Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 12:1
And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward, and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire.
1. northward ] The wrong direction; so follow marg. to Zaphon, a place on the E. of Jordan near Succoth, Jos 13:27, and not far from the river; Jos., Ant. xiii. 12, 5 (Asophon).
and didst not call us ] Untrue, see Jdg 12:2. The western Ephraimites had no concern of their own with an Ammonite invasion on the E. of Jordan; their alleged grievance was a piece of pretension. For the threat cf. Jdg 9:49; Jdg 9:52, Jdg 14:15, Jdg 15:6.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Ch. Jdg 12:1-7. Jephthah’s conflict with the men of Ephraim
A sequel of the Ammonite war. Jephthah had returned to his house (Jdg 11:34), two months at least had passed (Jdg 11:39), the Gileadite forces had dispersed (implied by Jdg 12:4), when the arrogant and jealous temper of the Ephraimites broke out, as formerly after Gideon’s victory (Jdg 8:1-3), but this time without a shadow of pretext. The narrative Jdg 11:1-6 has been regarded as a mere replica of Jdg 8:1-3, which it certainly resembles; but the situation here is different, and the marked originality of the incident in Jdg 11:5-6 forbids us to question the historical character of the present section.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Compare the similar complaint of the Ephraimites to Gideon Jdg 8:1, when a civil war was only avoided by Gideons wise and patriotic moderation. The overhearing pride of Ephraim comes out in both occurrences (see also Jos 17:14-18).
We will burn thine house upon thee with fire – Compare the fierce threat of the Philistines to Samsons wife Jdg 14:15, and the yet fiercer execution Jdg 15:6. Burning appears as a mode of capital punishment Gen 38:24; Jos 7:25, and as a mode of desperate warfare (Jdg 1:8; Jdg 20:48; Jos 8:8, Jos 8:19, etc.).
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jdg 12:1-3
Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee?
Shams and frauds
Though these Ephraimites are long since dead and gone, there are many Ephraimites alive. They are men who will not share the conflict themselves, but are angry when others succeed.
I. There are people still who think nothing can be done without them. We find these people everywhere–not a few of them at home. Ask that busy, bustling housewife to take her children out into the country for a day; or ask her to attend church on a Sunday morning; or ask her to give a few hours to visiting among the sick and the poor and the sorrowful, what will she say? How can I leave my house? Who will attend to my affairs? If I were out of that house a few days it would all go to ruin. That woman has grown daughters who could and would gladly see to things if she would only let them. But she goes on in her foolish whim that nothing can be done without her. And I verily believe that not a few would rather have nothing done at all if they could not do it. In business, too, the same thing occurs. There are men who are slaves to their business. Neither their sons nor their confidential men, who would suffer any loss rather than neglect the governors interest, can be trusted. They must see to it, or it wont be done. Some day God puts such a man on his back. He is away six months with a serious illness. His sons, who have not been thought capable hitherto, have responsibility thrown upon them, and rise to the position. The man is humbled, shamed, or it may be, delighted to find that the business has done better with the infusion of the new blood than it did with the old. The Church of Christ, unfortunately, is afflicted with a large number of men who think nothing can be done without them. There are men who would rather the battle should be lost than others win it–who would almost wish that evil should remain rather than others have the honour of removing it. But what does it matter who gains the victory if it be gained? God can accomplish His purposes without any of us. Look over the pages of history, and you will find that workers fall, but the work goes on.
II. There are some who, though they cant stop the work, try to prejudice the workers. The men of the text said in effect, And who are you? You are fugitives, mongrels, not of pure blood. What business have the likes of you to think you can fight the foes of Israel? It is monstrous, and we wont have it. The same thing goes on to-day. There are men who seem to think they have said something clever and settling when they say that the popular useful man was not born in a palace. Whos he? is their cry. Why, dont you know that he was a collier, and worked in a coal pit? His father died in a cottage. His mother was the daughter of a man who drove a horse and cart, and never had five pounds in his life. And what of that? Is it not honest to get coal? Better be a collier and dig coal in the service of man, and thus the service of God, than be a loafer, an idler, a consumer, a drone. Some of the noblest of Gods servants have come from among the poor, and the obscure, and the unknown. Our Lord Himself was a toiler, and the Son of toilers, and has for ever consecrated and blessed all honest necessary human labour. So I say to you all, toil on, pray on, fight on, win victories for God. Beat back the enemies of Israel; and if the Ephraimites, lacking courage and genius themselves, despise you, let them.
III. There are some who cant or wont do much themselves, but hate, and scorn, and try to persecute those who do. We will burn thine house upon thee. Alas! This has often found expression in the bitterness of party strife and religious bigotry. Unable to silence men whose lips God had touched as with live coals from His own altar, and whose hearts had felt the power of the living God, they have erected their stakes, piled their faggots, and lit their fires, in which the saints of God, the excellent of the earth, have stood till their flesh was shrivelled and their bones cindered. We will burn thine house upon thee with fire, said these men; but they found themselves unable to do it. Some men are hard to kill, and some houses bad to burn. Many a tyrant has found this out. We will burn thine house upon thee. It does not seem to have occurred to these cowardly Ephraimites that men who burn other peoples houses sometimes burn themselves. It is dangerous to play with edged tools. It is not safe to toy with fire. It may become the instrument of your own torture, the weapon of your own destruction. They that take the sword shall perish with the sword, said Jesus Christ; and there is for us no higher authority. Some men who are fond of using fire do no harm except to themselves. Whilst it is in some sense only right and just that this should be so, there are cases in which we are sorry for the opposers. Well had it been for these Ephraimites had they shared in the universal rejoicing. Well had it been for them if they had learned wisdom, and ceased from opposition. Their wicked and senseless opposition brought ruin upon themselves. In sheer self-defence the victor turned the sword upon them. Alas for them! Forty and two thousand of them that day left their dead bodies upon the plains as victims of their folly, and in illustration of our saying that the wicked often injure themselves. And this is true with the Lord Jesus and His gospel. Some men oppose it, reject it, mutilate it, burn it. All such injure themselves. They can never hurt the truth. It will live. They cannot stop the power of Jesus Christ to save men. The waves of the ocean dash against the granite rock, but the rock does not move. But what of the waves? Broken, they roll back in spray to the ocean out of which they came. Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. (C. Leach, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XII
The Ephraimites are incensed against Jephthah, because he did
not call them to war against the Ammonites; and threaten his
destruction, 1.
He vindicates himself, 2, 3;
and arms the Gileadites against the men of Ephraim; they fight
against them, and kill forty-two thousand Ephraimites at the
passages of Jordan, 4-6.
Jephthah dies, having judged Israel six years, 7.
Ibzan judge seven years, 8.
His posterity and death, 9,10.
Elon judge ten years, and dies, 11, 12.
Abdon judge eight years, 13.
His posterity and death, 14, 15.
NOTES ON CHAP. XII
Verse 1. The men of Ephraim gathered themselves together] vaiyitstsaek, they called each other to arms; summoning all their tribe and friends to arm themselves to destroy Jephthah and the Gileadites, being jealous lest they should acquire too much power.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Northward; over Jordan, so northward towards Mizpeh, where Jephthah was, Jdg 11:34, and which was in the northern part of the land beyond Jordan.
Said unto Jephthah, through pride and envy, contending with him as they did before with Gideon, Jdg 8:1. Wherefore passedst thou over? not over Jordan, for there he was already; but over the borders of the Israelites land beyond Jordan, as appears by comparing this with Jdg 11:29, where the same phrase is used.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. the men of Ephraim gatheredthemselves togetherHebrew, “were summoned.”
and went northwardAftercrossing the Jordan, their route from Ephraim was, strictly speaking,in a northeasterly direction, toward Mizpeh.
the men of Ephraim . . . saidunto Jephthah, Wherefore . . . didst [thou] not call us?Thisis a fresh development of the jealous, rash, and irritable temper ofthe Ephraimites. The ground of their offense now was their desire ofenjoying the credit of patriotism although they had not shared in theglory of victory.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together,…. Or “cried” r; got together by a cry or proclamation made: in the Hebrew text it is, “a man of Ephraim”; not a single man, but a body of men, who met together and joined as one man. It is highly probable that there were no less than 50,000 of them; for 42,000 of them were slain, Jud 12:6
and went northward; or, “went over northward s”; that is, over the river Jordan, which lay between Gilead and Ephraim; and when they had crossed the river, they turned northward; for Mizpeh, where Jephthah lived, was in the north of the land, near Hermon and Lebanon, Jos 11:3
and said unto Jephthah, wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon? not over Jordan, but over that part of the land of Israel from the plain where Jephthah dwelt, to the country of the children of Ammon:
and didst not call us to go with thee? they quarrel with him just in the same manner as they did with Gideon: these Ephraimites were a proud and turbulent people, and especially were very jealous of the tribe of Manasseh, of which both Gideon and Jephthah were; the one of the half tribe on this side Jordan, and the other of the half that was on the other side; and they were jealous of both, lest any honour and glory should accrue thereunto, and they should get any superiority in any respect over them, since Jacob their father had given the preference to Ephraim; and this seems to lie at the bottom of all their proceedings:
we will burn thine house upon thee with fire; that is, burn him and his house, burn his house and him in it; which shows that they were in great wrath and fury, and argued not only the height of pride and envy, but wretched ingratitude, and a cruel disposition; who, instead of congratulating him as Israel’s deliverer, and condoling him with respect to the case of his only child, threaten him in this brutish manner.
r , Sept. “clamatus”, i.e. “clamando convocatus”, Piscator. “mnellius”, Pimcator. s “transivit”, Pagninus, Montanus; “transiverunt”, Junius et Tremellius, Piscator.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Jephthah’s War with the Ephraimites, and Office of Judge. – Jdg 12:1. The jealousy of the tribe of Ephraim, which was striving after the leadership, had already shown itself in the time of Gideon in such a way that nothing but the moderation of that judge averted open hostilities. And now that the tribes on the east of the Jordan had conquered the Ammonites under the command of Jephthah without the co-operation of the Ephraimites, Ephraim thought it necessary to assert its claim to take the lead in Israel in a very forcible manner. The Ephraimites gathered themselves together, and went over . This is generally regarded as an appellative noun ( northward); but in all probability it is a proper name, “to Zaphon,” the city of the Gadites in the Jordan valley, which is mentioned in Jos 13:27 along with Succoth, that is to say, according to a statement of the Gemara, though of a very uncertain character no doubt, ( Joseph. Ant. xiii. 13, 5, xiv. 5, 4; Bell. Judg. i. 4, 2, Reland, Pal. pp. 308 and 559-60), the modern ruins of Amata on the Wady Rajb or Ajlun, the situation of which would suit this passage very well. They then threatened Jephthah, because he had made war upon the Ammonites without them, and said, “ We will burn thy house over thee with fire. ” Their arrogance and threat Jephthah opposed most energetically. He replied (Jdg 12:2, Jdg 12:3), “ A man of strife have I been, I and my people on the one hand, and the children of Ammon on the other, very greatly, ” i.e., I and my people had a severe conflict with the Ammonites. “ Then I called you, but ye did not deliver me out of their hand; and when I saw that thou (Ephraim) didst not help me, I put my life in my hand ” (i.e., I risked my own life: see 1Sa 19:5; 1Sa 28:21; Job 13:14. The Kethibh comes from : cf. Gen 24:33), “ and I went against the Ammonites, and Jehovah gave them into my hand. ” Jephthah’s appeal to the Ephraimites to fight against the Ammonites it not mentioned in Judg 11, probably for no other reason than because it was without effect. The Ephraimites, however, had very likely refused their co-operation simply because the Gileadites had appointed Jephthah as commander without consulting them. Consequently the Ephraimites had no ground whatever for rising up against Jephthah and the Gileadites in this haughty and hostile manner; and Jephthah had a perfect right not only to ask them, “ Wherefore are ye come up against me now ( lit. ‘this day’), to fight against me? ” but to resist such conduct with the sword.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Displeasure of the Ephraimites; Punishment of the Ephraimites. | B. C. 1143. |
1 And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward, and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire. 2 And Jephthah said unto them, I and my people were at great strife with the children of Ammon; and when I called you, ye delivered me not out of their hands. 3 And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands, and passed over against the children of Ammon, and the LORD delivered them into my hand: wherefore then are ye come up unto me this day, to fight against me? 4 Then Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead, and fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said, Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites. 5 And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; 6 Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand. 7 And Jephthah judged Israel six years. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.
Here Is, I. The unreasonable displeasure of the men of Ephraim against Jephthah, because he had not called them in to his assistance against the Ammonites, that they might share in the triumphs and spoils, v. 1. Pride was at the bottom of the quarrel. Only by that comes contention. Proud men think all the honours lost that go beside themselves, and then who can stand before envy? The Ephraimites had the same quarrel with Gideon (ch. viii. 1), who was of Manasseh on their side Jordan, as Jephthah was of Manasseh on the other side Jordan. Ephraim and Manasseh were hearer akin than any other of the tribes, being both the sons of Joseph, and yet they were more jealous one of another than any other of the tribes. Jacob having crossed hands, and given Ephraim the preference, looking as far forward as the kingdom of the ten tribes, which Ephraim was the head of, after the revolt from the house of David, that tribe, not content with that honour in the promise, was displeased if Manasseh had any honour done it in the mean time. It is a pity that kindred or relationship, which should be an inducement to love and peace, should be ever an occasion (as it often proves) of strife and discord. A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city, and contentions among brethren are as the bars of a castle. The anger of the Ephraimites at Jephthah was, 1. Causeless and unjust. Why didst thou not call us to go with thee? For a good reason. Because it was the men of Gilead that had made him their captain, not the men of Ephraim, so that he had no authority to call them. Had his attempt miscarried for want of their help, they might justly have blamed him for not desiring it. But when the work was done, and done effectually, the Ammonites being subdued and Israel delivered, there was no harm done, though their hands were not employed in it. 2. It was cruel and outrageous. They get together in a tumultuous manner, pass over Jordan as far as Mizpeh in Gilead, where Jephthah lived, and no less will satisfy their fury but they will burn his house and him in it. Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce. Those resentments that have the least reason for them have commonly the most rage in them. Jephthah was now a conqueror over the common enemies of Israel, and they should have come to congratulate him, and return him the thanks of their tribe for the good services he had done; but we must not think it strange if we receive ill from those from whom we deserve well. Jephthah was now a mourner for the calamity of his family upon his daughter’s account, and they should have come to condole with him and comfort him; but barbarous men take a pleasure in adding affliction to the afflicted. In this world, the end of one trouble often proves the beginning of another; nor must we ever boast as though we had put off the harness.
II. Jephthah’s warm vindication of himself. He did not endeavour to pacify them, as Gideon had done in the like case; the Ephraimites were now more outrageous than they were them, and Jephthah had not so much of a meek and quiet spirit as Gideon had. Whether they would be pacified or no, Jephthah takes care,
1. To justify himself, Jdg 11:2; Jdg 11:3. He makes it out that they had no cause at all to quarrel with him, for, (1.) It was not in pursuit of glory that he had engaged in this war, but for the necessary defence of his country, with which the children of Ammon greatly strove. (2.) He had invited the Ephraimites to come and join with him, though he neither needed them nor was under any obligation to pay that respect to them, but they had declined the service: I called you, and you delivered me not out of their hands. Had that been true which they charged him with, yet it would not have been a just ground of quarrel; but it seems it was false, and, as the matter of fact now appears, he had more cause to quarrel with them for deserting the common interests of Israel in a time of need. It is no new thing for those who are themselves most culpable to be most clamorous in accusing the innocent. (3.) The enterprise was very hazardous, and they had more reason to pity him than to be angry with him: I put my life in my hands, that is, “exposed myself to the utmost peril in what I did, having so small an army,” The honour they envied was bought dearly enough; they needed not to grudge it to him; few of them would have ventured so far for it. (4.) He does not take the glory of the success to himself (that would have been invidious), but gives it all to God: “The Lord delivered them into my hands. If God was pleased so far to make use of me for his glory, why should you be offended at that? Have you any reason to fight against me? Is not that in effect to fight against God, in whose hand I have been only an unworthy instrument?”
2. When this just answer (though not so soft an answer as Gideon’s) did not prevail to turn away their wrath, he took care both to defend himself from their fury and to chastise their insolence with the sword, by virtue of his authority as Israel’s judge. (1.) The Ephraimites had not only quarrelled with Jephthah, but, when his neighbours and friends appeared to take his part, they had abused them, and given them foul language; for I adhere to our translation, and so take it, v. 4. They said in scorn, “You Gileadites that dwell here on the other side Jordan are but fugitives of Ephraim, the scum and dregs of the tribes of Joseph, of which Ephraim is the chief, the refuse of the family, and are so accounted among the Ephraimites and among the Manassites. Who cares for you? All your neighbours know what you are, no better than fugitives and vagabonds, separated from your brethren, and driven hither into a corner.” The Gileadites were as true Israelites as any other, and at this time had signalized themselves, both in the choice of Jephthah and in the war with Ammon, above all the families of Israel, and yet are most basely and unjustly called fugitives. It is an ill thing to fasten names or characters of reproach upon persons or countries, as is common, especially upon those that lie under outward disadvantages: it often occasions quarrels that prove of ill consequence, as it did here. See likewise what a mischievous thing an abusive tongue is, that calls ill names, and gives scurrilous language: it sets on fire the course of nature, and is set on fire of hell (Jam. iii. 6), and many a time cuts the throat of him that uses it, as it did here, Ps. lxiv. 8. If these Ephraimites could have denied themselves the poor satisfaction of calling the Gileadites fugitives, they might have prevented a great deal of bloodshed; for grievous words stir up anger, and who knows how great a matter a little of that fire may kindle? (2.) This affront raises the Gileadites’ blood, and the indignity done to themselves, as well as to their captain, must be revenged. [1.] They routed them in the field, v. 4. They fought with Ephraim, and, Ephraim being but a rude unheaded rabble, smote Ephraim, and put them to flight. [2.] They cut off their retreat, and so completed their revenge, Jdg 11:5; Jdg 11:6. The Gileadites, who perhaps were better acquainted with the passages of Jordan than the Ephraimites were, secured them with strong guards, who were ordered to slay every Ephraimite that offered to pass the river. Here was, First, Cruelty enough in the destruction of them. Sufficient surely was the punishment which was inflicted by many; when they were routed in the field, there needed not this severity to cut off all that escaped. Shall the sword devour for ever? Whether Jephthah is to be praised for this I know not; perhaps he saw it to be a piece of necessary justice. Secondly, Cunning enough in the discovery of them. It seems the Ephraimites, though they spoke the same language with other Israelites, yet had got a custom in the dialect of their country to pronounce the Hebrew letter Shin like Samech, and they had so strangely used themselves to it that they could not do otherwise, no, not to save their lives. We learn to speak by imitation; those that first used s for sh, did it either because it was shorter or because it was finer, and their children learnt to speak like them, so that you might know an Ephraimite by it; as in England we know a west-country man or a north-country man, nay, perhaps a Shropshire man, and a Cheshire man, by his pronunciation. Thou art a Galilean, and thy speech betrays thee. By this the Ephraimites were discovered. If they took a man that they suspected to be an Ephraimite, but he denied it, they bade him say Shibboleth; but either he could not, as our translation reads it, or he did not heed, or frame, or direct himself, as some read, to pronounce it aright, but said Sibboleth, and so was known to be an Ephraimite, and was slain immediately. Shibboleth signifies a river or stream: “Ask leave to go over Shibboleth, the river.” Those that were thus cut off made up the whole number of slaughtered Ephraimites forty-two thousand, v. 6. Thus another mutiny of that angry tribe was prevented.
3. Now let us observe the righteousness of God in the punishment of these proud and passionate Ephraimites, which in several instances answered to their sin. (1.) They were proud of the honour of their tribe, gloried in this, that they were Ephraimites; but how soon were they brought to be ashamed or afraid to own their country! Art thou an Ephraimite? No, now rather of any tribe than that. (2.) They had gone in a rage over Jordan to burn Jephthah’s house with fire, but now they came back to Jordan as sneakingly as they had passed it furiously, and were cut off from ever returning to their own houses. (3.) They had upbraided the Gileadites with the infelicity of their country, lying at such a distance, and now they suffered by an infirmity peculiar to their own country, in not being able to pronounce Shibboleth. (4.) They had called the Gileadites, unjustly, fugitives, and now they really and in good earnest became fugitives themselves; and in the Hebrew the same word (v. 5) is used of the Ephraimites that escaped, or that fled, which they had used in scorn of the Gileadites, calling them fugitives. He that rolls the stone of reproach unjustly upon another, let him expect that it will justly return upon himself.
III. Here is the end of Jephthah’s government. He judged Israel but six years, and then died, v. 7. Perhaps the death of his daughter sunk him so that he never looked up afterwards, but it shortened his days, and he went to his grave mourning.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Judges – Chapter 12
Jephthah and the Ephraimites, vs. 1-7
The jealous pride of Ephraim again raises it ugly head, and this time much to the disaster of the Ephraimites. Jephthah was a diplomat, but he had no time for fools. Perhaps his leniency was limited by his own sorrow too, in the loss of his beloved daughter through his careless oath. The Ephraimites gathered themselves in force, several thousand in fact, and accosted Jephraimites gathered themselves in force, several thousand in fact, and accosted Jephthah that he would so slight them as not to send for their help against the Ammonites. They felt their ability to punish Jephthah for such a slight and even threatened to burn down his house on him.
Jephthah protested to them that the people of Gilead had been in terrible trouble with the Ammonites and had sought for help and leadership. When none was forthcoming, Jephthah had assumed the responsibility, and the Lord had delivered the enemy into his hands. It appeared that the bravado of the Ephraimites was only apparent when there was someone to take the initiative. There was no reason that the Ephraimites should come with an army to fight the Gileadites.
But Jephthah was compelled to gather his Gileadites and fight the Ephraimites. This the Gileadites were more ready to do because of the slanderous charge the Ephraimites made against them, that they were all a band of fugitives who had run away from obligations in the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh on the west of Jordan Doubtless there had been some of these in Gideon’s band of freebooters, but it was not true of the Gileadites generally. This resentment was so pronounced that the Gileadite army was inspired to fight the more earnestly.
As a result the Ephraimites were soundly defeated. As they were fleeing back across the Jordan, the Gileadites took possession-of the fords and slaughtered them. When a fugitive from the battle came to the river desiring to cross he was tested. He was asked to pronounce “Shibboleth,” whereupon the Ephraimite would say “Sibboleth, because Ephraimites could not pronounce the sh sound. If the person desiring to cross the river was proved an Ephraimite he was put to the sword. When the day ended the Ephraimites had lost a total of 42,000 men, (1Co 10:12).
Jephthah’s was the shortest judgeship recorded, lasting only six years. He died and was buried in Gilead.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
THE BOOK OF JUDGES
Judges 1-21.
THE Book of Judges continues the Book of Joshua. There are some Books of the Bible, the proper location of which require careful study, but Judges follows Joshua in chronological order. The Book opens almost identically with the Book of Joshua. In the latter the reading is, Now after the death of Moses the servant of the Lord it came to pass that the Lord spake unto Joshua. In the Book of Judges, Now after the death of Joshua it came to pass, that the Children of Israel asked thd Lord, saying Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first, to fight against them? And the Lord said, Judah shall go up. God always has His man chosen and His ministry mapped out. We may worry about our successors and wonder whether we shall be worthily followed, but as a matter of fact that is a question beyond us and does not belong to us. It is not given to man to choose prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors and teachers. That prerogative belongs to the ascended Lord, and He is not derelict in His duty nor indifferent to the interests of Israel. Before one falls, He chooses another. The breach in time that bothers men is not a breach to Him at all. It is only an hour given to the people for the expression of bereavement. It is only a day in which to calm the public mind and call out public sympathy and centralize and cement public interest.
