords, cut off all communication between the Moabites at Jericho and their countrymen east of the Jordan. They could neither escape into Moab nor get help from Moab. Thrown into confusion by the death of their king and the suddenness of the attack, the Moabites fell to the number of 10,000 men; and so ended the second servitude, to be followed by a rest (if the numeral in the text is sound) of eighty years.
Jdg 3:31
Of the Philistines. This is an isolated movement of the Philistines, alluded to in Jdg 10:11, but of which we have no further details. In Jdg 10:6 we read of Israel worshipping the gods of the Phllistines, and of an alliance between the Ammonites and Philistines to vex Israel; but the precise connection between the events of the two chapters, or the exact time when either occurred, cannot be determined with certainty. Nothing more is known of Shamgar, except the mention of him in Deborah’s song (Jdg 5:6).
HOMILETICS
Jdg 3:12-31
Miscellaneous Thoughts.
Sin and punishment, repentance and ready mercy, prayer and answer to prayer, and the providential government of God, ordering all things after the counsel of his own will, are the general subjects which the course of the narrative still sets before us. But other questions of considerable difficulty arise from the history of Ehud to which we shall do well to direct our attention. To avoid repetition the analogous case of Jael recorded in Jdg 4:1-24. may be considered at the same time.
I. MORAL PROBLEMS. Ehud and Jael are both represented to us as signal deliverers raised up by God to save Israel from his oppressors. Ehud holds a conspicuous place among the judges, and Jael is declared in the song of Deborah to be “blessed among women.” But if we try this hero and this heroine by the standard of morality set up by Christianity and by modern Christian civilisation, we find that they were both guilty of acts of assassination coupled with deceit and treachery. Ehud deceived Eglon into his confidence by pretending to have a message to deliver to him from God, and then stabbed him; and Jael enticed Sisera into her tent with the offer Of hospitality that she might murder him in his sleep. Some commentators on this history have justified both these actions on the dangerous ground that they were done by God’s special command, and that what would in themselves have been crimes became virtues under the dispensing power of God’s sovereign will. But such an explanation is neither warranted by Scripture nor satisfactory in itself. The true explanation is to be found in deeper views of God’s providential government of the world, by which man’s free will is reconciled with the sovereignty of God. It is manifest that, given the existence of evil in the world, and given the truth that the Most High doeth according to his will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, it must be that bad actions as well as good ones subserve and bring about the purposes of God. That Jacob’s deceit obtained his father’s blessing, or that the malice of the Jews brought about the great sacrifice of the death of Christ, are no proofs that God approves either deceit or malice, but are merely instances how man’s free-will, whether choosing good or evil, brings about the will of Goda truth which however unfathomable to our reason, we can see to be necessary to the existence of the government of the world. This view, too, while it does not disturb our trust in the perfect righteousness of God, confirms our trust in the absolute sovereignty of his power. It leaves to the righteous a sense of perfect security amidst the perplexing spectacles of wrong and wickedness triumphing for a time.
II. GOOD AND EVIL IN THE SAME HUMAN WILL. But are we then to set down Ehud and Jael among the wicked of the earth? By no means. But we must turn to another difficult problem, the co-existence of good and evil in the same human will. It is a simple fact, borne witness to by profane as well as sacred history, that in individuals the main bent of whose character is towards good, a great amount of evil may remain, when such evil is countenanced by the public opinion of their day, and by the practice of their contemporaries. Just as even wise men retain many gross popular errors in science till they are refuted and exploded by the light of new discoveries, so even good men remain unconsciously under the dominion of special evils till some new light has shined upon them and exposed their real nature. The cruelty of our penal laws down to the present century, the existence of the slave-trade and of slavery within our own memory, persecution unto cruel deaths for religious opinions, the severities of arbitrary governments till exploded in the light of freedom, are familiar examples how things evil in themselves may be approved by good and humane men when they are sanctioned by prevalent custom and by public opinion. And the observation of these and numerous analogous facts teaches us the folly as well as the injustice of judging men of one age by the standard of another. Turning then to Ehud and Jael, we know that in their days human life was not more valued than it is in Afghanistan to the present hour. We know that the life of an enemy was looked upon as a lawful and desirable prey to be seized whenever possible. We know that, in times when the weak have no protection from the strong by the action of law, the only weapon of defence that remains to them, that of cunning and deceit, becomes sharpened by constant use, and is habitually worn at their side. Guile in communities where there is no justice is not the exception but the rule, and feigned blandishments have a tendency to increase the fierceness which they were intended to conceal, when the time for concealment is past. When, therefore, Ehud and Jael in their respective times saw the people of God whom they loved trampled underfoot by cruel tyrants and oppressors; when they saw the glory of God in whom they believed profaned by the triumphs of idolatry; when they heard the cries and groans of those who Were reduced to bondage and were plundered of their lands; when indignation burnt in their hearts, and the blush of shame rose to their cheek, for the indignities which the people suffered at heathen handscan we wonder that their generous hearts planned vengeance and deliverance, and that they accomplished their purpose by such weapons as came to hand. Violence was no crime, deceit was no sin in their eyes. They had not, it is true, the grace to wait in patient faith, and They had the noble spirit of self-sacrifice, seeking nothing for themselves, ready to give all they had on the altar of religion and patriotism. They had the faith in God which marks the saint, and the disdain of danger which marks the hero. And so he who in his compassionate estimate of human conduct accepts a man according to what he hath and not according to what he hath not, accepted their virtues and covered their sin, even as we hope he will accept us when we act up to the light given to us, even though our best deeds are mixed up with sin, and our holiest works fall immeasurably short of the purity and holiness of God.