Men may choose their co-laborers as Judah chose Simeon; leaders may pick out their captains as Moses did, and as did Joshua; but God makes the first choice, and when men leave that choice to Him, He never makes a mistake.
Whenever a captain of the hosts of the Lord is unworthily succeeded, misguided men have forgotten God and made the choice on the basis of their own judgment.
People sometimes complain of some indifferent or false preacher, We cant see why God sent us such a pastor. He didnt! You called him yourself. You didnt sufficiently consult God. You didnt keep your ears open to the still, small voice. You didnt wait on bended knees until He said, Behold your leader; follow him!
When God appoints Judah, he also delivers the Canaanites and the Perizzites into his hands. Adoni-bezek, the brutal, will be humbled by him; the capital city will fall before him; the southland will succumb, also the north and the east and the west, and the mountains will capitulate before the Lord of Hosts.
But the Book of Judges doesnt present a series of victories. There is no Book in the Bible that so clearly typifies the successes and reverses, the ups and downs, the victories and defeats of the church, as the history of Israel here illustrates. It naturally divides itself under The Seven Apostasies, The Successive Judges, and The Civil War.
THE SEVEN APOSTASIES
The first chapter is not finished before failure finds expression. Of Judah it was said he could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had chariots of iron (Jdg 1:19). Of the children of Benjamin it was said, They did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem (Jdg 1:21). Of Manasseh it was said, They did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-Shean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land (Jdg 1:27). Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer, (Jdg 1:29); neither did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron (Jdg 1:30), nor the inhabitants of Mahalol. Neither did Asher (Jdg 1:31) drive out the inhabitants of Acho nor of Zidon; neither did Naphthali drive out the inhabitants of Beth-Shemesh (Jdg 1:33), and this failure to clear the field results in an aggressive attack before the first chapter finishes, and the Amorites force the children of Dan into the mountain (Jdg 1:34).
If one study these seven apostasies that follow one another in rapid succession, he will be impressed by two or three truths. They resulted from the failure to execute the command of the Lord. The command of the Lord to Joshua was that he should expel the people from before him and drive them from out of his sight, and possess their land (Jos 23:5). He was not to leave any among them nor to make mention of any of their gods (Jos 23:7). He was promised that one of his men should chase a thousand. He was even told that if any were left and marriage was made with them that they should know for a certainty that the Lord God would no more drive out any of these nations from before them; that they should be snares and traps and scourges and thorns, until Israel perished from off the good land that God had given them (Jos 23:13). How strangely the conduct of Israel, once in the land, comports with this counsel given them before they entered it; and there is a typology in all of this.
The Christian life has its enemiessocial enemies, domestic enemies, national enemies! Ones companionship will determine ones conduct; ones marriage relation will eventuate religiously or irreligiously. The character of ones nation is more or less influential upon life.
The ordinance of baptism, the initial rite into the church, looks to an absolute separation from the world, and is expressed by the Apostle Paul as a death unto sin, the clear intent being that no evil customs are to be kept, nor companions retained, nor entangling alliances maintained. The word now is as the word then, Come out from among them, and be ye separate (2Co 6:17).
They imperiled their souls by this forbidden social intercourse. It is very difficult to live with a people and not become like them. It is very difficult to dwell side by side with nations and not intermarry. Intermarriage between believers and unbelievers is almost certain to drag down the life of the former to the level of the latter. False worship, like other forms of sin, has its subtle appeal; and human nature being what it is, false gods rise easily to exalted place in corrupted affections.
If there is one thing God tried to do for ancient Israel, and one thing God tries to do for the new Israel, the Church, it was, and is, to get His people to disfellowship the world.
There are men who think God is a Moloch because He so severely punished Israels compromises. They cant forget that when Joshua went over Jordan and Israel lay encamped on the skirts of the mountains of Moab, her people visited a high place near the camp whereon a festival of Midian, idolatrous, licentious in the extreme, was in process, and they went after this putrid paganism and polluted their own souls with the idolatrous orgy. Then it was that Moses, speaking for the Lord, said, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun, and while that hideous row of dead ones was still before their eyes, the plague fell on the camp and 24,000 of the transgressors perished! But severe as it was, Israel soon forgot, showing that it was not too severe, and raising the question as to whether it was severe enough to impress the truth concerning idolatry and all its infamous effects.
Solomon is commonly reputed to have been the wisest of men, and yet it was his love alliances with the strange women of Moab, Ammon, Zidon and the Hittites, these very people, that brought the Lords anger against him and compelled God to charge him with having turned from the Lord God of Israel and in consequence of which God said, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant (1Ki 11:11).
Again and again the kingdom has been lost after the same manner. The present peril of the church is at this point, and by its alliance with the world, the kingdom of our Lord is delayed, and Satan, the prince of this world, remains in power, and instead of 24,000 people perishing in judgment, tens of thousands and millions of people perish through this compromise, and swallowed up in sin, rush into hell.
But to follow the text further is to find their restoration to Gods favor rested with genuine repentance. There are recorded in Judges seven apostasies; they largely result from one sin. There are seven judgments, increasing in severity, revealing Gods determined purpose to correct and save; and there are seven recoveries, each of them in turn the result of repentance. God never looks upon a penitent man, a penitent people, a penitent church, a penitent nation, without compassion and without turning from His purposes of judgment. When the publican went up into the temple to pray, his was a leprous soul, but when he smote upon his breast and cried, God be merciful to me a sinner, his was the instant experience of mercy. When at Pentecost, 2500 sincere souls fell at the feet of Peter and the other Apostles, and cried, Men and brethren, what shall we do, the response was, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and the promise was, Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
When David, who was a child of God, guilty of murder and adultery combined, poured out his soul as expressed in the Fifty-first Psalm, God heard that prayer, pardoned those iniquities, restored him to the Divine favor, and showered him with proofs of the Divine love.
When Nineveh went down in humility, a city of 600,000 souls, every one of whom from Sardana-palus, the king on the throne, to the humblest peasant within the walls, proving his repentance by sitting in sackcloth and ashes, God turned at once from the evil He had thought to do unto them and He did it not, and Nineveh was saved.
The simple truth is, God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He never punishes from preference, but only for our profit; and, even then, like a father, He suffers more deeply than the children upon whom His strokes of judgment fall.
What a contrast to that statement of Scripture, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, is that other sentence, Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints. The reason is not far to seek. In the first case it is death indeed; death fearful, death eternal. In the second case, death is a birth, a release from the flesh that held to a larger, richer, fuller life. In that God takes pleasure.
There is then for the sinner no royal road to the recovery of Gods favor. It is the thorny path of repentance instead. It is through Bochim, the Vale of Tears; but it were just as well that the prodigal, returning home, should not travel by a flowery path. He will be the less tempted to go away again if his back-coming is with agony, and home itself will seem the more sweet when reached if there his weary feet find rest for the first time, and from their bleeding soles the thorns are picked; if there his nakedness is clothed, his hunger is fed and his sense of guilt is kissed away. Oh, the grace of God to wicked men the moment repentance makes possible their forgiveness!
The court in Minneapolis yesterday illustrated this very point. When a young man, who had been wayward indeed, who had turned highway-robber, saw his error, sobbed his way to Christ and voluntarily appeared in court and asked to have sentence passed, newspapers expressed surprise that the heart of the judge should have been so strangely moved, and that the sentence the law absolutely required to be passed upon him, should have been, by the judge, suspended, and the young man returned to his home and wife and babe. But our Judge, even God, is so compassionate that such conduct on His part excites no surprise. It is His custom! Were it not so, every soul of us would stand under sentence of death. The law which is just and holy and good has passed that sentence already, and it is by the grace of God we have our reprieve. Seven apostasies? Yes! Seven judgments? Yes! But seven salvations! Set that down to the honor and glory of our God! It is by grace we are saved!
THE SUCCESSIVE JUDGES
Evidently God has no special regard for some of our modern superstitions, for in this period of conquest He deliberately chooses thirteen judges and sets them over Israel in turn, beginning with Othniel, the son of Kenaz, and nephew of Caleb, and concluding with Samson, the son of Manoah.
They represented varied stations of Israelitish society. A careful review of their personal history brings a fresh illustration of the fact that God is no respector of persons; and it also illustrates the New Testament statement that Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. With few exceptions these judges had not been heard of until their appointment rendered necessary some slight personal history. That is the Divine method until this hour. How seldom the children of the great are themselves great. How often, when God needs a ruler in society, He seeks a log cabin and chooses an angular ladAbe Lincoln. The difference between the inspired Scriptures and yesterdays newspaper is in the circumstance that the Scriptures tell the truth about men and leave God to do the gilding and impart the glory, instead of trying to establish the same through some noble family tree. There is a story to the effect that a young artist, working under his master in the production of a memorial window that represented the greatest and best that art ever knew, picked up, at the close of the day, the fragments of glass flung aside, and finally wrought from them a window more glorious still. Whether this is historically correct or not, we know what God has done with the refuse of society again and again. Truly
God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
That no flesh should glory in His presence * * * * He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord (1Co 1:27-29; 1Co 1:31).
Out of these un-named ones some were made to be immortalGideon, Jephthae, Samson, Deborah.
Gideon, the son of Joash, became such because he dared to trust God. The average Captain of hosts wants men increased that the probabilities of victory may grow proportionately. At the word of the Lord Gideon has his hundreds of thousands and tens of thousands reduced to a handful. What are three hundred men against the multitude that compassed him about? And what are pitchers, with lights in them, against swords and spears and stones; and yet his faith failed not! He believed that, God with him, no man could be against him. When Paul comes to write his Epistle to the Hebrews and devotes a long chapter of forty verses to a list of names made forever notable through faith, Gideon and Barak and Samson and Jephthaethese all appear, and they are put there properly, reason confirming revelation. Barak had faced the hundreds of iron chariots of the enemy, and yet at the word of the Lord, had dared to brave and battle them. Samson, with no better equipment than the jaw-bone of an ass, had slain his heaps. Jephthae, when he had made a vow to the Lord, though it cost him that which was dearer than life, would keep it. Such characters are safe in history. Whatever changes may come over the face of the world, however notable may eventually be names; whatever changes may occur in the conceptions of men as to what makes for immortality, those who believe in God will abide, and childrens children will call their names blessed. Gideon will forever stand for a combination of faith and courage. Barak will forever represent the man who, at the word of the Lord, will go against great odds. Jephthae will forever be an encouragement to men who, having sincerely made vows, will solemnly keep the same; and Samson will forever represent, not his prowess, but the strength of the Lord, which, though it may express itself in the person of a man, knows no limitations so long as that man remains loyal to his vows, and the spirit of the Lord rests upon him.
Before passing from this study, however, permit me to call your attention to the fact that there was made a political exception in the matter of sex. We supposed that the putting of woman into mans place is altogether a modern invention. Not so; it is not only a fact in English language but in human history, that all rules have their exceptions. Gods rule for prophets is men, and yet the daughters of Philip were prophetesses. Gods rule for kings is men, and yet one of the greatest of rulers was Queen Victoria. Gods rule for judges is men, and yet Deborah was long since made an exception. Let it be understood that the exception to the rule is not intended to supplant the rule. The domestic circle is Gods choice for womankind, and her wisdom, tact and energy are not only needed there, but find there their finest employment. And yet there are times when through the indifference of men, or through their deadness to the exigencies of the day, God can do nothing else than raise up a Deborah, speak to a Joan of Arc, put on the throne a Victoria.
I noticed in a paper recently a discussion as to whether women prominent in politics proved good mothers, and one minister at least insisted that they did. We doubt it! The text speaks of Deborah as a mother in Israel, but we find no mention of her children. Our judgment is that had there been born to her a dozen of her own Israel might never have known her leadership. The unmarried woman, or the barren wife, may have time and opportunity for social and political concern; but the mother of children commonly finds her home sphere sufficient for all talents, and an opportunity to reach society, cleanse politics, aid the church, help the world, as large an office as ever came to man. However, let it be understood that all our fixed customs, all our standard opinions, give place when God speaks. If it is His will that a woman judge, then she is best fitted for that office; if He exalts her to lead armies, then victory will perch upon her banners; if He calls her to the place of power on the throne, then ruling wisdom is with her.
In the language of the Apostle Paul, And what shall I say more, for the time would fail me to tell of Gideon and of Samson and of Barak and of Jepkthae. They are all great characters and worthy extended discussion. It would equally fail me to rehearse the confusion, civil and religious, that follows from the seventeenth chapter of this Book to the end, but in chapters nineteen to twenty-one there is recorded an incident that cannot in justice to an outline study, be overlooked, for it results in
THE CIVIL WAR
Tracing that war to its source, we find it was the fruit of the adoption of false religions. We have already seen some of the evil effects of this intermingling with heathen faiths, but we need not expect an end of such effects so long as the compromise obtains. There is no peace in compromise; no peace with your enemies. A compromise is never satisfactory to either side. Heathen men do not want half of their polytheism combined with half of your monotheism. They are not content to give up a portion of their idolatry and take in its place praises to the one and only God. The folly of this thing was shown when a few years since the leaders of the International Sunday School Association attempted to temporarily affiliate Christianity with Buddhism. The native Christians in Japan, in proportion to their sincere belief in the Bible arid in Christ, rejected the suggestion as an insult to their new faith, and the followers of Buddha and the devotees of Shintoism would not be content with Christian conduct unless the Emperor was made an object of worship and Christian knees bowed before him. It must be said, to the shame of certain Sunday School leaders, that they advocated that policy and prostrated themselves in the presence of His Majesty to the utter disgust of their more uncompromising fellows. The consequence was, no Convention of the International Association has been so unsatisfactory and produced such poor spiritual results as Tokios.
Confusion is always the consequence of compromise, and discontent is the fruit of it, and fights and battles and wars are the common issue.
Idolatry is deadly; graven images cannot be harmonized with the true God. The first and second commandments cannot be ignored and the remainder of the Decalog kept. It is God or nothing! It is the Bible or nothing! It is the faith once delivered or infidelity!
The perfidy of Benjamin brought on the battle. We have already seen that men grow like those with whom they intimately associate. This behavior on the part of the Benjamites is just what you would have expected. The best of men still have to battle with the bad streak that belongs to the flesh incident to the fall; and, when by evil associations that streak is strengthened, no man can tell what may eventually occur. Had this conduct been recorded against the heathen, it would not have amazed us at all. We speedily forget that as between men there is no essential difference. Circumstances and Divine aidthese make a difference that is apparent indeed; but it is not so much because one is better than the other, but rather because one has been better situated, less tempted, more often strengthened; or else because he has found God and stands not in himself but in a Saviour.
Pick up your paper tomorrow morning and there will be a record of deeds as dark as could be recorded against the natives of Africa, or those of East India or China, Siberia or the South Sea Islands. The conduct of these men toward the concubine was little worse than that of one of our own citizens in a land of civilization and Christianity, who lately snatched a twelve-year-old girl and kept her for days as his captive, and when at last she eluded him, it was only to wander back to her home, despoiled and demented. Do you wonder that God is no respecter of persons? Do you wonder that the Bible teaches there is no difference? Do you doubt it is all of grace?
The issues of that war proved the presence and power of God. There are men who doubt if God is ever in battle; but history reveals the fact that few battles take place without His presence. The field of conflict is commonly the place of judgment, and justice is seldom or never omitted. We may be amazed to see Israel defeated twice, and over 40,000 of her people fall, when as a matter of fact she went up animated by the purpose of executing vengeance against an awful sin. Some would imagine that God would go with them and not a man would fall, and so He might have done had Israel, including Judah and all loyal tribes, been themselves guiltless. But such was not the truth! They had sins that demanded judgment as surely as Benjamins sin, and God would not show Himself partial to either side, but mete out judgment according to their deserts. That is why 40,000 of the Israelites had to fall. They were facing then their own faithlessness. They were paying the price of their own perfidy. They were getting unto themselves proofs that their fellowship with the heathen and their adoption of heathen customs was not acceptable with God.
Many people could not understand why England and France and Belgium and Canada and Australia and America should have lost so heavily in the late war, 19141918, believing as we did believe that their cause was absolutely just. Why should God have permitted them to so suffer in its defense? Millions upon millions of them dying, enormous wealth destroyed, women widowed, children orphaned, lands sacked, cities burned, cathedrals ruined, sanctuaries desecrated. The world around, there went up a universal cry, Why? And yet the answer is not far to seek. England was not guiltless; France was not guiltless; Belgium was not guiltless.
Poor Belgium! All the world has turned to her with pity and we are still planning aid for the Belgians and to preach to them and their children the Gospel of grace, and this we should do; but God had not forgotten that just a few years ago Belgium was blackening her soul by her conduct in the Belgian Congo. Natives by the score and hundreds were beaten brutally, their hands cut off because they did not carry to the Belgian king as much rubber and ivory as Belgian avarice demanded. American slavery, in its darkest hour, never knew anything akin to the oppression and persecution to which Belgium subjected the blacks in the Congo. Significant, indeed, is the circumstance that when the Germans came into Belgium, many Belgian hands were cut off; hapless and helpless children were found in this mangled state. Frightful as it was, it must have reminded Belgian authorities of their sins in Africa and of the certainty and exactitude of final judgment.
We have an illustration of this truth in the Book of Judges. When Judah went up against the Canaanites and the Lord delivered them into his hands, they slew in Bezek 10,000 men. They found Adoni-Bezek, the king, and fought against him, and caught him and cut off his thumbs and great toes. We cry Horror! and wonder that Gods own people could so behave; but, complete the sentence, and you begin to see justice, And Adoni-bezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table. As I have done, so God hath requited me (Jdg 1:7).
Think of England in her infamous opium traffic, forcing it upon natives at the mouths of guns, enriching her own exchecquer at the cost of thousands and tens of thousands of hapless natives of East India and China!
Think of France, with her infidelity, having denied God, desecrated His sabbath, rejected His Son and given themselves over to absinthe and sensuality!
Think of the United States with her infamous liquor traffic, shipping barrels upon barrels to black men and yellow men, and cursing the whole world to fill her own coffers.
Tell me whether judgment was due the nations, and whether they had to see their sin in the lurid light of Belgian and French battlefields; but do not overlook the fact that when the war finally ends, Benjamin, the worst offender, the greater sinner, goes down in the greatest judgment, and one day Benjamins soldiers are almost wiped from the earth! Out of 26,700, 25,000 and more perish. Tell us now whether judgment falls where judgment belongs!
Take the late war. Again and again Germany was triumphant, but when the Allies had suffered sufficiently and had learned to lean not to themselves but upon the Lord; when, like Israel, they turned from hope in self and trusted in God, then God bared His arm in their behalf and Germany went down in defeat, a defeat that made their come-back impossible; a defeat that fastened upon them the tribute of years; a defeat that proved to them that, great as might have been the sins of the allied nations, greater still, in the sight of God, was their own sin; for final judgment is just judgment.
God is not only in history; God has to do with the making of history. If men without a king behave every one as is right in his own eyes, the King of all kings, the Lord of all lords, will do that which will eventually seem right in the eyes of all angels and of all good men. That is GOD!
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
JEPHTHAHTRAGEDY AND TRIUMPH
Judges 11, 12.
AS before suggested, we cannot afford to pass over in silence the man to whom the finger of inspiration points with pride, as in Heb 11:32. Any name that is righteously associated with Gideon David and Samuel, not to speak of Barak and of Samson, is thereby made immortal; and any study of the Book of Judges that did not linger thoughtfully upon the eleventh and twelfth chapters would be necessarily superficial and unsatisfactory.
The introductory sentence of the eleventh chapter arrests the attention of the reader, Now Jephthah the Gileadite was a mighty man of valor. Such men make history, and over their names intelligent readers, through the centuries, linger; and of their deeds such readers think long and deeply.
The life history of Jeph thah as recorded in these two chapters may be expressed in four suggestionsVice and Jephthah; The Vow of Jephthah; The Victory of Jephthah, and The Virtues of Jephthah.
VICE AND JEPHTHAH
Life is a series of paradoxes. The opening sentence of this chapter, Now Jephthah the Gileadite was a mighty man of valor delights the reader, excites expectation, and prepares him for a feast of high exploits; but when the sentence is complete one stands in amazement and is prepared to expect little of heroism and even to anticipate much of ignobility, for the sentence is thus completed, and he was the son of a harlot.
Is human life different from water? one of the two essentials to its existence; can it rise above its source? Can the man who is born in sin and of sin be less than a sinner? These are all questions that the full study of these chapters will illumine if it does not adequately answer.
But, in their contemplation, let us face all the facts. When we have read three verses we will have compassed the following certainties: He was the child of vice; he was the victim of vice; and he was a leader of the vicious.
He was a child of vice! He was the son of a harlot, and Gilead begat Jephthah. What greater blow can strike the life of a lad than to begin it as a bastard? Such is this handicap that thousands of women have destroyed their own, rather than subject them to the natural indignities, handicaps and hardships that such a birth effects.
It is a truth that no matter how one comes into the world he may live gloriously and leave behind him both an honorable and an imperishable name. The laws of God and the grace of God are both adapted to that possibility. But it is also true that Society is the harsh enemy of the unrighteously born, and in consequence of that fact, of all the burdens that men bear few are so crushing as the burden of an illegitimate birth. This is the infliction that Society visits upon the harlot; and it is not content to treat the mother as an outcast, it insists upon visiting the same judgment upon the child.
Society refuses to look for possible points of approval or conceivable virtues in the woman who has loved out of wedlock. She may have the keenest intellect, the tenderest and most compassionate spirit and even entertain the noblest ambitions, but, it compels her, like Hester in Hawthornes Scarlet Letter to stand forever in both mock and mark of shame; and her child to endure with her the same. Such then, was Jephthahs evil heritage.
He was the victim of vice. Gileads wife bare him sons; and his wifes sons grew up, and they thrust out Jephthah, and said unto him, Thou shalt not inherit in our fathers house; for thou art the son of a strange woman (Jdg 11:2).
He was another Ishmael in experience; he was another Joseph in suffering; he was another David in fraternal contempt. This is another instance of social injustice. Jephthah had no guilt. The fact that his mother was not their mother was not Jephthahs fault. Since his was not the sin neither should his have been the shame. Gilead was the culprit, but here that social law, expressed in the Decalogue itself, is wrought into experience and the iniquity of the father is visited upon the children.
The world is filled with such tragedies. Years ago I knew one of the greatest of Americas ministers. In my student days he was a man of advanced age, but extensive and profound influence. Yet it was told me by those who knew his secret that he had come to his place of power in spite of the circumstance that he was the illegitimate child of one of Americas great but godless statesmen; and that the heaviest burden of his life had been the bearing of that knowledge. He had not been permitted to share the honors to which his own father attained; nor to have any part in the estate left at his dying; nor even to call brother and sister those who belonged to him by blood. Such was Jephthahs estate!
He became a leader of the vicious. Then Jephthah fled from his brethren, and dwelt in the land of Tob: and there were gathered vain men to Jephthah, and went out with him (Jdg 11:3).
It is not an unusual thing for the man that Society has unjustly judged and unrighteously condemned, to turn rebel against the same. So did David (1Sa 22:2); and Rezon (1Ki 11:24); and Adonijah (1Ki 1:5); and Jereboam (2Ch 13:7); and also Absalom (2Sa 15:1). Few of these had so unjustly suffered as had Jephthah, but each one of them became a leader of a bandit band; and David, at least, like Jephthah, led successfully and became a nation builder.
It is thus that successful revolutions have commonly been wrought. The time was when George Washington was looked upon in England as a mere free-booter, and unrighteous rebel; yet the time came when even England was compelled to yield to his prowess and unite in his praise. But with Washington it required a lifetime for the first and a century for the second.
Jephthah, however, revealed such valor and wisdom that whilst he was yet in youth Israel acknowledged both and proffered him a captaincy; in fact a supreme rulership for the time. In accepting the same Jephthah dictated his own terms. If he went to their aid he should become their head (Jdg 11:5-11). He was, nevertheless, an astute statesman. When once he had agreed to lead Israel he immediately laid the foundations for righteous procedure. He prepared a way of peace and proffered the same to Ammon (Jdg 11:12-29). This course on Jephthahs part is a tribute to his character; a presentation also of his quick discernment of the right; and a basal occasion of the Spirits descent upon him and enduement of him.
It is not always true that the rebel is the Governments enemy; he may easily be the Governments friend. His rebellion may be justified by existing conditions, and even required for their correction. If his cause is wrong it ends, to be named a rebellion; if right, it commonly eventuates in what is later known as a revolution.
There has always been the impression that still abides, that the man who does not back the national or ecclesiastical program is an undeserving rebel; but history is not more replete with illustrations of any truth than with the absolute certainty that the man who espouses an unpopular cause and in its incipiency accepts the support of the poor and oppressed and outcast crowd, and continues his advocacy of the same until a majority of men have been convinced and join themselves to his colors, is in the end known as the true statesmen. Great causes are seldom born full-blown. The right rarely ever gathers to itself quickly a majority. The valorous man in the initial stages of his plans and opinions is seldom justly judged by Society; time has ever been the friend of truth, and vicissitudes the opportunity of the valorous.
THE VOW OF JEPHTHAH
The preceding history has been but preparatory to the real conflict. It found a sort of counterpart in Germanys request to be permitted to pass peacefully through the territory of Belgium. They knew that the great conflict was to come when France and England and Russia and finally, even America should be faced. It was, therefore, with this mighty enterprise at hand that Jephthah realized his full dependence upon God.
And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If Thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands,
Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lords, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering (Jdg 11:30-31).
This vow was suddenly made, but it may not have been suddenly conceived. Such vows were common in Jephthahs day; common with the heathen nations, and even well-known to Israels customs. It revealed a sense of dependence upon the Divine One.
In the further discussion of these chapters, we shall find that Jephthah was rather poorly instructed in the law and ways of the Lord, but as a Gileadite he knew Him and worshiped Him and trusted His power.
It is a great thing to know God, even though the knowledge is utterly incomplete. It is a great thing to depend upon Him in the fateful hours of life. It is a great thing to bind ourselves to Him by vows, and it is a great thing to put our trust in His power. It may be a truth, as W. J. Dawson said, War under the best circumstances is a gigantic gamble, in which the stakes are not only human lives, but national destinies. No great general, however brave and sagacious he may be, can ever be absolutely sure of success. In all warfare what seems chance plays a great part, often so unexpected a part that all the calculations of the wisest strategy are upset by the event. Hence the greatest soldier, surest of himself and of his cause, can scarcely meet the dawn of battle without solemn thoughts and noble fears.
But the gambling element is taken out when God is taken in. The element of uncertainty is removed when the cause is truly committed to Him. Chance plays no part when Providence appears, and the humbled captain may be sure of himself and his cause if God go with him to battle.
This Jephthah seems to have believed and so based his vow.
This vow was seriously made. The language, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lords, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering (Jdg 11:30-31), is language remote from flippancy.
Beasts do not dwell in houses, with the exception of that domestic favorite, the dog; and he, being an unclean animal, could not have been involved in this vow. It would seem fairly certain that Jephthah knew that some member of his family would become this sacrifice, and there is nothing in this entire story to indicate that Jephthah was a brutal man who could offer a wife, or child, without regret. On the contrary, his rent clothes, his stricken cry, his broken spirit, as recorded in the thirty-fifth verse, all go to indicate his parental tenderness and paternal affection.
What, then, is the meaning of this strange procedure? Necessarily this, that Jephthah knew the significance of the hour to which he had come, and understood what it would mean for the Children of Israel to go down before the face of Ammon. Every war demands domestic sacrifices. The wife lays her young husband on the altar in the interest of the homeland. The most affectionate fathers, the most tender mothers, contribute their sons to be slain that their people and nation may live. If, in such an hour as that of the late war, a father or mother draw back and try to keep the son at home and alive, when the safety of the country demands his sacrifice, they are hotly condemned, and he must wear that most contemptuous of epithetsa shirker. Taking, then, the most serious view of this subject conceivable, that Jephthahs daughter was actually sacrificed on the altar to God, are you ready to condemn the man who, to save his country, contributed his child? You answer me, Nay, but we condemn the God that demanded it, or that would even accept it. But do you? Do you condemn the God that demanded our sons for the safety of England, and France, and America, in the horrible experience of 1914-18?
And yet, further, when did God demand it? This vow, on the part of Jephthah, was a voluntary one. It was not in response to a Divine speech. It was, rather, the prompting of a human heart in the hour of need. How like our own day, and even our own experiences now! Have you not made many and serious pledges to God when danger was nigh, when destruction was just at hand, when everything dear seemed to be in the balance? And have you not, in your deepest soul, believed that such pledges on your part were acceptable to Him and might secure fresh exhibitions of His favor and proofs of His love? And, then, have you not done the thing that is shamed by Jephthahs conduct, namely, when God has heard you and has marvelously answered, and has brought you victoriously through, forgotten to pay your vow, and even broken the very covenant that you yourself thought and voiced, and trampled your own pledges under your feet as you turned again to sin?
THE VICTORY OF JEPHTHAH
It was a complete victory.
So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the Lord delivered them into his hands.
And he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto the plaint of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the Children of Israel (Jdg 11:32-33).
The Lord does nothing incompletely, and the Lord delivered them into his hands. It was like the victories that had attended Jonathan and his armour-bearer. It was like the victories that had been with David in his best day. It was like the victory that He had given to Gideon. In other words, it was like God! The children of Ammon were subdued before the Children of Israel.
The promise of your victory and mine is in Him. We know whom we have believed, and are persuaded that He is able to keep that which we have committed unto Him. Faith is the victory because faith brings God, before whose face all opposition flees, and by whose hand all enemies are overthrown.
It was a costly victory.
And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dames: and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter.
And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me; for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back (Jdg 11:34-35).
When was war ever waged without this very price? It meant, then, it means now, and so long as war lasts, it will forever mean the sacrifice of our darlings, our sons, our daughters. Old men excite war and become, themselves, the directors of war; but young men and maidens are the sacrifices on its bloody altar.
However, we cannot pass by this pathetic scene of a beautiful daughter, dancing into her fathers presence to the music of timbrels, to break his heart by her vision of beauty, to compel him to rend his clothes and cry, Alas, thou hast brought me very low, for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back, without grieving over Jephthah as we grieve over so many men, because like him they know not the ways of God, nor are yet acquainted with the Word of God.
How many times we shut ourselves up to judgment when God has provided a path of mercy, because we knew it not? How many people harrow their souls with the sense of sin, and forget the promised salvation? How many people face constantly the final judgment, and even hell, and forget that they need not come into judgment nor endure hell? They know some Scripture, enough to fall under the condemnation of its sentences, and they do not know enough to find the way out. Such is the tragedy of ignorance itself!
Jephthahs vow could have been kept, and his daughter saved at the same time, had he but known the law of the Lord. Far back in Lev 27:1-4, the Lord had revealed mercys way:
And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
Speak unto the Children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation.
And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary.
And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels.
Poor Jephthah! Anguished, heart-broken, wretched, and undone, because he knew not the Word of the Lord. The knowledge of that single sentence would have saved him out of his sorrow, and at the same time kept his vow absolutely, for if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. He was rich now! The wealth of Israel was at his command, for he was potentially their king, and all the spoils of the Amorites were his to dispose of as he would, and yet, in the ignorance of the Word of the Lord, his heart is broken, his life is blighted, his very soul within him is stricken, and he is a man who had saved his country by loyalty to the Lord, and knew not how to save himself, in his ignorance of His Word.
It was a victory of the cross.
And she said unto him, My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the Lord, do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as the Lord hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon.
And she said unto her father, Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.
And he said, Go. And he sent her away for two months: and she went with her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains.
And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man. And it was a custom in Israel,
That the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year (Jdg 11:36-40).
Men have always condemned this vow of Jephthah, and enemies of the truth have used it again and again to prove that Jehovah was merely another Molocha god who delighted in sacrifice and sniffed the blood of the beautiful and virtuous, with pleasure. But all such interpretations are contortions.
It is a singular thing that this Book, written millenniums ago, in the day when the ideas of God were supposed to be primitive and deficient, falls not into the mistake of making God responsible either for this vow or for its execution. There is not a hint anywhere that God either demanded this sacrifice, or delighted in it. It was not because He had required it; it was because Jephthahs uninstructed conscience suggested and executed.
But there is here a true lesson. The voluntary surrender of this daughters life as a sacrifice because her nation had been saved, is one of the greatest adumbrations of the cross known to Old Testament teaching. She died that Israel might live, and Christ died that we might be saved. Her voluntary offering of self was akin to His voluntary offering of self, and the great and eternal principle that the individual must suffer to secure societys safety, has been so often illustrated that men who talk against atonement prove themselves ignorant of all moral and spiritual values.
But we prefer to conclude this study by a consideration of
THE VIRTUES OF JEPHTHAH
Condemn his ignorance as you like; call as much attention as you will to his heathenish ideas of propitiation, certain great facts remain that give occasion to his name in the galaxy of the faithful found in Hebrews 11.
First, he sought not to save himself. If ever a man was tempted to break his vow to God, Jephthah was that man; and if ever a man proved that he would rather die than do it, Jephthah is that illustration. There is no natural father living who would not yield up a dozen lives to save his darling daughter, and, in this instance, his only child. So when she died, Jephthah died a dozen times, yea, a hundred, a thousand deaths. What a temptation to retract! The war is over, the victories are won, the channel of history is changed; even God Himself will not bring back to life the slaughtered hosts of the Amorites. Why, then, keep my word? So Jephthah might have reasoned; but be it forever said to his credit, that he did not so. He had vowed, and he would pay his vow at all cost. What a lesson for the modern man!
You were in trouble yesterday! Clouds hung above your head! Lightning flashes were before your eyes! It looked to you that at any moment everything that you held dear might be in ruin, and you promised God that if He would intervene, clear the clouds away, and save you out of impending judgment, you would prove your loyalty, illustrate your love, and never again be faithless, or even forgetful. He heard you; He answered you. Are you keeping your pledge? Yesterday, I was at deaths door, and I said over and over, Lord, if I can live, I will do this; I will do that; I will prove myself a servant of Thy will, and never again will I depart from the paths of Thine appointment! He raised me up; where are the vows? Am I keeping them at all cost? Am I able to say, as Jephthah said, I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back? Oh, we men of this twentieth century; ye women of this very day! We; ye, need the history of Jephthahs conductSteadfastness in keeping vows to God. Is that not a virtue?
He made an unspeakable sacrifice. When adepts in figures sit down and calculate into the millions, and billions, what a war has cost a nation, how foolish and how utterly materialistic are all such reckonings! What matters it that England is in debt for one hundred years? What matters it that America must be taxed so heavily, and France to the point of continuous and oppressive extent? Our losses are not our money. Thats a bagatelle, and I dont care how big the amount was! Pile up your figuresbillions on billionswhat are they beside the sons that were slaughtered, and the daughters that died? Thats the loss! Thats the true sacrifice. Life, after all, is the gold of the worldits rubies, its diamonds. The world has but one precious possession, and thats its sons and its daughters. No man, therefore, ever paid a greater price. No patriotism ever voiced itself in a greater sacrifice than Jephthah made to save Israel. His was the supreme sacrifice!
He was enrolled with Gods saints. And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets (Heb 11:32).
Do you mean to tell me now that you dont believe he belongs there? Then I mean to tell you that your opinion has little value since it sets itself in opposition to Divine revelation. This name, in spite of all the ruggedness associated with its carving, in spite of all the handicaps with which the life linked to it began and continued, is among the immortals, to abide!
The Ephraimites may gather themselves together, if they will, and complain of Jephthah as they complained of Gideon. But Jephthah will answer them in words and in war. There are those who think that we should not war with men who do not speak our shibboleth, and they tell us that it is a minor matter. Nay, verily! It is a distinction with a difference. The man who does not speak the shibboleth of Gods revelation may profess kinship with us, but, as a matter of fact, he is not of us. He may claim that he wants to fight with us, but the truth is that he is ready to fight against us. Jephthah laid the ages under an additional tribute of obligation, when he held these apostate children of Benjamin to strict account for their course and conduct.
The Ephraim of today is the enemy of the Church of God. He is known now as the middle-of-the roader. He will not take sides with Israel, the fundamentalist; nor will he fight with the Amorite, the modernist. But his chief complaints are against the former, and his chief assistance is unto the latter. How, then, can it be otherwise than that he, too, should be judged an enemy and meet the fate of them that will not fight for God? Did not Christ say, He that is not with Me is against me. If ever there was just claim, as in the apostolic line of them that are loyal to God, Jephthah holds it. His true successors are those who, like him, seek the salvation of the nation and look for the same through sacrifice, and are ready, if need be, to put themselves upon the altar, for it is still a truth, as Christ asserted, He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal (Joh 12:25).
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
THE ARROGANT EPHRAIMITES AND JEPHTHAHTHE JUDGES WITHOUT FAME
(Jdg. 12:1-15.)
CRITICAL NOTES. Jdg. 12:1. Gathered themselves together.] Not in a disorderly or tumultuous manner as some would take it, but assembled in force, for the purpose of fighting if necessary (ch. Jdg. 7:23-24; Jdg. 10:17). Passed over (Jordan) northward, or it may mean to Zaphon, for such is the Hebrew word. Zaphon was a town in the tribe of Gad, mentioned along with Succoth.
Wherefore, etc., didst thou not call us to go with thee?] This was nothing but the old haughty and jealous spirit of the most ambitious of the tribes, which was constantly reappearing when the honours seemed to be going in the direction of others. We see it in Joshuas days at the division of the land (Jos. 17:14-18), we see it in the days of Gideon (Jdg. 8:1-3), and we see it now. We will burn thine house on thee with fire.] Such was the depth of their hatred. This was not uncommon in that rough age (ch. Jdg. 14:15; Jdg. 15:6; Jos. 7:25; Gen. 38:24; Jos. 8:8; Jos. 8:19; Jud. 1:8).
Jdg. 12:2. When I called you, ye delivered me not, etc.] This is not told before, probably because they met the request with a point-blank refusal. They would refuse to fight under the leadership of a man like Jephthah, who had not the pure blood of an Israelite. Though God had acknowledged him, they would not. Also they felt that the danger was very serious, and so they kept within their own borders (Psa. 78:9-11). Put my life in my hands] a phrase meaning, I risked my life, and you did not assist me (1Sa. 19:5; Job. 13:14; Psa. 119:109). This was the wolf and the lamb policy on the part of the Ephraimites, but they found Jephthah a rough lamb to deal with. His language, however, is not defiant. He would willingly have taken their help, but when they did not give it. he sought the special help of his God, and that was not refused.
Jdg. 12:3. Wherefore then are ye come up to fight against me?] Since God Himself has succoured me, why do you come to fight with me? Why not rather be grateful that the whole land is rid of the dark shadow of the oppressor? There was nothing here to give just cause of offence, and if the issue was tragic, compared with the parallel case of Gideons dealings with them, the circumstances were very different. Thus in Gideons days, the Ephraimites had really done much to gain the large success of the occasion, but here they had done nothing. Gideon had good reason to thank them for the share they had in the defeat of the common enemy; Jephthah had not a word to say of any good they had done, because they really had done nothing. Gideon, though called to task for overlooking these proud people, was not threatened with anything against his personal safety, but against Jephthah they came up in force, and vowing the direst vengeance. They would indeed not wait for any explanation. The attack began on their side.
Jdg. 12:4. The men of Gilead smote Ephraim, etc.] It would seem as if the feeling of resentment in this case were cherished more by the men of Gilead, than by Jephthah himself. For what was done is put chiefly in their name, both in Jdg. 12:4 and Jdg. 12:5. Jephthah led them in self-defence but did not instigate them. The supercilious contempt with which the Ephraimites looked down upon the Gileadites, and their disdaining to acknowledge Jephthahs leadership, notwithstanding his victorious closing of the war, was keenly felt by the Gileadites. It was a sting to their tribal character, and led to a spirit of bitter retaliation. They thirsted for an opportunity of taking revenge.
Ye are fugitives of Ephraim, etc.] This statement is not very clear as it stands; but the meaning seems to beYe are the scum of Ephraim, and counted as such both among the common Ephraimites and Manassitesa bad lot, who have no position as good citizens, but are nondescripts. The Gileadites, in fact, were not a tribe, but the descendants of a powerful family in Manasseh. But both Manasseh and Ephraim were the children of Joseph, and so there ought to have been a family kindred feeling. Instead of this, there was nothing but jealousy and desire for superiority on the side of Ephraim, because of the greater blessing which the patriarch Jacob bestowed on his younger grandson (Gen. 48:17-19). Presuming on this advantageous position, which their ancestor left them in legacy, the men of Ephraim claimed to represent the whole of the children of Joseph, that isEphraim proper and all Manasseh, thus including the men of Gilead as well. They regarded themselves as the people of high caste, the Manassites as a sort of plebeians, and the Gileadites as nothing better than pariahs. In the collective mass of the children of Joseph, the Gileadites were regarded by these men of pride as menials or cads, because they were properly not a community at all, but only a set of fugitives, and yet they presumed to hold up their heads as if they were a tribe. Hence they were goaded on to be resentful.
Jdg. 12:5. Took the passages of Jordan.] They lived on both sides of the river, though chiefly on the east side (see Num. 26:29-30, etc.). They seemed to be better acquainted with the crossings than the Ephraimites; and they were in no mood to give quarter, for they were high-spirited, and could not bear the taunts that were flung at them.
Jdg. 12:6. Say now Shibboleth, etc.] How greatly is the pride of the Ephraimites humbled, that now they are glad to renounce the tribal connection, and to say they are not Ephraimites, to save their lives! This too was said to Gileadites! But the dissemblers were discovered. The wicked is snared by the transgression of his lips. The sound of sh seems to have been common among the dialects spoken to the east of Jordan, but it had not yet got a place in the spoken language of the Ephraimite. By his inability to pronounce this sound an Ephraimite was easily discovered. In the day of reckoning, what a variety of witnesses can God bring against a guilty man! They lie on all sides. Every stone, every straw, the very winds of heaven, or the clods of the dust (Job. 20:27; Job. 18:8-10).
In different communities among the same people, nothing is more common than to hear different dialects spoken. The guttural sound of the letters ch as known and pronounced in Scotland is impossible of pronunciation by an Englishman, as in the words Ecclefechan or Auchtermuchty. Again, the letter r, as in river cannot be pronounced by a native of Northumberland. The sound of th cannot be given by many foreigners, though quite easy of utterance to the English-speaking race. Many German Jews pronounce the Hebrew word Beth as Baiss, and Bereshith they pronounce as Beresiss or Bereshiss. Peter, as a Galilean, often brought in his broad inelegant phrases which grated on refined ears, so that bystanders knew him to be a Galilean from his tongue. Thy speech bewrayeth thee (Mar. 14:70). So is the Arabic tongue different as spoken in Aleppo, in Cairo, and in Bagdad. The word Shibboleth itself means a stream, or sometimes ear. But the sole reference here, is to the pronunciation of the first combination of letters in the word. When, during the Flemish war, the insurrection against the French broke out (1302), the gates were guarded, and no one was suffered to pass out except those who were able to say, Scitt ende friend. which words no Frenchmen could pronounce.(Cassel.)
There fell of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.] Certain numbers had a special significance among the Israelites. Forty-two mockers of the prophet Elisha were torn to pieces by the bears (2Ki. 2:24); when Gods judgments descend on Ahabs house, 42 brethren of Ahaziah are put to death by Jehu (2Ki. 10:14).
Jdg. 12:7. He was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.] God takes care of His owneven their dust is precious. Jephthah has been harshly judged by many. But it is manifest that God makes much of him, according to His own rule. Them that honour me I will honour. How small a matter to be judgedrather misjudged of man! He that judgeth us is the Lord.
In his city.] So the Sept. reads. It uses for . In that case Mizpah would be the place where he was laid, for it was the city of Jephthah.
Jdg. 12:8. Ibzan of Bethlehem]. Some think this was the same with Boaz, for it seems to have been in Judah. The thought was common among the Jews, yet it rests purely on supposition. The eference is rather to a town in Zebulun.
Jdg. 12:9-15. The lives of the three judges mentioned here were short and uneventful. All that is said of them is that they lived a little while, they passed across the stage, and then disappeared. two of them had large families, but no names are given, and nothing is recorded as to what they did. It is said of Abdons sons and nephews, or rather grandsons, that they rode on ass colts, which in those days implied wealth and high station alike (Ch. Jdg. 5:10; Jdg. 10:4).
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ON CHAPTER 12
I. It is impossible to satisfy the cravings of pride and envy.
They are like the daughters of the horse-leach that continually cry, Give, give. Nothing would please these Ephraimites. Jephthah offered at the outset to give them a large share of the honours of the fight, but then they kept in the background; for it was by no means certain whether they should overcome or be overcome, and now when the battle is over and won, they turn round and murmur because they were not called (comp. Mat. 11:16-19). See remarks on Jdg. 8:1-3.
II. Deadly results flow from a malicious use of the tongue.
Malicious words sting a man usually in his character, that is, in the apple of his eye. For nothing about him is so sensitive as his character. Hence the consequences are often most destructive (Jas. 3:2-8). You are the refuse of Ephraim, worthless as the rubbish under our feet. Such was the taunt of the imperial tribe towards the poor Gileadites, who, however, could as keenly resent a barbed arrow thrown at them by the tongue as any other class. Their rage became a frenzy, and, those who had so thoughtlessly flung the shaft of reproach, little reflected on the terrible rebound their evil words would produce. There fell at that time of Ephraimites 42,000 men. Some would indeed reduce the number to 2,040 men. But the A.V. is most generally taken as correct. Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
There is no limit to the ruinous effect of an evil tongue. It is the instrument of all strife and contention, the inventor of law suits, and the origin of wars. It is the origin of error, of lies, of calumny, and of blasphemies. [sop]. A large manufactory is burnt down to the ground, notwithstanding that many engines are employed to pour water upon it. That fire is kindled by a rushlight. A splendid farmyard, with hay ricks, corn stacks, stables, and other buildings, is reduced to blackened ruins by a destructive fire: and that is the doing of a lucifer match! Life and death are in the power of the tongue. What need to offer the prayer, Set a watch, Lord, before my mouth; keep the door of my lips.
III. Sinful passions, long-cherished, will in the end bring dire punishment.
The same pride and envy, superciliousness of manner, and arrogance of spirit, with resentfulness of feeling, which were shown on this occasion, were exhibited many years before to Gideon. During all those years such dispositions were cherished by the Ephraimites, and though the Ruler in Providence permitted them long to pass with impunity, the time came round at last for these wicked to receive the due reward of their iniquities (2Pe. 2:3; Pro. 29:1). The long delay to bring punishment, means that Gods goodness would lead men to repentance.