III. THE CONCLUSION WHICH WE THUS ARRIVE AT IS, THAT GOD‘S PURPOSE OF DELIVERANCE TO HIS CHURCH MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY BAD MEN AS WELL AS BY GOOD, and by bad as well as good actions; that the degree in which good men fall short of the glory of God varies widely according to their opportunities; and that God graciously accepts the thoughts and intents of loving and faithful hearts in spite of sin committed in ignorance of his will, dealing with men’s souls through the infinite merits of the death of his dear Son, and with respect to the full satisfaction of his atoning bloodto whom he glory and praise for ever and ever! We learn also to take a juster view of the great figures which are set before us in Holy Scripture. They are not ideal figures or perfect characters. They are faithful delineations of the real lives of men and women who lived two or three thousand years ago; who stood up head and shoulders above their contemporaries in certain great gifts and qualities, but who necessarily partook of the character of the age they lived in. While we try to emulate their faith, we must judge of their actions by the light of the perfect law of God.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR
Jdg 3:12-14
Continued and repeated offence entails more signal punishment.
Jehovah is spoken of here as if he had become the God of heathen nations. He takes the side of the enemies of Israel, and strengthens them for the subjugation of his own people.
I. THE INSTRUMENT OF CHASTISEMENT IS SPECIALLY PREPARED BY GOD.
II. A VISIBLE SIGN OF DISGRACE EXISTED IN THE CONQUEST OF JERICHO.
III. THE PERIOD OF OPPRESSION WAS MORE THAN DOUBLED.M.
Jdg 3:15-26
Ehud.
There is no grandeur of character about Ehud, nor can he boast of an illustrious descent; yet he is sufficient for the purpose of delivering Israel. The defectiveness of the instrument makes the Divine agent the more conspicuous. We see here:
I. GOD‘S USE OF OBSCURE AGENTS AND INSTRUMENTALITIES. He was of the less important tribe; personally obscure; physically defective. So God uses the weak things of this world to confound the mighty, etc; that the praise may be given to the true source of power and wisdom. On the present occasion the choice was singularly felicitous, as it emphasised both subjection and deliverance as Divine. The left-handedness of Ehud also becomes curiously and instructively prominent. His very defect proved his fitness for the special task he had to accomplish. Is his power but a one-sided one, and hardly available for regular service? If he be in earnest an opportunity will be given for its effective use. It is exacted by God’s servants that they do what they can; the rest is to be left with himself.
II. DEFECTIVE POWERS AND CHARACTER RESTRICTED TO THEIR PROPER SPHERE. We can see from the history that the moral character of Ehud is not high. His success, humanly speaking, depended on duplicity, boldness, sleight of hand. He has decision enough to improve upon the advantage which he has thus obtained, and to weaken the enemy by a terrible blow. But there is no sign of the judicial faculty, nor even of great military skill. He rendered a signal service, and then apparently retired into obscurity. He held no high office, or great public responsibility.M.
Jdg 3:31
Shamgar.
A long interval has elapsed. The moral effect of Ehucl’s feat is beginning to lessen. Another warning is required. It is given from the opposite side of Israel in the incursion of six hundred Philistines. These are not many, but they may be spies, pickets, the vanguard of great armies. If any effect is to be produced upon those who are behind them it must be by a sudden and. decisive blow. The example of Ehud is a precedent. Another hero rises to deliver Israel at a stroke. And by a rude and apparently ill-adapted weapon. Shamgar illustrates:
I. THE INFLUENCE OF EXAMPLE. “After him”an Ehud inspires a Shamgar.
II. OF THE GREAT EFFECTS WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED BY IMPERFECT MEANS WHEN ZEALOUSLY AND SEASONABLY USED. The slaying of the six hundred deterred perhaps a whole series of invasions. It lent itself easily to poetic treatment, and appealed to popular imagination. The inspiration of the deed was unmistakable. A common man, a rude implement used by Jehovah at a set time for the deliverance of his people.