IV. The Redeemer cares for the bodies as well as the souls of those whom He redeems.
The very burial place of the good man is worth mentioning. His dust is precious, however great may be the humiliation of the grave. His grave is known to Him by whom he is redeemed; and, when the time comes for the gathering up of the jewels, there will be no difficulty in finding out the spot where every jewel is to be found. This is the Fathers will, that of all which He hath given me, I should lose nothing, but raise it up again at the last day. We wait for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body. Every part of the man must be redeemed, for it is for the honour of Him whose the work is, that it should be done with perfection. As Moses said to Pharaoh, not a hoof shall be left behind, so will a greater than Moses, who is the author of a greater redemption require from Death, that he yield up all the parts and fragments of the vile body, so that not a limb shall be left in the grave. All now sleep under the eye of Jesus, and the moment is advancing when at His Almighty whisper, all that has been so long in the dark charnel-house held bound in the sleep of death, shall awake singing, each one rising on the wing like the lark, but with sweeter song, to meet their Lord in the air, and surround his throne with adorations and praises as their never-ceasing employment.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Ephraimites Slain by Jephthah Jdg. 12:1-6
And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward, and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire.
2 And Jephthah said unto them, I and my people were at great strife with the children of Ammon; and when I called you, ye delivered me not out of their hands.
3 And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands, and passed over against the children of Ammon, and the Lord delivered them into my hand: wherefore then are ye come up unto me this day, to fight against me?
4 Then Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead, and fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said, Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites.
5 And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay;
6 Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.
1.
What was the ground of the complaint? Jdg. 12:1
They were probably wanting spoils. The children of Ephraim had been blessed throughout much of Israels history. Jacob had adopted Ephraim as one of his sons and given the descendants of Ephraim the status of one of the twelve tribes of Israel. When he pronounced his blessings on his twelve sons, he prophesied that Ephraim would be like a fruitful bough. Joshua, the first leader of the people of Israel in the Promised Land, was from this tribe; and in many ways they had taken a place of leadership. When Jephthah arose and delivered the Israelites from the oppressing Ammonites, these Ephraimites probably felt they had not been given proper opportunity to assume the role of leader.
2.
When had Jephthah called the men of Ephraim? Jdg. 12:2
Since the children of Ephraim said that Jephthah had not called them and Jephthah said he had called them, two different times of calling must have occurred. Probably Jephthah had given indication earlier that the Ammonites were oppressing the Gileadites. Nothing had been done about it, however, until the enemies from the east crossed Jordan and entered into the territory belonging to the tribes who lived west of the Jordan. Even then, the western tribes had not been able to provide proper leadership. In their desperation, they came to Jephthah and asked him to take the place of leadership. Jephthah had marched boldly ahead, and God had used him mightily.
3.
What attitude did the men of Epbraim take toward the Gileadites? Jdg. 12:4
The Ephraimites had called the Gileadites fugitives of Ephraim. They indicated they were like unwelcome foreigners among the Ephraimites and the Manassites. Such a description would be used only of those who were regarded as inferior, and this must have aroused animosity among the Gileadites.
4.
Why did the men of Ephraim deny their identity? Jdg. 12:5
After the Gileadites took possession of the fords of the Jordan, the Ephraimites were afraid to reveal their true identity. As these warriors began to filter back to their land on the west side of the Jordan after having fought in Gilead on the east of Jordan, they were accosted by the Gileadites who controlled the crossings of the Jordan. It was then that the Gileadites asked for proper identification of these returning soldiers. When they asked one if he were an Ephraimite, he denied it because he was afraid for his life.
5.
Why were they not able to pronounce the word? Jdg. 12:6
Their speech organs were shaped by usage so as to prevent proper pronunciation. After pronouncing a word in a certain way a person becomes so accustomed to this pronunciation that he is unable to pronounce it differently. Such habits of speech become very deeply entrenched, and it is possible to identify a persons homeland by listening to his speech. During the trial of Jesus, those who identified Peter as one of His disciples said, Thy speech maketh thee known (Mat. 26:73). In other accounts of Peters denials he was identified as a Galilean. Quite evidently, the speech habits of those in Galilee were different from those in Judea. It is possible even today to identify people from different localities by the way in which they speak.
Jephthas death Jdg. 12:7
7 And Jephthah judged Israel six years. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) Gathered themselves together.Literally, were called. Hence the Vulg. renders it a sedition arose in Ephraim. No doubt the phrase arose from the circulation of some warlike summonswhether watchword or tokenamong the tribe (Jdg. 7:23-24; Jdg. 10:17).
Northward.Mizpeh in Gilead lay to the northeast of the tribe of Ephraim. The Hebrew word is Tsaphonah, rendered Sephenia in some MSS. of the LXX. (Cod. A., Kephenia). Hence some suppose that it means towards Tsaphon, a town in the Jordan valley not far from Succoth, which the Jews identified with Amathus (Jos. 13:27).
And didst not call us.The tribe of Ephraim throughout the Book of Judges is represented in a most unenviable lightslothful and acquiescent in time of oppression, and turbulently arrogant when others have taken the initiative and won the victory (Jos. 17:14-18; Jdg. 8:1). They brought on their own heads the terrible disgrace and humiliation which Jephthah inflicted on them. They resembled Sparta in dilatoriness, and perhaps in courage; but when Athens had won Marathon, Sparta had at least the generosity to congratulate her (Herod. v. 20).
We will burn thine house upon thee with firei.e., we will burn thee alive in thy house. They regarded it as an unpardonable offence that Jephthah should have delivered Israel without recognising their hegemony (see Jdg. 8:1). The horrible threat shows the wild manners of the times (Jdg. 14:15; Jdg. 15:6; Jdg. 20:48); and if a whole tribe could be guilty of such conduct, it shows how little cause we have for surprise at the much less heinous aberrations of individual men like Gideon and Jephthah and Samson.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
EPHRAIM’S JEALOUSY AND DEFEAT, Jdg 12:1-6.
Ephraim’s ambition and jealousy towards other tribes had burst out once before, in the days of Gideon, (Jdg 8:1-3,) but the soft answer of that heroic judge prevented then a rupture between the men of that tribe and the divinely chosen judge. But in Jephthah the men of Ephraim find a man of different mettle, and a character less placable than Gideon. His stern and resolute spirit smites the head of Ephraim’s jealousy, and thus for a long time silences that factious element in Israel. At a later period, however, Ephraim’s irrepressible pride and ambition broke out again, and led to the secession of the ten tribes and the Assyrian exile.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. The men of Ephraim The warriors of that tribe.
Gathered themselves together Were summoned by their leaders to muster for battle. The warriors gathered from this single tribe were more than forty-two thousand. Jdg 12:6. They meant to make a great demonstration in Israel, and show Jephthah and the eastern tribes how powerful they were. It was passionate ambition and jealousy taking up arms for self-gratification.
Went northward So the ancient versions; but the better rendering is, went over to Zaphon. Zaphon was a city in the tribe of Gad. See at Jos 13:27.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Chapter 12. Jephthah and Ephraim Fall Out.
This chapter relates a quarrel between Jephthah and the Ephraimites, which was fatal to the latter; the period of Jephthah’s judging of Israel; his death and burial, and then briefly makes reference to three more judges of Israel, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon.
Jdg 12:1
‘ And the men of Ephraim were gathered together, and went northward, and said to Jephthah, “Why did you pass over to fight against the children of Ammon, and did not call us to go with you? We will burn your house on you with fire.” ’
Next to Judah, Ephraim was the largest and strongest tribe in the confederacy. And they were jealous for their position of leadership. While not always fully responding to the call to arms (as seemingly in this case) once victory had been achieved they tended to be affronted that they had had no part in it.
It seems here also that they did not like the rise of a strong tribal group in Gilead which might usurp their position. Thus they decided to act on a pretext in order to exert their authority and superiority. Gathering a large army of about fifty military units (forty two military units were later decimated) they crossed the Jordan and moved northward towards Mizpah. It was civil war in the tribal confederacy. They no doubt hoped that Gilead had been weakened by their war against Ammon, and were certain that this Jephthah would prove no match for them.
Their excuse for the invasion was that they had not been called to help in the fight with Ammon. They felt slighted. But their real reason was in order to prevent Gilead becoming too strong. They overlooked the fact that over the years of oppression they had not moved a muscle to come to the aid of the tribes Beyond Jordan.
“We will burn your house over you with fire.” They would teach this upstart leader, and Gilead, a lesson they would not forget. The idea was that they would destroy him to teach them a lesson. Of course, if he had recognised his inferior position and their importance and submitted to them they might have been merciful. And that is probably what they expected. They had not reckoned on strong resistance. Were they not, with their brother Judah, one of the two most powerful tribes in the confederacy?
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jdg 12:1-6 Gilead Fights Ephraim Jdg 12:1-6 records the civil war between several tribes of Israel, the Gileadites and Ephraimites. Gideon was able to reason with this tribe diplomatically and appease their anger (Jdg 8:1-3). In contrast, Jephthah gave this same tribe a harsh answer and had to fight them in battle. This story illustrates Pro 15:1, “A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger.”
Jdg 12:6 Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.
Jdg 12:6
Jdg 12:6 Word Study on “Sibboleth” The Hebrew word “Sibboleth” ( ) (H5451) is a corrupted pronunciation of “Shibboleth.”
Jdg 12:6 Comments – Although the Hebrew language was unique to the nation of Israel, the people developed different dialects. Jdg 12:6 shows that the Hebrew silibant “shin” ( ) was also pronounced “sin” ( ) by the Ephraimites. Since the Gileadites were standing at a flowing stream, they picked a word that meant “a stream,” and they asked the Ephraimites to pronounce it. We read in the New Testament that the speech of the Galileans was pronounced different than that of Judea (Mar 14:70).
Mar 14:70, “And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Ammonite Oppression and Deliverance by Jephthah The story of Jephthah’s leadership over Israel during the period of the Judges offers readers one of the most amazing stories to deal with in the Holy Scriptures. This judge made a vow unto the Lord that resulted in the offering of his daughter as a burnt sacrifice unto the Lord. Yet, the great victory that the Lord gave him in defeating the Ammonites won him recognition in the “Hall of Faith” found in Heb 11:1-40. Jephthah is listed with a number of other judges because he demonstrated tremendous faith in God (Heb 11:32-34).
Heb 11:32-34, “And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.”
Haddon Robinson says this story teaches us that “God overlooks ignorance, but not unbelief.” [22]
[22] Haddon W. Robinson, “The Story of Jephthah: Judges 11,” Expository Homiletical Conference, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Hamilton, Massachusetts, 14 October 2011.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Defeat of the Ephraimites
v. 1. And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together and went northward, v. 2. And Jephthah, v. 3. And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands, v. 4. Then Jephthah gathered together, v. 5. And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites, v. 6. then said they unto him, Say now shibboleth v. 7. And Jephthah judged Israel six years,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Jdg 12:1
Northward, or, otherwise rendered, to Zaphon, a city of the Gadites mentioned in Jos 13:27 together with Succoth, and thought to be the modern, Amateh on the Wady Rajlb (see Vanderveld’s map). It is difficult to say with certainty which rendering is right, but on the whole the latter seems most probable. Although Gilead does lie north-east of Ephraim, it hardly seems a natural description of the Ephraimite movement to say they “went northwards;” whereas if they marched to Zaphon the phrase would be precise. The previous phrase, gathered themselves together, means mustered for battle, as in Jdg 7:23, Jdg 7:24. We will burn thine house, etc.the same savage threat as the Philistine youths made use of to induce Samson’s wife to discover and reveal his riddle (Jdg 14:15), and as the Philistines actually put in practice upon her and her father in revenge for the destruction of their corn (Jdg 15:6). Passedst thou over, as in Jdg 11:29, Jdg 11:32; Jdg 12:3.
Jdg 12:2
When I called you. This incident is not mentioned in the previous narrative. Probably Jephthah asked the help of Ephraim when he was first made chief of the Gileadites, and they refused partly because they thought the attempt desperate, and partly because they were offended at Jephthah’s leadership.
Jdg 12:4, Jdg 12:5
The English version of these somewhat obscure verses is obviously wrong, and devoid of sense. The obscurity arises partly from Jdg 12:5 and Jdg 12:6 being merely an amplification, i.e. a narrative in detail of what is more briefly related in Jdg 12:4; and from the insertion of the explanatory words, “Gilead lies in the midst of Ephraim and in the midst of Manasseh,” in verse 4. The literal translation of the two verses is as follows:And the men of Gilead smote Ephraim (at the fords of Jordan), for, said they, ye are fugitives of Ephraim. (Gilead lies in the midst of Ephraim and in the midst of Manasseh, i.e. between Manasseh and Ephraim, so that in coming from Manasseh, where they had taken refuge, to return to Ephraim they were obliged to pass through Gilead, and the Gileadites had taken the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites; and it was so, that when the fugitives of Ephraim said, Let me pass over, that the men of Gilead said, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay, then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth, etc; i.e. they put him to the test of pronunciation; and if they found by his pronunciation of the word Shibboleth, viz; Sibboleth, that he was an Ephraimite, in spite of his denial, then they took him and slew him (killed him in cold blood) at the passages of Jordan. ) And there fell at that time, etc. The direct narrative goes on here from verse 4. Omitting the long explanatory parenthesis from the latter part of verse 4 to the latter part of verse 6, the narrative runs (verse 4), And the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, for, said they, ye are fugitives of Ephraim; and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand. The parenthesis explains why the Ephraimites had to pass through Gilead, and how the Gileadites ascertained in each case whether a man was an Ephraimite or not.
Jdg 12:6
Say now Shibboleth, etc. We have thus, as it were, accidentally preserved to us a curious dialectical difference between the Ephraimites and the inhabitants of Gilead. A similar difference exists at the present day between the pronunciation of the inhabitants of different parts of Germany. What the Hanoverians call stein, a stone, the other Germans call shtein. Shibboleth means both an ear of corn and a stream. Forty and two thousand. It is possible that the war between Jephthah and the Ephraimites may have lasted a considerable time, though only the single incident of the slaughter at the fords of Jordan is mentioned, so that the large number of 42,000 men may be less improbable than it seems at first sight. There is, however, always some doubt as to the correctness of numbers (see 1Sa 6:19).
Jdg 12:7
Six years. Perhaps his sorrow for his daughter shortened his life. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite. Better, And Jephthah the Gileadite died. In one of the cities. His exact burial-place was perhaps unknown, and therefore the general phrase in the cities of Judah was used, as in Gen 13:12. Lot is said to have dwelt in the cities of the plain, and in Neh 6:2 San-ballat asked Nehemiah to meet him in the villages of the plain. Still the phrase is not what you would expect here, and it seems unlikely that Jephthah’s burial-place should be unknown. The Septuagint, Vulgate, Syriac, and Arabic versions read, “in his city Gilead,” as if Gilead had been the name of Jephthah’s paternal city. Another conjecture is that there might have been an Ar of Gilead as well as the well-known Ar of Moab, or there might have been a collection of towns called Arey- Gilead (the towns of Gilead), after the analogy of Havoth-jair (Jdg 10:4), but there is no evidence in support of these conjectures.
HOMILETICS
Jdg 12:1-7
The envy of the small great at the great deeds of the small.
The detection of faults of character is useful to those who wish to correct and perfect their own, and for this reason the observation of the tendency of particular positions to produce particular faults is very valuable. The particular vice of the human mind which the shameful and unpatriotic arrogance of the Ephraimites towards the deliverer of their country brings to light, is the tendency on the part of those in high places to resent and envy the great deeds and successes of those whom they look upon as very inferior to themselves. Ephraim was the largest and most powerful of the tribes of Israel. The great leader, Joshua, was of that tribe, and they seem to have thought that they had an hereditary primacy among the tribes. We have already seen this spirit breaking out fiercely in their strife with Gideon (Jdg 8:1-3), and now again in their hostile attack upon Jephthah. Nay, even in Joshua’s time something of the same arrogance drew down upon them the rebuke of their great captain (Jos 17:14-16). They seen, to have thought that, being the chief tribe, they were entitled to be considered first in everything; that their advice was always to be sought, their wishes always to be consulted; and that the maintenance of their dignity ought to be the first consideration of all the other tribes. And yet we do not find them maintaining their claims by pre-eminent zeal for the public service, by a spirit of self-sacrifice for the public good, nor by furnishing the most eminent men to take the lead in civil or military affairs. They were not the first to risk life and limb against the Midianite hosts; they were not the first to repel the invasion of the children of Ammon. Their own dignity, and not their country’s good, was their chief concern. Hence, when an unknown Gideon, of one of the inferior houses of Manasseh, or a half-caste Jephthah on the other side Jordan, rose to the first rank as saviours of their country, the envy of Ephraim burst out into a flame. What business had such as they to do great things? It was an invasion of the prerogative of the “great people.” It was presumption; it was a slight put upon Ephraim. No punishment was too bad for such insolence. “We will burn thine house upon thee with fire.” This history then illustrates the pride of caste. It shows us men, having a great opinion of themselves, not influenced by that good opinion to do as much as possible for others, but only to exact as much as possible for themselves. It shows us how an overweening estimate of themselves induces men to envy others, whom they think inferior, if they distinguish themselves, and rise superior to them in public estimation. It was very much the same spirit which showed itself in the Pharisees when our Lord’s fame as a teacher drew such multitudes to hear him. They thought they had the monopoly of teaching, that no doctrine which did not emanate from their schools ought to be listened to, that knowledge could proceed from no mouth but that of a Rabbi. And so when the carpenter’s Son opened his mouth and poured forth Iris lessons of exquisite wisdom and power, and enchained the attention of the multitudes, and was acknowledged as a prophet, their envy was excited. Instead of rejoicing that God had sent them a teacher mighty in word and deed, they only plotted how they might silence the eloquent tongue. Instead of sitting at his feet and learning at his mouth the true will of God and the way of life, they were only roused to hatred, and persuaded the multitude to say, Let him be crucified. The same spirit is common in our own days in every profession. The small great envy the great deeds of the small. But God’s gifts are not confined to any caste or class; and they only are truly great who rejoice in great qualities wherever they are found, and view without envy the career of those who outstrip them in the race of doing good and advancing the glory of God.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR
Jdg 12:1-3
Ingratitude the frequent reward of benefactors.
The triumph of Jephthah is marred by another incident. Ephraim, most powerful tribe west of the Jordan, confronts him in hostile array. His experience must have been bitter and hard to comprehend. But he is not alone in the results which his good deeds brought upon him. Benefactors in every age have met with a like reception.
I. THEIR GOOD DEEDS ARE THEMSELVES AN OFFENCE. This has its root and ground in the incapacity of the natural mind to perceive and appreciate spiritual motives; but it seldom takes the form of direct, simple objection to the good deed. Other forms of excuse for opposition are easily discovered.
1. The spirit in which they are wrought is misunderstood or misinterpreted. The key to our judgments of others is in ourselves. If then we are evil, our judgments will be perverted. All through the history of God’s Church this influence is apparent, from the old ill-natured query, ‘”Does Job serve God for nought?” to the culminating wickedness described in the gospel: “The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not … He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (Joh 1:5, Joh 1:10, Joh 1:11). “To the pure, all things are pure,” and vice versa.
2. They present an unwelcome contrast to the conduct of others. Every good deed is as a light which brings to view things of like kind, and inspires similar behaviour; but also reveals the hideousness and hatefulness of the ordinary life of man. This is an offence against the amour propre of the sinner, and therefore unpardonable; it is also an exposure of hypocrisy, and sadly inconvenient. It makes the heart of good men ache to see this, and to cry, “When will goodness not be the exception, but the rule?”
3. The honor they acquire for their authors is coveted. To minds not actuated by the spirit of goodness, the only thing that can be desired in good works is the outward fame and advantage they bring. The exclusion from this is keenly resented. Hundreds are eager to share the crown of the righteous who are far from breathing his spirit or emulating his example.
II. HOW HARD IS IT FOR EVEN GOOD MEN TO UNDERSTAND THIS! Jephthah argues his case, and asks, “Wherefore are ye come up unto me this day, to fight against me?” The law of Moses promised temporal advantages to those who fulfilled it. Occasionally these were not enjoyed, and there was a consequent perplexity. But we are not to suppose that this wonder and mental trouble were confined to that dispensation; they are deeply human characteristics. Our Saviour himself experienced them when he asked, “Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? (Joh 10:32); and again, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me” (Mat 26:55). The key to this mystery is furnished by the beatitude of the persecuted for righteousness’ sake (Mat 5:11, Mat 5:12), and realised in the spirit of Christ’s sacrifice.M.
Jdg 12:4
The reproach of the righteous.
“Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites.”
I. THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO TRUTH AND GOODNESS OFTEN OBJECT TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN LIFE AND THE CHARACTER OF THOSE WHO ARE REPUTED TO DO GREAT WORKS IN GOD‘S SERVICE. “Fugitives” is a term of social reproach. It suggests vile reasons which made it convenient for them to leave their own home. So it was said, “Is not this Joseph, the carpenter’s son?” and, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” So Joh 9:24, Joh 9:29.
II. THIS OBJECTION IS INCONSEQUENT. It ignores the real authorship of goodness, and the method of his working, and character of his instrumentalities in all time. It is self-contradictory (Joh 9:31).M.
Jdg 12:5, Jdg 12:6
Shibboleth:-The importance of little defects, faults, etc.
This not absolute, but relative.
I. WHEREIN THIS IMPORTANCE CONSISTS.
1. In what they suggest or reveal. A slip in accidence, or a blunder in the statement of matter of fact, may discredit the pretended scholar. A difference in tone or manner may mean indifference or enmity or hypocrisy. Temporary neglect of a child may prove want of real parental affection. Neglect of private or public prayer may be little in itself, but it may spring from the alienation of the soul from God. The glib utterance of a “white lie” may make us doubt the whole moral character of the speaker. Grave diseases often declare themselves by comparatively slight symptoms, as leprosy, paralytic ataxia, etc.
2. We see it in the order of life as a whole. In the vegetable and animal world the law of the:’ survival of the fittest” often works through comparatively slight organic adaptations. In human life the advantage and ultimate success of men often depends upon their slight superiority to other competitors. A little ignorance, extravagance, carelessness, etc. may work ruin. “A stitch in time saves nine.” “Ready, aye ready,” is a noble motto. Great discoveries have been made by men who were just a little in advance of their fellows.
3. A critical occasion may give a trifle an unlooked-for importance. The cackling of geese saved Rome, according to the myth. Peter’s uncouth accent occasioned the observation of the maid, and his emphatic denial of Christ. Vessels have been wrecked because of a little carelessness in taking observations when mists have suddenly arisen, or rocks were in the course. Souls have been lost through impressions produced by the inconsistencies of professing Christians.
II. OUR DUTY WITH RESPECT TO THEM. “Of course it is to correct them, to get rid of them,” you say. Yes; but how? Sometimes they are so related to us that we cannot remove them. It is necessary then that we should do all in our power to compensate for them by cultivating other qualities, etc; or to neutralise their influence by timely explanations and clear proofs of our real intention, spirit, character, etc. Mere punctilio, or the scrupulosity of the martinet will not do. We must beware of the folly of those who “strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.” Let the whole life be emphatic in contradiction, and let the spirit of Christ so shine through us that men will learn to know us in spite of those failings and defects which give us the lie. “Not far from the kingdom of heaven” may be worse than entire alienation from it.
Tests: their good and evil. As a means of discovering the Ephraimite, the device was highly natural and ingenious. In the main and roughly it was successful. Some such method was evidently required. There was no time to enter into minute detail or examination. But, on the other hand, it was quite possible that some who were not Ephraimites were slain by mistake. So in determining fitness for Church membership, office, or spiritual responsibility
I. TESTS MAY BE NECESSARY. There are times when it is of the utmost importance for us to know who are God’s people and who are not. We are to “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” From the unholy, disorderly, unbelieving we are commanded to withdraw ourselves. But this injunction were impossible of fulfilment were the distinction between saints and sinners not capable of being made. Christ has happily supplied a test”By their fruits ye shall know them.” The confession of the lips is another element, but it must not be dissociated from the former. So in the life of every day we require to know men, and accordingly have to form our opinions and judgments of them. This is so vital and necessary to safety and happiness, that we do it almost automatically, unconsciously. The honest and the dishonest, the true and the false, the friend and the enemy, we learn to distinguish by actions and words, and the course of their conduct It is foolish, therefore, for persons to object to teststhey are necessary throughout the whole range of life, temporal and spiritual. But
II. THEY MAY MISLEAD. In the nature of things they must be superficial, local, accidental, etc. They are observed and interpreted by fallible men. Trifling differences may acquire factitious importance. A man is not to be condemned for a word; a careful study should be made of the whole conduct and character of the man. The Christian life has many “notes,” and where one is not forthcoming another may be present. The Epistles have, therefore, a variety of points upon which Christians may test themselves and others. God alone knoweth the heart, and in Christ he will judge the world by infallible judgment. It is better to err on the side of leniency to offenders than on that of severity. It matters not how we may commend ourselves to men, our condition in the sight of God is of chief account.M.
Jdg 12:1-6
Vaulting ambition, which o’erleaps itself.
This was not the first time of such offence on the part of Ephraim. Gideon had to bear with their unreasonableness, and was gracious enough to permit their co-operation in securing the results of his victory. But now the “cup of their iniquity is full.” Not for Ammon’s destruction alone is Jephthah raised up; he has a punishment to mete out to Ephraim. They knew it not, but this pride of theirs was on the verge of its fall. They presumed on former exemption from evil consequences, and blindly rushed upon their chastisement. We see here
I. PRIDE IN ITS DEVELOPMENT AND CAREER. Past kindness and consideration only hardened and strengthened it. Past achievements and the prestige acquired through them are relied upon instead of present obedience to God, etc. Ephraim cared more for its own position and advantage than to serve the commonwealth. By its inaction in the past and its hostile attitude to Jephthah on the present occasion it plays the traitor. It despised its brethren, and refused to recognise the leader God had chosen, and now it threatened to overthrow the advantage acquired by the Ammonite victory. It became a public nuisance and a political danger.
II. PRIDE IN ITS DIVINE CHASTISEMENT, In the various details of its punishment it is hard to repress a certain measure of sympathy for it. There is something always in the humiliation of a proud nature that commands our sympathy. And yet it was necessary and right that Ephraim should be taught a terrible lesson.
1. That very tribe, membership with which had been their boast, they would now fain deny.
2. The taunt of being “fugitives,’ which they had used against the Gileadites, is now turned against themselves.
3. The martial strength upon which they had relied is now effectually and suddenly reduced. So will it be with all who set themselves against Christ and his kingdom. “Upon whomsoever this stone shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” If God is against us, or, what is the same thing, we are against God, we may expect patient forbearance, and at first gentle chidings; but, if we persist, a terrible retribution. Sin is pride; it refuses to bow to God’s will, or to accept the methods of his salvation.M.
HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY
Jdg 12:1
Jealousy.
The men of Ephraim are angry with Jephthah because lie has repulsed the Ammonites without their aid.
I. GREAT MEN ARE COMMONLY ASSAILED BY THE JEALOUSY OF THEIR RIVALS.
1. This is no proof of any failing on the part of those who are thus attacked. While some of the noblest of men have brought trouble upon their own heads through want of consideration for the petty weaknesses of their inferiors, the best and most conciliatory of men have not been able to avoid the envy and misjudgment of meaner natures. It is impossible to please all classes in doing a work of any magnitude and value. They are not always the worthiest men who have the fewest enemies. Christ had more foes than friends.
2. This is no proof of the claims of the rivals of great men. People who cannot improve a work can criticise it.
II. THEY WHO ARE BACKWARD IN ENCOUNTERING THE DANGER OF BATTLE ARE EAGER IN COVETING THE HONOUR OF VICTORY. There is no reason to believe that the men of Ephraim showed any willingness to join with Jephthah till after his great success. Weak and selfish people who will not enter into any enterprise until they see it has succeeded are plentiful enough, but they are worthless. The true men are they who will advocate the right cause when it is at a low ebb, when it is unpopular, when it seems doomed to failure, when the service of it involves risk and loss.
III. THE TASK FROM WHICH MEN SHRINK BEFOREHAND LOOKS EASY AFTER IT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY PERFORMED. Now that Jephthah has defeated the Ammonites, the men of Ephraim think his work was only a safe road to honour in which they would gladly have accompanied him. When we see the master of some art working with deft skill and unerring accuracy, nothing looks more easy than to do as he does. His very triumph destroys the appearance of the difficulties which lie in its way. Thus the honours of the artist and the orator, and, in religious matters, of the martyr and the missionary, inspire jealousy in men who think they are cheaply won just on account of that very excellency which conceals the necessary sacrifice, suffering, or toil by the perfect conquest of it.
IV. SELFISH PEOPLE ARE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR OWN SHARE IN THE HONOUR OF A GREAT ENTERPRISE THAN ABOUT THE SUCCESS OF IT. The men of Ephraim do nothing to encourage Jephthah; they are only anxious to share his honour. We see in public life personal ambition overcoming public spirit, in Christian work the honour of the agent exalted above the success of the work. But the patriot should be supremely anxious for the welfare of his country, no matter by whom this is secured, and the Christian should be simply desirous of the triumph of Christ and the extension of Christianity, though he may not share the honours of victory. The jealousy which would hinder the good work of others because we have no share in it is treason to Christ. It is unworthy for the Christian to covet or to hold a post which he knows another will occupy better than himselfA.
Jdg 12:6
Shibboleth.
I. IF A MAN‘S PROFESSION IS FALSE TO HIS CHARACTER, THIS WILL BE MADE MANIFEST BY THE HABITS OF HIS LIFE. The Ephraimite who denied his tribal relation was betrayed by his dialectic pronunciation. Thus Peter was convicted of falsehood (Mat 26:73). It matters little what we say if our conduct belies our words. No man can ultimately conceal his character; it will come out in his countenance, it will colour his speech, it will shape his action. If a man would completely suppress his character, he must destroy it, because while it exists it must obey its nature, which is to be the source of all conduct. You cannot quench a volcano by building over its crater, nor stay the flow of a stream by walling it in. Our true nature, whether it be good or bad, must reveal itself
(1) in great critical epochs, when it can endure no restraint; or
(2) in casual accidents, when we are off our guard and do not consider the occasion sufficiently important to demand much concern; or
(3) in the general course and colour of our life (Mat 7:16).
II. SHALL SUPERFICIAL SIGNS MAY INDICATE GREAT FUNDAMENTAL DISTINCTIONS. The test of the “Shibboleth” has been much misunderstood, as though it were an instance of the importance which is sometimes unduly given to mere trivial distinctions. The test was simply a means of discovering the tribal relations of men. The Gileadites cared nothing for the difference of pronunciation in itself. They simply used it as a means for determining a really important pointthe truth or falsehood of the profession of those who said they were not men of Ephraim. The same mistake was involved in Gibbon’s famous sneer about the great division of Christendom on the question of a diphthong. It was not a diphthong, but the fundamental truth of the perfect Divinity of Christ that Athanasius and his friends were contending with the Arians about, and the use of the diphthong was simply a convenient form in which to bring the question to a definite point. So the recent controversies about vestments have been ridiculed as though they were questions of “ecclesiastical millinery,” while both parties know quite well that these outside and apparently trivial differences are the signs of fundamental questions concerning priestly authority and sacramental grace.
1. We must beware of judging of the magnitude of a question by the comparative insignificance of its external indications.
2. We must, nevertheless, be careful not to assume that trivial external distinctions are signs of deep and important differences until we have proved the fact. We may erect the test of a “Shibboleth” to separate people who have no such fundamental distinctions as those of the men who had been true to Jephthah and the men who had enviously opposed him. The danger is that we should thus magnify the importance of the “Shibboleth” itself, and so become narrow and sectarian.A.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
CHAP. XII.
The Ephraimites expostulate with Jephthah, and threaten to burn his house. Jephthah discomfits them: he dies, and is succeeded by other judges.
Before Christ 1180.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Ephraims proud and envious conduct towards Jephthah
Jdg 12:1-7
1And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward [proceeded to Zaphon], and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over [Why didst thou pass onproceed] to fight against the children [sons] of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire. 2And Jephthah said unto them, I and my people were at great strife [in a severe conflict] with the children [sons] of Ammon; and when [omit: when] I called you, [and] ye delivered me not out of their hands [hand]. 3And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands [hand], and passed over [on] against the children [sons] of Ammon, and the Lord [Jehovah] delivered them into my hand: wherefore 4then are ye come up unto me this day, to fight against me? Then [And] Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead, and fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they [had] said, ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites [fugitives of Ephraim are ye Gilead, in Ephraim and Manasseh]. 5And the Gileadites took the passages [fords] of [the] Jordan before the Ephraimites [toward Ephraim]: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped [the fugitives of Ephraim], said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; 6Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not1 frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him and slew [slaughtered] him at the passages [fords] of [the] Jordan. And there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand. 7And Jephthah judged Israel six years: then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Jdg 12:6.Could not, is too strong. Keil: , stands elliptically for , to apply the mind, to give heed. Cf. 1Sa 23:22; 1Ch 28:2, with 2Ch 12:14; 2Ch 30:19.Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
The victory of Jephthah is followed by a repetition of what took place after Gideons heroic achievement. The overbearing pride of the chief tribe, Ephraim, vents itself in each instance against the victor who has risen up within the smaller tribe, and has become the saviour of the people. Now as then the presumptuous jealousy of the tribe complains that it has not been invited to take part. But this apparent eagerness for war was hypocritical. The thing really desired was a share in the booty and the results of success. Ephraim would help to reap, where it had not sown. The injustice of the tribe was even greater on this occasion than in the time of Gideon. For then it really did render some little assistance, albeit only after Gideon had first led the way. But here it had been called on for help, and had stayed at home. As soon, however, as victory had been obtained, it came with threats and war. But it was not so successful now as with Gideon. That hero, when they clamored against him, was still in pursuit of the enemy, and was obliged, for the sake of his own success, to allay their pride and presumption by gentleness. Jephthah had no reason for submitting to such arrogance. Nor did the Ephraimites come with words only; they were prepared to use force. They derided the people, and thought that with arms in their hands they could chastise Gilead and humble Jephthah. They will set his house on fire over his head. Then Jephthah shows that he is not only a hero against enemies but also the Judge in Israel. It is his authority which he tries and proves by chastising Ephraim. But here also, as in his dealings with the sons of Ammon, he first establishes the righteousness of his conduct by clear words. However, if sinful Ephraim had cared for righteousness, it would in no case have entered on this course. It relied on violence, like Ammon; and like Ammon it experienced the chastisement of violence. No Judge of whom the history tells us inflicts such chastisement and exercises such power within the nation as well as against alien enemies, as does Jephthah. But it was needed; and the humiliation of Ephraim for its sin was less severe than it might otherwise have proved, because the punishment came in the time of Israels freedom, and not at the expense of that freedom.
Jdg 12:1. And proceeded to Zaphon. The older Jewish expositors, whom Ewald and Keil have followed, already found in , not direction toward the north, but the name of a city, which lay beyond the Jordan in the tribe of Gad (Jos 13:27). This interpretation rests on the requirements of the context. For in order to explain verses 4 and 5, Ephraim must have advanced across the Jordan. The remark in the Jerusalem Talmud (Shwiith, 9, 2), which identifies Zaphon with , Amathus, Aemath, cf. Amateh (cf. Ritter, xv. 1031), is therefore altogether suitable. For this city was still known in later times as a strong point on the Jordan, as Josephus repeatedly states. The Onomasticon, also (ed. Parthey, p. 26), says concerning it, that it lay beyond the Jordan, to the south of Pella; for Ritters oversight, who supposes that the Onomasticon identifies Amathus with another Aemath in the tribe of Reuben, is not to be concurred in. Amathus, according to its stated distance from Pella (in vigesimo primo milliario), could not lie in the tribe of Reubenwhich agrees so far with the fact that Zaphon was in Gad.
Jdg 12:2. And Jephthah said unto them. It was not related above that Jephthah called on the tribe of Ephraim to assist, as he here reminds them; but that he would do so, was to be expected. But even if he had not done so, what was there to justify Ephraim in its contention and war? Jephthahs answer is not defiant: it allows that Gilead would gladly have accepted help, if only a helper had been at hand. Jephthah would gladly have yielded the precedence in victory to Ephraim, if Ephraim had only wielded arms against the enemy as bravely as it now uses words against its brethren. But when he saw that there was no deliverer, he put his life in his hand, and God gave the victory. Did not Jephthah devote his dearest possession in order to obtain from God the victory for which he entreated Him?
The Midrash has a thought in this connection, which, when disengaged from its unhistorical wrappings, is judicious and profound. It says that for the things which befell Israel under Jephthah only the priests were to blame. Why did they not annul the vow of Jephthah! Why did they not restrain Ephraim from civil war! It is manifest that a truth is here suggested which applies to all times. It is undoubtedly the duty of persons equipped with spiritual power, to lift up their voices for peace, and especially to labor for concord between the single tribe and all Israel. If they neglect this duty, their candlestickthis also the Midrash intimateswill sooner or later be overthrown.
Jdg 12:3. Wherefore then are ye come up unto me this day to fight against me? Ephraims attempt is actually more culpable than Ammons. In itself considered, civil war between cognate tribes is a disgrace, which can only spring from ungodliness. But the sin of Ephraim, when it proposes to burn the house of Jephthah, is still further aggravated by the fact that it is directed against the restorer of the divine law and the deliverer of Israel. It is moral and national treason. The Spartans also, under all sorts of pretexts, had left Athens to face alone the advancing Persians. But when the battle at Marathon had been won, the auxiliary troops who arrived too late to be of service, praised and applauded the heroism of Athens (Herod. vi. 120). Jephthah dwells on the injustice of Ephraim, who would not indeed fight against Ammon, but now (this day) undertakes to make war on him (he always stands personally for his people), in order to excuse his armed resistance. Ephraim now receives the punishment which properly it had already deserved at Gideons hands. It is totally defeated by the hero; and its men find themselves entered on a calamitous flight.
Jdg 12:4-5. And the men of Gilead smote Ephraim. It was not Jephthah, as the fine representation gives us to remark, who prosecuted the bloody pursuit. He contented himself with chastising Ephraim according to its presumption; but the people of Gilead had been exasperated by the contempt of the Ephraimites. It is true that the sentence in which the ground of the wrath of the Gileadites over an utterance of the Ephraimites is expressed, is not easily expounded: . For it is not at once apparent how the Gileadites could be called fugitives of Ephraim, seeing they were descendants of Manasseh. A closer inspection, however, makes this intelligible. Ephraim raised a claim to participate in war, only in the cases of Gideon and Jephthah. not in those of the other Judges. It is manifest, therefore, that it based its claim upon the fact that Gideon and Jephthah belonged to Manasseh, its own sister-tribe. At any rate, the House of Joseph. Ephraim and Manasseh, had from of old a consciousness of a certain unity of its own. It treated as one with Joshua (Jos 17:14 ff.). It entered together into its territory (Jdg 1:22). Under king Solomon it was under a common administrative officer (1Ki 11:28). Now, in the House of Joseph Ephraim had the chief voice; for Manasseh was divided, and its possessions lay scattered among other tribes. Hence, it could with some plausibility claim it as its right that no division of the House of Joseph should undertake a warlike expedition without its participation. Nor do Gideon and Jephthah deny this right. We did call thee, says the latter; but thou didst not come. Only the manner in which Ephraim raised its claim was sinful, unjust, and arrogant. For it raised it, not in the time of distress, but for the sake of the booty; and instead of applauding a great achievement, it indulged in derision, which exasperated the warriors of Gilead. For in storming at Jephthah for not calling it, it denies to Gilead every right of separate action. How can Gilead presume to exercise tribal functions, and set a prince and judge over Israel? Gilead is no community at all, but only a set of fugitives, who act as if they were a tribe, whereas in fact they belong elsewhere. They use the word peletim (fugitives) by way of contumely, just as among the Greeks meant both fugitive and banished. Ye are fugitives of Ephraim, taunted the Ephraimites, and would set yourselves up as an independent principality. In so saying, Ephraim arrogantly put itself in the place of the House of Joseph, to which Gilead also belonged, since it was the son of Machir of Manasseh. Gilead belongs in the midst of Ephraim and Manasseh. This addition was intended to add point to what preceded. Gilead is nothing by itself, has no tribal rights; it belongs to the House of Joseph. This was true, indeed; and Gileads descendants lived on both sides of the river (Num 26:30 ff.); but fugitives they were not. The half-tribe of Manasseh beyond the Jordan was as independent as any other tribe; and in the war against Ammon Gilead proper was doubtless joined by men of other tribes, especially Gad. It was therefore no wonder that the men of Gilead became greatly exasperated, and did not spare the Ephraimites even in their flight. Jephthah only defeated them; but the multitude slew them like enemies, and gave no quarter. Thus, sin and contumely beget passion and cruelty. The discord of brethren inflicts the deepest wounds. Nowhere does hatred rise higher, than where concord is natural.
Jdg 12:6. Then said they to him, Say Shibboleth. Ephraim meets with remarkable experiences at the fords of the Jordan. In Gideons time, it gained easy victory there over the Midianites whom that hero chased into their hands; now it is itself chased thither and there put to death. In the outset, its men had taunted Gilead with the term fugitives of Ephraim, and now they are themselves in very truth . Before they prided themselves upon their tribe name Ephraim, which they haughtily used for the whole House of Joseph; and now, when an Ephraimite came to the stream, he is fain to deny his tribe in order to save his life. The enraged men of Gilead will not suffer one Ephraimite to cross the river; hence the requisition of every one who wished to pass over, to say Shibboleth, which no Ephraimite could do, for he could only say Sibboleth. What Shibboleth meant, is of minor importance; but as its enunciation was required at the river, and in order to pass it, it may be assumed that the Gileadites thought rather of the signification stream than ear, both of which the word has. Every Ephraimite in this extremity had the feeling afterwards depicted in the Psalm (Psa 69:3 [Psa 69:2]): I am come into depths of waters, and the stream overflows me, .When, during the Flemish war, the insurrection against the French broke out, May 25, 1302, the gates were guarded, and no one was suffered to pass out, except such as were able to say, Scilt ende friend, which words no Frenchman could pronounce. (Mensel, Gesch. von Frankr. ii. 134; Schmidt, Gesch. von Frankr. i. 682).
And there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand. The number 42 (7 times 6) appears to be not far removed from a round number; but its occurrence is associated with severe and well-merited judgments on sin. As here 42,000 sinful Ephraimites fall, so 42 of the mockers of the prophet Elijah are killed by bears (2Ki 2:24); and when the judgment of God breaks forth over the house of Ahab, 42 brethren of Ahaziah are put to death by Jehu (2Ki 10:14).
Jdg 12:7. And he was buried in one of the cities of Gilead. Herein the mournful lot of Jephthah, resulting from the surrender of his daughter, shows itself. He had no heir, as he had had no inheritance. He was the first and the last in his house. The greatness of his deeds is proved by the fact that they were nevertheless remembered; for in what city he was buried was not known, just as to us Mizpah, the place where he had his home, is also unknown, and as the place of his birth is not mentioned, it is not known what his fathers name was; it is not known whore his own grave is. Gilead begat him, and Gilead received his corpse. He shares no fathers tomb, and no son shares his. He was a great hero who lived and died solitary; only faith in God was with him. Six years he ruled; when they were finished, his rest from labor and sorrow began. His name did not return; Gileads power rose not again: but he was not forgotten in Israel. His sorrow and victory are typicalso the older expositors suggestof Him who said: Not my will, but thine, be done!
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Jephthahs vocation was extraordinary, and equally extraordinary was his fate. He gave up everything to God for his people; and yet at last the envy of his countrymen pursues him. They threaten to burn his house, which for their sake he has made desolate. He makes no boast of this, however; yet exercises discipline with a strong hand. Six years he judged, and in the seventh rested from an office that had brought him so much grief.
1. Prior to success friends are few; but afterwards all wish to share in it. While there is danger, he who takes the lead is called valorous; after the victory, usurper. Sin regards not the offerings which the warrior brings, but only the results which he has obtained. The evil will not assist in sowing; but yet would fain participate in the harvest.
2. Life offers nothing to such as serve not God, even though one rise as high as Jephthah. If Jephthah had not rebuilt the altar of Jehovah in Israel, he had been happier in the desert and the silence of seclusion. The charm of life must be sought in the gospel. Life is short; and though prolonged, full of trouble. Every religion builds its altar for eternity. For Him who has wrought six days for his Saviour, and confessed Him, there opens on the seventh the Sabbath of eternity.
Starke: The godly are never long without a cross: they are tried at home and abroad; without is fighting, within is fear (2Co 7:5).Sailer: The gospel without suffering belongs to heaven; suffering without the gospel, to hell; the gospel with suffering, to earth.
[Henry: It is an ill thing to fasten names or characters of reproach on persons or countries, as is common, especially on those who lie under outward disadvantages; it often occasions quarrels of ill consequences, as here. See likewise what a mischievous thing an abusive tongue is.Wordsworth: Here we see a specimen of that evil spirit of envy and pride which has shown itself in the Church of God. They who are in high place in the Church, like Ephraim, sometimes stand aloof in the time of danger. And when others of lower estate have stepped into the gap, and have stood in the breach, and braved the danger, and have fought the battle and gained the victory, as Jephthah the Gileadite did (the man of Gilead, which was not a tribe of Israel), then they are angry and jealous, and insult them with proud words, and even proscribe and taunt them with being runaways and deserters, and yet daring to claim a place among the tribes of Israel. Has not this haughty and bitter language of scorn and disdain been the language of some in the greatest western church of Christendom against the churches of the reformation? Has it not sometimes been the language of some in the Church of England towards separatists from herself? Schism doubt less is a sin; but it is sometimes caused by the enforcement of anti-scriptural terms of communion, as it is by the Church of Rome; and the sin of the schism is hers. It is often occasioned (though not justified) by spiritual languor and lethargy in the Church of God. Zeal for God and for the truth is good wherever it be found. Let the churches of Christ stand forth in the hour of danger and fight boldly the good fight against the Ammonites of error and unbelief. Then the irregular guerrilla warfare of separatist2 Jephthahs and their Gileadites will be unnecessary, and they will fight side by side under the banner of Ephraim.The same: The Gileadites did not slay the Ephraimites because they did not agree with them in pronunciation, but because they were Ephraimites, which was discovered by their different pronunciation. The strifes in the Church of God lie deeper than differences of expression in ritual observances or formularies of faith. They lie in the heart, which is depraved by the evil passions of envy, hatred, and malice; and slight differences in externals are often the occasions for eliciting the deep rooted prejudices of depraved will, and the malignant feelings of unsanctified hearts. Let the heart be purified by the Holy Spirit of peace, and the lips will move in harmony and love.The same: That river which in the days of Joshua had been divided by Gods power and mercy, in order that all the tribes might pass over together into Canaan, the type of heaven, is now made the scene of carnage between Gilead and Ephraim. In the Church of God, the scenes of Gods dearest love have often been made, the scenes of mens bitterest hate. The waters of baptism, the living waters of the Holy Scriptures, and of the holy sacrament of the Lords Supperthese passages of our Jordanthe records and pledges of Gods love to the Israel of God, have been made the scenes of the bitterest controversies, and of blood shed of brethren, by those who bear the name of Christ. The holy sepulchre itself has been made an aceldama.Tr.].