III. OF THE SIGNIFICANCE AND VALUE OF A SINGLE GREAT DEED, We hear nothing of Shamgar before or after.
1. Its greatness lay in the agent rather than the means. Previous preparation of character was required.
2. The moral effect was sudden, wide-spread, and decisive. God used it for a greater purpose than was immediately contemplated.
3. But it did not qualify for permanent official usefulness. It was followed up by no spiritual witness, or succession of services. It might be that Shamgar outlived his fame, or obscured it by unworthy life, etc. The constant service ought to supplement the individual exploit.M.
HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY
Jdg 3:15
A man left-handed.
The left-handed man may be regarded as a type of the abnormal, the eccentric. The existence and position of such people deserves notice.
I. THE PROVIDENTIAL GOODNESS OF GOD PERMITS PECULIAR VARIATIONS FROM THE NORMAL TYPE OF HUMANITY. God does not form all men according to one exact pattern. There is great variety in the nature, capacity, position, and vocation of men. While most are more or less near to the central type, some are far removed from it.
1. Such people should be treated with delicacy and consideration. In the present instance the variation is too slight to be an affliction, but in more severe cases the sufferers are likely to be painfully conscious of their peculiarity. Christian courtesy will devise means of making this as little apparent as possible.
2. The common human likeness which belongs to all men should be recognised beneath the few discrepancies which strike us forcibly just because they contrast with the multitudinous points of agreement. The peculiarities are superficial. The deeper nature is true to the normal type of the great human family. The left-handed man has the same heart as the right-handed man. If we had more breadth of sympathy, more care for real and deep human qualities, and less regard for superficial and trivial points, we should recognise more genuine humanity in the most eccentric people.
3. Peculiarities of constitution should be borne with calm faith in the wisdom and goodness of God. They may be severe enough to constitute a heavy cross. Yet they come from the hand of our Father who will not willingly afflict. It is well therefore to proceed to see how they may be turned to good accounts or how the evil of them may be ameliorated.
II. DIRECT ADVANTAGES MAY BE DERIVED FROM THE PECULIARITIES OF ABNORMAL CONSTITUTIONS. Ehud is able to effect his terrible purpose the more securely through the surprise occasioned by his unexpected action (Jdg 3:21). It is foolish to aim at eccentricity, because such an aim would result in abnormal habits without abnormal capacities. But where the peculiarity is natural it must be regarded as providential, and we should then cast about to see if it may not be turned to some advantage, so that the thing which appears at first as nothing but a hindrance may be found a source of some special aptitude. If the peculiarity be a positive affiiction, it may enable those who suffer from it to sympathise with and help their companions in similar affliction. Thus the blind may have a mission to the blind. If the peculiarity compel an unusual manner of acting it may be the means of accomplishing some special but much-needed work.
III. PECULIAR DISADVANTAGES IN ONE DIRECTION ARE OFTEN COMPENSATED FOR BY PECULIAR ADVANTAGES IN ANOTHER. The man who is weak in the right band, is left-handed, i.e. he has special strength and skill with his left hand. The blind often have a rare skill in music. Muscular weakness is often accompanied by intellectual. strength, deficient health by fine spiritual powers. Therefore instead of complaining of the peculiarity with which he is tried it would be well if the person who suffered under it were to be thankful for the special advantages with which he may be favoured. No peculiarity which may seem to exclude from the advantages of human society will sever from the love of God or from the sympathy of Christ the Good Physician.A.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
The last servitude was eight years, and this eighteen. Observe, how the Lord, according to his promise, increaseth the stripes upon increased rebellion. See Lev 26:27-28 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jdg 3:13 And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees.
Ver. 13. And possessed the city of palm trees. ] A poor city now, but there, belike, he had built some forts and earthworks; namely at Jericho, famous for palm trees, as Justin also testifieth.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Amalek. See note on Exo 17:16.
palm trees. Compare Deu 34:3.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Ammon: Jdg 5:14, Psa 83:6
the city: Jdg 1:16, Deu 34:3, Psa 83:7
Reciprocal: Jdg 6:3 – Amalekites Jdg 10:9 – passed Jdg 12:15 – in the mount
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jdg 3:13-14. City of palm-trees That is, Jericho. Not the city which was demolished, but the territory belonging to it. Here he fixed his camp, for the fertility of that soil, and because of its nearness to the passage over Jordan, which was most commodious both for the conjunction of his own forces, which lay on both sides of Jordan, to prevent the conjunction of the Israelites in Canaan with their brethren beyond Jordan, and to secure his retreat into his own country. Eighteen years The former servitude lasted but eight years; this eighteen; for if smaller troubles do not the work, God will send greater.