Footnotes:
[1][Jdg 12:6.Could not, is too strong. Keil: , stands elliptically for , to apply the mind, to give heed. Cf. 1Sa 23:22; 1Ch 28:2, with 2Ch 12:14; 2Ch 30:19.Tr.]
[2][Dr. Wordsworth looks on Jephthah as one who does mighty deeds in an irregular manner, at a time when those persons who are placed in authority by God, and who ought to employ Gods appointed means in a regular way, are faithless to their trust, and neglect their duty to God and his Church. His work may be compared to that of the Wesleys and Whitefields, etc. see on Jdg 11:1. The definition of irregularity here given, applies to all the Judges. In a certain sense, they were all irregular; but that Jephthah was so in any special sense is abundantly refuted by Dr. Cassels exposition.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
This chapter is connected with the former. It relates to us the displeasure of the men of Ephraim against Jephthah, because he called them not to the battle with Ammon; and the sad consequence of this jealousy: the death of Jephthah; the three successive judges to Jephthah, lbzan, Elon, and Abdon, including a period of 25 years.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
If the Reader recollects the dying benediction of the Patriarch over the two sons of Joseph, how under the spirit of prophecy Jacob put Ephraim before Manasseh, he will here trace the fulfillment of it, and therefrom discover the foundation of the jealousy between those two houses. See Gen 48:13-20 . But what a melancholy event is it in human nature, to behold from the consequence of the fall the quarrels of brethren to be even greater than among strangers. A brother offended (we are told in scripture) is harder to be won than a strong city. Pro 18:19 . Precious Jesus! what a refreshing thought is it to my soul, that amidst all my numerous and repeated provocations, thou art not so offended. Thou art indeed the Brother born for adversity; the friend that loveth at all times; and that sticketh closer than a brother. Pro 18:24Pro 18:24 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jdg 12:6
I can and do, in retrospect, sympathize heartily, tenderly, and reverentially with the Simeonite or Evangelical reaction. Not a stone would I dare to throw at the names of any of the good men who took part in it. But, at the same time, I know perfectly well that there is a type of character which never did, never will, perhaps, understand Evangelicism, but which is capable of religious faith acceptable to God, though innocent of Shibboleths; and a type which could have found no shelter during (which I dare to call) the Sturm und Drang season of the Simeonite reaction, except in the bosom of the English Church.
W. B. Rands in Henry Holbeach , II. pp. 44, 45.
As it is the ear of fruit which distinguishes the wheat from the tares, so this is the true Shibboleth that He, who stands as Judge at the passages of Jordan, makes use of to distinguish those that shall pass over Jordan into the true Canaan from those that should be slain at the passage. For the Hebrew word Shibboleth signifies an ear of corn. And perhaps the more full pronunciation of Jephthah’s friends, Shibboleth, may represent a full ear with fruit in it, typifying the fruits of the friends of Christ, the antitype of Jephthah; and the more lean pronunciation of the Ephramites, his enemies, may represent their empty ears, typifying the show of religion in hypocrites without substance and fruit.
Jonathan Edwards in The Religious Affections.
Reference. XII. 6. G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, p. 269.
Jdg 12:8 ; Jdg 12:11 ; Jdg 12:13
As one old statesman leaves the scene, a younger one comes forward, in the vigour of hope and power, to fill his place. When one great orator dies, another commonly succeeds him. The opportunity of the new aspirant is the departure of his predecessor; on every vacancy some new claimant many claimants probably strive with eager emulation to win it and to retain it. Every loss is, in a brief period, easily and fully repaired. Even, too, in the hereditary part of our constitution, most calamities are soon forgotten. One monarch dies, and another succeeds him. A new court, a new family, new hopes and new interests, spring up and supersede those which have passed away.
Bagehot in The Economist for December, 1801.
Jdg 12:3
A deep teaching lies in the Hebrew idea, recurrent in so many forms, and haunting the world of fairyland and of legend, that the most precious gift of heaven must be long waited for. The late-born child is always the best beloved, the wondrously gifted, the miracle of strength, or the seer, who is to decide the fate of a nation. More or less, we see that the late-born is the precursor of the virgin-born.
Julia Wedgwood, Message of Israel, p. 142.
References. XIII. 16. W. Ewen, Christian World Pulpit, 1891, p. 328. XIII. 18-22. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons (1874), p. 249.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Jdg 12
1. And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together [literally, were called together; the same phrase in chap. Jdg 7:23-24 ], and went northward [in order to cross the Jordan fords. Mizpeh in Gilead lay to the north-east of the tribe of Ephraim], and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us [“the tribe of Ephraim throughout the book of Judges is represented in a most unenviable light.” Compare the similar complaint of the Ephraimites to Gideon, chap. Jdg 8:1 ; see also Jos 17:14-18 ] to go with thee? We will burn thine house upon thee with fire [that is, we will burn thee alive in thy house; a threat which shows somewhat the wildness of the times. See a similar threat in chap. Jos 14:15 , and an execution of it in chap. Jos 15:6 . Burning was a mode of capital punishment; see Gen 38:24 ; Jos 7:25 ].
2. And Jephthah said unto them, I and my people were at great strife with the children of Ammon [literally, I was a man of strife, I and my people, and the children of Ammon exceedingly. For a similar phrase, see Jer 15:10 ]; and when I called you, ye delivered me not out of their hands. [The Ephraimites held themselves selfishly aloof. When Jephthah says, “I called you,” he speaks in the person of Gilead or of the Gileadites].
3. And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands [in the hollow of my hand], and passed over against the children of Ammon, and the Lord delivered them into my hand [Jephthah makes his appeal to Jehovah]: wherefore then are ye come up unto me this day [for the phrase “come up,” see chap. Jer 1:1-16 ], to fight against me?
4. Then Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead [under great provocation. By “the men of Gilead,” understand the eastern tribes generally], and fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said [here the translation and meaning are regarded by eminent critics as highly uncertain: one says that it seems to be “implied that in spite of Jephthah’s perfectly reasonable answer the Ephraimites advanced to attack Gilead, and goaded the Gileadites to fury by intolerable taunts, which prevented the Gileadites from giving any quarter when they had won the victory “], Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim [an extremely obscure passage. The Speaker’s Commentary gives the following as the most grammatically correct and natural rendering of this and the two following verses: “The men of Gilead smote Ephraim, for they, the Gileadites, said, Ye are fugitives to Ephraim (Gilead lies between Ephraim and Manasseh); and Gilead took the fords of Jordan before Ephraim, and it came to pass, when the fugitives of Ephraim said, Let me pass over, and the Gileadites asked him, Art thou an Ephraimite? and he answered, No; then said the Gileadites to him, Say Shibboleth, etc., so they, the Gileadites, slew them at the ford of Jordan], among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites.
5. And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan [because only through them could the Ephraimites escape to their own tribe] before the Ephraimites [literally, to Ephraim]: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped [fugitives to Ephraim. It has been suggested that a bitter retribution may be implied in these words. “The Ephraimites had taunted the eastern Manassites with being fugitives to Ephraim, and in the next verse they themselves appear to be in another but fatal sense fugitives to Ephraim] said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay;
6. Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth [a ford; depth of waters; water-flood; channel]; and he said Sibboleth [according to The Speaker’s Commentary, this is a curious instance of dialectic difference of pronunciation between the east and west Jordanic tribes…. The sh may have been as impossible for an Ephraimite to pronounce as th is to a Frenchman]: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. [“Archdeacon Farrar says, ‘On May 25th, 1802, all the French were detected by their inability to pronounce the words,’ scilt, end, friend. “] Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan [the Arabic version says, they led him across, but the word means rather massacred, butchered]: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand [not necessarily that they were all butchered, but only that that was the number of the invading army; it may include the slain in battle and those killed at the fords; see chap. Jer 4:16 ].
7. And Jephthah judged Israel [his authority embracing all Israel after the subjugation of the Ephraimites] six years. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead [literally, in cities of Gilead; according to the LXX. in his city, Gilead, that is, Ramoth-Gilead, or Mizpeh of Gilead].
8. And after him Ibzan [about whom nothing further is known than is found in these three verses; some have supposed him the same as Boaz] of Bethlehem [Josephus assumes that Bethlehem-Judah is here meant] judged Israel.
9. And he had thirty sons, and thirty daughters [implying polygamy, wealth, and great state. Compare 2 Kings x. I and Jdg 8:30 ], whom he sent abroad [whom he gave in marriage out of his house], and took in thirty daughters from abroad for his sons. And he judged Israel seven years.
10. Then died Ibzan, and was buried at Bethlehem.
11. And after him Elon [the name means a Terebinth: it is customary for Orientals even now to name their children from trees. Archdeacon Farrar says that one of his muleteers in Palestine was named “Father of Olives “], a Zebulonite, judged Israel; and he judged Israel ten years.
12. And Elon the Zebulonite died, and was buried in Aijalon [a place in the tribe of Zebulun, not elsewhere mentioned: where the vowel-points are omitted, the names Elon and Aiialon are identical in Hebrew] in the country of Zebulun.
13. And after him Abdon [ servant ] the son of Hillel [praising. The Rabbi called Hillel is regarded as by far the greatest and best of the Rabbis], a Pirathonite [and therefore of the tribe of Ephraim], judged Israel.
14. And he had forty sons and thirty nephews [the Hebrew has, sons of sons: the word “nephews” in our version always means grandsons, “nieces” is a word which means granddaughters in Wyclif’s Bible], that rode on threescore and ten ass colts [implying wealth and distinction]: and he judged Israel eight years.
15. And Abdon the son of Hillel the Pirathonite died, and was buried in Pirathon [now called Feratah, six miles west of Shechem] in the land of Ephraim, in the mount of the Amalekites [pointing to an early settlement of Amalekites in Central Palestine. “The twenty-five years, apparently consecutive ones, occupied by the judgeship of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, seem to have been very uneventful and prosperous, since the only record of them preserved in the annals of their country relates to the flourishing families and peaceful magnificence of two of their number…. Jephthah’s victory over the enemies of Israel was followed by twenty-five years of peace under three judges…. All the three belong to the western tribes. The first from Bethlehem, the second from Zebulun, and the third from Ephraim.] [The venerable John Trapp, remarking on Jdg 8:6 , says, “They were discerned by their lisping, their dialect betrayed them. How many have we that can hardly lisp out a syllable of good language, and if they attempt it, falter fearfully.” On Jdg 8:14 he quaintly remarks, “In Persia the peasant never rideth; the gentleman never goeth on foot, but fighteth, tradeth, con-ferreth, doeth, all on horseback.”]
Shibboleth
WE have just inquired, Is Abimelech dead? and to that inquiry we received a very decisive reply. Are the Ephraimites dead? Are they clean gone for ever? To this inquiry what reply can we discover in the history which is now before us? Why concern ourselves about an extinct tribe? Principally because we deny that the tribe is extinct. There are no extinct tribes where great moral characteristics and inspirations are concerned. Men die, but Man lives. The individual type seems to modify, and to pass away by development or by extinction, but a certain ground-line runs through all human history; there is a purpose in it, there is a grand central idea which abides. This we shall see if we study the history of Ephraim, as revealed in this incident connected with the war of Jephthah upon the children of Ammon.
Are the Ephraimites dead? Are they dead who are hard upon a man when he is in circumstances of extremity? Are they dead who do not fear to strike the last blow upon a man who is supposed to be staggering and to be unable to resist? Jephthah was exhausted. The war had been a triumphant one, but even triumph is succeeded by exhaustion. Prosperity takes out of a man the very energy which he was required to show in securing the honour. Great efforts are followed by great weaknesses. Added to this, there was a vow claiming execution. The only child was away upon the mountains on a two months’ respite, and in this time of extremity and agony, proud and arrogant Ephraim came to ask a question and deliver a threatening. Are the Ephraimites, then, dead? Have they no successors? Are we now quite patient, after the manner of Christ, with men who are tired, for the moment outworn, and to whose physical exhaustion great mental prostration is added? If so if there are no such men; if there are no such cruel proposals and demands; if there are no such untimely and aggravating threats, then the Ephraimites are dead, and shame be to the preacher who would exhume such men even that he might rebuke their forgotten wickedness.
Are the Ephraimites quite dead? Are there not men who cannot bear that anything should be done but by themselves men who will deny the victory rather than award the merit? Are there not men who would not allow even the world to be converted but under their inspiration, and guidance, and cooperation? Are there Christian communions which deny to one another that they are accomplishing real and solid good in society? Is there a spirit of criticism which says, “The work may be only in appearance a kind of superficial work is no doubt being done, but time will test and time will tell,” a spirit which hampers and frets great Christian aggressions by narrow-minded and impious criticism? Ephraim could not bear that the battle should be won in which Ephraim had taken no part We measure successes by the part which we ourselves have in them. If we were not in the fray, leading it, and causing it to issue in victory, how can we suppose that the fray was other than a tumult in which there was neither reason nor righteousness?
Are the Ephraimites quite dead? Are there not people who profess to be offended because they were not invited? Ephraim said, “Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee?” ( Jdg 12:1 ). We stand much upon the etiquette of invitation. We are so self-restrained, and so conscious of intolerable modesty, that unless we are properly invited to pray we will not worship God, and unless we are besought almost by deputation to take an interest in Christian service we will stand back in unchristian resentment. There are people who must be invited every day. What they suppose themselves to be it is almost impossible to tell. But they must be invited, entreated; the impression must be produced upon them that the universe would go out like a dying spark if they did not come to its patronage and sustenance. They have to be courted by the Church, waited upon, sedulously attended to. If a card should be sent to other people and not to them they would have no part or lot in the matter. Their dignity perish with them! They have no right to be in the Church. They are spots in the feast of charity. Who issues the invitations? The Lord. Whose battle is it? The battle is not yours, but God’s. For whom do we work when we open the door, light the lamp, throw in the coin of charity? Is it for the minister for some man? Then why this sensitiveness? Why this retirement to bed, and covering oneself up with all the clothes, and sweltering in an undeserved and unrecognised obscurity? Who called us to the service? Our call is from eternity. We respond to a divine decree and purpose, and as we were not born of men into this service we do not own their rulership: we are the sons of God, and we will work, whoever sends for us, or ignores us, or praises us. That is the spirit of consecration, and any other spirit in any man, in the pulpit or out of it, is not of God. Reason would be shocked were we to go into detail upon this matter. The childishness, the pettishness, the resentment, which we see in some poor souls, would discourage the strongest heart, were not our trust put in the living God. When such Ephraimites retire, are they any loss? Yes, they are: when they have gone we have lost folly, pride, petulance, arrogance and a great burden which we carried with a sense of intolerable pain.
Are the Ephraimites quite dead? Are they dead who have curiously forgotten their own faithlessness in the past? Jephthah said, “When I called you, ye delivered me not out of their hands. And when I saw that ye delivered me not, I put my life in my hands, and passed over against the children of Ammon, and the Lord delivered them into my hand” ( Jdg 12:2-3 ). Men curiously forget the invitations that they have actually received. They put them aside, because they were not willing to obey them; and having put them out of sight, they have put them out of memory; and having put them out of memory, they impiously deny their existence. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Were the Ephraimites, then, so brave and bold and constant in all faithfulness that they should criticise the action of Jephthah? People should be very careful how they criticise. The popular proverb is a wise one which says, “They who live in glass houses should not throw stones.” Jephthah remembered the case. He had not forgotten sending for the Ephraimites at a critical time in his history, and the Ephraimites paid no heed to his cry. We cannot always be sending for the men who are supposed to be neglected. There is a point at which common reason says, No; we will send no more for you. There is a point indeed at which decency can proceed no further. The people who have always to be sought, and always to be sent for, and always to be implored to come, will break the patience they have misunderstood, and will come to the ruin which they deserve.
Are the Ephraimites quite dead? Are they dead in whom envy culminates in revenge? “We will burn thine house upon thee with fire” ( Jdg 12:1 ). They had better have reckoned with the enemy first. Some houses are not easily lighted. The spirit of men, however, is here clearly revealed. They envied Jephthah his honours, and envy has but a short distance to go to reach revenge. What will not envy do? Of what is it compounded? Of what hateful juices is that devil’s cup made up, envy, the spirit that has no generous word even for a friend, much less an antagonist; envy, that reduces everything that is done to the lowest possible point; envy, so critical in vision, so unjust in criticism; envy, that, serpent-like, entwines itself around the heart, and transforms what ought to be a fountain of benevolence into a fountain of deadly bitterness? Envy cannot rest in mere criticism. Envy must do mischief: not only is there a condemnatory word, but there is a word of menace: the inward fire expresses itself in outward conflagration. Beware of the very first symptom of envy, jealousy! Cultivate the noble spirit, the spirit of appreciation and recognition, and if in this respect you water others, you shall be divinely watered yourselves; your heart shall be as an abundant harvest field, laden with the very gold of heaven.
Are they dead who are insolent, who descend to the use of contemptuous taunts? If not, then the Ephraimites are not dead. The Ephraimites said to Jephthah and his tribe, “Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites” ( Jdg 12:4 ). You belong to neither one tribe nor another; ye upstarts, ye off-scouring, how dare you fight without asking us to lead you? That tribe can come to no good. Watch its history, and see whether such vaunting can end in honour. Are insolent men dead? the men who stealthily pick up stones and carry them until a suitable opportunity arises for throwing them at those who have outrun them and outfought them in the war? Are you ever reminded of your lowly parentage? Is it ever whispered that you were not born in royal circles? Does any adversary ever give the hint, quite in a Christian spirit, and in a fine and beautiful hypocrisy, that you were not born as highly and famously as he was, albeit the place of his birth has not to this day been discovered, though it might possibly have been found out if the lowest creature on earth had thought it worth while to put the vain and useless inquiry? Jephthah was stunned by this taunt. Many a man can bear a threat to have his house burned who cannot endure too much impertinence. Some noble natures have chafed under insolence who could have gone with some steadfastness even to martyrdom. Jephthah was roused. He now came to a kind of war he would have avoided if he could. So long as it was a heathenish war a battle with the enemy, he was equal to the occasion; but when the battle became internecine, of the nature of a family feud, partaking somewhat of the quality of civil war, his soul revolted. So long as it was Ammon, the outward heathen enemy, he was not unprepared to go forward even alone to fight the foe. But who would enter into a family feud, a tribal dispute? Who would not rather half apologise, and explain as far as possible, and swallow somewhat, rather than play the foul game of Cain and Abel? Jephthah was quiet, almost as quiet as Gideon at the first when the same Ephraimites assailed him. Jephthah said: I did send for you; I wanted you to come; I did not forget your high position; but when ye did not come I put my life in my hand; I had my life on my palm, like a loose bird that might at any moment fly away, and in that condition I went out to fight Ammon, and I take no merit or undue praise to myself: “The Lord delivered them into my hand: wherefore then are ye come up unto me this day, to fight against me?” He reasons well! There is a touch of condescension in his reasoning which detracts nothing from its dignity and cogency. Presently they will go too far with him. Ephraim said, “Ye are but the fugitives of the tribes, ill-born, ill-bred; Ephraim will not have you; Manasseh will not have you; you are playing between the two, being outcast of both, away with you!” It was enough! We shall see who was overthrown. The Gileadites took the fords of the Jordan, and said in effect, “Every man who passes here will have to give a good reason for his doing so.” When any man said, “Let me go over,” the men of Gilead said unto him, “Art thou an Ephraimite?” Now we have come to real conflict Apologies are no excuse at this point, nor explanations. Every man now holds his life who can hold it. If the man said, No, I am not an Ephraimite, they tested him: they said unto him, “Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.” Do not interfere with divinely-qualified soldiers. They may expose themselves to your criticism now and again, but in so far as they are divinely qualified they will conquer at the last. There will be a period of apology and self-exculpation, there will be moments given up to explanatory statements; but let them alone, they cannot be slain. If you apply fire to their houses, the very houses will not burn. They must win, because they are sent of God.
Sometimes we misapply the use of this word Shibboleth as, indeed, what do we not misapply when we come into the spiritual interpretation of the Bible? Now the phrase is used in this sense, namely: if we cannot pronounce the Shibboleth of a sect we are regarded as heterodox. It has become quite a proverb amongst us, has this use of the word Shibboleth. Men defend themselves by saying one to another, Although we cannot pronounce your Shibboleth, we claim to be independent and accurate thinkers. The term Shibboleth has no relation whatever to that kind of remark. The test was put, not as a test of orthodoxy, but as a test of character, and is it not true that character is tested by little things? Regarding a Christian country, the men are comparatively few in number who are guilty of great crimes or aggravated transgressions against the state, or against one another. How many men could arise and indignantly repel great impeachments: but the question relates to little matters: and what can test character more than little experiments, minute utterances and observances? We may not have sinned against God, or against one another, in a manner that could be called romantic or tragical, but what about the little offences, the minor immoralities, the white lies, the leaving out the words of letters which give them their real meaning? What about mispronunciation, false accent, calculated emphasis so laid on as to give false colour to the thought that is being uttered? What about attitudes, postures, hints? What about unuttered defamations? What about “hesitated dislike”? It is along that line you know whether men can say Shibboleth or Sibboleth. The leaving out of a syllable changes the whole message; the introduction of false emphasis is destructive of integrity. Let us, therefore, examine ourselves in so-called little things and minute ceremonies and utterances: then what hand has not done the wrong deed? What tongue has not spoken in the wrong tone, if not in the wrong language? Who, then, can claim to be white-robed? Who can say of himself that his purity is like the snow, untrodden, and unstained? We must not recede from the application of such passages by limiting them to sectarian differences, or metaphysical contrasts; but follow out the exact line of the thought, and then we shall come to a test of sincerity, a test of truthfulness, a test of character, we shall know whether a man is trying to save his life at the expense of truth. The Ephraimite said in effect: “I will tell any number of lies, if you will only let me escape.” But the Ephraimites have mocked the Gileadites let them mock them now! So it shall be at the great upwinding of things. Sceptics, assailants, enemies of Christ and his cross, have yet to meet that same Christ in an official examination. The war does not end just now. All things are to be brought up for arbitrament and final decision, and we read of those who shall pray the rocks and the hills to fall upon them and hide them from the face the wrath, the burning countenance of the Lamb. We must be prepared for these test interviews and final examinations; then it will be seen that all pride, and arrogance, and insolence, and flippancy will have no reply in that day. Be wise ere the sun go down. Kiss the Son, while his anger is kindled but a little. If we have spoken haughtily even against the Son of God it may be forgiven us, if we repent with our hearts. He himself has said so. He never shut the door upon contrition, repentance, or attempts at restitution. Wherein we have been unjust to the Bible, unjust to the Church, unjust to Christ, wherein we have been excusing ourselves from joining the war on petty grounds of not having been invited, let us repent this very day, call ourselves not only sinners, but fools in the sight of God for such a mean exculpation; and with one heart and mind and soul, let us say or sob, “God be merciful to me a sinner!”
Prayer
Almighty God, do thou bless us according to our need, and have mercy upon us according unto the multitude of our sins. Thy loving-kindnesses cannot be reckoned up: behold, they are more than the sands upon the sea-shore, and they exceed the stars in multitude. We live upon them: without them we could not live. We are fed by the mercy of the Lord; we are led by the light of his glory; we stand on the rocks which he has laid as foundations, and our whole life is rooted in his eternity. We look up unto heaven expectantly and gratefully. We love thee for all thou hast given, and we must continue to live upon thy regard for us. Thou hast redeemed us at a great cost: thou hast called us to the cross of the Saviour; thou hast made known unto us thy purpose to save our souls. We are therefore full of gladness, and a new song is in our mouth, and our expectation is from on high. We commit one another to thy tender care, for they are well kept whom thou dost keep. Lead us by still waters and in green pastures, and show us where thou dost make thy flock couch at noon; and may we always be in thine arm, or guided by thine eye, or sustained by thine hand. Let thy wisdom be within us a continual light, and thy grace an abiding hope. Make our way straight before our feet: bring down all high places; make all rough places smooth; lift up the valleys; and thus do thou, preparing a way for us, delight us with the city which is at the end. We bless thee for the hope of heaven the all-completing world, the place all light, all purity, all love. We have heard of it with the hearing of the ear, and thou art daily satisfying us that it is more than eye hath seen or ear heard or heart conceived the sublimest of thy wonders, a city worthy of thyself. Meanwhile help us to work more, to dig deeply, to do our present duty with both hands earnestly. May our eyes be in our head, may our hearts be true and loyal to God’s doctrine, and in all the way of life may we know that to do is to learn, that to obey is to be instructed, and if we do the will we shall know the doctrine, and the mystery shall not appal us, but draw us on by a marvellous fascination. This life we want to live; this discipline we are prepared by thy Spirit to undergo. The Lord work in us all the good pleasure of his will, and the work of faith with power, and then call us into upper places to behold sights we cannot now see, and enter upon work which at present is too much for our poor strength. Amen.
XXIX
THE STORY OF ABIMELECH, THE USURPER, AND OF JEPHTHAH
Judges 9-12
1. Who was Abimelech, and was he one of Israel’s judges sent out by the Lord?
Ans. Abimelech was the natural son of Gideon, not the legal son, and evidently a godless case. He was not sent of the Lord to be a judge. Whatever rule he obtained he obtained by murder, unsurpation, and conspiracy. So we don’t count him at all in the list of the judges, but his history only as an episode in the period of the judges.
2. How was his usurpation effected?
Ans. By conspiracy with the city of Shechem, and by the murder and assassination of all his father’s legal children except one, the youngest, Jotham, who escaped.
3. Analyze the sin of Abimelech and Shechem.
Ans. (1) The sin consisted in the attempt to establish a monarchy while God was the ruler of the theocracy. (2) It consisted of murder in order that no competition might arise between the real, legal children of their great leader, Gideon.
4. Through whom and how came a protest against the sin?
Ans. The protest came from Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon. He took his position on top of Mount Gerizirn, and from the top of that mountain all the valley could hear him and all on the highest mountains, so he occupied a high pulpit. He stated his case in the form of a parable, or in the strictest sense of fable. He said that the trees of the field called upon the fig tree to be their king, and it had better things to attend to than to be king; they called on the olive tree, and the olive tree had better things to do than to be king; so finally they applied to the bramble, and it agreed that it would be king if they would rest under its shadow. Now the briar doesn’t make much of a shadow, but they agreed to it.
5. Was Jotham’s illustration a fable or a parable, and what the distinction between them?
Ans. Parable is a broader word and includes fable. A fable is a parable of this kind: It attributes intelligent action to either inanimate creation or brute creation. Numerous cases you have of them in Aesop’s Fables. But a parable supposes real people and presents them acting as one would naturally do under the circumstances. But inasmuch as a parable etymologically means, according to the strict Greek word parabola, the putting of one thing down against another for the purpose of contrast, therefore a fable may come within the definition of a parable.
6. What fable of Aesop’s somewhat similar?
Ans. The fable of the frogs who implored Jupiter to send them a king. He dropped a log into the pond and it made a great splash and ripples but later when they found that they could jump upon that log they had no regard for their king and implored Jupiter to send another. Whereupon Jupiter sent a long-necked stork, or crane. And he gobbled up quite a number of his subjects every morning and they much regretted swapping King Log for King Stork.
7. What are the great lessons of Jotham’s fable?
(1) The best and most ambitious men are not ambitious to rule over people. See our Lord’s lesson in the Gospel: “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; it shall not be so with you.” There is something greater than to be king and whoever ministers to others is greater than any king that ever sat on the throne.
(2) The second lesson of the fable is that when the ambitious in their selfishness seek to rule and the people are gullible enough to give them rule, then it means mutual destruction both to the self-seeking ambitious one and the gullible people who put him in power.
8. How did Jotham apply his fable?
Ans. In this way: “Now if you have done the right thing to Gideon in the murder of his children and in the election of this self-seeking assassin, then have joy in him and let him have joy in you; but if you are wrong in that may the fire come out of him that will burn you up and may a fire come out of you that will burn him up.”
9. Cite proof that the fable was inspired.
Ans. The proof is found at the close of this lesson where it is said, “according to the word of Jotham,” and that is exactly what happened. The first time a row came up between him and the people he wiped them off the face of the map, and soon after a remnant in fighting against him killed him; a woman dropped a millstone down on his bead. What an inglorious death! So he perished and they perished, and the record says that it was done according to the word of Jotham.
10. What use does Dr. Broadus make of Jotham in his History of Preaching?
Ans. In citing cases of real pulpit eloquence he mentions Jotham and his high pulpit he stood on, his use of illustrations and his sensational sermon, and then that having created a sensation, he ran away from it. That is about the substance, but you had better read what Dr. Broadus says in his History of Preaching.
11. What Old Testament parables precede Jotham’s fable?
Ans. None; for another fable, see 2Ki 14:9-14 .
12. Cite the names and tribes of the next two judges after Gideon and their respective periods of judging.
Ans. Tolar of the tribe of Issachar, who judged twenty-three years, and Jair of the tribe of Manasseh, who judged twenty-two years.
13. After Tolar and Jair how did Israel increase its idolatries and what the deities?
Ans. Read 10:6. Here is what he says: “And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim, and Ashtaroth [both of these are plural], and the gods of Syria, and the gods of Sidon [Sidon is a part of Phoenicia], and the gods of Moab, and the gods of the children of Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines.” They took in more gods this time than ever before.
14. Find the names of the gods of the Philistines, of Ammon, of Moab, and of Sidon in addition to Baalim and Ashtaroth.
Ans. One god of the Philistines was Dagon; another was Baal-zebub; Milcom, or Moloch of Ammon; Chemosh of Moab; Gerakles and Melkar of Phoenicia.
15. What evidence of their repentance when trouble came?
Ans. (1) The confession of sin Jdg 10:10-15 . (2) Putting themselves in God’s hands to be punished at his will, Jdg 10:15 . (3) Putting away the strange gods. That is good proof of repentance.
We now come to consider the case of JEPHTHAH
16. Cite the story of Jephthah up to the call of the people to make him leader. Where is Tob, what his life there and what the similarity with the case of Abimelech?
Ans. Jephthah, as I have stated, was the son of Gilead, by a harlot, and his brethren or his half-brothers, the legal children of Gilead, denied him the right to any part of the inheritance, and the city of Shechem coincided with them. So he had to leave, and he retired to a great rich country in Syria. The name of the place was Tob, and there, being a valorous man, he gathered about him a company of men, pretty lawless fellows; some of them, regular free-lances. The similarity of his case and Abimelech’s is that he and Abimelech were both natural sons.
17. Considering Gen 21:10 , the case of Hagar; the case of Tamar, Gen 38:12-26 ; and Deu 21:15-17 , was it lawful to deny Jephthah a part of his father’s inheritance, and if so wherein does this case differ from others cited?
Ans. Hagar was really the wife under the law and Tamar’s action was strictly within the law, though Judah did not suppose it at the time. And in the case cited in Deuteronomy there were the children of two wives but they were both wives. So none of them applies to this case. Jephthah was the son of a harlot born utterly out of wedlock, and therefore, it was lawful to deprive him of any inheritance, but it was a mean thing to do.
18. What condition did Jephthah exact of Gilead before he would accept their appeal and how did he certify it?
Ans. He made them enter into a claim covenant at Mizpah that if he came in their extremity and delivered them from this bondage that had come upon them, then he was to be their prince, and he had the word spoken before the Lord at Mizpah. The student of history will remember how Rome pleaded with Coriolanus, whom she expelled, not to destroy Rome, and sent his mother to beg him not to do it. He said, “Mother, you have saved Rome but you have lost your son.”
19. State Jephthah’s negotiation with Ammon, and its results.
Ans. He sent a very able statement to the king of Ammon, who was leading this invasion of Israel, and he put the case this way: “We obtained this territory 300 years ago under Moses; God put it into our hands. Why have you been silent 300 years? We will not surrender what God has put into our hands and which we have held for that long.” They disregarded his negotiation.
20. What the first proof that Jehovah had any part in the leadership of Jephthah?
Ans. Now, heretofore everything that is said in the record shows that it was the plan of the people to go and stand for Jephthah as leader, and the first sign is in Jdg 11:29 , showing that after he took the position of leader the Spirit of the Lord came upon him.
21. What the vow of Jephthah and wherein its rashness?
Ans. When they refused to negotiate, he vowed if God would give him the victory over them that whoever was the first to come out of his house to meet him on his return from battle) he would offer as a burnt offering to Jehovah. The rashness of it was, as all the context goes to show, that he meant persons and Jehovah’s law was against offering people as burnt offerings.
22. State two theories of what became of Jephthah’s daughter, which the older, which best supported by the context and history, and if you say the first, how, then, did the second originate?
Ans. The first theory is that Jephthah said he would offer the one meeting him as a burnt offering and the text shows that just what he vowed, that he did unequivocally. That theory held the fort until 1,200 years after Christ, i.e., from Jephthah’s time until 1,200 years after Christ; all commentaries, Jewish and Christian, stated that Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering to Jehovah, but about 1,200 years after Christ a Jewish rabbi questioned it and then a few of the sentimental Christians, among them Grotius, the distinguished theologian of Holland, followed by Hengstenberg, a German, and a few English people, Adam Clarke for one, and their theory was that Jephthah vowed to the Lord that if something that could be offered as a burnt offering met him it should be burned, but if it were not it was still to be consecrated to God, and what took place was not the death on the altar of sacrifice, but the daughter was shut up to perpetual virginity. The overwhelming majority of the commentaries, and men who have respect for what the Word says, hold to the first theory, but if you want to see both theories stated and your question demands that, you look in Appendix 4 to the “Cambridge Bible,” Book of Judges. Now, that second theory being more and more in fashion was originated by early nunneries, women taking the vow of perpetual virginity for Christian service, and yet the majority of the Catholics do not believe that. They believe that she was put up as a burnt offering.
23. Why, in your judgment, did not Jephthah appeal to Lev 27:2-8 , for commutation of his vow? That is, if one made a vow, a scale of compensation was provided and by paying that compensation in money he could be released from the vow. The question now is why did not Jephthah appeal to the Levitical law?
Ans. A great many people say that Jephthah was ignorant of this law, but that history took place at Mizpah where the high priest lived, and the high priest knew of that law if Jephthah didn’t. He did not appeal to that because the Levitical law did not apply as it does to other kinds of vows.
24. From the context was the vow inspired?
Ans. Jdg 11:29-30 , shows that the Spirit of the Lord rested on him, and inasmuch as in Heb 11:32 , Jephthah is commended as one of the heroes of faith, my answer is that the vow was not inspired and an entirely new subject on the vow question was introduced after the statement that the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. Heb 11:32 has nothing to do with it from the fact that a man may have faith and do many mean things and wrong things, as David did.
25. Is it better to break a vow that involves sin than to keep it?
Ans. Before you answer, compare Psa 15:4 , Ecc 5:4 , with Mat 14:6-11 , where Herod vowed with an oath that he would give the dancing girl anything she asked for, and she asked for the head of John the Baptist. Take the three passages and make out your answer. Let those first two cases refer to cases that are not sin. I heard a man once swear that he would eat the devil in flames and I have always excused him from eating the devil particularly as hot as that.
26. What proverb of English classics applies to Jephthah’s vow?
Ans. This proverb, “This promise is better in the breach than in the observance of it.”
27. Cite the case of Jephthah’s contention with Ephraim, and what use has been made of “Shibboleth”?
Ans. Ephraim as usual (you know, I quoted the prophet who said that Ephraim is a cake not turned), when Jephthah gained that victory, drew out his army and demanded why he did not call on him. Jephthah did not give him a soft answer. He said, “I did call on you and you refused to come and when you refused I wrought the deliverance, and now if you want to fight let us fight.” And he gave him a good beating. In other words, when he got through the cake was cooked on both sides. Now, this “Shibboleth,” that was the word that the enemy had to pronounce. They could not pronounce the sh; they said Sibboleth, and as they were running away and Jephthah’s men found them, they were asked to say “Shibboleth,” and if they said “Sibboleth,” they were known to be the enemy and were killed right there. It has become since that day popular with those who think that others are requiring too hard doctrines. They say, “Well, I don’t pretend to be able to pronounce ‘Shibboleth,’ but you need not want to kill me just because I can’t sound every letter just like you.”
28. What three judges succeeded Jephthah, from what tribes, and the notes of time?
Ans. That is expressed in two or three verses, as follows: Ibzan of the tribe of Zebulon, judged seven years; Elon of the tribe of Zebulon, judged ten years; Abdon of the tribe of Ephraim, judged eight years.
Jdg 12:1 And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward, and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire.
Ver. 1. Gathered themselves together. ] Heb., Were called; sc., by Jephthah, as Jdg 12:2 , but came too late. Post bellum auxilium, so some understand it. Others, that these Ephraimites desirous of vain glory, provoking their brethren and envying them, as Gal 5:26 , tumultuarily met to pick a quarrel and make war upon Jephthah and his Gileadites, whom they insolently revile and threaten. “Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who can stand before envy?” Pro 27:4 The venom of all vices is found in that sharpfanged malignity.
And went northward.
Wherefore passedst thou over to fight?
We will burn thy house upon thee with fire. children = sons.
Chapter 12
Now, remember the men of Ephraim when Gideon came back having, you know, gotten the victory and they said, “Why didn’t you call us?” Well here they are again, chapter twelve.
AND the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went northward, and said unto Jephthah, Why did you pass over to fight against the children Ammon, and you didn’t call us to go with you? We’re gonna burn you and your house with fire ( Jdg 12:1 ).
Well, they got by with this kind of stuff with Gideon. Gideon was just a very, you know, diplomatic, mild-mannered fellow, but not so Jephthah. He was the son of a harlot, tough cookie. He grew up with a tough crowd and you don’t mess with Jephthah like you would with Gideon. And so they came to Jephthah throwing on in the same trip that they threw on Gideon years earlier.
And Jephthah said, I and my people ( Jdg 12:2 )
Now look, notice, Jephthah was a very egocentric person. Notice all the I’s and the my’s and so forth in these next few verses. It demonstrates the guy’s egocentricities.
And Jephthah said unto them, I and my people were at great strife with the children of Ammon; and I called you, and you delivered me not out of their hands. And when I saw that you daily delivered me not, I put my life in my hands, and passed over against the children of Ammon, and the LORD delivered them into my hand: wherefore then are you come up against me, me this day, to fight against me? ( Jdg 12:2-3 )
So notice all these personal pronouns the guy’s using. He’s very egocentric.
And Jephthah gathered together all of the men of Gilead, and they fought with Ephraim: and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said, You Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim and among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites. And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites ( Jdg 12:4-5 ):
They come over against them into the land of Gilead, cross Jordan coming over against them. And so the men of Jephthah took the forts where they cross the Jordan River. And as the Ephraimites were trying to sneak back into their own land they’d stop them and they’d say, “Say Shibboleth: and say are you an Ephraimite?”
“Oh no, we’re not Ephraimites.”
They’d say, “Say Shibboleth” and the guys from Ephraim couldn’t pronounce, couldn’t pronounce the “sh” sound and they’d say, “Sibboleth” and they knew that they were then Ephraimites and so they’d wipe them out. And some forty-five, forty-six thousand Ephraimites bit the dust: forty-two.
And Jephthah judged Israel for six years. And he died, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead ( Jdg 12:7 ).
So really he didn’t reign too long, just six years. And then the tenth judge was this guy Ibzan from Bethlehem and his claim to fame was he had thirty sons and thirty daughters who he sent abroad to marry with the kings from other nations and he took in thirty daughters from abroad for his sons. So he shipped his daughters out and then took thirty daughters from other kingdoms for his sons. He judged Israel for seven years. He was buried in Bethlehem. Then Elon became the eleventh judge. He was from the tribe of Zebulon. He judged Israel for the years and he was buried at a high or rather Ajalon or Aijalon in the country of Zebulun.
Then Abdon became [the twelfth] judge, [the son of Hillel] and he had forty sons and thirty nephews, that rode on seventy donkeys: and he judged Israel for eight years ( Jdg 12:13-14 ).
These guys really didn’t do very much. Not much is told about them. “
The men of Ephraim took the same action in the case of Jephthah as they had done in the case of Gideon. After his victory they complained that they had not been called to help. It would seem as though they had become more arrogant as the result of Gideon’s conciliatory method with them, for this time they came with the deliberate purpose of war. In Jephthah they found a man of another mold. He did not attempt to conciliate but visited them with the most severe punishment. Two things combined to rouse his anger, first as he reminded them when he and his people had been at strife with the children of Ammon, he had asked the aid of Ephraim and it had been refused. What had offended him and the men of Gilead most deeply, however, was the taunt which Ephraim had used against them, ‘Ye are fugitives of Ephraim, ye Gileadites, in the midst of Ephraim, and in the midst of Manasseh.”
This clearly again reveals the sad disintegration of the nation. The consciousness of the unity of the people seems largely to have been lost. A moment’s retrospect here will be of value. After the terrible multiplication of idolatry (chapter lo), God had refused to hear the people and it is questionable whether anything afterward can be spoken of as deliverance. Prior to the raising up of Jephthah, there was a cry to God by the people, but it could hardly be claimed that Jephthah delivered the nation.
at the Fords of Ephraim
Jdg 12:1-15
In this second war, Jephthah showed the same conciliatory spirit as he had showed to Ammon. He parleyed sensibly and courteously before he went into the conflict. A great many Christians are less Christian than this. They ignore Christs strict injunction, Mat 18:15. Ephraim had acted in the same manner to Gideon, Jdg 8:1. In each case that tribe wanted to retain its primacy without the sacrifice which leadership involves; and it was angry when deliverance had arisen from another source. Leadership must be won, not inherited. Ephraim, therefore, was clearly in the wrong; and when her troops, which had crossed the Jordan into Gilead, were hurled back, the slaughter at the ford fell as a national judgment. The omission of a letter in their speech betrayed them. Alas, that Christians have martyred their fellows for even less!
Jephthah died soon after. Probably he died, not of age nor the brunt of war, but of a broken heart. The sweet voice of his child was always calling him. But the Spirit of God wrote on his memorial tablet-By faith Jephthah.
CHAPTER 12 The strife–Jephthahs Death–The Other Judges
1. The strife and the slaying of the Ephraimites (Jdg 12:1-6)
2. Jephthahs death (Jdg 12:7)
3. Ibzan, Elon and Abdon (Jdg 12:8-15)
The strife of Ephraim and their question reminds us of what happens under the judgeship of Gideon. There the soft answer turned away wrath. How different it is here. Jephthah in self exaltation shows a far different spirit. Notice the I in his answer. I was at great strife–I and my people–I called you–I saw–I put my life in my hand. A great strife follows. The Gileadites take the fords of Jordan and those who said Sibboleth were slain. Horrible record! Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were murdered. And this sad extermination of brethren has its sequel in Christendom. Shibboleth means flood, that which divides. Sectarianism is undoubtedly in view here. How Gods people have suffered under it and still suffer! It is true every test that divides the people of God from one another, and not from their enemies, is another false shibboleth. May God graciously deliver His people from all sectarian strife, which is but the work and the fruit of the flesh (Gal 5:19-21).
Three judges follow after Jephthahs death. These correspond to their typical meaning to Tola and Jair after Abimelechs lordship had been broken. Ibzan of Bethlehem. Ibzan means shining–splendour. Then there is Elon, which means strength; and Abdon, the meaning of which is service, the son of Hillel, praising. These three give us a little glimpse of Him who will come in splendor and in strength–that is in power and great glory, to set things right. Then all strife and disorder will end and happy service and praise will follow.
gathered: Heb. were called
Wherefore: Jdg 8:1, 2Sa 19:41-43, Psa 109:4, Ecc 4:4, Joh 10:32
we will burn: Jdg 14:15, Jdg 15:6, Pro 27:3, Pro 27:4, Jam 3:16, Jam 4:1, Jam 4:2
Reciprocal: Num 21:24 – Israel 2Sa 19:43 – the words 1Ki 12:13 – answered Pro 13:10 – Only Pro 17:14 – beginning Pro 26:4 – General Mar 3:24 – General
Jdg 12:1-15 once again reveals the tragedy pride can lead us into (compare Jos 17:14-18 and Jdg 8:1-3 ). The tribe of Ephraim approached Jephthah with threats because he had not called them to battle. He told them he had called and they had refused to come to his aid so he proceeded into battle without them at great personal risk. Jephthah gathered his army together and fought with the people of Ephraim. They blocked their path across the fords of Jordan and used a dialect distinction to be sure none got away. Forty-two thousand were slain as a result of pride (1-6).
Jdg 12:1. The men of Ephraim went northward Over Jordan, where Jephthah was, in the northern part of the land beyond Jordan. And said Through pride and envy, contending with him as they did before with Gideon; over to fight Not over Jordan, for there he was already; but over the borders of the Israelites land beyond Jordan.
Jdg 12:3. I put my life in my hands; a Hebraism of forcible import. David twice uses the same phrase. Now, to take the life of a man who had thus devoted himself, and whom God had honoured, was the extreme of wickedness.
Jdg 12:6. Shibboleth. Vox Hebraica, juxta interpretationem Hebram, significet impetum currentis aqu. This Hebrew word, according to the interpretation of the rabbins, designates impetuous currents of waters. Our travellers state that the Jordan is, in many places, not more than twenty yards across, but that the stream is generally very rapid.
In the north of Europe, our fathers varied in the enunciation of several letters from the south. The th is not sounded by the southern inhabitants; as for example, in the name of their god, Thor, thur, and in thundr; that is, Jupiter, or high thundering Jove. So with regard to s. Toroth Adonai, the law of the Lord, the Persic and German Jews say, Toross Adonai. The radical letter s is wanting in the dialects and language of the south sea, which make them call the English, the goose language, because of its hissing sibilancy. It is wanting also in the Somerset dialect; they say, zaviour, zoul, zin, zupper. Hence our present mode of writing, If he misses his mark, instead of the subjunctive, If he miss, greatly disfigures our language by sibilancy, and violates all our rules of grammar. See my Grammar. Rule 18.
Jdg 12:9. Ibzan judged Israel seven years. See the chronology, 1Ki 6:1.
Jdg 12:14. Forty sons. The dignity of those judges was supported by presents, and booty in conquests. They aimed at the dignity of gentile kings. We have no record of those judges but one; they kept their country in peace.
REFLECTIONS.
Jephthah, having returned to his house in all the glory of victory, but inconsolably afflicted because of his vow, found one calamity added to another. Ephraim, one of the strongest tribes, and elevated with the pride of Jacobs blessing, found his honour tarnished in not being called to the war against the Ammonites. He could not bear to see Gilead enjoy, almost alone, the glory of the conquest, and the riches of the spoil. Therefore, assembling the whole tribe, he crossed the Jordan, menacing Jephthah with fire and sword, and reproaching all Gilead as fugitives and exiles. Let this sad portrait of the human heart teach us to moderate impetuous passions by reason, and they will gradually subside. The more sober operations of wisdom afford the safest counsel, and lead the mind to take the ground of permanent and honourable conduct.
But how did Jephthah reply? Did he make apologies, and sue for peace?
Did he humble himself as the wary Gideon, on the like occasion; and say, Is not the gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer? Being a soldier by profession, he boldly spake the truth; that as they had not acted a brotherly part, and come when first called, during the long strife with Ammon, he did not think proper to lose an opportunity by awaiting their doubtful aid; for he knew that God would help him. And while the elders carried back this bold reply he blew a trumpet, reassembled his valiant army, and gave his insolent brother a tremendous defeat. The quarrels of brethren, and brethren connected by every religious tie, are much to be lamented. If we are wronged, let us urge our complaints with modesty and love; the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. But if the wrong be, as in this case, a mere retaliation, then we ought to bear it with patience. We cannot but regard this defeat as a visitation on Ephraim; because with all his strength and pride, he had suffered his brethren to be so long invaded both by Ammon and Philistia.
Guilt, in long disputes, is not confined, to one party. Gilead, and the rest of his brethren on the east of Jordan, were cruel and bloody in return. Taking advantage of the ford they murdered all the fugitives of Ephraim, whom they ought generously to have pardoned and suffered to go home, that brotherly kindness might once more have been revived in an age which called for unanimity and concord. How lamentable to see the quarrels of the tribes enfeeble their hands, and render the nation a prey to every invader.
The manner in which they detected the Ephraimites was extremely cruel, because it tempted a brother to tell a lie the moment before his death. Pointing to the Shibboleth, that is the stream, they bade him pronounce it: and he said Sibboleth; and the stroke of death immediately followed. How dreadful that one man can divert himself with the miseries of another! If the healing of grace do not go deeper into the heart of man than his sins he is utterly lost, for this dreadful spirit can never enter heaven.
While Israel was very much divided by jealousies and pride, we next see the gracious care of heaven over them, in raising up judges out of different tribes, that all these jealousies might subside. Let us learn of God to conquer an angry brother by that kind of firmness and love which gains his approbation, that we may be brothers for ever in the best of bonds.
XII. 16. Civil War between Gilead and Ephraim.The Ephraimites hankered after the primacy among the tribes. Their amour propre was easily offended, their anger quickly enflamed. Instead of praising God for Jephthahs great victory, they were furious because he won it without their aid. They insulted him as they once insulted Gideon, and perhaps expected an equally meek and flattering answer. But Jephthah was a man of a different mould and temper. Hurling a few scathing words at heroes who were brave when the war was over, he presumed, judging from their insolence, that they now wished to fight with him, and he was ready. The result deeply stirs the readers imagination. Led by a general like Jephthah, Gilead was more than a match for Ephraim, and the western tribe was not only put to flight, but found the fords of Jordan guarded to bar their passage. Every man who wished to cross was subjected to a singular test. His life hung on the pronunciation of a sibilant. He was asked to say Shibboleth (ear of corn), and if he said Sibboleth, he was slain there and then. His speech betrayed him. So in the Sicilian vespers, March 31, 1282, the French were made to betray themselves by the pronunciation of ceci e ciceri; those who pronounced c as in French (sesi e siseri) were hewn down on the spot. (Moore).
Jdg 12:4. The words because they said, Ye are fugitives of Mount Ephraim make no sense in their present position, and probably should stand after Jordan in Jdg 12:6. The huge numbers are doubtless the work of R.
Jdg 12:7. The Heb. text in the cities of Gilead, is evidently wrong; the LXX has in his city of Gilead.
12:1 And the men of Ephraim gathered themselves together, and went {a} northward, and said unto Jephthah, Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call {b} us to go with thee? we will burn thine house upon thee with fire.
(a) After they had passed Jordan.
(b) Thus ambition envies God’s work in others as they did against Gideon, Jud 8:1.
Jephthah’s battle with the Ephraimites 12:1-7
The writer’s emphasis now shifts from Jephthah’s foolishness to Ephraim’s arrogance. Like Gideon, Jephthah had to deal with disgruntled Ephraimites, but in Jephthah’s case the result was a costly civil war.
The Ephraimites were the Gileadites’ neighbors to the west. They resented the fact that Jephthah had not requested their assistance in the war with the Ammonites. We noted earlier that the Ephraimites considered themselves superior to their brethren in some respects (cf. Jdg 8:1). They foolishly threatened to punish Jephthah for this affront (Jdg 12:1).
"Why should the Ephraimites complain about a victory accomplished through God’s intervention for the benefit of all the tribes? It was a strange jealousy that spurred on Ephraim." [Note: Wolf, p. 458.]
Jephthah opened his mouth wisely again and replied that he had indeed requested their help, but they had not responded (Jdg 12:2). This did not satisfy the Ephraimites, however, who mobilized a large fighting force to teach the Gileadites a lesson. These proud Israelites wanted to dominate, to control, and to receive recognition among their brethren. They evidently regarded the Gileadites as "fugitives" (Jdg 12:4) because they had settled east of the Jordan River.
"As is so often the case, internal disputes broke out after the common enemy was subdued. The main issue appears to be Jephthah’s unilateral action in Transjordan. However, a much more serious issue is apparent, a developing independence among the tribes east of the Jordan. The conflict between the Ephraimites and the Gileadites is a sad commentary on the lack of Israelite unity in this period." [Note: Monson, p. 187.]
When the Ephraimites had confronted Gideon, he responded with psychology (Jdg 8:1-3). Jephthah was a different kind of person from Gideon, however. He responded with a sword. Jephthah was a nobody, and nobodies are often unimpressed with people who think they are somebodies, as the Ephraimites did.
In the battle that followed east of the Jordan, 42,000 Ephraimites (or 42 military units) suffered defeat, a high price for jealousy. The Gileadites stopped those who tried to flee back home at the fords of the Jordan. The Ephraimites’ accent did not permit them to say shibboleth (meaning "ear of corn" or "flowing stream") normally. Similarly during World War II, the Nazis identified Russian Jews by the way they pronounced "kookoorooza," the Russian word for corn. [Note: Wolf, p. 458.] In this way the Gileadite soldiers identified the fleeing Ephraimites.
"Here is graphic evidence that language distinctions had begun to mark the rapidly widening division of the nation." [Note: Merrill, Kingdom of . . ., pp. 172-73. Cf. Daniel I. Block, "The Role of Language in Ancient Israelite Perceptions of National Identity," Journal of Biblical Literature 103:3 (September 1984):339, n. 75.]
Unfortunately Jephthah treated his own brethren, the Ephraimites, as he had dealt with Israel’s enemy, the Ammonites. He unleashed his zeal and took vengeance far out of proportion to what might have been legitimate.
Jephthah served as a judge in Israel probably just over the transjordanian tribes. He did so for only six years after his victory over the Ammonites and his appointment by the elders of Gilead, and he apparently failed to achieve any rest for the land.
"Gideon was a weak man who was transformed into a fearless warrior. Jephthah was a valiant warrior. Because of his tragic family life, he had to become strong to survive. The story of his life is of God taking a strong man, and, by His Spirit, turning him into a usable man. Whatever our strengths and weaknesses, the secret of our usefulness is our availability to our God." [Note: Inrig, p. 189.]
Earlier we saw that Gideon’s failure had bad consequences for his nation (ch. 8) and for him personally (ch. 9). Likewise Jephthah’s failure had bad consequences for him personally (ch. 11) and for his nation (ch. 12). We shall see that Samson’s failure also had bad consequences for his nation and himself (ch. 16). The bad personal consequences Gideon experienced involved the premature death of his 70 sons. Jephthah’s personal tragedy involved the premature death of his only daughter. [Note: See Michael J. Smith, "The Failure of the Family in Judges, Part 1: Jephthah," Bibliotheca Sacra 162:647 (July-September 2005):279-98.] Samson himself died prematurely (cf. Rom 6:23).
Gideon’s failure was compromise with idolatry. The appeal of the world-Gideon’s cultural environment-brought him down. Jephthah’s failure was ignorance of, or inattention to, God’s Word. In the record of Satan’s temptations in Scripture, he sought to get people to doubt, deny, disobey, or disregard what God had said (cf. Genesis 3; Matthew 4). Jephthah fell before Satanic attack. Samson’s failure was indulging his fleshly appetites. These three major judges all experienced success, but they also failed. One of the three major sources of temptation was responsible for the failure of each of them. All three judges failed to follow God fully. Each one turned aside to self-will. All three represent Israel in the period of the judges, and all three are typical of all believers. They experienced a measure of spiritual success, but they also failed for the same reasons we fail.
SHIBBOLETHS
Jdg 12:1-7
WHILE Jephthah and his Gileadites were engaged in the struggle with Ammon jealous watch was kept over all their movements by the men of Ephraim. As the head tribe of the house of Joseph occupying the centre of Palestine Ephraim was suspicious of all attempts and still more of every success that threatened its pride and preeminence. We have seen Gideon in the hour of his victory challenged by this watchful tribe, and now a quarrel is made with Jephthah who has dared to win a battle without its help. What were the Gileadites that they should presume to elect a chief and form an army? Fugitives from Ephraim who had gathered in the shaggy forests of Bashan and among the cliffs of the Argob, mere adventurers in fact, what right had they to set up as the protectors of Israel? The Ephraimites found the position intolerable. The vigour and confidence of Gilead were insulting. If a check were not put on the energy of the new leader might he not cross the Jordan and establish a tyranny over the whole land? There was a call to arms, and a large force was soon marching against Jephthahs camp to demand satisfaction and submission.
The pretext that Jepthah had fought against Ammon without asking the Ephraimites to join him was shallow enough. The invitation appears to have been given; and even without an invitation Ephraim might well have taken the field.
But the savage threat, “We will burn thine house upon thee with fire,” showed the temper of the leaders in this expedition. The menace was so violent that the Gileadites were roused at once and, fresh from their victory over Ammon, they were not long in humbling the pride of the great western clan.
One may well ask, Where is Ephraims fear of God? Why has there been no consultation of the priests at Shiloh by the tribe under whose care the sanctuary is placed? The great Jewish commentary affirms that the priests were to blame, and we cannot but agree. If religious influences and arguments were not used to prevent the expedition against Gilead they should have been used. The servants of the oracle might have understood the duty of the tribes to each other and of the whole nation to God and done their utmost to avert civil war. Unhappily, however, professed interpreters of the divine will are too often forward in urging the claims of a tribe or favouring the arrogance of a class by which their own position is upheld. As on the former occasion when Ephraim interfered, so in this we scarcely go beyond what is probable in supposing that the priests declared it to be the duty of faithful Israelites to check the career of the eastern chief and so. prevent his rude and ignorant religion from gaining dangerous popularity. Bishop Wordsworth has seen a fanciful resemblance between Jephthahs campaign against Ammon and the revival under the Wesleys and Whitefield which as a movement against ungodliness put to shame the sloth of the Church of England. He has remarked on the scorn and disdain-and he might have used stronger terms-with which the established clergy assailed those who apart from them were successfully doing the work of God. This was an example of far more flagrant tribal jealousy than that of Ephraim and her priests; and have there not been cases of religious leaders urging retaliation upon enemies or calling for war in order to punish what was absurdly deemed an outrage on national honour? With facts of this kind in view we can easily believe that from Shiloh no word of peace, but on the other hand words of encouragement were heard when the chiefs of Ephraim began to hold councils of war and to gather their men for the expedition that was to make an end of Jephthah.
Let it be allowed that Ephraim, a strong tribe, the guardian of the ark of Jehovah, much better instructed than the Gileadites in the divine law, had a right to maintain its place. But the security of high position lies in high purpose and noble service; and an Ephraim ambitious of leading should have been forward on every occasion when the other tribes were in confusion and trouble. When a political party or a church claims to be first in regard for righteousness and national well being it should not think of its own credit or continuance in power but of its duty in the war against injustice and ungodliness. The favour of the great, the admiration of the multitude, should be nothing to either church or party. To rail at those who are more generous, more patriotic, more eager in the service of truth, to profess a fear of some ulterior design against the constitution or the faith, to turn all the force of influence and eloquence and even of slander and menace against the disliked neighbour instead of the real enemy, this is the nadir of baseness. There are Ephraims still, strong tribes in the land, that are too much exercised in putting down claims, too little in finding principles of unity and forms of practical brotherhood. We see in this bit of history an example of the humiliation that sooner or later falls on the jealous and the arrogant; and every age is adding instances of a like kind.
Civil war, at all times lamentable, appears peculiarly so when the cause of it lies in haughtiness and distrust. We have found however that, beneath the surface, there may have been elements of division and ill will serious enough to require this painful remedy. The campaign may have prevented a lasting rupture between the eastern and western tribes, a separation of the stream of Israels religion and nationality into rival currents. It may also have arrested a tendency to ecclesiastical narrowness, which at this early stage would have done immense harm. It is quite true that Gilead was rude and uninstructed, as Galilee had the reputation of being in the time of our Lord. But the leading tribes or classes of a nation are not entitled to overbear the less enlightened, nor by attempts at tyranny to drive them into separation. Jephthahs victory had the effect of making Ephraim and the other western tribes understand that Gilead had to be reckoned with, whether for weal or woe, as an integral and important part of the body politic. In Scottish history, the despotic attempt to thrust Episcopacy on the nation was the cause of a distressing civil war; a people who would not fall in with the forms of religion that were in favour at headquarters had to fight for liberty. Despised or esteemed they resolved to keep and use their rights, and the religion of the world owes a debt to the Covenanters. Then in our own times, lament as we may the varied forms of antagonism to settled faith and government, that enmity of which communism and anarchism are the delirium, it would be simply disastrous to suppress it by sheer force even if the thing were possible. Surely those who are certain they have right on their side need not be arrogant. The overbearing temper is always a sign of hollow principle as well as of moral infirmity. Was any Gilead ever put down by a mere assertion of superiority, even on the field of battle? Let the truth be acknowledged that only in freedom lies the hope of progress in intelligence, in constitutional order and purity of faith. The great problems of national life and development can never be settled as Ephraim tried to settle the movement beyond Jordan. The idea of life expands and room must be left for its enlargement. The many lines of thought, of personal activity, of religious and social experiment leading to better ways or else proving by and by that the old are best-all these must have place in a free state. The threats of revolution that trouble nations would die away if this were clearly understood; and we read history in vain if we think that the old autocracies or aristocracies will ever approve themselves again, unless indeed they take far wiser and more Christian forms than they had in past ages. The thought of individual liberty once firmly rooted in the minds of men, there is no going back to the restraints that were possible before it was familiar. Government finds another basis and other duties. A new kind of order arises which attempts no suppression of any idea or sincere belief and allows all possible room for experiments in living. Unquestionably this altered condition of things increases the weight of moral responsibility. In ordering our own lives as well as in regulating custom and law we need to exercise the most serious care, the most earnest thought. Life is not easier because it has greater breadth and freedom. Each is thrown back more upon conscience, has more to do for his fellow men and for God.
We pass now to the end of the campaign and the scene at the fords of Jordan, when the Gileadites, avenging themselves on Ephraim, used the notable expedient of asking a certain word to be pronounced in order to distinguish friend from foe. To begin with, the slaughter was quite unnecessary. If bloodshed there had to be, that on the field of battle was certainly enough. The wholesale murder of the “fugitives of Ephraim,” so called with reference to their own taunt, was a passionate and barbarous deed. Those who began the strife could not complain; but it was the leaders of the tribe who rushed on war, and now the rank and file must suffer. Had Ephraim triumphed the defeated Gileadites would have found no quarter; victorious they gave none. We may trust, however, that the number forty-two thousand represents the total strength of the army that was dispersed and not those left dead on the field.
The expedient used at the fords turned on a defect or peculiarity of speech. Shibboleth perhaps meant stream. Of each man who came to the stream of Jordan wishing to pass to the other side it was required that he should say Shibboleth. The Ephraimites tried, but said Sibboleth instead, and so betraying their west-country birth they pronounced their own doom. The incident has become proverbial and the proverbial use of it is widely suggestive. First, however, we may note a more direct application.
Do we not at times observe how words used in common speech, phrases or turns of expression, betray a mans upbringing or character, his strain of thought and desire? It is not necessary to lay traps for men, to put it to them how they think on this point or that, in order to discover where they stand and what they are. Listen and you will hear sooner or later the Sibboleth that declares the son of Ephraim. In religious circles, for example, men are found who appear to be quite enthusiastic in the service of Christianity, eager for the success of the church, and yet on some occasion a word, an inflexion or turn of the voice will reveal to the attentive listener a constant worldliness of mind, a worship of self mingling with all they think and do. You notice that and you can prophesy what will come of it. In a few months, or even weeks, the show of interest will pass. There is not enough praise or deference to suit the egotist, he turns elsewhere to find the applause which he values above everything.
Again, there are words somewhat rude, somewhat coarse, which in carefully ordered speech a man may not use; but they fall from his lips in moments of unguarded freedom or excitement. The man does not speak “half in the language of Ashdod”; he particularly avoids it. Yet now and again a lapse into the Philistine dialect, a something muttered rather than spoken, betrays the secret of his nature. It would be harsh to condemn anyone as inherently bad on such evidence. The early habits, the sins of past years thus unveiled, may be those against which he is fighting and praying. Yet, on the other hand, the hypocrisy of a life may terribly show itself in these little things; and every one will allow that in choosing our companions and friends we ought to be keenly alive to the slightest indications of character. There are fords of Jordan to which we come unexpectedly, and without being censorious we are bound to observe those with whom we purpose to travel further.
Here, however, one of the most interesting and, for our time, most important points of application is to be found in the self-disclosure of writers-those who produce our newspapers, magazines, novels, and the like. Touching on religion and on morals certain of these writers contrive to keep on good terms with the kind of belief that is popular and pays. But now and again, despite efforts to the contrary, they come on the Shibboleth which they forget to pronounce aright. Some among them who really care nothing for Christianity, and have no belief whatever in revealed religion, would yet pass for interpreters of religion and guides of conduct. Christian morality and worship they barely endure; but they cautiously adjust every phrase and reference so as to drive away no reader and offend no devout critic; that is, they aim at doing so; now and again they forget themselves. We catch a word, a touch of flippancy, a suggestion of license, a covert sneer which goes too far by a hairsbreadth. The evil lies in this, that they are teaching multitudes to say Sibboleth along with them. What they say is so pleasant, so deftly said, with such an air of respect for moral authority that suspicion is averted, the very elect are for a time deceived. Indeed we are almost driven to think that Christians not a few are quite ready to accept the unbelieving Sibboleth from sufficiently distinguished lips. A little more of this lubricity and there will have to be a new and resolute sifting at the fords. The propaganda is villainously active, and without intelligent and vigorous opposition it will proceed to further audacity. It is not a few but scores of this sect who have the ear of the public and even in religious publications are allowed to convey hints of earthliness and atheism. A covert worship of Mammon and of Venus goes on in the temple professedly dedicated to Christ, and one cannot be sure that a seemingly pious work will not vend some doctrine of devils. It is time for a slaughter in Gods name of many a false reputation.
But there are Shibboleths of party, and we must be careful lest in trying others we use some catchword of our own Gilead by which to judge their religion or their virtue. The danger of the earnest, alike in religion, politics, and philanthropy, is to make their own favourite plans or doctrines the test of all worth and belief. Within our churches and in the ranks of social reformers distinctions are made where there should be none and old strifes are deepened. There are of course certain great principles of judgment. Christianity is founded on historical fact and revealed truth. “Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.” In such a saying lies a test which is no tribal Shibboleth. And on the same level are others by which we are constrained at all hazards to try ourselves and those who speak and write. Certain points of morality are vital and must be pressed. When a writer says, “In mediaeval times the recognition that every natural impulse in a healthy and mature being has a claim to gratification was a victory of unsophisticated nature over the asceticism of Christianity” – we use no Shibboleth test in condemning him. He is judged and found wanting by principles on which the very existence of human society depends. It is in no spirit of bigotry, but in faithfulness to the essentials of life and the hope of mankind, that the sternest denunciation is hurled at such a man. In plain terms he is an enemy of the race.
Passing from cases like this, observe others in which a measure of dogmatism must be allowed to the ardent. Where there are no strong opinions strenuously held and expressed little impression will be made. The prophets in every age have spoken dogmatically; and vehemence of speech is not to be denied to the temperance reformer, the apostle of purity, the enemy of luxurious self-indulgence and cant. Moral indignation must express itself strongly; and in the dearth of moral conviction we can bear with those who would even drag us to the ford and make us utter their Shibboleth. They go too far, people say: perhaps they do; but there are so many who will not move at all except in the way of pleasure.
Now all this is clear. But we must return to the danger of making one aspect of morality the sole test of morals, one religious idea the sole test of religion and so framing a formula by which men separate themselves from their friends and pass narrow bitter judgments on their kinsfolk. Let sincere belief and strong feeling rise to the prophetic strain; let there be ardour, let there be dogmatism and vehemence. But beyond urgent words and strenuous example, beyond the effort to persuade and convert there lie arrogance and the usurpation of a judgment which belongs to God alone. In proportion as a Christian is living the life of Christ he will repel the claim of any other man, however devout, to force his opinion or his action. All attempts at terrorism betray a lack of spirituality. The Inquisition was in reality the world oppressing spiritual life. And so in less degree, with less truculence, the unspiritual element may show itself even in company with a fervent desire to serve the gospel. There need be no surprise that attempts to dictate to Christendom or any part of Christendom are warmly resented by those who know that religion and liberty cannot be separated. The true church of Christ has a firm grasp of what it believes and is aiming at, and by its resoluteness it bears on human society. It is also gracious and persuasive, reasonable and open, and so gathers men into a free and frank brotherhood, revealing to them the loftiest duty, leading them towards it in the way of liberty. Let men who understand this try each other and it will never be by limited and suspicious formulae.
Amidst pedants, critics, hot and bitter partisans, we see Christ moving in divine freedom. Fine is the subtlety of His thought in which the ideas of spiritual liberty and of duty blend to form one luminous strain. Fine are the clearness and simplicity of that daily life in which He becomes the way and the truth to men. It is the ideal life, beyond all mere rules, disclosing the law of the kingdom of heaven; it is free and powerful because upheld by the purpose that underlies all activity and development. Are we endeavouring to realise it? Scarcely at all: the bonds are multiplying, not falling away; no man is bold to claim his right, nor generous to give others their room. In this age of Christ we seem neither to behold nor desire His manhood. Shall this always be? Shall there not arise a race fit for liberty because obedient, ardent, true? Shall we not come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ?
For a little we must return to Jephthah, who after his great victory and his strange dark act of faith judged Israel but six years. He appears in striking contrast to other chiefs of his time, and even of far later times, in the purity of his home life, the more notable that his father set no example of good. Perhaps the legacy of dispeace and exile bequeathed to him with a tainted birth had taught the Gileadite, rude mountaineer as he was, the value of that order which his people too often despised. The silence of the history which is elsewhere careful to speak of wives and children sets Jephthah before us as a kind of puritan, with another and perhaps greater distinction than the desire to avoid war. The yearly lament for his daughter kept alive the memory not only of the heroine but of one judge in Israel who set a high example of family life. A sad and lonely man he went those few years of his rule in Gilead, but we may be sure that the character and will of the Holy One became more clear to him after he had passed the dreadful hill of sacrifice. The story is of the old world, terrible; yet we have found in Jephthah a sublime sincerity, and we may believe that such a man, though he never repented of his vow, would come to see that the God of Israel demanded another and a nobler sacrifice, that of life devoted to His righteousness and truth.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary