Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 17:1
And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name [was] Micah.
1. the hill country of Ephraim ] See on Jdg 3:27. In view of its subsequent connexion with the sanctuary at Dan, some think that Micah’s house was at Beth-el. The narrative, however, leaves the situation vague; it may imply that he lived somewhere on the road which ran northwards along the Central Highlands, Jdg 18:13.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
See the introduction to the Book of Judges. The only point of contact with the preceding history of Samson is, that we are still concerned with the tribe of Dan. See Jdg 18:1-2, note. Josephus combines in one narrative what we read here and in Jdg 1:34, and places it, with the story in Judg. 1821, immediately after the death of Joshua.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jdg 17:1-13
Micah.
Micahs mother
In the second verse of this chapter Micah makes a clean confession of a great wrong which he had done to his mother. It seems, says Matthew Henry, that this old woman, with long scraping and saving, had hoarded a considerable sum of money–eleven hundred pieces of silver. It is likely she intended, when she died, to leave it to this son. In the meantime, it did her good to count it over and call it her own. On discovering that she had been relieved of her treasure, Micahs mother became justly indignant. She scolded and called down curses on the one who had robbed her. This she did in her sons presence, and though she made no direct charge of the offence upon him, her conduct greatly disturbed his conscience. Some time later he made an open acknowledgment to his mother of the whole matter, and restored the stolen treasure. The reappearance of the lost shekels had a remarkably soothing effect on her disposition. She forgot all about the wrong done to her, and all about her own distemper. Blessed be thou of the Lord, my son, said this forgiving mother. Is it not wonderful what a difference a little money makes in ones disposition and feelings? She who could curse at its loss now as readily blesses with its return. One can imagine a very different state of things had Micah come to her with his confession, but without the eleven hundred pieces of silver. Note now another incident in this transaction. After this money had been stolen Micahs mother gave as one reason for feeling so badly that she had dedicated it wholly to the Lord. When she had it in her possession she had not the heart to do this, but as soon as it was gone she made known her good intentions. For some reason Micah was moved to restore to his mother the money which belonged to her. What did she do with it? Did she give it to the Lord; according to her reported oath of dedication? The record shows she gave to Him but the veriest part of it. Nine hundred shekels she kept for herself. The remaining two hundred she devoted to religious uses. What a picture in this conduct of Micah and his mother of poor, weak, vacillating, human nature, sinning and confessing, cursing and blessing, as circumstances determine! What wonder, says Matthew Henry, that such a mother had such a son! She paved the way for his theft, by her probable stinginess. In her poverty she professed generous feeling towards the Lords cause. When her money came back, she gave to it less than one-fifth of the all she had promised. (W. H. Allbright.)
There was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
Anarchy
At the first, one would think that it were a merry world if every man might do what he listed. But yet sure those days were evil. This, a complaint. To let you see, then, what a monster lurketh under these smooth terms, doing that which is right in our eyes. Two parts there be, the eye, and the hand. To begin with the eye, and that which is right in the eye. There began all evil in the first temptation–even from this persuasion, they should need no direction from God, or from any; their own eye should be their director to what was right. Three evils are in it. It is not safe to commit the judgment of what is right to the eye; and yet it is our surest sense, as that which apprehendeth greatest variety of differences. But I know withal, the optics (the masters of that faculty) reckon up twenty several ways, all which it may be and is deceived. The object full of deceit; things are not as they seem. The medium is not evenly disposed. Take but one: that of the oar in the water. Though the oar be straight, yet, if the eye be judge, it seemeth bowed. And if that which is right may seem crooked, that which is crooked may seem right.. So the eye is no competent judge. But admit we will make the eye judge, yet not every mans eye; that were too much. Many weak and dim eyes there be, many goggle and mis-set; many little better than blind; shall all and every of these be allowed to define what is right? Some, it may be (perhaps the eagle), but shall the owl and all? I trow not. Many mis-shapen kinds of right shall we have if that may be suffered. We all know self-love, what a thing it is, how it dazzleth the sight; how everything appeareth right and good that appeareth through those spectacles. Therefore, not right by the eye. At least, not every mans eye. Nay, not any man is right by his own eye. I now pass to the next point. Here is a hand, too. For here at this breaketh in the whole sea of confusion, when the hand followeth the eye, and men proceed to do as lewdly as they see perversely. And sure the hand will follow the eye, and men do as seemeth right to them, be it never so absurd.
1. Micah liked an idol well; Micah had a good purse; he told out two hundred shekels, and so up went the idol.
2. The men of Dan liked well of spoiling; they were well appointed, their swords were sharp; they did it.
3. They of Gibeah, to their lust, rape seemed a small matter; they were a multitude, no resisting them; and so they committed that abominable villainy. But what, shall this be suffered and no remedy sought? God forbid. First, the eye, error in the eye, is harm enough; and order must be taken even for that. For men do not err in judgment but with hazard of their souls; very requisite, therefore, that men be travailed with, that they may see their own blindness. But, if they be strongly conceited of their own sight, and will not endure any to come near their eyes: if we cannot cure their eyes, what, shall we not hold their hands neither? Yes, in any wise. We see, then, the malady; more than time we sought out a remedy for it. That shall we best do if we know the cause. The cause is here set down. If the cause be there is no king, let there be one: that is the remedy. A good king will help all, if it be of absolute necessity that neither Micah, for all his wealth, nor Dan, for all their forces, nor Gibeah, for all their multitude, do what they list. This is then Gods means. We cannot say His only means, in that there are states that subsist without them, but this we may say, His best means–the best for order, peace, strength, steadiness. The next point is, no king in Israel. That this is not noted as a defect in gross, or at large, but even in Israel, Gods own chosen people. It is a want, not in Edom or Canaan, but even in Israel. Truly Israel, being Gods own peculiar people, might seem to claim a prerogative above other nations, in this, that they had the knowledge of His laws, whereby their eyes were lightened and their hands taught. Of which there needeth no reason but this: that a king is a good means to keep them Gods Israel. Here, for want of a king, Israel began, and was fair onward, to be no longer Israel, but even Babel. I come to the third part: and to what end a king? What will a king do unto us? He will in his general care look to both parts, the eye and the hand–the eye, that men sin not blindly for want of direction; the hand, that men sin not with a high hand for want of correction. But this is not all; the text carrieth us yet further–that it is not only the charge of the king, but the very first article in his charge. (Bp. Andrewes.)
Anarchy
I. The tragical antecedent: In those days there was no king in Israel.
II. The terrible consequent: Every one did that which was right in their own eyes.
III. The infallible connection between that cause and this effect. (Thos. Cartwright, D. D.)
The evil of unbridled liberty
To live as we please would be the ready way to lose our liberty, and undo ourselves. Tyranny itself were infinitely more tolerable than such an unbridled liberty. For that, like a tempest, might throw down here and there a fruitful tree, but this, like a deluge, would sweep away all before it. Many men, many minds, and each strongly addicted to his own. If, therefore, every man should be his own judge, so as to take upon him to determine his own right, and according to such determination to proceed in the maintenance of it, not only the government, but the kingdom itself would quickly come to ruin; and yet admit of the former, and you cannot exclude the latter. Diseases in the eye, errors in the judgment, are dangerous; and there being not one reason in us, there is the more need of one power over us. Yet they who see amiss, hurt none, they say, but themselves; but how if their unquiet opinions will not be kept at home? but prove as thorns in their sides, and will not suffer them to take any rest, till from liberty of thinking, they come to liberty of acting! Nor is there any reason we should be lawless, to do what we please, for we cannot fathom the depth and deceitfulness of our own hearts, much less of the hearts of other men. Only this we know, we are all the worse for that which we mistake for liberty (mistake, I say), for to live as we please is indeed to lose our liberty, of which the law is so far from being an abridgement that it is the only firm foundation upon which it must be built. (Thos. Cartwright, D. D.)
The Levite was content.–
The young Levite; or, rich content
His morals were bad, but his spirit of general contentedness was good. Can it be said of men now that they are content? How much unrest is there all around us! The discontented spirit is easily discovered. The merchant, in his office or on the market, makes certain profits, but frets himself that he has not made more. The tradesman bitterly complains of the badness of trade, and the artisan of slackness of work. When he has succeeded in finding employment he will be found quarrelling with the rate of payment. Nor is the discontented spirit confined to the town; it is found in rural districts too. Speak with the occupier, and what a string of complaints he has about home or weather; speak with the wife, and she complains of her wayward family; with the son, and you find that he is weary of country life, and longs for the excitement of a city; with the daughter, and she is annoyed that school life has to be followed by what she terms home drudgery. You may go away from such a place of beauty in complete disgust. The appearances have completely belied the reality. Even the Indian, for whom a blanket and weapon would appear to suffice, is ofttimes discontented because game is scarce or his maize plot unproductive. It is difficult to find any person who is without some reason for discontent, or any position which places a man beyond its reach. The joy of the early Church (Act 2:46) grew out of its contentedness. Its first experience of the results of religion was so joyous that it was a foretaste of millennial bliss. It lasted, unfortunately, too short a time, and yet long enough to show what should be the ideal of life.
1. This simplicity of heart, this contentedness of mind, is not always inherited, does not always come by nature, but may be obtained. It can only come fully when the heart is at peace with God through Christ. The man is alive to God. He gives all his affection to God, because he lives in the love which God has to him. His greatest desire is to have his whole nature subdued to Christ, and serve Him in singleness of heart.
2. Again, this state is not one which comes to all suddenly. Indeed, it comes to most gradually. Paul, the apostle, only attained it by degrees.
3. There is a temporary advantage in discontent. But for dissatisfaction with our spiritual state and progress, we should not strive to make any advance.
4. Look at some of the results which follow the attaimnent of the contented spirit.
(1) There will be a readiness to make the best of any position in which we may be placed. There was a schoolmaster among the Cumberland Hills, of whom Robertson speaks in one of his lectures–a man who rested content with a very small school, small salary, and small house; though his abilities would have obtained for him a position much higher in the eyes of the world, but who refused every inducement to remove. He said, I reckon that the privilege of living amid beautiful scenery much more than compensates for a large salary with work in the stifling atmosphere of some town. It is possible, therefore, to gain contentedness in respect to position, and the more surely if we can have the assurance that Christ has taken up His abode in our hearts.
(2) Where this spirit obtains, there will be a more cheerful view of life cherished. A little girl once inquired, Mamma, did the cheerful God make all the beautiful flowers? The childs idea of God was far higher than of many Christians. Her expression, which was apparently bold, was one indicative of sweet simplicity and singleness of heart. Would that we could be in spirit as that little child.
(3) Where this spirit of content obtains, there will be a more earnest performance of any duty that may fall upon us. That which our hands find to do we shall do with our might. We shall ever search out occasions of usefulness. If we see any wrong, we shall not be content to let it rest. If we see ignorance and sin around, we shall strive to remove it.
(4) Where there is this rich content and true singleness of heart there will be a clearer and yet clearer perception of Gods truth and will. There is a clearness of vision following on singleness of desire.
(5) Moreover, there will be perfect willingness to leave everything in Gods hands. Much of the fret and worry of life will thus be saved. (F. Hastings.)
Micah consecrated the Levite.–
An unauthorised ordination; or, a pastor-elects recognition services
I. The pastor.
1. A recognised minister.
2. Without a charge.
3. Very poor.
4. In search of a ministry.
5. Of a good character.
6. A young pastor.
II. The call.
1. Its nature.
(1) To a small church.
(2) Unanimous.
(3) With little inquiries.
(4) Upon his own merit.
(5) By a very rich church.
2. Its condition.
(1) Much respected.
(2) Poor stipend.
III. The acceptance of the call.
1. Immediate.
2. Without a scruple.
IV. The recognition service.
1. An unauthorised ordination.
2. Without any ceremony.
3. With a good purpose.
V. The great satisfaction of the church in their choice. (M. Jones.)
Now know I that the Lord will do me good.–
The great religious want and mistake of humanity
I. The great religious want of humanity.
1. A friendly relation with the Eternal.
2. Some mediator to procure this friendship.
II. The great religious mistake of humanity. This man concludes that he shall obtain the Divine favour simply because he has a priest in his house. He may have drawn this false and dangerous conclusion from one of the following popular assumptions:
1. That there was something morally meritorious in merely supporting a minister of the Lord.
2. That the priest would have some special power with Heaven to obtain good.
3. That by his formally attending to the religious ordinances which this Levite prescribed the Lord would do him good. (Homilist.)
Micah and the Levite
I. Selfishness in religion. This lies at the foundation of Micahs trouble. The institution of Micahs new form of worship had its root in this vice. He did not break away from the old form of things because he was dissatisfied with it, but because it caused self-denial and money to support the established order of worship at Shiloh. It took time to go up there, and means to convey himself and family. Why could he not manage the matter more economically and just as satisfactorily at home, and thus avoid the annoyance and expense? Many a man has made this mistake of Micah, in think- ing he could worship God as acceptably in his own way as in any other–in thinking there is no difference between a man-made and a Divinely-appointed religion. In Micahs case selfishness defeated itself, as it does invariably. In departing from the true religion he soon came to have no religion at all. And is not this the inevitable course of religious declension? If I could paint a picture that would preach a sermon, it would be Micah running after his gods and his renegade priest, and crying: Ye have taken away my gods and my priest, and what have I more?
II. Imitation in religion. Micahs worship was a cross between Judaism and heathenism. He had the priest and the ephod on one side, and the molten and graven images on the other. Either he did not perceive the incongruity, or he thought it would make no difference. Some form of worship he considered a necessity. He was not ready to throw religion overboard. His difficulty was in thinking it made little difference after all what kind of religion a man has so long as he has some form of worship. Having no true idea as to the place of worship, he came soon to have no true idea of worship itself. This is a natural order of declension. Men nowadays break away from the sanctuary, not meaning to give up all religion. Having no stated place of worship, they go here and there for a time, and then cease to go altogether. Breaking with the established order of worship, Micah manufactured a worship of his own. He mistook the sign for the thing signified. His religion was an imitation–a counterfeit–and a counterfeit is more or less a copy of the genuine. Many a man has made this mistake of Micah, in thinking that some religion was better than none–that a poor thing was better than nothing at all. Counterfeits and shams abound in religion. Imitations and incongruities are seen on every hand. One is forced to inquire, Is there anything real and genuine? Is every man the maker of his own idols? Is each and every one to be guided by his own ideas of worship? God forbid! If it be so, then unity is impossible, and confusion and bitterness and babble are the inevitable sequence.
III. Self-complacency. With his young priest and his heathen gods Micah was satisfied. Because he was, he thought God would be. Hence his complacent utterance: Now know I that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my priest. We have seen, even in our day, instances not altogether dissimilar. Families depending on the orthodoxy of the Church for the Divine approbation; Churches expecting all will go well from the ecclesiastical standing or ordination vows of their ministers. How often families and Churches and ministers have been disappointed! The truth is, there can be but one way of securing Gods blessing, whether for the individual, the family, or the Church. That one way is the way of loving and faithful obedience to His requirements. Not what we think, but what He thinks; not what we consider best, but what He commands, is our duty and happiness. Religion is not a human invention, but a Divine obligation. It is not a matter of mental caprice, but of joyful submission to the will of Heaven. (W. H. Allbright.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XVII
Micah, an Ephraimite, restores to his mother eleven hundred
shekels of silver, which he had taken from her, 1, 2.
She dedicates this to God; and out of a part of it makes a
graven image and a molten image, and gets them up tn the
house of Micah, 3, 4;
who consecrates one of his sons to be his priest, 5.
He afterwards finds a Levite, whom he consecrates for a priest,
and gives him annually ten shekels of silver, with his food and
clothing, 6-13.
NOTES ON CHAP. XVII
Verse 1. And there was a man of Mount Ephraim] It is extremely difficult to fix the chronology of this and the following transactions. Some think them to be here in their natural order; others, that they happened in the time of Joshua, or immediately after the ancients who outlived Joshua. All that can be said with certainty is this, that they happened when there was no king in Israel; i.e., about the time of the Judges, or in some time of the anarchy, Jdg 17:6.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The things mentioned here, and in the following chapters, did not happen in the order in which they are put; but much sooner, even presently after the death of the elders that overlived Joshua, Jdg 2:7, as appears by divers passages; as first, Because the place called Mahaneh-dan, or the camp of Dan, Jdg 13:25, was so called from that which was done, Jdg 18:12. Secondly, Because the Danites had not yet got all their inheritance, Jdg 18:1, which is not credible of them above three hundred years after Joshuas death. Thirdly, Because Phinehas the son of Eleazar was priest at this time, Jdg 20:28, who must have been about three hundred and fifty years old, if this had been done after Samsons death, which is more than improbable.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. a man of mount Ephraimthatis, the mountainous parts of Ephraim. This and the other narrativesthat follow form a miscellaneous collection, or appendix to the Bookof Judges. It belongs to a period when the Hebrew nation was in agreatly disordered and corrupt state. This episode of Micah isconnected with Jud 1:34. Itrelates to his foundation of a small sanctuary of his ownaminiature representation of the Shiloh tabernaclewhich he stockedwith images modelled probably in imitation of the ark and cherubim.Micah and his mother were sincere in their intention to honor God.But their faith was blended with a sad amount of ignorance anddelusion. The divisive course they pursued, as well as thewill-worship they practised, subjected the perpetrators to thepenalty of death.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And there was a man of Mount Ephraim,…. This and the four following chapters contain an history of facts, which were done not after the death of Samson, as some have thought, and as they may seem at first sight, by the order in which they are laid; but long before his time, and indeed before any of the judges in Israel, when there was no king, judge, or supreme governor among them, as appears from
Jud 17:6 even between the death of Joshua and the elders, and the first judge of Israel, Othniel; and so Josephus e places them in his history, and the connection of them is with Jud 2:10 and so accounts for the rise of idolatry in Israel, how it got into the tribe of Dan, and spread itself over all the tribes of Israel, Jud 2:11 which brought on their servitude to Cushanrishathaim, in which time the Jewish chronology f places those events; but they were certainly before that, for the idolatry they fell into was the cause of it; yet could not be so early as the times of Joshua, and before his death; because in his days, and the days of the elders, Israel served the Lord; the reasons why they are postponed to the end of this book, and the account of them given here, are, according to Dr. Lightfoot g, that the reader observing how their state policy failed in the death of Samson, who was a Danite, might presently be showed God’s justice in it, because their religion had first failed among the Danites; that when he observes that 1100 pieces of silver were given by every Philistine prince for the ruin of Samson, Jud 16:5 he might presently observe the 1100 pieces of silver that were given by Micah’s mother for the making of an idol, which ruined religion in Samson’s tribe; that the story of Micah, of the hill country of Ephraim, the first destroyer of religion, and the story of Samuel, of the hill country of Ephraim, the first reformer of religion, might be laid together somewhat near. That the facts after related were so early done as has been observed, appears from the following things; the priest of the idol Micah made was a grandson of Moses, Jud 18:30, the Danites’ seeking to enlarge their possessions, related in the same chapter, was most probably as soon as they were driven into the mountains by the Amorites, Jud 1:34. Mahanah Dan, from whence they marched, and had its name from their expedition, Jud 18:12 is mentioned before in the history of Samson, Jud 13:25 and therefore the expedition must be before his time. Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was alive at the battle of Gibeah, Jud 20:28 and Deborah speaks of the 40,000 Israelites slain by Benjamin at it, Jud 5:8. This man with whom the idolatry began was of the tribe of Ephraim, and dwelt in the mountainous part of it:
whose name was Micah; in the original it is Micajehu, with part of the name Jehovah affixed to it, as Dr. Lightfoot h remarks, till he set up his image, and thenceforward was called Micah; but, according to Abarbinel, the former was his name while he was a child, and in his youth, and with his mother, being a diminutive term, and when he became a man be was called Micah, Jud 17:5.
e Antiqu. l. 5. c. 2. sect. 8, &c. f Seder Olam Rabba, c. 12. p. 33. g Works, vol. 1. p. 46. h Works, vol. 1. p. 45.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Jdg 17:1-3 A man of the mountains of Ephraim named Micah ( , Jdg 17:1, Jdg 17:4, when contracted into , Jdg 17:5, Jdg 17:8, etc.), who set up this worship for himself, and “respecting whom the Scriptures do not think it worth while to add the name of his father, or to mention the family from which he sprang” ( Berleb. Bible), had stolen 1100 shekels of silver (about 135) from his mother. This is very apparent from the words which he spoke to his mother (v. 2): “ The thousand and hundred shekels of silver which were taken from thee (the singular refers to the silver), about which thou cursedst and spakest of also in mine ears (i.e., didst so utter the curse that among others I also heard it), behold, this silver is with me; I have taken it. ” , to swear, used to denote a malediction or curse (cf. , Lev 5:1). He seems to have been impelled to make this confession by the fear of his mother’s curse. But his mother praised him for it, – “ Blessed be my son of Jehovah, ” – partly because she saw in it a proof that there still existed a germ of the fear of God, but in all probability chiefly because she was about to dedicate the silver to Jehovah; for, when her son had given it back to her, she said (v. 3), “ I have sanctified the silver to the Lord from my hand for my son, to make an image and molten work. ” The perfect is not to be taken in the sense of the pluperfect, “I had sanctified it,” but is expressive of an act just performed: I have sanctified it, I declare herewith that I do sanctify it. “ And now I give it back to thee, ” namely, to appropriate to thy house of God.
Jdg 17:4 Hereupon-namely, when her son had given her back the silver (“he restored the silver unto his mother” is only a repetition of Jdg 17:3, introduced as a link with which to connect the appropriation of the silver)-the mother took 200 shekels and gave them to the goldsmith, who made an image and molten work of them, which were henceforth in Micah’s house. The 200 shekels were not quite the fifth part of the whole. What she did with the rest is not stated; but from the fact that she dedicated the silver generally, i.e., the whole amount, to Jehovah, according to Jdg 17:3, we may infer that she applied the remainder to the maintenance of the image-worship.
(Note: There is no foundation for Bertheau ‘s opinion, that the 200 shekels were no part of the 1100, but the trespass-money paid by the son when he gave his mother back the money that he had purloined, since, according to Lev 6:5, when a thief restored to the owner any stolen property, he was to add the fifth of its value. There is no ground for applying this law to the case before us, simply because the taking of the money by the son is not even described as a theft, whilst the mother really praises her son for his open confession.)
Pesel and massecah (image and molten work) are joined together, as in Deu 27:15. The difference between the two words in this instance is very difficult to determine. Pesel signifies an idolatrous image, whether made of wood or metal. Massecah , on the other hand, signifies a cast, something poured; and when used in the singular, is almost exclusively restricted to the calf cast by Aaron or Jeroboam. It is generally connected with , but it is used in the same sense without this definition (e.g., Deu 9:12). This makes the conjecture a very natural one, that the two words together might simply denote a likeness of Jehovah, and, judging from the occurrence at Sinai, a representation of Jehovah in the form of a molten calf. But there is one obstacle in the way of such a conjecture, namely, that in Jdg 18:17-18, massecah is separated from pesel , so as necessarily to suggest the idea of two distinct objects. But as we can hardly suppose that Micah’s mother had two images of Jehovah made, and that Micah had both of them set up in his house of God, no other explanation seems possible than that the massecah was something belonging to the pesel , or image of Jehovah, but yet distinct from it-in other words, that it was the pedestal upon which it stood. The pesel was at any rate the principal thing, as we may clearly infer from the fact that it is placed in the front rank among the four objects of Micah’s sanctuary, which the Danites took with them (Jdg 18:17-18), and that in Jdg 18:30-31, the pesel alone is mentioned in connection with the setting up of the image-worship in Dan. Moreover, there can hardly be any doubt that pesel , as a representation of Jehovah, was an image of a bull, like the golden calf which Aaron had made at Sinai (Exo 32:4), and the golden calves which Jeroboam set up in the kingdom of Israel, and one of which was set up in Dan (1Ki 12:29).
Jdg 17:5-6 His mother did this, because her son Micah had a house of God, and had had an ephod and teraphim made for himself, and one of his sons consecrated to officiate there as a priest. (the man Micah) is therefore placed at the head absolutely, and is connected with what follows by : “ As for the man Micah, there was to him (he had) a house of God.” The whole verse is a circumstantial clause explanatory of what precedes, and the following verbs , , and , are simply a continuation of the first clause, and therefore to be rendered as pluperfects. Micah’s beth Elohim (house of God) was a domestic temple belonging to Micah’s house, according to Jdg 18:15-18. , to fill the hand, i.e., to invest with the priesthood, to institute as priest (see at Lev 7:37). The ephod was an imitation of the high priest’s shoulder-dress (see at Jdg 8:27). The teraphim were images of household gods, penates, who were worshipped as the givers of earthly prosperity, and as oracles (see at Gen 31:19). – In Jdg 17:6 it is observed, in explanation of this unlawful conduct, that at that time there was no king in Israel, and every one did what was right in his own eyes.
Jdg 17:7-9 Appointment of a Levite as Priest. – Jdg 17:7. In the absence of a Levitical priest, Micah had first of all appointed one of his sons as priest at his sanctuary. He afterwards found a Levite for this service. A young man from Bethlehem in Judah, of the family of Judah, who, being a Levite, stayed ( ) there (in Bethlehem) as a stranger, left this town to sojourn “ at the place which he should find, ” sc., as a place that would afford him shelter and support, and came up to the mountains of Ephraim to Micah’s house, “making his journey,” i.e., upon his journey. (On the use of the inf. constr. with in the sense of the Latin gerund in do, see Ewald, 280, d.) Bethlehem was not a Levitical town. The young Levite from Bethlehem was neither born there nor made a citizen of the place, but simply “sojourned there,” i.e., dwelt there temporarily as a stranger. The further statement as to his descent ( mishpachath Judah) is not to be understood as signifying that he was a descendant of some family in the tribe of Judah, but simply that he belonged to the Levites who dwelt in the tribe of Judah, and were reckoned in all civil matters as belonging to that tribe. On the division of the land, it is true that it was only to the priests that dwelling-places were allotted in the inheritance of this tribe (Jos 21:9-19), whilst the rest of the Levites, even the non-priestly members of the family of Kohath, received their dwelling-places among the other tribes (Jos 21:20.). At the same time, as many of the towns which were allotted to the different tribes remained for a long time in the possession of the Canaanites, and the Israelites did not enter at once into the full and undisputed possession of their inheritance, it might easily so happen that different towns which were allotted to the Levites remained in possession of the Canaanites, and consequently that the Levites were compelled to seek a settlement in other places. It might also happen that individuals among the Levites themselves, who were disinclined to perform the service assigned them by the law, would remove from the Levitical towns and seek some other occupation elsewhere (see also at Jdg 18:30).
(Note: There is no reason, therefore, for pronouncing the words (of the family of Judah) a gloss, and erasing them from the text, as Houbigant proposes. The omission of them from the Cod. Vat. of the lxx, and from the Syriac, is not enough to warrant this, as they occur in the Cod. Al. of the lxx, and their absence from the authorities mentioned may easily be accounted for from the difficulty which was felt in explaining their meaning. On the other hand, it is impossible to imagine any reason for the interpolation of such a gloss into the text.)
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Micah and His Gods. | B. C. 1406. |
1 And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah. 2 And he said unto his mother, The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from thee, about which thou cursedst, and spakest of also in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it. And his mother said, Blessed be thou of the LORD, my son. 3 And when he had restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, I had wholly dedicated the silver unto the LORD from my hand for my son, to make a graven image and a molten image: now therefore I will restore it unto thee. 4 Yet he restored the money unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah. 5 And the man Micah had a house of gods, and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest. 6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
Here we have, I. Micah and his mother quarrelling. 1. The son robs the mother. The old woman had hoarded, with long scraping and saving, a great sum of money, 1100 pieces of silver. It is likely she intended, when she died, to leave it to her son: in the mean time it did her good to look upon it, and to count it over. The young man had a family of children grown up, for he had one of age to be a priest, v. 5. He knows where to find his mother’s cash, thinks he has more need of it than she has, cannot stay till she dies, and so takes it away privately for his own use. Though it is a fault in parents to withhold from their children that which is meet, and lead them into temptation to wish them in their graves, yet even this will by no means excuse the wickedness of those children that steal from their parents, and think all their own that they can get from them, though by the most indirect methods. 2. The mother curses the son, or whoever had taken her money. It should seem she suspected her son; for, when she cursed, she spoke in his cars so loud, and with so much passion and vehemence, as made both his ears to tingle. See what mischief the love of money makes, how it destroys the duty and comfort of every relation. It was the love of money that made Micah so undutiful to his mother as to rob her, and made her so unkind and void of natural affection to her son as to curse him if he had it and concealed it. Outward losses drive good people to their prayers, but bad people to their curses. This woman’s silver was her god before it was made thither into a graven or a molten image, else the loss of it would not have put her into such a passion as caused her quite to forget and break through all the laws of decency and piety. It is a very foolish thing for those that are provoked to throw their curses about as a madman that casteth fire-brands, arrows, and death, since they know not but they may light upon those that are most dear to them.
II. Micah and his mother reconciled. 1. The son was so terrified with his mother’s curses that he restored the money. Though he had so little grace as to take it, he had so much left as not to dare to keep it when his mother had sent a curse after it. He cannot believe his mother’s money will do him any good without his mother’s blessing, nor dares he deny the theft when he is charged with it, nor retain the money when it is demanded by the right owner. It is best not to do evil, but it is next best, when it is done, to undo it again by repentance, confession, and restitution. Let children be afraid of having the prayers of their parents against them; for, though the curse causeless shall not come, yet that which is justly deserved may be justly feared, even though it was passionately and indecently uttered. 2. The mother was so pleased with her son’s repentance that she recalled her curses, and turned them into prayers for her son’s welfare: Blessed be thou of the Lord, my son. When those that have been guilty of a fault appear to be free and ingenuous in owning it they ought to be commended for their repentance, rather than still be condemned and upbraided for their fault.
III. Micah and his mother agreeing to turn their money into a god, and set up idolatry in their family; and this seems to have been the first instance of the revolt of any Israelite from God and his instituted worship after the death of Joshua and the elders that out-lived him, and is therefore thus particularly related. And though this was only the worship of the true God by an image, against the second commandment, yet this opened the door to the worship of other gods, Baalim and the groves, against the first and great commandment. Observe,
1. The mother’s contrivance of this matter. When the silver was restored she pretended she had dedicated it to the Lord (v. 3), either before it was stolen, and then she would have this thought to be the reason why she was so much grieved at the loss of it and imprecated evil on him that had taken it, because it was a dedicated and therefore an accursed thing, or after it was stolen she had made a vow that, if she could retrieve it, she would dedicate it to God, and then she would have the providence that had so far favoured her as to bring it back to her hands to be an owning of her vow. “Come,” said she to her son, “the money is mine, but thou hast a mind to it; let it be neither mine nor thine, but let us both agree to make it into an image for a religious use.” Had she put it to a use that was indeed for the service and honour of God, this would have been a good way of accommodating the matter between them; but, as it was, the project was wicked. Probably this old woman was one of those that came out of Egypt, and would have such images made as she had seen there; now that she began to dote she called to remembrance the follies of her youth, and perhaps told her son that this way of worshipping God by images was, to her knowledge, the old religion.
2. The son’s compliance with her. It should seem, when she first proposed the thing he stumbled at it, knowing what the second commandment was; for, when she said (v. 3) she designed it for her son to make an image of, yet he restored it to his mother (being loth to have a hand in making the image), and she gave it to the founder and had the thing done, blaming him perhaps for scrupling at it, v. 4. But, when the images were made, Micah, by his mother’s persuasion, was not only well reconciled to them, but greatly pleased and in love with them; so strangely bewitching was idolatry, and so much supported by traditions received from their parents,1Pe 1:18; Jer 44:17. But observe how the old woman’s covetousness prevailed, in part, above her superstition. She had wholly dedicated the silver to make the graven and molten images (v. 3), all the 1100 pieces; but, when it came to be done, she made less than a fifth part serve, even 200 shekels, v. 4. She thought that enough, and indeed it was too much to give for an image that is a teacher of lies. Had it been devoted truly to the honour of God, he would not thus have been put off with part of the price, but would have signified his resentment of the affront, as he did in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. Now observe,
(1.) What was the corruption here introduced, v. 5. The man Micah had a house of gods, a house of God, so the LXX., for so he thought it, as good as that at Shiloh, and better, because his own, of his own inventing and at his own disposal; for people love to have their religion under their girdle, to manage it as they please. A house of error, so the Chaldee, for really it was so, a deviation from the way of truth and an inlet to all deceit. Idolatry is a great cheat, and one of the worst of errors. That which he aimed at in the progress of his idolatry, whether he designed it at first or no, was to mimic and rival both God’s oracles and his ordinances. [1.] His oracles; for he made teraphim, little images which he might advise with as there was occasion, and receive informations, directions, and predictions from. What the urim and thummim were to the prince and people these teraphim should be to his family; yet he could not think that the true God would own them, or give answers by them, and therefore depended upon such demons as the heathen worshipped to inspire them and make them serviceable to him. Thus, while the honour of Jehovah was pretended (v. 3), yet, his institution being relinquished, these Israelites unavoidably lapsed into downright idolatry and demon-worship. [2.] His ordinances. Some room or apartment in the house of Micah was appointed for the temple or house of God; an ephod, or holy garment, was provided for his priest to officiate in, in imitation of those used at the tabernacle of God, and one of his sons he consecrated, probably the eldest, to be his priest. And, when he had set up a graven or molten image to represent the object of his worship, no marvel if a priest of his own getting and his own making served to be the manager of it. Here is no mention of any altar, sacrifice, or incense, in honour of these silver gods, but, having a priest, it is probable he had all these, unless we suppose that, at first, his gods were intended only to be advised with, not to be adored, like Laban’s teraphim; but the beginning of idolatry, as of other sins, is like the letting forth of water: break the dam, and you bring a deluge. Here idolatry began, and it spread like a fretting leprosy. Dr. Lightfoot would have us observe that as 1100 pieces of silver were here devoted to the making of an idol, which ruined religion, especially in the tribe of Dan (as we shall presently find), which was Samson’s tribe, so 1100 pieces of silver were given by each Philistine lord for the ruin of Samson.
(2.) What was the cause of this corruption (v. 6): There was no king in Israel, no judge or sovereign prince to take cognizance of the setting up of these images (which, doubtless, the country about soon resorted to), and to give orders for the destroying of them, none to convince Micah of his error and to restrain and punish him, to take this disease in time, by which the spreading of the infection might have been happily prevented. Every man did that which was right in his own eyes, and then they soon did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord. When they were without a king to keep good order among them, God’s house was forsaken, his priests were neglected, and all went to ruin among them. See what a mercy government is, and what reason there is that not only prayers and intercessions, but giving of thanks, should be made for kings and all in authority,1Ti 2:1; 1Ti 2:2. Nothing contributes more, under God, to the support of religion in the world, than the due administration of those two great ordinances, magistracy and ministry.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Judges – Chapter 17
Micah’s gods, vs. 1-6
The first thing the student of the Book of Judges needs to realize when he comes to the last chapters of the Book is that the events here are not chronologically successive to the events already studied about the various judges. In fact, internal evidence indicates that the events of Judges 17-21 occurred very soon after the conquest, this event now introduced likely occurred during the lifetime of Joshua. Note in connection with this Jdg 18:1.
This account opens with an event already having occurred. Micah, a man of mount Ephraim, evidently in the tribe of Ephraim, is introduced. At once is seen the moral conditions of those early times, and they are not all good. Micah was a thief, stealing from his own mother. His mother was an idolator, already having relegated the Lord in her mind to graven and molten images. The woman had made a “curse” relative to eleven hundred shekels of silver she possessed. The curse does not mean that she had cursed because it was stolen, or cursed the one who had stolen it. It means that she had made a vow concerning the silver to dedicate it to the Lord, so that to use it otherwise would involve a curse on the one violating the vow.
This may be the reason Micah acknowledged having taken the silver, he being fearful of the consequences. The blessing the mother pronounced on Micah is surely not because he took the silver, but because he acknowledged it. When he returned it to her she told him she had dedicated it to the Lord to make a graven image and a molten image. This illustrates the warped conception of the worship of the Lord. To think that the Lord could be honored by making silver images to represent Him! She was either ignorant of the law of Moses or otherwise treated it lightly, and both are inexcusable.
Micah refused to keep the silver, so his mother took it to the foundry and had the images made with two hundred of the shekels. Micah built himself a god-house and set up the images in it. He also made an ephod, for a priest, and teraphim. These last were little good luck gods, or pieces. One of Micah’s sons was installed as priest of the god-house.
The last statement in the passage, verse 6, seems to indicate that Israel was handicapped by not having a king. However, the Lord did not intend for them to have a king yet. The problem was that they did not acknowledge that the Lord was their king and seek after Him. Without a strong king to compel them to his will they ignored the Lord and did whatever seemed to them right to do. This situation brought them havoc over and over, not only during the judgeship, but even after they had a king. What man thinks is right in his mind is always wrong.
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
IDOLATRY IN ITS INCIPIENT STAGEBY IMAGE-WORSHIP
(Jdg. 17:1-13.)
HOMILETICS
I. Idolatry begins with those who are not upright in moral conduct. Jdg. 17:1-4.
Micah himself is first heard of as stealing a large sum of money, and his mother is first mentioned as uttering curses on the head of the offender, whoever he might be. Subsequently, when the money is given up, and the offender is discovered to be her own son, the mother entirely loses sight of the immoral character of the act, and though no sorrow is expressed by him for the evil of his conduct, she at once proceeds to pour blessings on his head, simply because the money was restored. Further, she professes to have devoted the whole of the money to the service of Gods house, yet when coming to the decision as to how much shall be given for that purpose, she gives really less than one-fifth of the whole to that service. No wonder, if those, who had already made a god of their money, should hold very cheaply by the name of the true God.
II. God has established in the heart of every criminal the means of detecting his own crime. Jdg. 17:2.
How long Micah may have kept his theft a secret is not said, but memory and conscience, as two detectives working together, made every place too hot for him, until he made a full confession (Psa. 32:3-5). The work of detection was done most effectively, for no man can flee from himself, and it was done directly, without any slow process of going round about (Jos. 7:16-21). Fears were aroused in his superstitious mind, lest a mothers curse should fall upon him, and disquieting thoughts like wandering ghosts rose up before him in his fancies by day and his dreams by night, to scare him into a full disclosure of the evil act.
III. The powerlessness of human cursing. Jdg. 17:2.
The mother cursed the thief. Was there anything in that to rouse Micahs fears? Had he any good reason to fear that the curse would really come? That a certain power both of blessing and cursing was vested in the father, in the patriarchal age, is undoubted (Noah, Isaac, Jacob, etc.). The father was then the priest and prophet in the family. But when he either bestowed a blessing, or pronounced a curse, it seemed always to be when he was Divinely commissioned to do so (Gen. 9:25-26). Isaac having blessed Jacob could not alter it, nor confer the blessing on Esau also. There were limits to the power of blessing; and so with cursing. The blessing, or the curse, would not come at the mere caprice of him who pronounced it, but only as it came from the Divine Spirit, resting on the person authorised to give it. Some of the female sex were prophetesses, but only as such could they either bless or curse (Judges 5)
IV. Conscience compels a tribute to religion, even from the avaricious heart Jdg. 17:3.
What the leading motive may have been for erecting a sanctuary in their dwelling, we are not informed, but one thing is clear in this case, that though Micah and his mother were both avaricious, they felt that the claims of religion were strong, and must have large external respect paid to them. Where any tenderness of conscience is left, there is a secret instinctive conviction, that man must have a God, whom he is bound to serve, and to whom he owes the deepest homage. So the mother spoke at first of devoting the whole 1,100 shekels (about 140), to the purpose of establishing a system of image-worship in their household. Even the hard-fisted Laban had his gods (Gen. 31:19; Gen. 31:30; Mic. 6:7.)
V. The deceitfulness of the heart in thinking it can bribe conscience.
So much is parted with, that the heart may keep all the rest and enjoy it in quietude. An opiate is given to conscience in the religious offerings made, to lull it asleep or to blunt its sting. Every wicked man feels that he must, at any cost, still that stern voice and buy off its threatenings. But it is vain to think of closing up the black and yawning gulf of fears, which conscious guilt opens in the soul, by casting into it silver and gold, prayers and penances, deeds of charity, and formal observances of religious worship (Mic. 6:7). Nothing can purge conscience but the blood of Christ (Heb. 9:14).
VI. The error of departure from the rule laid down by God for His own worship.
Micah departed from this rule broadly in making a graven image, which is expressly forbidden in the most solemn language uttered on Sinai (Exo. 20:4), and which had the first of the heavy curses pronounced upon it at Mount Ebal (Deu. 27:15). He erred also in following only the thoughts of his own heart, without asking counsel at the mouth of the Lord; whereas it is the very foundation of true religion to acknowledge Him in everything, and reverently observe what He appoints. For a man to try to carve out a religion for himself, different from what God has appointed, is itself an act of irreligion. Again, he appointed first his son, and afterwards a Levite, to be his priest, whereas none but the sons of Aaron could lawfully execute the duties of that office. The place too was unlawfulhis own dwelling, for all acceptable public worship was required to be carried on before the ark at Shiloh. All this was highly presumptuous and irreverent. It was for a man to tell God, that he would take the matter of His worship into his own hands, and decide for himself, when, where, and how he would discharge his religious obligations.
Besides all this, it was an express refusal to accept the mode of worship already appointed by God, as exhibited at Shiloh, at no great distance from where Micah lived. When God has already spoken, it is for every right-hearted worshipper to obey. To bring in another mode, or to bring in a modification of His mode, would indeed be most irreverent.
VII. It is dangerous to frame a religion merely according to ones own wishes.
This is first of all to insult the Divine Majesty, as if the creature might presume to dictate to the Creator what duties He should require it to fulfil. This of itself must be a heinous offence. It is also most distrustful, as if the Creator were not infinitely kind, wise, faithful and true, and worthy of the most absolute confidence. But it implies more; it amounts to a casting off the authority of the Creator entirely, at the moment when it professes to acknowledge Him as the Object of worship. Besides, a religion so framed will be a hideous misrepresentation of all that God is, and an exhibition of what the vile and wicked heart of man would wish him to be. This is strikingly exemplified in all the religions of the heathen world, without a single exception.
VIII. Those who have no religion in the heart take the more pains to show it in the externals.
This is one of the many phases of the deceitful workings of the human heart. By making a bustle about external forms and ceremonies, a man persuades himself, either that he has something of reality about him after all, or that God will, at any rate, accept the very ardour of his manner as counting for so much. But all the while the heart will not give up itself. This is specially exemplified among those who attach excessive importance to forms, ceremonies, gestures, intonations of voice, and the like; also among those who rest on the regularity of observances, the mere number of services gone through, and the amount of penance self-inflicted. Micah gave himself a great deal of trouble with the externals, but we do not find any evidence to prove that he had any real love to God, and delight in communion with Him in the heart. Pretence of religion is seen in such cases as Hos. 7:14; Mal. 3:14; Mat. 6:5; Mat. 6:7; Mat. 6:16; 1Ki. 18:26, &c. Opposite examples: Mary sitting at Jesus feet. The beloved disciple listening with breathless attention to the gracious words that came from the Saviours lips. The publican smiting his breast, &c. The long-afflicted invalid sayingIf I but touch Him I shall be whole. Lord lift on me the light of Thy countenance. In these cases we see the heart at work in giving itself to God.
IX. Some people are proud of having the name of being religious. Jdg. 17:5.
Micah wished not only to be as good as his neighbours, but he wished to have a name for religion, and so he turns his dwelling into a sanctuary. The man Micah has a house of God. This is how he was spoken of in the world. He seemed to wish to have his house full of religion. The meaning, however, is not a house with many gods in it. The word Elohim seems to denote God simply. But his house contained a regular establishment of the worship of God. There was the image, as a representation of the object of worship; the ephod, or sacred dress, without which no acceptable service could be done before God; the teraphim, to be consulted as oracles; and the priest, or recognised official for conducting religious services. Was not Micah a good Pharisee? Ought not his name to go out as one zealous towards God, and abounding in religious services?
Many still regard a religious name as giving respectability, and hence they do much to gain it. They also regard it as a source of influence and so covet it.
X. The great sin of using a high religious profession as a means of getting gain.
This appears to have been the chief aim of Micah in building up his idolatrous establishment. He thought to make his house a resort for religious worshippers, or a shrine where offerings would be presented, and fees would be charged for inquiry at the oracle. It is not likely, that so avaracious a man would put out so much money on the sacred materials, without expecting to receive as much again with profit superadded. And this explains the agonising wail which he raised, when his establishment was broken up by the unceremonious Danites, Ye have taken away my gods, and what have I more? It is a fearful provocation to a holy God, when His great name and hallowed worship are prostrated to serve the ends of covetousness.
What shall we say of gifts presented at shrines, of the sale of indulgences, of the sale too of church livings, of the presenting of unholy men to church benefices, merely for the sake of a living, and such-like practices? Or what can we think of those who take the name of Christian professor, and connect themselves with a certain church in order thereby to increase their incomes, or advance their position in society, with many varieties of the same principle? It all savours much of the Micah spirit, and must end in some fit manifestation of the Divine frown.
XI. Idolatry is a most God-dishonouring sin.
(1.) It is an inconceivable degradation to the Divine nature, to suppose it to be represented by dumb wood, or stone, graven by art and mans device, the work of the hands of the worshippers themselves!
(2.) Though it begins with the professed intention of worshipping the true God through the image, yet the constant presence of the image in the act of worship, and its continual association with the giving of Divine honours, insensibly leads after a time to the worship of the image itself. Thus another object becomes honoured and not God, and the substitute is merely a piece of wood, or a stone!
(3.) The spirituality of the Divine nature is lost sight of.
(4.) God Himself is lost sight of, and creations of mans wicked nature take His place, leading to all manner of sinful deeds.
XII. The hearts power of self-deception in matters of religion.
He supposed that now God would do him good, seeing he had a Levite to be his priest. What miserable logic does an unrenewed man show, when trying to make out a favourable case for himself as regards his personal religion. He was not right even in the one point, which he thought to be so good that it would serve for all the rest. It was not the right thing for a Levite to discharge priestly duties. Such honour belonged to Aaron and his sons alone. And then Micah was wrong everywhere else. It was not right to have the sanctuary of God in his own private dwelling. It was not right to have an image representing God. It was not right for any one to wear the ephod except at Shiloh in association with the ark. It was not right for him to presume to carve out his religion for himself. In truth, he was wrong all over, and yet he thought he was wonderfully near the mark.
What a small vestige of evidence will suffice, for an ungodly man to think himself almost a Christian. A short formal prayer offered up once a day; a chapter of the Book of God read once a week; one attendance at Divine Service on the Lords Day; a small coin given for religions purposes; those, together with a fair reputation for good morality, are held to be a sufficient proof that his name ought to go on the Christian list, though all the time he is a stranger to the power of religion, and has had no experience of having had his heart warmed with the constraining influence of the love of Christ.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
DOUBLE APPENDIX Jdg. 17:1 to Jdg. 21:25
The Idolatry of Dan Jdg. 17:1 to Jdg. 18:31
Micahs Images Jdg. 17:1-6
And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah.
2 And he said unto his mother, The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from thee, about which thou cursedst, and spakest of also in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it. And his mother said, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my son.
3 And when he had restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, I had wholly dedicated the silver unto the Lord from my hand for my son, to make a graven image and a molten image: now therefore I will restore it unto thee.
4 Yet he restored the money unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah.
5 And the man Micah had a house of gods, and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest.
6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
1.
Who was Micah? Jdg. 17:1
The word Micah is an abbreviation for Micaiah (Jer. 26:18). The name is interpreted by a question: Who is like the Lord? The name was given to a rather large group of men, there being at least eight men in the Old Testament who bore this name. The best-known man bearing this name is the prophet whose book is one of the Twelve. The Micah mentioned in this chapter of Judges is not further identified, but the account of his idolatrous worship is one of great importance.
2.
Where was Mount Ephraim? Jdg. 17:1
The land given to the tribe of Ephraim was largely composed of hill country. There were many smaller mountains within the border of this section of Palestine, but the northern part was especially hilly since the heights of Mount Carmel began to take their rise from the center of this land. On the northern border of the territory assigned to Ephraim were Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Somewhere in this hill country Micah and his mother had settled.
3.
In what way had Micahs mother uttered a curse? Jdg. 17:2
The Scripture is not clear as to the nature of the curse which was uttered by Micahs mother, but it appears on the surface that she had prayed for God to curse whoever had stolen her money. There is a possibility of her simply placing a ban on the money or in other words, having dedicated it to the service of God. When the money was restored to her, she said she had sanctified the silver to the Lord. In either case Micah realized he was encountering a possibility of being smitten of the Lord for having taken his mothers money. He had heard the curse which she uttered, and this frightened him into making a confession of his theft.
4.
Why did his mother pray for him to be blessed? Jdg. 17:2
When Micah made a confession of his theft, his mother prayed God to bless him. She saw in his confession a proof of his fear of God. More than this, his confession made possible her dedicating the silver to the Lord. When her son gave the money back to her, she was able to fulfill her intentions.
5.
What kind of image was made? Jdg. 17:4
Two different words are used in the Hebrew text to describe the idolatrous image. The first word pesel is used for an idolatrous image made either of metal or wood. The word massecah stands for something poured or cast. When this latter word is used in the singular, it generally refers to the calf cast by Aaron or Jeroboam. The two words used together probably describe a symbol of the Lord. Judging from the events at Mount Sinai, Micahs mother probably made an idol in the form of a calf to stand for the presence of the Lord. In Jdg. 18:17-18, the two words are not used together; and some think Micahs mother made two different objects. It is hard to imagine, however, that Micahs mother made two images of the Lord. For this reason it seems better to view this reference as signifying an image, pesel and a pedestal upon which it stoodthe massecah. In Jdg. 18:30-31 the pesel alone is mentioned. Likely it was probably an image of a bull similar to the golden calf which Aaron made at Sinai (Exo. 32:4) and the two golden calves which Jeroboam erected in Israel, one of which was set up in Dan (1Ki. 12:29).
6.
What was the house of gods? Jdg. 17:5
Micahs house of gods was a private shrine which he erected on his property. It was not another tabernacle or a forerunner of the temple. God had decreed only one sanctuary (Deuteronomy 12). Although the house of gods which Micah erected was largely for his own private use, it is possible that neighbors and friends came to the sanctuary of false worship erected by this well-to-do man. Thus the seeds of idolatry were scattered far and wide from this center of paganism.
7.
What was the ephod? Jdg. 17:5
The ephod was the garment worn by the priests. God had prescribed the attire for priests. Various articles of clothing were describedan ephod, a robe, a mitre, linen breeches and breast plate. The ephod was a short garment without sleeves and formed the basic article of clothing.
8.
What were the teraphim? Jdg. 17:5
Teraphim were small household gods. They are sometimes called penates. Rachel stole Labans teraphim when she and Jacob fled from Haran (Gen. 31:19). These images were worshiped as the givers of earthly prosperity and as sources of divine knowledge. The form teraphim is the plural of the singular teraph.
9.
What was the meaning of the remark about no king? Jdg. 17:6
The author is dating the event as being prior to the time of writing, which was probably in the early days of the monarchy. The events which transpired in Chapter 17 did not necessarily follow those which are described in Chapter 16 of the book of Judges. That is to say, Micahs era was not later than that of Samsons. Micah established his false worship some time during the period of the judges. More than likely it occurred early in the era and may be no less than a century after the false worship which erupted at Sinai was soundly denounced by Moses.
10.
What is the bearing of this regarding the date of the book? Jdg. 17:6
If the people were then becoming acquainted with the monarchy, it would help them make a comparison between their times and the early days. Throughout the last five chapters of the book of Judges we find constantly recurring references of a similar nature (Jdg. 18:1; Jdg. 19:1 and Jdg. 21:25). If Samuel were the author, he was evidently emphasizing the difference in the social climate under the judges as compared to that under the king. By the end of Sauls lifetime the people of Israel had been given ample opportunity to see the nature of a king. They had asked for a king to enable them to be like all the nations (1Sa. 8:5). Most of the time commentators view this period as a time of near anarchy. We may be led to believe that it was also a time when the spiritual climate was very poor. Nevertheless the record says that every man did that which was right in his own eyes. It does not say that every man did what was wrong. Things could have been worse.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) There was.The Vulg. has, there was at that time which is an error, for these events happened before the days of Samson.
A man of mount Ephraim.The hill-district of Ephraim, as in Jdg. 2:9. The Talmud (Sanhedr. 103, b) says that he lived at Garab, not far from Shiloh, but the name (a blotch) is probably a term of scorn (Deu. 28:27). Similarly, we find in Perachim, 117, a, that he lived at Bochi. (See Jdg. 2:1-5.) Most of the idolatrous violations of the second commandment occurred in the northern kingdom (Gideon, Jdg. 8:27; Micah, Judges 17; Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12, 13). These apostasies were not a worship of other gods, but a worship of the true God under unauthorised conditions, and with forbidden images.
Whose name was Micah.Scripture does not deem it necessary to say anything more about him. His very namehere Micayeh, Who is like Jehovah seems to show that he had been trained by pious parents. The contraction Micah is adopted throughout the rest of the story.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
MICAH AND THE LEVITE, Jdg 17:1-13.
1. Mount Ephraim The exact limits of this mountain range are nowhere indicated in the Scriptures. It ran midway through the territory assigned to the tribe of this name, extending as far north as Shechem, (Jos 20:7; Jos 21:21,) and at least as far south as Ramah. Jdg 4:5. It was the central portion of the great mountain range that forms the backbone of Palestine, and took this name from the early allotment of this section of the country to the tribe of Ephraim.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Judges 17 . Micah and the Levite.
This chapter illustrates the rise of idolatry and disobedience to Yahweh in Israel after the death of Joshua. It is illustrated from an incident which occurred in the hill country of Ephraim, where a man, who had stolen a large sum of money from his mother, returned it, on which part of it was sadly converted to an idolatrous use. Two images and a teraphim were made of it, and eventually a Levite appointed to be priest. In the following chapter this priest would then aid the half-tribe of Dan to steal the images from their owner. Thus theft is central to, and emphasised in, the account. The second sad final result is the setting up of a rival Sanctuary to that already in place, in Laish (Dan). It was contrary to the covenant with Yahweh, directly as a result of this theft.
Jdg 17:1
‘ And there was a man of the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Micah.’
This incident took place fairly early on in the period of the Judges for it occurred prior to the movement of the Danites from their allotted territory to Laish (Jdg 18:1), yet not early enough to be too much before this event. It is significant because it occurred within reasonable reach of the central sanctuary, demonstrating that the hold and significance of the central sanctuary, and of the Law of God which it upheld, was at this time fairly minimal even within a close range.
The people were now settling down into the land and were prepared to coexist with the inhabitants of the land and imitate their ways. And from this incident and what follows we can see why there was a necessity for Yahweh’s activity as described in the book of Judges.
The name Micah means ‘who is like Yah (Yahweh)?’ It was deliberately ironic that someone with a name like that should be presented as an example of those who turned from Yahweh to their own ways, bringing Him down to the level of other religions. The description of his whereabouts was deliberately vague although it would be some miles north of Jerusalem. He represented in general the behaviour of many Israelites.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jdg 17:1 And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah.
Jdg 17:1
Jdg 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
Jdg 17:6
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Making of the Image
v. 1. And there was a man of Mount Ephraim whose name was Micah. v. 2. And he said unto his mother, v. 3. And when he had restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, I had wholly dedicated the silver unto the Lord from my hand for my son to make a graven image and a molten image; now, therefore, I will restore it unto thee. v. 4. Yet he restored the money unto his mother, v. 5. And the man Micah had an house of gods, v. 6. In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Jdg 17:1
We here light upon quite a different kind of history from that which has preceded. We no longer have to do with judges and their mighty deeds in delivering Israel from his oppressors, but with two detached histories, which fill up the rest of the book, relating to the internal affairs of Israel. There is no note of time, except that they happened before the time of Saul the king (Jdg 17:6; Jdg 18:1), and. that Phinehas the son of Eleazar was alive at the time of the occurrence of the second (Jdg 20:28). Both, no doubt, are long prior to Samson. The only apparent connection of the history of Micah with that of Samson is that both relate to the tribe of Dan, and it may be presumed were contained in the annals of that tribe. Compare the opening of the Books of Samuel (1Sa 1:1). Mount Ephraim; i.e. the hill country of Ephraim, as in Jdg 3:27; Jdg 7:24, etc.
Jdg 17:2
The eleven hundred. See Jdg 16:5, note. Thou cursedst. The Cethib and the Alexandrian Codex of the Septuagint read, Thou cursedst, i.e.. adjuredst me, which is a better reading. There is a direct and verbal reference to the law contained in Le Jdg 5:1. The word thou cursedst here and the voice of swearing in Leviticus are the same root. It was in consequence of this adjuration that Micah confessed his guilt. Compare Mat 26:63, when our Lord, on the adjuration of the high priest, broke his silence and confessed that he was Christ, the Son of God. In Achan’s confession (Jos 7:19, Jos 7:20) there is no distinct reference to Le Mat 5:1, though this may have been the ground of it.
Jdg 17:3
I had wholly dedicated. It is not clear whether the words are to be rendered as in the A.V; had dedicated, expressing the dedication of them before they were stolen, or whether they merely express her present purpose so to dedicate them. But the A.V. makes very good sense. Her former purpose had been that the money should be given for her son’s benefit to make his house an house of gods. Now that he had confessed, she resumed her purpose. Now therefore I restore it unto theethat is, in the shape of the graven and molten images, as it follows in the next verse. The narrative gives a curious example of the semi-idolatry of the times. A graven image and a molten image. There is a good deal of difficulty in assigning the exact meaning of the two words here used, and their relation to one another in the worship to which they belong. The molten image (massechah), however, seems to be pretty certainly the metal, here the silver, image of a calf, the form which the corrupt worship of Jehovah took from the time when Aaron made the molten calf (Exo 32:4, called there ‘egel massechah, a molten calf) to the time when Jeroboam set up the golden calves at Dan and Bethel (1Ki 12:28, 1Ki 12:29). And that massechah means something molten is certain both from its etymology (nasach, to pour) and from what Aaron said in Exo 32:24 : “I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.” Here too Micah’s mother gives the silver to the founder, i.e. to the fuser of metals. The pesel, or graven image, on the other hand, is something hewn or graven, whether in wood or stone, and sometimes overlaid with gold and silver (Deu 7:25). One might have thought, from the language of verse 4, and from the mention of the pesel alone in Jdg 18:30, Jdg 18:31, that only one image is here intended, which was graven with the chisel after it was cast, as Aaron’s calf seems to have been. But in Jdg 18:17, Jdg 18:18 they are mentioned separately, with the ephod and teraphim named between them, so that they must be distinct. From the above passages the pesel or graven image would seem to have been the most important object, and the difficulty is to assign the true relation of the massechah or molten image to it. Hengstenberg thinks the massechah was a pedestal on which the pesel stood, and that the ephod was the robe with which the pesel was clothed, and that the teraphim were certain tokens or emblems attached to the ephod which gave oracular answers. But this is not much more than guess-work. Berthean considers the ephod, here as elsewhere, to be the priest’s garment, put on when performing the most solemn services, and specially when seeking an answer from God. And he thinks that the massechah formed a part of the ornament of the ephod, because in Jdg 18:18 the Hebrew has “the pesel of the ephod.” The teraphin he thinks are idols, a kind of Dii minores associated with the worship of Jehovah in this impure worship. But there does not seem to be any means at present of arriving at any certainty. The massechah might be a rich gold or silver overlaying of the wooden image, possibly movable, or it might be the separate image of a calf supposed to belong, as it were, to the pesel, and to symbolise the attributes of the Godhead.
Jdg 17:4
Yet he restored. Rather, so he restored, repeating what was said in Jdg 17:3, and adding the consequence, that his mother took two hundred shekels and gave them to the founder. It is a great puzzle to explain why two hundred shekels only are here spoken of, and what became of the other nine hundred. Bertheau thinks the two hundred were different from the eleven hundred, and were the fifth part of the whole value stolen, which the thief, according to Le Jdg 6:5, was bound to give in addition to the principal. He therefore translates Jdg 6:4 thus: “So he restored the money to his mother (and his mother took two hundred shekels), and she gave it to the founder,” etc. Others understand that two hundred only were actually made into the graven and molten image, and the other nine hundred were devoted to other expenses of the worship. In the house of Micah. This explains, Now I will restore it unto thee, and, for my son to make, etc; in verse 3.
Jdg 17:5
And the man Micah, etc. It is impossible to say for certain whether the state of things here described in respect of Micah preceded the events narrated in the preceding verses, or was consequent upon them. If it preceded, then we have the reason of his mother’s vow: she wished to make her son’s “house of God” complete by the addition of a graven and molten image. If it was consequent upon his mother’s vow, then we have in the opening verses of this chapter a history of the circumstances of the foundation of Micah’s “house of God,” which was to play an important part in the colony of Danites, whose proceedings arc related in the following chapter, and for the sake of which this domestic history of Micah is introduced. House of gods. Rather, of God (Elohim); for the worship was of Jehovah, only with a corrupt and semi-idolatrous ceremonial. An ephod. See Jdg 8:26, Jdg 8:27, note. Teraphim. See Gen 31:19 (images, A.V.; teraphim, Hebrews); 1Sa 15:23 (idolatry, A.V.; teraphim, Hebrews); 1Sa 19:13 (an image, A.V.; teraphim, Hebrews); Hos 3:4,to etc. They seem to have been a kind of Penates, or household gods, and were used for divination (Eze 21:21; Zec 10:2). Became his priest. One function of the priest, and for which it is likely he was much resorted to, was to inquire of God by the ephod (Jdg 18:5, Jdg 18:6). What his other duties might be does not appear.
Jdg 17:6
There was no king. This must have been written in the days of the kings of Israel and Judah, and perhaps with reference to the efforts of such kings as Ass (1Ki 15:13) and Jehoshaphat (1Ki 22:43) to put down idolatry.
Jdg 17:7
Of the family of Judah. These words are difficult to explain. If the man was a Levite he could not be of the family or tribe of Judah. Some explain the words to be merely a more accurate definition of Bethlehem-judah, as if he would say, I mean Bethlehem in the tribe of Judah. Others explain them to mean that he was one of a family of Levites who had settled in Bethlehem, and so came to be reckoned in civil matters as belonging to Judah. Others, that he was of the family of Judah on his mother s side, which might be the cause of his settling at Bethlehem. But many commentators think them spurious, as they are not found in the Septuagint (Cod. Vat.), nor in the Peschito, nor in No. 440 of De Rossi’s MSS. The Septuagint has Bethlehem of the family of Judah.
Jdg 17:8
From Bethlehem-judah. Rather, out of. The whole phrase means, out of the city, viz; out of Bethlehem. Mount Ephraimthe hill country of Ephraim, as Jdg 17:1, where see note.
Jdg 17:10, Jdg 17:11
A father. This is not a common application of the word father in the Old Testament. The prominent idea seems to be one of honour, combined with authority to teach and advise. It is applied to prophets (2Ki 2:12; 2Ki 6:21; 2Ki 13:14), and to Joseph (Gen 45:8). The idea is implied in the converse phrase of son, applied to those to whom the prophets stood in ‘the relation of spiritual fathers (see 2Ki 8:9; Pro 4:10, Pro 4:20, and frequently elsewhere). The abuse of the feeling which dictates the term as applied to human teachers is reproved by our Lord (Mat 23:9). It has been freely used in the Christian Church, as in the titles papa or pope applied to bishops, abbot and abbas, father in God, fathers of the Church, etc. Here there is perhaps a special reference to the function of Micah’s priest to ask counsel of God, and then give that counsel to those who came to inquire (see note to verse 5). It may be added that the idea of counsellor seems to be inherent in the word cohen or priest, as in 2Sa 8:18; 1Ki 4:5, etc. Ten shekelsa little over a pound of our money, but probably equivalent to 20, when considered relatively to articles of consumption. A suit of apparel. There is great doubt as to the exact meaning of the word rendered suit in this connection. The word means anything arranged, i.e. put in a rank, or row, or order. In Exo 40:23 it is applied to the shewbread: “He ordered the bread in order.” Thence it came to mean the estimation or worth of a person or thingsome-what as we use the word rank. From this last sense some interpret the word here to mean the worth or price of his clothes. Others, including St. Jerome and the Septuagint, interpret it a pair of vestments, meaning summer and winter clothing. But perhaps the A.V; suit, meaning the whole set of under and upper garments, is after all the best interpretation. The Levite went in. The Hebrew is went, i.e. according to the common use of the word, went his way. And such is probably the meaning here. He went his way to consider the proposal made to him. The result is given in the next verse: And the Levite was content, etc.
Jdg 17:13
Then said Micah, etc. We may notice this incidental proof that the Levites in the time of Micah held the religious position which is ascribed to them in the Pentateuch. I have a Levite. Rather, the Levite, meaning the particular Levite of whom it is the question. A Levite would be without the article, as in verse 7, or would be expressed as in Jdg 19:1 (Hebrews), a man a Levite.
HOMILETICS
Jdg 17:1-13
The superstitious worship of the true God.
The natural history of religion is a very curious one. There is first the broad division between worship given to false gods and that which is given to the one-true and living God, Creator of heaven and earth. The heathen of old, like the heathen of to-day, worshipped those that were no gods. Either they had no existence at all, and were the creatures of man’s imagination, divinities supposed to preside over the various powers of nature and the affections of the human heart; gods of the weather, of the earth, and sea, and sky; malignant spirits supposed to influence human destiny, and requiring gifts to propitiate them: personifications of light, or death, or even of criminal human passions; or else they were beings who had indeed a real existence,sun, moon, stars, stones, animals, angels, demons, or the spirits of dead men,but who were not God. This worship of false gods we know from Holy Scripture, and from the annals of all nations, was prevalent over the whole ancient world, and we know that it exists in heathen lands to the present day. But that is not the form of corrupt religion to which this chapter calls our attention, nor is it that into which there is any probability of Christians falling in this nineteenth century. We turn, therefore, to the varieties of the worship offered to the one true God. And first to look at the particular case before us. The mother of Micah seems to have been in her way a devout woman. The scraping together 1100 shekels was probably not effected without considerable effort and self-denial, for it was a large sum (more than 110), eleven times the yearly wages of the Levite. She meant to consecrate it to Jehovah, the God of Israel. She seems too to have been a good mother, for she intended this consecration to be for her son’s benefit, and her language and conduct, when her son confessed his guilt, were pious and forgiving. And yet we find her disobeying the express command of God, and making a graven and a molten image to be used in his worship and service. In like manner we find Micah giving signs of a tender conscience and of the fear of God in confessing his sin when adjured according to the law; we find him anxious for the favour of God, and looking to him to do him good; we find him liberal and large-hearted in providing at his own expense for the worship of God; and yet, with a strange inconsistency, we find him doing the very things which God’s word forbad, and setting’ up images, and teraphim, and a superstitious ephod in a “house of God” of his own devising, and under a priest of his own consecration. In like manner again we find even Aaron making a golden calf for the people to worship, and saying, or encouraging the people to say, “This is thy God, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt,” and building an altar before it, and keeping a feast in its honour. We read of the golden calves of Jeroboam, and we read too of the high places and the sacrifices upon them even under the pious kings. These then are distinct examples of the superstitious worship of the true God, and lead us to the anxious question, how we are to worship God. Under the Old Testament this was not left to chance or human choice. In the nonage of the Church, before the coming of Christ, all the ordinances of Divine service were prescribed with minuteness and exactness. The sanctuary itself, the Aaronic priesthood, the Levitical ministrations, the feasts of the Lord, the gifts and offerings and devotions of the people, were all ordered by the authority of the word of God. But under the New Testament, when the fulness of the time is come, and the Church has entered into the full possession of the privileges of adopted sons, it is so no longer. Besides a few general principles and broad rules, and the institution of the two sacraments, and the Lord’s Prayer, the Church has received from Holy Scripture no form of Divine service. She has to frame her rules and canons of Divine worship according to the light and wisdom vouchsafed to her by the Holy Spirit of God. In doing this she must have regard to two things.
1. The character and mind of God, so that the worship may be of a kind that will be pleasing and acceptable to him.
2. The nature and character of man, so that the worship may be of a kind to assist the worshipper to raise his heart to God, and impress him with a sense of the majesty, and holiness, and goodness of God. With regard to the first, the general intimations of him who alone knows the things of God, even the Holy Spirit of God, are very clear. “God is a spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” “Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.” “To do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased” (see too Mic 6:6-8). Every attempt to substitute costly gifts, or gorgeous ceremonies, or showy processions, or lights, or music, or gestures, or anything bodily and sensuous, for the ritual of repentance, faith, fear, love, and self-consecrationconsecration of the will and affectionsto the service of Almighty God can only be made in ignorance of his character and mind as revealed to us in Holy Scripture. It is as truly superstitious as were Micah’s images, and teraphim, and ephod, and house of God. With regard to the second, the outward accessories of worship must be of a kind to assist the worshipper in his endeavour to draw near to God and worship him with all the powers of his soul. Under the pretence of purely spiritual worship, it is very easy so to get rid of all outward acts and circumstances as to get rid of worship itself. The light of religion in the soul cannot burn unless in an atmosphere which feeds the flame. Reverence and awe, prayer and praise, forgetfulness of the world, and thoughts of heaven need to be quickened and encouraged by the posture of the body, by the words of the lips, by sights and sounds expressive of those invisible things which the soul seeks to handle in its approaches to the throne of God. It is therefore a legitimate subject of consideration what forms of worship are most calculated to increase and heighten the devotion of the worshippers. Forms which tend merely to please the senses are worthless; forms which tend to soothe the conscience of the impenitent, and to stifle its questionings by creating a feeling of duty performed and of satisfaction made to God, are pernicious; and forms which so fill the thoughts as to the manner of performing them as to leave no room for thoughts of God are injuries rather than benefits to the soul Forms, again, which leave the soul self-satisfied, which convey a false impression of God’s favour and grace being given when he is really displeased and offended, and which comfort and encourage those who ought to be horribly afraid and trembling for fear of God’s judgments, are manifestly destructive of the souls of those for whose benefit they purport to exist. A faithful Church will root up all such as dishonouring to God and as very hurtful to man. One other characteristic of superstitious worship must be noted. It is compatible with vice, and with the dominion of sin in the heart. Superstition has no tendency to correct the principles of action, or to purify the thoughts and affections of the inner man. The sequel of Micah’s history supplies a notable instance of this. The Danites, in their superstitious desire to possess the images of Micah’s chapel, and the religious services of Micah’s priest, scrupled not to break the commandments of God by stealing, and, if need were, by committing murder. Stealing sacred relics and transporting them by guile or violence from one religious house to another is a well-known form of mediaeval superstition. The brigands in the mountains of Italy have been often known to kneel before an image of the Virgin, and ask the blessing of the priest or bishop, and then return to their work of plunder or murder. Superstition is no check upon the passions, and no bar to the reckless pursuit of what men deem to be their interests or know to be their desires. There is no gulf between superstitious worship and immoral conduct. The man who mistakes the aspect of God towards superstitious vanities is prone to mistake also his aspect towards moral disorder and sin. But he who really enters into the tabernacle of God. and communes with God in spirit, comes forth with his face shining with inward righteousness, the reflection of God’s glory in the face of Jesus Christ. His life is a continuation of his prayers, his praise culminates in good works. In the interests of moral goodness, as well as for the honour of God, it is of supreme importance that the worship of the Almighty be free from superstition.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR
Jdg 17:1-13
The history of a man-made ministry
1. Its genesis. It belongs to the main design of the book to show how the various disruptive tendencies of a religious and social nature increased unchecked when “there was no king in Israel.” The book begins with a note of unity”the children of Israel asked Jehovah.” Repeated idolatrous defections are chronicled, and mention made of the setting up of an ephod in Ophrah: the city of Gideon, and its evil consequences. In one respect the schisms from the national religion were even more dangerous than complete departure from it. The unity of Israel was thus destroyed in its chief sanction and sign, the universal sacrifice and confession at Shiloh. Another of these schismatic points of departure is here related. The description is full of realistic force, and is governed by the dogmatic purpose of exposing the immoral motives of it, and thus discrediting it in the eyes of every true Israelite. It is exposed as the private and selfish appropriation of a national blessing. As the political unity of Israel depended upon maintaining a central religious authority and a uniform ritual and priesthood, the setting up of a house of gods was in itself, irrespectively of its motives, a crime of the first magnitude. The New Testament idea of Church and ministry is different. There the unity of the Spirit is the prevailing aim. But whenever separation originates in similar motives to those here depicted, the sin of schism equally exists.
I. THE CHARACTER OF ITS AUTHORS. Avaricious mother, dishonest son. Both superstitious. Not honesty, but fear of a curse, actuates Micah to restore the “eleven hundred shekels.” The getting back of the money is the chief concern of the mother, and so she straightway blesses whom she had cursed (cf. Jas 3:10). Only 200 shekels are actually appropriated to the end proposed.
II. ITS MOTIVES. Apparently the warding off of the curse is the first concern with both. But an equally powerful motive was the securing of the gain resulting from fees and gifts. In this way they would become rich. Where the aim is selfish and impure, the character of the worship becomes of secondary consequence, and the latent tendency towards idolatry begins to show itself. It is the motive that is of chief concern in questions of religion. Everything else will be dominated by this: “Is it for self, or is the glory of God my chief aim?” Founders of churches and religious institutions, and candidates for the ministry, should examine themselves ere they are committed to the work upon which they have set their hearts.
III. THE COMPLEXION OF THE WORSHIP. It is a “house of gods,” containing a “graven image and a molten image,” an ephod, and teraphim, which is the outcome of their religious or superstitious zeal. In its nature eclectic, in the crudest sense of the word, this system of religious worship is on the face of it a sacred means to a vulgar, secular end. The house became a place of irregular worship, of soothsaying and divination.
IV. THE INSTRUMENT OF THEIR DESIGNS. A son is the first expedient in the direction of a priesthood; but this is not considered sufficiently authoritative. Accident throws in the way a young Levite of Bethlehem-judah, who appears to have taken to a wandering life through discontent, curiosity, idleness, or restlessness. A shiftless, unscrupulous, easily impressible character, in a needy condition, and with the Levitical status, just the fitting occupant of such an office. The undue influence of Micah is thus secured permanently. Promising that he should be a “father and a priest,” and receive clothing, board, and “ten shekels” wages, to the needy adventurer “making his way” he thus becomes patron; and the promised standing of the priest relatively to Micah is soon reversedhe “was unto him as one of his sons.” The consecration too is from Micah. The good and the evil of patronage, private and otherwise, in religion; the dependence of the ministry”like people like priest;” the question of “consecration” and “orders.”
V. THE SUPERSTITIOUS PRESUMPTION OF FALSE RELIGION. There is the more care as to the external ritual, the priestly “succession,” etc. in proportion to the earthliness of the underlying motive.
1. Where he heart is wrong undue reliance is placed upon externals in religion. The priest’s advantage of descent was vitiated by his becoming a mercenary and a schismatic. Rites and ceremonies are multiplied in default of the “Presence” at Shiloh and its simple service. The error is in placing the virtue in the external observances instead of the reality of worship, purity of life and motive, and the presence of the Spirit of God. Romanism has been defined as “a system of position and imposition, or of posture and imposture.”
2. Jehovah is supposed to countenance a religion which is essentially opposed to him. God cannot take rank or be associated with other gods. His glory must be the chief object of the worshipper, the priest, and the patron. Selfish aims, disobedience to his clearly-revealed will concerning his service and Church, can never receive his blessing. Yet observe the self-deception of Micah. He does not see all this, or the evils soon to come upon him. On the other hand, “the pure in heart“ shall see God. His presence is independent of the external completeness, etc. of ritual. True priesthood is a Divine unction, and not a human monopoly.M.
HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY
Jdg 17:1-4
Avarice and superstition.
The story of Micah and his mother illustrates the strange blending of avarice and superstition which may be observed in those people who have lowered themselves to a worldly habit of life without entirely losing the influence of religion.
I. WHEN RELIGION SINKS INTO SUPERSTITION, ITS UNWORLDLY SPIRIT IS QUENCHED AND AVARICE IS UNRESTRAINED. The religion of Israel is now most degraded, and one result of its degradation is seen in a corresponding lowering of morality. Great devotion to a superstitious religious system is not incompatible with a very low tone of moral life.
1. This is seen in the avarice of Micah‘s mother,
(1) Tempting to deception, if not complete dishonesty, on the part of the son,
(2) giving rise to unseemly temper and blind cursing on her own side, and
(3) to a mean and unworthy attempt at restoring family peace by a compromise between selfish greed and religious devotion200 shekels only are devoted to the image, and, though Micah had intended all to go to this object, the remaining 900 shekels are retained by the mother.
2. The same degradation of morality is seen in the unworthy conduct of the young man. He shows no confidence in his mother. He thinks he can honour God with the proceeds of deception. It is only under a dark religion of superstition that we can suppose the end to justify the meansa sacrificial object to excuse domestic fraud.
II. WHEN, UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A WORLDLY SPIRIT, AVARICE IS UNRESTRAINED, RELIGION TENDS TO SINK INTO SUPERSTITION. Covetousness is idolatry (Col 3:5). The habit of setting the affections on earthly things blinds the soul to the perception of pure spiritual truth. This is seen in the story of Micah and his mother.
1. Micah displays a dread of his mother‘s curse, but no consciousness of guilt. His confession and restitution are not the result of repentance, but of superstitious fear.
2. His mother shows no grief at the revelation of his conduct, but only delight at seeing the money, and a desire to remove the effect of her curse by pronouncing a blessing on her son.
3. Subsequently the young man dreads to touch the money which is affected with his mother s curse, though she offers it to him, and she feels bound to use it, or part of it, in the service of God.
4. Religious feelings do not seem to affect the moral conduct of either person, but only to incline them to image-making. Thus worldly greed drags down religion till this becomes merely a worldly habit of gross idolatry and magic spells. We may see in the present day religions of mere ritual and superstitious practices attracting the most worldly people, and not restraining, but rather shaping themselves into the mould of their low and earthly affections.A.
Jdg 17:6
No king.
The writer of the Book of Judges more than once attributes the social disorders of Israel to the want of a king. This idea has its bearings on national interests and on private conduct.
I. THE NEED OF A KING IN CONNECTION WITH NATIONAL INTERESTS.
1. A centre of authority is essential to the peace arid prosperity of a nation. As the first duty of a government is to maintain order, so the need of authority and organisation for the maintenance of order makes the establishment of a government essential to a nation. This is necessary,
(1) to punish violence and crime,
(2) to restrain the unjust encroachment of one man upon the rights of another,
(3) to arbitrate between the conflicting claims of individual men and of great classes of the community,
(4) to promote national objects which are too large for private enterprise, and
(5) to cement the unity of the nation and organise this for defence against foreign invasion.
2. When a nation is not prepared for self-government it is best for it to be ruled by one strong hand. Apart from political requisites, certain moral conditions must be fulfilled before a people can practise self-government. There must be unity of sympathy and self-control. Neither of these conditions was fulfilled by the tribes of Israel in the days of the Judges. Mutual jealousy and antagonism prevailed among them, and violent measures were too common for the minority to submit peaceably to the will of the majority. The spiritual vision of the Divine King which had maintained the unity of the nation in the days of Moses was fading away, and now that sublime and unearthly government was nearly lost, there was no hope for the people but in the establishment of a human monarchy. It is foolish to maintain in words an ideal which is too high for practice. Better confess our degeneracy and shape our conduct according to the means within reach.
II. THE NEED OF A KING IN CONNECTION WITH PRIVATE CONDUCT. The soul needs a king. We are born to obey. We need some authority above us to keep us right.
1. It is not safe for every man to do what is right in his own eyes, because
(1) we are swayed by passion and selfish greed, and
(2) in our best moments we are liable to prejudice, and are too short-sighted to see what is best. The anarchy of universal self-seeking without restraint would bring the world to ruin. For the good of all it is necessary that each should not be at liberty simply to please himself.
2. It is not right for every man to do that which is right in his own eyes. We are members one of another, and are morally bound to respect the rights, and needs, and wishes of our neighbours. We are children of the great King, and under a supreme obligation to respect his law. The Church is not a republic; it is a kingdom. The Christian is not free to follow his fancy; he is required to submit to and to obey the mind and will of Christ. Christian liberty is not found in the license of self-will, but in the willingness of obedience and the love which delights to fulfil the will of God and to do to others as we would that they should do to us.A.
Jdg 17:13
Faith in the priest.
I. FAITH IN THE PRIEST IMPLIES A DESIRE FOR GOD‘S BLESSING. The priest is trusted for his influence with God. He is sought after because God’s blessing is desired. So far the faith in the priest indicates good qualities. It is a sign of religious ideas, though these are vague and perverted. There is something pathetic in Micah’s utterance. Now at last he may expect blessing. His mother’s graven image did not secure this; his temple and its elaborate worship left him dissatisfied; but he can have no rest till he is assured that God is blessing him. He is wealthy, but wealth will not satisfy him without the blessing of God. So he presses on to find this one source of true peace. How many men are ready to mock at Micah’s superstition who have no gleam of his true faith I It is better to be seeking the blessing of God, though in mistaken ways, than, while discerning the folly of these ways by the light of a cold rationalism, to be dead to any yearnings for the supreme good.
II. FAITH IN THE PRIEST IMPLIES A CONSCIOUS NEED OF AN INTERCESSOR. All priestly religions spring out of a true instinct of conscience. They are not simply the fabrications of a tyrannical priestcraft. Religion requires a priest. It is right to feel, like Micah, unworthy and unable to obtain God’s blessings for ourselves, and, like him, to look for an intercessor. Christianity is based on these ideas; it is the religion of a mediator, a priest. Christ satisfies this desire to seek God’s blessing through the help of another, through the work of a priest (Heb 6:20).
III. FAITH IN THE PRIEST IMPLIES SUPERSTITIOUS TRUST IN RELIGIOUS OFFICIALISM. The error is to be found,
(1) in choosing a merely human priest, and
(2) in placing a wrong kind of trust in him, and not simply in believing in the idea of priesthood.
1. This priestly superstition expects blessings irrespective of the character of the print. Micah has had a priest beforehis own son. He has no reason to believe that the Levite is a better man. He only knows that he belongs to the sacred tribe of temple officials. This is characteristic of the superstition of priestliness. It supposes that the office sanctifies the man, not the man the office. It looks for good from the priest simply through his official functions. Christ is a priest not by reason of birth or anointing (he was not of the tribe of Levi), but by reason of nature, and character, and work.
2. This priestly superstition expects blessings apart from the religious character of the recipient. Micah believes that the mere presence of the Levite in his house will benefit him. He does not think of the Levite influencing his character for good. So there are people who imagine the priest can do them good apart from their own character and conduct. But Christ, the true Priest, only brings to us the blessings secured by his sacrifice and intercession when we submit to him so as to receive a new birth to a holy life.A.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
CHAP. XVII.
Micah, an Ephraimite, restores the money which he had taken from his mother; from which she commands a graven image to be made; Micah hires a Levite to be his priest.
Before Christ 1426.
Jdg 17:1. And there was a man of mount Ephraim The second part of the book of Judges begins here; containing an account of several transactions in and about the time of the judges, which the sacred historian omitted in their proper order, that he might not interrupt the thread of a narrative relating to the transactions of the whole nation.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
PART THIRD
The conclusion of the Book, tracing the evils of the period, the decay of the priesthood, the self-will of individuals, and the prevalence of licentiousness, passion, and discord, to the absence of a fixed and permanent form of government.
__________________
FIRST SECTION
The History Of Micahs Private Temple And Image-worship: Showing The Individual Arbitrariness Of The Times, And Its Tendency To Subvert And Corrupt The Religious Institutions Of Israel
__________________
Micah, a man of Mount Ephraim, sets up a private sanctuary and engages a wandering Levite to be his Priest
Jdg 17:1-13
1And there was a man of Mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah [Micayehu]. 2And he said unto his mother, The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from thee,1 about which thou cursedst, and spakest of also in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it. And his mother said, Blessed be thou of the Lord 3[Jehovah], my son. And when he had [And he] restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, [and] his mother said, I had wholly dedicated2 the silver unto the Lord [Jehovah] from my hand for my son, to make a graven image 4and a molten image:3 now therefore I will restore it unto thee. Yet [And] he restored the money [silver] unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah [Micayehu]. 5And the man Micah had an house of gods [a Beth Elohim, Gods-house], and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated [appointed] one of his sons, who [and he] became his priest. 6In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. 7And there was a young man out of Beth-lehem-judah of the family of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned there [temporarily] 8And the man departed out of the city from [out of] Beth-lehem-judah, to sojourn where he could find a place: and he came to mount Ephraim to the house of Micah, as he journeyed. 9And Micah said unto him, Whence comest thou? And he said unto him, I am a Levite of Beth-lehem-judah, and I go to sojourn where I may find a place. 10And Micah said unto him, Dwell [Abide] with me, and be unto me a father and a priest, and I will give thee ten shekels of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel, and thy victuals. So the Levite went in. 11And the Levite was content [consented] to dwell with the man, and the young man was [became] unto him as one of his sons. 12And Micah consecrated [appointed] the Levite; and the young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah. 13Then said Micah, Now know I that the Lord [Jehovah] will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to [seeing the Levite has become] my priest.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Jdg 17:2.** is the dat. incommodi. Strictly speaking, simply marks some sort of relation, the exact nature of which must be otherwise determined. The present phrase, rendered as literally as possible, is: which (sc. ) was taken for thee, cf. our popular use of the same phrase, and the German, welches dir genommen ward. Ewald (who with characteristic self-confidence announces that he must leave the silly absurdity of the ordinary explanation of this passage to those who do not hesitate to find their own folly in the Bible,) seems to take as the dative of the author: the money taken (received) by thee from my father. For he relates, quite in historical style, that a young man of Mount Ephraim, whose father probably died early, took the money which had been left to his mother into his own hands, in order by using to increase it (!); and that, followed by his mothers blessing, he was fortunate, and was about to restore the money to her, as became a dutiful son, when she made him a present of it in the shape of a handsome (schmucken) god, etc. The perfect , he says, is the perfect of volition (like , Jdg 17:3): I will take; it is my will to take. But if the Hebrew author meant to tell this story, he expressed himself very obscurely. The imprecatory oath, too, is thus left without explanation. And notwithstanding all Ewalds efforts in behalf of him, Micah is still in suspicious possession of the money ( ), before he tells his mother that he will take it. Under such circumstances, the benediction which, according to Ewald, the mother pronounces on her son, might be more politic than free.Tr.]
[2 Jdg 17:3. . Render: I verily dedicate. Although Dr. Cassel also translates here by the pluperfect, he explains it of the present, see below. On this use of the perfect cf. Ges. Gram. 126, 4. The word wholly of the E. V. is better omitted. The infin. absolute in this construction is intensive, not extensive. It does not assert the completeness of the consecration, but simply makes it prominent, as being the use to which she determines to put the money. Cf. Ges. 131, 3.Tr.]
[3 Jdg 17:3. . Dr. Cassel: Bild und Gusswerk, image and cast-work; i.e., an image of wood or stone covered with a thin coating of silver or gold, see below. This explanation, although concurred in by several critics, is not yet sufficiently certain to make it worth while to disfigure our English text by inserting it.Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
After the story of Samsons heroic life and death, there follow in conclusion two narratives, of which the first embraces chaps. 17 and 18, the second chaps. 1921. Though not connected with each other either by time or place, they are nevertheless not mere accidental appendages to the preceding historical narrative, but essential parts of the well-considered organism of the entire Book, in consequence of which also they received the position in which we find them. The profound pragmatism of the Book (see Introduction, sect. 1) designs to show, that the heroic period of the Judges is full indeed of the wonders of Gods compassion, but lacks that organic centralization and unity which only the kingly office, rightly instituted and rightly exercised, could afford. This want manifested itself even under the greatest Judges. The influence of the Judge extended, for the most part, only over the individual tribes to which he be longed, while in others it was not seldom resisted; and, being wholly personal in its nature, disappeared from his house as soon as he died.
In chaps. 17 and 18 another lesson is brought forward, hints of which had already occurred in earlier parts of the Book. The religious central point of the nation, also, became unsettled. And this was the greater danger. The sanctuary at Shiloh, the law and covenant of God that were in the sacred ark, were the real pillars of Israels nationality. The existence of this spiritual unity was brought out in the opening sentence of the Book: And after the death of Joshua, the sons of Israel asked Jehovah. It had in dark times demonstrated itself to be the guaranty of national cohesion. The tribes were twelve, indeed, and their cities lay scattered from Beer-sheba to the sources of the Jordan; but there was but one sanctuary where the God of Israel was inquired of. It appeared, however, that the long-continued want of a closer political organization, threatened also the unity of the religious organism. For not only was the service of foreign idols introduced, threatening the nerve of popular strength and national freedom, but subjective superstition, also, and inconsiderate division, asserted themselves within the religious organization. This is shown by the story of Micahs sanctuary.
Jdg 17:1. And there was a man of mount Ephraim, and his name was Micayehu. Avarice, the Apostle tells us, is the root of all evil. Covetousness, like all sin, knows no shame. Its lustful eyes profane even that which is holy. The treasures of temples have ever excited the rapacity of savage enemies. The gifts of the pious convert houses of prayer into objects of envy. Faithful Israelites, who believed in Jehovah, went to Shiloh, in Ephraim, performed there their pious duties, inquired of God after truth, prayed, and brought their offerings for the honor and maintenance of the house of God. Among those who did this, was doubtless also the father of Micayehu. For that he confessed Jehovah, is evident from the name which he gave to his son: , who is like Jehovah. Such names are only given in homes where Jehovah is honored, at least in appearance. The mere fact, however, that persons are named Theodore,4 Nathaniel, Theophilus, or other like names, gives no assurance that they are what their names declare them to be. The father of Micayehu must also have been rich; for he left his widow large sums of money. The latter, according to all appearances, was avaricious; and it was probably on this account that true faith in Jehovah took no root in her heart, although the name of Jehovah was often on her lips.
Jdg 17:2-3. Behold, here is the money; I took it. The rich woman had been deprived of a large sum of money. Eleven hundred shekels, at that time, evidently represented a very considerable amount; large enough to be spoken of in round figures. The woman was beside herself; her soul was in her money: and so she cursed the thief. Cursing is still a frightful oriental custom. It was regarded as an invocation of judgments from heaven. Hence, the dread of the effects of curses, in heathenism, arose not only from faith, but still more from superstition. The sin was indeed engaged in, but the curse was dreaded; just as other thieves do not refrain from stealing, but guard themselves anxiously against the police. To this must be added that parental curses were feared as the heaviest of all bans (among the Greeks cf. Ngelsbach, Nachhom. Theol., p. 350). Sirach (iii. 9) still said in his day, that the curse of a mother overturns the houses of children. Micah heard the awful imprecations of his mothers malediction, and shuddered. He could not say, a causeless curse takes no effect (Pro 26:2). He had taken the money, which was now charged with his mothers curses. With these he will not have it. Here is your money back, he says; I took it. As one shakes off rain, so he would free himself of this curse-laden money. It is thy son, he says, and his house, whom thou hast cursed. Take the moneyI do not wish it. His words, so far as we can see, express more of reproach than of consciousness of guilt. And the mother resembles those people of whom James says (Jdg 3:10): Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. She had cursed, in inconsiderate wrath, and without investigation, on account of her lost money. That being recovered, she will save her son from the effects of her malediction. As if blessing and curse were under human control, she exclaims: Blessed be thou, my son, unto Jehovah.
The son was in any case wrong in taking the money secretly. The purpose for which he took it, seems to be indicated by the context and the speech of the mother. He wished it for the purpose which he afterwards carried out. This also explains sufficiently why he took it secretly: he probably did not believe that his mother would approve his design. For the preparation of pesel and massekah, an image and cast-work, for the purpose he had in view, was itself a theft, notwithstanding that it looked like an act of service to God. But it turned out differently. It was natural that his mother should ask for what purpose he had taken it; and he replies that he had destined it for Jehovah, to fit out a private sanctuary with an image and cast-work. The mother, in order to appease him, says: then do I consecrate it for Jehovah, from my hand for my son (the formula of dedication), that he may make an image and cast-work;5 now therefore take the money. Hereupon there arises a genuine contest of superstition. He is now afraid of the curse-laden money. And she is in dread lest the frustration of the seemingly religious end for which her son intended to use it, should fall back upon herself. He has excused his theft with the word Jehovah; and she seeks to cover up her curse with it. Superstition thus shows itself to be the worst profanation, transmuting eternal truth into subjective personal interest.
Jdg 17:4. And his mother took two hundred shekels of silver. Micah had once more refused the money. He still fears the curse that it may bring with it. Thereupon the mother causes the image and cast-work to be made; applying, however, not 1,100 shekels, but only 200. This shows that it was only avarice, and not the fact that she had dedicated the money to religious purposes, that had inspired her curse. For even now she cannot part with more than 200 shekels out of the 1,100. On the other hand, it becomes evident that the purpose for which Micah took the money was the manufacture of the image; for it is set up in his house, and he combines with it still other operations.
Jdg 17:5. And he set up an ephod and teraphim. These words give the key to the whole transaction, and even afford a clew to the time in which it took place. The paternal house of Micah, it appears, had not openly broken with the service of Jehovah. This is clear from both his and his mothers words (Jdg 17:2-3; Jdg 17:13). But their hearts were not wholly with God. This is evident from her avarice and malediction. Theirs was not a house in which the Canaanitish Baal was sacrificed to; but neither was it one in which there was more of true religion than the form and name. In the house of Joash there stood, before Gideon destroyed it, an altar of Baal and an Asherah. That was not the case here. But selfishness and superstitious egoism are idolatrous in their nature and consequences, even when Jehovah, that is, the God of Israel, is still spoken of. What R. Juda Hallevi6 says of Micah and others, applies especially to him: He resembles a man who, while incestuously marrying his sister, should strictly observe the customary laws of marriage. He makes use of the name of God, but for that which is vanity (, Exo 20:7). He made an ephod. The sin of which he was thus guilty, lay not in the ephod, but in the fact that he set it up. The ephod was designed for the lawful priesthood. The Urim and Thummim were intended for Israels high-priests (Exo 28:30), in order that by means of them they might be the constant organ of objective divine wisdom for the whole people, at the place where they served before God. Hence, they neither could nor ought to serve the subjective interests of individual men or tribes, or be inquired of anywhere else than where the priest was who bore them on his heart. This fact also renders the meaning of Jdg 8:27 clear, where it is related that after Gideon had set up an ephod with the golden booty obtained from the Midianites, all Israel went a-whoring after it, and found a snare in it. Gideon, it is true, served Jehovah sincerely and truly, and meant only that his ephod should serve as a reminder to the people of the wonderful deeds of God; but in setting it up, he nevertheless introduced a precedent which subjective superstition misused to its own hurt. For, inasmuch as he set it up in his own house, he gave occasion for others to think that they also might do the same in their houses. The deeds in consequence of which he instituted the ephod were soon lost sight of; and the eye was directed only to the money out of which it proceeded. It may be assumed that precisely for Micah Gideons example proved a source of danger,for which, however, the blame falls not on the hero, but on Micah. We thus obtain a clew to the time in which the event here related occurred. Micah was a man of Ephraim who lived not long after the days of Gideon. There was pride enough in Ephraim to arrogate to itself the right of doing what was done, however grandly and nobly, in the smaller tribe of Manasseh. It is at all times the practice of paltry selfishness to dishonor the extraordinary actions of great men, by using them as cloaks for their own mean ends. Gideon destroyed the altar of Baal secretly, and for this purpose made use of his fathers people and means without his fathers knowledge. Micah probably excused himself by this example, when he secretly took his mothers money, in order to set up that which in his own interest he destined for God.
The anarchy of arbitrary individualism exhibits itself very strikingly here, in the fact that a mere common man ( , Jdg 17:1), without name or merit, has the presumption to do the same thing which Gideon, the Judge and Deliverer of Israel, had undertaken to do; and that he does it on the same mountains of Ephraim on which, at no great distance, in Shiloh, the ark of God and the lawful ephod were to be found. R. Nathan7 thinks that the places were so near to each other, that the smoke from both sanctuaries might commingle, as it rose upward. A mere common man, who had nothing but money, presumed to found a sanctuary, with an ephod and a priest, and to pass this off as an oracle of Jehovah. The object he had in view can hardly have been any other than to ensnare the people who, in the pressure of their religious needs, sought for instruction, and brought votive offerings and gifts. For this purpose, the house which he founded must have been assimilated to the tabernacle; yet not so completely as to be attractive only to the thoroughly pious worshippers of Jehovah. For as these would not under any circumstances visit any sanctuary but that at Shiloh, Micahs house would then have failed of its purpose. It could be made attractive only by making it minister to the superstition of sensual worship, and by vesting this ministry in the forms of the service of Jehovah. Hence he speaks of consecration to Jehovah, but at the same time represents the latter by means of (an image and cast-work). He set up an ephod, and supplemented it with teraphim. He needed a priest; and in the absence of a Levite, he himself selects one of his sons for the office. Every part of his proceeding is thus marked by subjective arbitrariness, which under pious names concealed self-interest and superstition. The narrator strikingly points out this his sin, by means of a few delicate strokes. Hitherto the man had always been called Micayehu, distinctly bearing the name of Jehovah. But from Jdg 17:5, where he sets up his sanctuary, onward, he is only spoken of as Micah. The name of God was not to be desecrated in him. And although Micah speaks of Jehovah (Jdg 5:13), his house is only called a Beth Elohim,a name also given to the temples of heathen deities,not Beth Jehovah, house of Jehovah. No description is given of what the goldsmith shaped out of the mothers two hundred pieces of money; but it is called , an image and cast-work. These words at the same time pronounce judgment against the sin that had been committed, for they are the technical expressions under which the law forbids the making of every kind of image-work for idolatrous purposes. The narrator has his eye doubtless on Deu 27:15 : Cursed () is the man that maketh , an abomination unto Jehovah, the work of the hands of the artificer. He intimates, assuredly, that the same man who stood in such dread of his mothers curse on the thief of her money, rendered himself obnoxious to the more awful curse of the divine law, when he desired, or at any rate accepted, such image-work. The form of the image cannot, however, be determined with certainty. The opinion that it represented a calf, is certainly not tenable. It is not true that Jehovah, the God of Israel, was ever or anywhere represented under the figure of a bull or calf. On the contrary, this figure was symbolical of a contrast, a national and historical contrast, with Jehovah. This appears both from the golden calf of the desert and from the history of Jeroboam.8 To infer from the analogy of the latter, that Micah also cast a calf, would likewise be erroneous. For Micahs act has no national, but only a religious significance. He does not intend to set up a contrast to Jehovah, but only a superstitious syncretism with other sanctuaries. Had the image been a calf, the narrator would have taken occasion to say so; for that of itself, in its relation to the idolatry of the desert, would have indicated the nature of Micahs sin. Since it must be assumed that Micah intended to establish a sort of tabernacle, it is to be supposed that in his image-work also he carried out this imitation to the extreme of superstition. In the tabernacle, on the [mercy-seat] there were two cherubim, with outspread wings; and in Exo 25:22, God says: I will speak with thee from upon the kapporeth [mercy-seat], from between the two cherubim. Now, if Micah, while in general imitating this arrangement, transformed the cherubim into sphinx-like figures, such as were found in Egyptian temples, and symbolyzed (as Clem. Alex., Strom, lib. v. Judges 5, well explains,) the mysterious problems concerning the Deity, which received their solution at the hands of the priests, he would at the same time minister to the superstition of the time. And it was especially the establishment of an oracle that Micah had in view. The verb means to cut, to chisel, especially in wood, to carve; for the image, , can be burnt (Deu 7:5; Deu 7:25), or sawed in pieces (Deu 12:3). is the coating of gold with which the image was covered (cf. Ewald, Alterthmer, p. 256, 2d edit.), and is therefore oftenest mentioned in connection with pesel, but frequently also without it. Such wooden images (called , by the Greeks), says K. O. Mller (Archologie, 69), were adorned with chaplets and diadems, neck-chains, and ear-pendants. To this the lawgiver refers, when he says (Deu 7:25): The images of their gods ye shall burn with fire; thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them. Beside the ephod Micah also made teraphim. This addition shows that he designed the ephod for divining purposes. The subject of the teraphim has hitherto remained enveloped in a great deal of obscurity. From Eze 21:26 (21), 2Ki 23:24, and Hos 3:4, (cf. also 1Sa 15:23), it is certain that they were consulted, like oracles. They were shaped like human beings, see 1Sa 19:13; and they were small, otherwise Rachel could not have concealed them (Gen 31:34). Antiquity conceived of every thing connected with divination as wrapped in darkness and mystery. The heathen oracle issued out of the depth and darkness in enigmatic language. At Megara, there was an oracle of the goddess Night, represented as a high and closely veiled figure. The little teraphim also must have borne about them tokens of their mysterious nature. We may venture to recognize them in the little shapes of Greek art, enveloped in a thick mantle and hat, who constantly accompany the figures of sculapius, the divining god of the healing art (where also the tablets usually appear, symbolic of the responses of the god. Mller, Archol., 394, 1). Among the various names given to these attendant figures by the Greeks, is that of Telesphoros, end-bringing.9 It is well known that oracles were most frequently consulted with reference to physical ailments. In Israel, also, in days of apostacy, idols were applied to for healing (2Ki 1:2). The teraphim, accordingly, appear to represent oracles of healing. Their name, at all events, teraphim (trophim), approximates closely to that of Trophonius,10 for which also the Greek language affords no suitable etymology. Trophonius is the healing oracle, who delivered his responses in a dark chasm, and who, like sculapius, is represented with a serpent, from which he probably derived his name (cf. ). The relationship of teraphim and seraphim is plain enough. The serpent-divination of Greece is manifestly of Asiatic origin. That the Israelites offered incense to the healing serpent erected by Moses, we learn from the history of Hezekiah, who destroyed it (2Ki 18:4). The teraphim, then, explain themselves and some other matters, when we regard them as Telesphoroi, possessed of oracular healing attributes. Every passage in which they appear is in this way fully explained.
Jdg 17:6. In those days there was no king in Israel. There was no central civil authority, that could interpose against sin and its seductive arts. The sentence teaches that in Israel it was considered the office of the king, not to allow such arbitrariness and sin as those of Micah to assert themselves. It was regarded as a mark of anarchy, when, alongside of the sanctuary at Shiloh, a common man took it upon himself to seduce the people into superstition. It must, however, be said, that even though the worship of God in Shiloh was strong enough to face such dangers, it is nevertheless presumptively a sign of weakness in the contemporary ministers of that worship, that Micah had the courage to do as he did. The complaint of our verse is made, because in reality Micah sinned against the very foundations of the Mosaic faith and law. It is not the freedom which permitted a man to have a chapel of his own, that is lamented; but the license which enabled him to fit out an idol-temple, to establish an oracle, and arbitrarily to disfigure the genuine national cultus. For the rest, the utterance is one that could be made only when the kingly office was either expected to exhibit or had exhibited, its efficiency in protecting the law in its purity. It was possible only until the most flourishing point of Solomons reign, and probable only in the times when men were seeking a king to remedy the prevalent anarchy.
Jdg 17:7-12. And there was a Levite. Micah probably found that his sanctuary lacked consideration, because it had no priest. There were priests enough in Ephraim, to be sure; but it would seem that none of them were willing to serve himwhich redounds to their honor. Assistance came to him, however, from another quarter. A young man, who according to rule was settled in Judah ( , cf. Jos 21:4), became discontented at home, and took to travelling about, after the manner of a scholar in the Middle Ages. He stopped some time in Bethlehem, but left that place also; and on his way over the mountains of Ephraim, he came to Micah. The position of Micahs sanctuary must have been a favorable one, near the highways from south to north; for the Danites, who came from Eshtaol and Zorah, and the young Levite, who came from Bethlehem, passed by it. Micah, hearing that the Levite was unengaged, proposed to him to take service with himself. The proposition was made sufficiently inviting. The young man was to be honored as a father (, pater), become a priest, and be placed in good circumstances. Vanity, and the offer of a good place led the young Levite astray,and he was not the last who fell thus. He forgot who he was (see at Jdg 18:30), and whom as Levite he ought to serve, and consented (, cf. on Jdg 1:27). Micah took him in with great joy; so that, even beyond his promises, he received him as one of his sons,an expression which stands in suggestive contrast with Micahs promise to regard him as a father. For the sake of money, the Levite submitted to be consecrated, ordained, by an Ephraimite. (The words are a standing expression for to induct, to ordain The expression is derived (as Exo 29:33 compared with 17:24 clearly shows), from the ceremony of laying the offerings required at the consecration of a priest upon his hands, , Exo 29:24). At all events, Micah valued the Levitical dignity more highly than the Levite himself did. When the latter had entered his house, he exclaimed:
Jdg 17:13. Now know I that Jehovah will do me good, seeing the Levite, has become my priest. These words indicate most strikingly, the thorough self-deception of the man. He looks for blessings to Jehovah, against whom he has committed the mortal sin of image-worship. He expects these blessings on account of a Levite, who did wrong when he allowed himself to be hired. He who sets up ephod and teraphim for the enlightenment of others, has himself so little insight into the spirit of truth as not to perceive that in the falsehood of his entire establishment its downfall is already assured. Perhaps, he also found pleasure in the descent of his Levite (Jdg 18:30), although it ought rather to have frightened him. But self-love blinds him, and his soiled conscience builds hopes on the name of a Levite, whose doings in his house challenged the judgments of God. Now know I, he exclaims. He will soon learn how deceptive this knowing is.
Footnotes:
[1][Jdg 17:2.** is the dat. incommodi. Strictly speaking, simply marks some sort of relation, the exact nature of which must be otherwise determined. The present phrase, rendered as literally as possible, is: which (sc. ) was taken for thee, cf. our popular use of the same phrase, and the German, welches dir genommen ward. Ewald (who with characteristic self-confidence announces that he must leave the silly absurdity of the ordinary explanation of this passage to those who do not hesitate to find their own folly in the Bible,) seems to take as the dative of the author: the money taken (received) by thee from my father. For he relates, quite in historical style, that a young man of Mount Ephraim, whose father probably died early, took the money which had been left to his mother into his own hands, in order by using to increase it (!); and that, followed by his mothers blessing, he was fortunate, and was about to restore the money to her, as became a dutiful son, when she made him a present of it in the shape of a handsome (schmucken) god, etc. The perfect , he says, is the perfect of volition (like , Jdg 17:3): I will take; it is my will to take. But if the Hebrew author meant to tell this story, he expressed himself very obscurely. The imprecatory oath, too, is thus left without explanation. And notwithstanding all Ewalds efforts in behalf of him, Micah is still in suspicious possession of the money ( ), before he tells his mother that he will take it. Under such circumstances, the benediction which, according to Ewald, the mother pronounces on her son, might be more politic than free.Tr.]
[2][Jdg 17:3. . Render: I verily dedicate. Although Dr. Cassel also translates here by the pluperfect, he explains it of the present, see below. On this use of the perfect cf. Ges. Gram. 126, 4. The word wholly of the E. V. is better omitted. The infin. absolute in this construction is intensive, not extensive. It does not assert the completeness of the consecration, but simply makes it prominent, as being the use to which she determines to put the money. Cf. Ges. 131, 3.Tr.]
[3][Jdg 17:3. . Dr. Cassel: Bild und Gusswerk, image and cast-work; i.e., an image of wood or stone covered with a thin coating of silver or gold, see below. This explanation, although concurred in by several critics, is not yet sufficiently certain to make it worth while to disfigure our English text by inserting it.Tr.]
[4]The priest who subsequently entered the service of Micah, was named Jonathan, i.e., Theodore. See at Jdg 18:30.
[5]Bertheau assumes that the mother devoted the money to this purpose, inasmuch as her son had already a Beth Elohim. But it was only the image that could make any house a House of God. It is certainly more natural to suppose that, when he utterly refused to accept the money, she took it upon herself to provide the image with the money in question, in order to deliver him from the curse. She can have come to this use of the money, only because he gave it as the object for which he took it. The mother applies only two hundred shekels; the opinion that the others were used by way of endowment is at least not indicated in the text.
[6] Kusari, iv. 14, ed. Cassel, p. 335.
[7]The Talmud, Sanhedrin, 103 b, calls the name of the place where Micah lived, , and puts it at a distance of three from Shiloh. So far as the name is concerned, it appears to be only a name of reproach, with a reference to Deu 28:27; Lev 21:20. In Pesachim 117 a, the place seems to be named [fletus, ploratus], probably is pursuance of a similar homiletical explanation.
[8]Cf my treatise, Jeroboam, Erf. 1856. Unfortunately, Keil also thinks that this opinion is scarcely to be doubted, although he adduces no grounds for it. For that the term , in Exo 32:4, is also followed by , is as natural as it is that this latter word is always found whenever cast images are spoken of. Cf. Exo 34:17. The error is so widespread that it has even found a place in the reply of Thomas (Union, Kath. Kirche, p. 40), to Stahls book on Union. [On this question of the meaning of calf-idols in Israel, cf. Smiths Bible Dictionary, art. Calf.Tr.]
[9]It is only by the gift of foretelling limit and end, from amid concealment and mystery, that the nature and symbol of the Telesphoroi can be explained; and only thus far can a connection between them and the sages of telesphoria, of which Bckh speaks, be allowed. It is only their connection with the teraphim that explains both these and them. This fact escaped both Preller (Griech. Myth., i. 327) and Welcker (Griech. Myth., ii. 740).
[10]Whose connection with Serapis and Saraph is to be more minutely explained elsewhere.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The subject of this, and all that remains in the book of the Judges, puts on a different complection from what went before. The Reader will recollect the title it bears: the transactions here recorded; where in those days when there was no king in Israel; when every man did that which was right, or pleasing, in his own eyes. And how right that was, the sad account here given doth but too plainly show. In this chapter we have, in the example of one house and family, a lively Feature of the Idolatry of the land. Micah sets up an image for his god, of silver stolen from his mother: and takes a vagabond Levite for his priest.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Observe how, out of the same mouth, when there is no grace in the heart, come cursings or blessings. It seems very plain that money was the idol of both. Hence the son robbed the mother, and the mother cursed the son. Alas! what a dreadful state is the mind of both parent and offspring in by nature.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jdg 17:9-11
After that first fervour of simple devotion, which his beloved Jesuit priest had inspired in him, speculative theology took but little hold on the young man’s mind. When his early credulity was disturbed, and his saints and virgins taken out of his worship, to rank little higher than the divinities of Olympus, his belief became acquiescence rather than the ardour; and he made his mind up to assume the cassock and bands, as another man does to wear a breastplate and jack-boots, or to mount a merchant’s desk, for a livelihood, and from obedience and necessity, rather than from choice. There were scores of such men in Mr. Esmond’s time at the universities, who were going into the Church with no better calling than his.
Thackeray, Esmond, chap. IX.
In The Force of Truth, Thomas Scott confesses that his original views in entering the ministry ‘were these three: A desire of a less laborious and more comfortable way of procuring a livelihood, than otherwise I had the prospect of; the expectation of more leisure to employ in reading, of which I was inordinately fond; and a proud conceit of my abilities, with a vainglorious imagination that I should sometime distinguish and advance myself in the literary world.’
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Jdg 17 (Annotated)
Jdg 17
[“A wholly disconnected narrative here follows, without any mark of time by which to indicate whether the events preceded or followed those narrated in the preceding chapter. The only point of contact with the preceding history of Samson is that we are still concerned with the tribe of Dan. The Speaker’s Commentary. ]
1. And there was [before the days of Samson] a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah [a contraction of Micayeh = who is like Jehovah].
2. And he said unto his mother, The eleven hundred shekels of silver [136] that were taken from thee, about which thou cursedst [thou didst adjure; see Mat 26:63 ], and spakest of also in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it. [See Pro 28:24 .] And his mother said, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my son.
3. And when he had restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, I had wholly dedicated [consecrating, I consecrated] the silver unto the Lord from my hand for my son, to make a graven image and a molten image: now therefore I will restore it unto thee.
4. Yet [And] he restored the money unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder [see Isaiah’s opinion of founders, Isa 46:6-10 ], who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah.
5. And the man Micah had an house of gods, and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated [installed] one of his sons, who became his priest.
6. In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. [See this forbidden in Deu 12:8 .]
7. And there was a young man out of Beth-lehem-judah of the family [tribe] of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned there. [See Gen 49:7 .]
8. And the man departed out of the city from Beth-lehem-judah to sojourn where he could find a place: and he came to mount Ephraim to the house of Micah [probably having heard of Micah’s chapel], as he journeyed.
9. And Micah said unto him, Whence comest thou? And he said unto him, I am a Levite of Beth-lehem-judah, and I go to sojourn where I may find a place.
10. And Micah said unto him, Dwell with me, and be unto me a father and a priest, and I will give thee ten shekels [the shekel weighed about half an ounce] of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel, and thy victuals. So the Levite went in.
11. And the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young man was unto him as one of his sons.
12. And Micah consecrated the Levite [which none might lawfully do but the high-priest]; and the young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah.
13. Then said Micah, Now know I that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my priest [see next chapter for the answer].
A Series of Surprises
The book of Judges properly closes with the sixteenth chapter. What follows after the sixteenth chapter has been described as an appendix two appendices, indeed, dealing with the case of two Levites. From the seventeenth chapter onward the matter was probably written long before other portions of the book, in the days of Joshua and the greater judges. Certainly, this part of the book was written when there was no king in Israel, and when every man was left to do that which was right in his own eyes. The history of the two Levites is full of romantic interest. The first history is to be read aloud and preached about quite freely; the second is to be read in secret hardly read at all, and yet fully comprehended, because of the following chapter in which vengeance, just and tremendous, is dealt out to men who inflicted upon Israel a scandal that was never forgotten. Let us publicly and openly read the case of the first Levite, and then read in shame and secrecy what follows; then come into the light once more, and close the book of Judges amid a blaze of glory.
Is not this a fair picture of life? What undulation! What incessant variety! what visions of beauty! what disclosures of shame! how bright is the fair, great heaven; and yet how near the deep and awful hell! Micah dwelt in mount Ephraim, and stole silver from his mother: Micah afterwards became a maker of gods. What rapid transitions in character! what wonder if the rapidity of the transitions sometimes excites suspicion as to the reality of the conversion? But is not history condensed? The verses read in flowing sequence, as if no time had elapsed between one line and another: hence the shock with which we come upon the fact that the man who was but yesterday a concealed criminal is today a manufacturer of gods and churches. Is there not a punctuation in life which is inserted by the hand of God? Are not the observers to blame for a good deal of what is called unnatural and too swift transition in character? Who knows what may happen in one hour when God is the minister and a repentant soul is the subject? Sometimes life is wrought out very swiftly, so far as public observation can detect; yet it is being lived very slowly in the consciousness of the man: he is so fired with pain because of conscious sin that he would have himself transported in unnamable swiftness of time into a new consciousness and a blessed individuality. At the same time, a sober lesson does reveal itself at this very point. Whilst conversion may scarcely be too sudden, the manufacture of gods and churches ought not to take place with indecent haste, if at all. It is difficult to believe that a man can spring at one bound from being a concealed felon into being a patron of the universe a builder of gates that open heaven, a creator of altars and priests. There should be some time spent in solitude, in secrecy, in earnest wrestling prayer: the whole night should be thus spent, and the morning light will shine upon a new personality, bearing a new and larger name. At the same time, recognising the sobriety and gravity of the lesson, let no man be discouraged should he really feel what by its purity must be a divine impulse to move instantly and to act like a man who, having wasted many days, seeks to redeem the time, and to make one day as long as two, by diligent industry, by the passion of consecrated love.
This chapter is full of surprises. What can be more surprising than that a layman should consecrate a priest? This is what Micah did. Micah began where he could. Everything was to be done at once. So Micah consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest Men do things in high passion which would be unnatural and almost irrational if done in cold blood. We must always calculate the influence of spiritual temperature upon human action. Some things we must have heard, and not read; the whole meaning was in the way of saying them. The Bible only tells us that certain persons “cried unto the Lord,” verily a poor report, utterly inadequate, yet all that was possible: for who can write down a “cry”? who can paint, even in letters, an agony? So some allowance must be made for the new spiritual passion of Micah. A man can do great things when he is really on fire. No man knows himself, as to the full volume and bulk of his being, until he is possessed no longer a little measurable self, but part of an infinite immeasurable totality. We speak of men being “mighty in prayer.” They cannot account for it. Yet they know that sometimes they have hold of God, and that omnipotence graciously yields to the gracious violence. Indeed, man must at certain historical periods make priests. Whether we are in such a historical period now, is not the immediate question, but following the unfolding of history along the biblical line we see how now and again man must be almost almighty. Despair finds new energies. Religious despair, religious helplessness, finds God, or makes an image supposed to be like him. Do not let us mock at idolatry of a really heathen kind too flippantly; there may be an aspect of idolatry that touches our sense of the ludicrous, but there is also an aspect of it which touches our tears. To be an idolater in a Christian land is not only an anachronism, it is a blasphemy: but follow the whole history of idolatry and study its pathetic side, and see if it be not true that in man’s attempts to make gods, and altars, and priests, there is something infinitely touching. To that mystery in our being a divine revelation may one day be made. It may be at that very point God will begin the miracle of self-revelation of incarnation. Man must have a priest. There are necessities which cannot be denied urgencies of soul which must be appeased, soothed, if not gratified. Are not all men looking round some hopelessly and indistinctly for helpers, spiritual assistants, for brother-men larger than they and altogether mightier in the nobler life, to lift them up, to eke out their poor expressions, to find prayers which their poor lips may utter as if their own? Is there not something in the heart that cries “Master, Lord, teach us how to pray”? The fault does not lie in the impulse, but in its perversion; nay, rather, there is an unmistakable touch and signature of divinity in the impulse. Blessed are they who have received the ministry of sanctification and have responded to the divine provision made for great human passions, and great spiritual necessities. Yet no man can make a priest. Priests are the miracles of manhood men who have the gift of prayer, men who by looking on human sorrow are moved heavenward to intercede on man’s behalf A strange gift, signalised by fire, is that of being able to pray in every tongue, so that every man may hear in the tongue in which he was born an interpretation of his soul’s poverty and need. Such intercessors are not made by man: these are the gifts of God to every age. “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” Yet this is confining the idea of priesthood to intercession. If it be so confined, what possible objection can be lodged against it? To make a priest anything more than one who is mighty in prayer, mighty in sympathy, keen in moral insight, patient more than woman, is not the work of man.
A surprising thing it is that a converted thief should elaborate a religious system: “And the man Micah had an house of gods and made an ephod” a gorgeous priestly robe “and teraphim” little Syrian images. This is a condensed statement. Who can go into the detail of these two lines? “An house of gods ” a consecrated place a gods’ house: what patience in the elaboration of the deities; what painstaking in the fabrication of the ephod; what detailed and critical, if not artistic, care, in the shaping of the teraphim; we are apt to overlook the detail of all worship. Look upon the poorest little church, on the bleakest hillside, and what does it look like but a handful of 6tones rudely put together, a sight that might be remarked upon at the moment, and passed by and forgotten? yet who can tell the history of these few stones? who knows with what hands they were carried and shaped and put in place? who knows how the labourers toiled when the day’s work was done that they might put up the simple structure, to have a home in which to worship God? Who knows at what sacrifice the Bible was bought by these poor peasant worshippers, how small sums were laid by from week to week, and how as the little pile neared maturity the thrifty one almost had the Bible by the anticipation of love, how the Bible was preserved, loved, almost worshipped? Do not let us pass by all these things carelessly as if they meant nothing; they are full of tears, full of pathos, full of that finest quality of manhood which is the real wealth of any nation.
Yet Micah was ill at ease. Who can make one of his own sons into his superior? The son was but a makeshift after all. How superstition tyrannises over men! To have a son for a priest as Micah had was like a kind of illicit marriage. A sense of un-naturalness marred the service. The son was quite right in many respects, worthy of confidence and honour and love; but in his official capacity he was still a son. Who does not like his minister to come down out of the clouds? Who likes to see a minister grow up before his very eyes to know the child at home, to follow the boy at school, to see him pass through various processes, and at length appear as a recognised minister of Christian truth? Who does not feel slightly uneasy if he knows the minister’s mother and brothers and sisters? Who does not say, “Are they not all with us? Is not this the carpenter’s son”? To some people, if a man is once a carpenter’s son, he never can be anything else by all the miracles of Heaven. Why? Because they themselves could never be anything else: they measure themselves in measuring him. Who does not like a species of ghostliness to be round about a minister? Who likes to think that his minister eats and drinks and sleeps? In very deed, some quite hide that aspect of the ministry and graciously pay no attention to it. Micah was but a man. It would be a beautiful thing if ministers could come down from the clouds and go back to the clouds, and we could have nothing to do with them but enjoy a momentary revelation. This has many applications. The man who felt somewhat uneasy or dissatisfied as to his son being priest, represents a great many men. Who could be so grand a minister as the brother sitting at our side, who, suddenly inflamed by the divine presence, rises and speaks to human need in human speech? If we were not so little, so superstitious, so denuded of the higher and sublimer reason, we should find in man known man our truest representative. It is because we have misunderstood humanity that we have undervalued the true ministry.
But fortune seemed to be upon Micah’s side. We are now in times of wandering and adventure and bold enterprise, and in those times a young man was travelling out of Beth-lehem-judah of the family of Judah, and he happened to be a real Levite; and when he came to mount Ephraim, to the house of Micah, Micah elicited his story, and instantly said to him, “Dwell with me, and be unto me a father and a priest.” The Levites in those days were driven about. It was mourned in one of the prophetic books that the portion of the Levites was withheld from them. They were under Heaven’s frown: “I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.” So this young man was wandering, more or less in a spirit of enterprise and curiosity; and he came, as we now say, by chance to the house of Micah. There was something interesting about him. He certainly was not a money-seeker; the terms were these: “And I will give thee ten shekels of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel, and thy victuals” ( Jdg 17:10 ) twenty-five shillings a year was not much for a priest, even including one suit of clothes and victuals. A man who had spent hundreds of shekels upon his gods thought he was liberal in spending five-and-twenty shillings a year on his priests! There are persons who think more of the church as a building than of the minister as a servant of the soul. Who was this Levite? Was he a man of any name? Not much in himself, but he was the grandson of Moses. To what adversities may we come in life, and to what “base uses”! The grandson of Moses, the caretaker of Syrian images, and the priest of an idolater! Who can say to what we may be driven? Once let the centre go; once depart from the vital point; take one step in a wrong direction, and who can calculate the issue? Be steadfast; hold on to the ascertained to that which is proved to be beneficent, pure, noble; or you may come into a servility which not only disennobles you but throws unjustly a slur on the most famous memory. No man liveth unto himself. We have to take care of the past, if we would really take care of the future. Now Micah was comparatively happy. Micah consecrated the Levite. The Levite was not a priest, but he seemed to have an odour of sanctity about him, and, for the rest, Micah, having once got his hand into priest-making, made no account of it. The young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah; then Micah was at rest.
The greatest surprise of all remains. Here is an idolater appealing to the true God! “Then said Micah, Now know I that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my priest” ( Jdg 17:13 ). Here is a false worshipper unconsciously throwing off his own idols! He keeps the idols as men keep cabinets of curiosities. He has a house, a little museum, a small miniature pantheon; but in his finer moods he appeals to the true and living God. So literal are we, we like to have something to lay the hand upon. Men like a substantial and visible religion. Yet Micah felt that God would do him good, seeing he had a Levite for his priest. The son did not quite fill up the space, but now with a real living Levite on the premises, the Lord the eternal God, the Father of every living thing will do this man of mount Ephraim good. How we degrade God, that is to say, how we misconceive him and misrepresent him to ourselves! The Lord will do us good if our heart is right towards him. The Lord will make up for the absence of all priests, ministers churches, books, and ordinances, if we are unable to avail ourselves of such help: God will allow us to eat the shewbread, if there be no other food with which to appease our hunger. The true Church is where the right heart is. God himself is a Spirit. There is no image of him that can be made by human hands. There is one Priest Jesus Christ, the true Melchizedek. He alone can sacrifice and has sacrificed and is sacrificed for us. There is one altar the cross the cross of Jesus Christ: God forbid that we should even know any other altar than the cross of our redeeming, atoning, glorious Saviour. For what are we looking? We cannot appease our deepest needs, silence our most poignant cries, by any manufactures possible to our ingenuity and skill: the Son of God is the Saviour of the world; he is able to save unto the utmost all that come unto God by him, seeing that he ever liveth to make intercession for us. If any man should now say that he himself is needful to our communion with Heaven, he is more than wrong in opinion, the case is infinitely more serious than that which can be measured by mere mistakenness of judgment: he usurps the place of Christ, he dethrones the Son of God, he at least divides the prerogative of the one Advocate. This, then, is our Christian position: Man needs a priest that Priest is Jesus Christ; man needs communion with Heaven that communion is spiritual; man needs an answer to the agony of his own accusation that answer is in the cross of Christ. These are great mysteries, but the soul may become reverently familiar with them, after great suffering, prolonged prayer, and simple trust in the living God.
Prayer
Almighty God, thou hast recorded thy name in thy house, and there thou wilt meet them that seek thee. The heart seeketh God in all its pain and need; the spirit crieth out for the living God, as a land that is thirsty cries out for the great rain. We bless thee for this hunger and for this thirst; a blessing follows this desire, for this desire is none other than the gift of God. Now we know the meaning of the blessing pronounced upon those who hunger and thirst after righteousness. Hereby know we that we are not of the earth earthy, but that we have in us the fire of God, the spark of deity, the mysterious power which makes us thy children. We cannot be satisfied with what we see, or hear, or touch; beyond all this we have needs they cannot satisfy. Our satisfaction is in the living God; our rest is in heaven; we are at peace only when we are reconciled unto God by our Lord Jesus Christ; therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God, and now we rejoice as those who have entered into harmony with the spirit of heaven, and to whom is reserved an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away. Our joy is pure; our peace is unspeakable; our heaven has begun below. We bless thee for all that is meant by the name Jesus Christ; in it is all eternity, and in it is all time; it is the music of creation; it is the Gospel addressed to human hearts; it is a refuge in time of need. When we need refuge, Jesus Christ is more to us than at any other time; when we feel our own littleness, then we see Christ’s majesty. We come to the throne by the way of the cross. We bring with us no virtue of our own, but crying necessity, burning pain, consciousness of a great void; and yet we bring with us also a great hope; we feel that we shall not be disappointed whilst we linger at the cross, and pray where Jesus died. Our heart is full of thankfulness because of thy great mercy and care. Every day witnesses to thy tender lovingkindness. Thou dost live for thy creation; thou dost live in it, and through it all thou dost send currents of life, utterances of music, gospels of grace. So would we live that we may enter into thy purpose, and embody it, and realise it to those who look on. This being our desire, it shall surely be answered; for thou canst not deny thine own inspirations: these longings are part of the yearning of thine own solicitude. Thou wilt reply to us graciously, even when thou dost contradict and repel us in the mere letter. Why should we importune thee in the letter, when thou hast taught us to pray in the spirit and to fall into happy harmony with all thy will, first crucifying ourselves with Christ, and then having known the fellowship of his sufferings, knowing also the power of his resurrection? We will cast ourselves into thine hands, not daring to utter one petition lest we should offend thy purpose, but comprehending all our prayer in the one complete desire that thy will may be done on earth as it is done in heaven. We bless thee for all the hints of a better life, which we obtain from the existence through which we are now passing: we are walking in the night-time; we have nothing but the stars to read; but they are thy lights; thou hast set them in appointed places; thou hast taught them to glitter according to thy will, and to speak to the observant eye in significant light: and are not the breezes, too, full of hints of a better land? are they not tinctured with a fragrance not of earth? do they not come to us bringing health and revival and sweetness all hints of a greater state? And the earth is for man: it is full of symbol and suggestion and strange writing, to be made out by the scholars of Christ. We will walk on now up the steep places, wishing they were not so high; now down into the valleys, wishing they were not so long: but thou wilt not allow these selfish wishes to mar the perfectness of our resignation when we say with the spirit, Thy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven. All our ways are in thine hands. Keep us wherever we are; keep us near the altar, near the cross, and thus near thine own heaven. We commend one another always to thy gracious keeping: we can only be kept as we are held in the hollow of thine hand: outside that hand there is no security; within it is the security of almightiness. Help us in all good purposes; give us steadfastness therein that sacred determination, that faithful constancy, which comes of conviction akin to inspiration. Be with all who are on the sea that great, wide, troubled sea. Be with all our friends who are far away in the colonies, in other lands, speaking other languages, seeking to establish friendly relations with other peoples, struggling for bread, promoting the interests of civilisation, living a hard life that they may make the lives of others easier. Forget not our sick-chambers the churches in our homes, the abodes of pain, chambers set apart for whispering, and thought, and patience, and prayer. Be with all persons in difficulty, extremity, intolerable anxiety, and grant unto such answers to their pain from heaven; then shall they sing in the night-time and glory exceedingly even in tribulation, knowing the dominion of God in human life, and answering with glad belief the gospel that thou doest all things well. Let thy word flame like a sun, or descend like the dew, or breathe into our hearts like the still small voice. Let it come as thou wilt, under what symbol thou dost ordain, only let it come a word of emancipation, a word of benediction, a word of comfort, gracious as the speech of Christ, and sacred as his blood. Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XXI
MICAH AND THE DANITES, OUTRAGE OF THE MEN OF GIBEAH, AND THE NATIONAL WAR AGAINST BENJAMIN
Judges 17-21
What can you say of this whole section?
Ans. (1) It, like the book of Ruth, is an appendix to the book of Judges without regard to time order as to preceding events.
(2) While there are four distinct episodes, namely (a) the case of Micah, (b) the Danite migration, (c) the outrage at Gibeah, (d) the war of the other tribes against Benjamin, yet they go in pairs; the story of Micah is merged into the Danite migration and the outrage of Gibeah results in the war against Benjamin.
2. Show how one expression characterizes all four of the episodes and would serve for a text illustrated by each of the four stories in historical order.
Ans. The text is, “In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” First episode, Jdg 17:6 ; second episode, Jdg 18:1 ; third episode, Jdg 19:1 ; fourth episode, Jdg 21:25 .
3. What the bearing of this text on a late date of the composition of the book?
Ans. If the reference be to an earthly king, as usually supposed, it would only indicate that the book was compiled from tribal and national documents and edited by Samuel after the establishment of the monarchy, which theory is supported by many identical passages in parts of Joshua, Judges, and I Samuel. But if the reference be to Jehovah as King, then it proves nothing as to later authorship.
4. What the probability of its reference to Jehovah as King?
Ans. (1) The whole book is written to show a series of rejections of the theocracy that they might follow their own bent, some one way and some another (Jdg 2:11 ).
(2) Every one of the four instances of its use is introduced in a connection to emphasize a forsaking of Jehovah as a King, plainly marking insubordination against his royal authority. Its first use immediately follows and expounds Micah’s establishing an independent “house of gods” with an independent ephod and images and priesthood, Jdg 17:5-6 . Its second use introduces the rebellion of Dan in leaving the lot assigned to him by Jehovah and setting up at Laish a rival house of worship with images and independent priesthood, Jdg 18:1 . Its third use introduces a story of wickedness against Jehovah equaling the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, Jdg 19:1 ; Jdg 19:22-26 . Its fourth use does not occur in Jdg 20:1-18 , Judges 26-28, where the people seek Jehovah for counsel, but is reserved as a comment on the irreligious dancing of Shiloh’s daughters and the crafty expedient of supplying wives to the male remnants of Benjamin without appeal to Jehovah Jdg 21:16-25 .
(3) This series of the rejections of Jehovah as King culminated in demanding an earthly king, 1Sa 8:1-7 .
(4) When they did get an earthly king there was no tendency to check them in doing what was right in their own eyes, instead of in Jehovah’s eyes, but only increased it. See case of Solomon, 1Ki 11:1-4 ; Jeroboam, 1Ki 12:26-33 ; Ahab, 1Ki 16:30-34 , and many others. Hence there would be no relevancy in saying, “every man did that which was right in his own sight,” because there was no earthly king in Israel. The “doing what was right in his own sight” does not apply to everything but is limited in its four contextual uses to sins of rebellion against Jehovah’s kingly authority, and what earthly kings promoted rather than checked.
5. But is not late authorship clearly established by the declaration that Dan’s rival house of worship was continued by Jonathan and his sons as priests “until the day of the captivity of the land”?
Ans. It entirely depends upon what captivity is meant. It could not mean the Babylonian captivity of Judah, for long before that event the ten tribes, including Dan, had been led into captivity so perpetual they are called the lost tribes. It could not mean the captivity of the ten tribes by Sennacherib, for long before that event Jeroboam, the founder of the northern kingdom, had established at Dan a different worship. It could not have persisted during the times of David and Solomon when all recognized the central place of worship at Jerusalem. It could not have referred to any date beyond the period of the judges, because the duration of this rival Danite worship is limited in the very verse following the time the house of God was at Shiloh, Jdg 18:31 . So that “the captivity” referred to must have been the Philistian captivity in the days of Elithe judge, when the ark was captured, 1Sa 4:3-18 , and quite to the point the Hebrew text of 1Sa 4:21-22 , replaces the phrase “captivity of the land” by “captivity of the glory of the Lord.”
6. What the first episode?
Ans. The sin of Micah in establishing in his family a “house of gods,” with image worship and an independent priesthood.
7. State the case in detail to show Jehovah was not recognized as King in Israel.
Ans. (1) A son stole 1,100 shekels of silver from his mother, violating Jehovah’s Fifth and Eighth Commandments, afterwards confessing and restoring.
(2) The mother (a) usurped Jehovah’s prerogative in cursing the unknown thief; (b) she either lied in saying she had “wholly dedicated it to Jehovah” or) like Ananias and Sapphira, robbed God in keeping back more than four-fifths; (c) she violated the Second Commandment in making images for worship; (d) the son established in his family a rival house to Shiloh; (e) he first violated the law of the priesthood by setting apart his own sons as priests; (f) he substituted a stray Levite, out of a job, and not of the house of Aaron.
8. What the second episode?
Ana. The Danites, through cowardice failing to capture from strong enemies the land allotted them by Jehovah, sent out spies to find good land where the inhabitants were weak and peaceful. The spies on their way discover Micah’s private “house of God” and inquire of its false priest rather than of Jehovah at Shiloh, whether they will prosper in their intent. The subservient priest assures them it will come out all right. They come to a part of the territory allotted to another tribe and find a quiet, unwarlike community remote from the capital and power of their nation. The spies return with a glowing report of the good land, the helplessness of the inhabitants, and the little prospect of interference from their nation. An army is dispatched forthwith, which on the way over bids Micah for his recreant priest who, preferring to represent a tribe rather than a family, not only breaks his contract by slipping away, but helps to steal all Micah’s gods and paraphernalia of worship. Then the bereft Micah follows with his piteous remonstrance: “Ye have taken away my gods which I have made, and the priest, and gone away, and what have I more! And then mock me by saying, What aileth thee?” The grim response of the Danites reminds me of the ungrateful wolf’s reply to the crane in Aesop’s fable: “Count it reward enough that you have safely withdrawn your neck from a wolf’s throat.” So Micah returned empty-handed to reflect on the rewards of hospitality, the sanctity of contracts, the wisdom of investing good shekels in the manufacture of gods, and the ingratitude of God’s people in forsaking their Maker. But the imperturbable Danites, like Gallio, caring for none of these things, went marching on, and like a stealthy band of Comanches, swooped down upon the unsuspecting community, blotted it off the map and set up their rival to the house of God in Shiloh and went into tribal idolatry.
9. How does the incident prove ancestor Jacob a prophet?
Ans. “Dan shall be a serpent in the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse’s heels so that his rider falleth backward.”
10. Wherein did the Mormons show their appreciation of the prophecy and its fulfilment?
Ans. By naming their terrible secret organization which perpetrated the Mountain Meadows Massacre, “the Danites.”
11. Who was this shabby, subservient Levite and how did later Jews seek to hide his identity?
Ans. His name was Jonathan, a grandson of Moses. See Standard Revision of Jdg 18:30 , and compare with common version “Manasseh” instead of Moses. The Jews in the Targum and Septuagint changed Moses to Manasseh, unwilling to tarnish the name of the great ancestor. But Manasseh had no son named Gershom while Moses did, as the genealogies show. It is not unusual for even sons of great men, much less grandsons, to degenerate and “peter out.”
12. What prophecy of Moses is also fulfilled in the incident ?
Ans. “And of Dan he said, Dan is a lion’s whelp, that leapeth forth from Bashan.” And it was from the mountains of Bashan that this “cub lion” leaped upon the hapless village of Laish in the valley below.
13. Why is the tribe of Dan omitted in the catalogue of tribes in Rev 7:4-8 ?
Ans. Probably because Dan migrated to Laish and there set up a rival worship.
13a. What event introduces the episode of the Benjaminites?
Ans. The horrible outrage perpetrated by the men of Gibeah, a city of Benjamin, Jdg 19 .
14. What do you gather from the first of this story?
Ans. (1) That the relation between a man and his concubine was a legal one counted here as marriage.
(2) It was the woman who sinned and the man who forgave.
(3) The instant reconciliation when he went after her and the insistent hospitality and welcome of the father-in-law.
(4) The Levite’s loyalty to Israel in refusing to lodge in the city of the Jebusites when by a little more travel he could reach a city of his own nation.
(5) The inhospitality of the men of Gibeah who would have suffered one of their nation to remain in the street all night, contrasted with the generous welcome to strangers extended by the sojourning Ephraimite.
15. What the moral condition of the city as disclosed by the horrible outrage?
Ans. It was as Sodom in the days of Lot. Compare Gen 19:1-11 , with Jdg 19:22-27 .
16. The Common Version and the Vulgate (Latin) make a certain Hebrew word of Jdg 19:22 , and other Old Testament passages, a proper name, as, “certain sons of Belial,” which the Canterbury Revision renders “certain base fellows” which is right?
Ans. The author is much inclined to favor the Common Version here and in 1Sa 2:12 . It is true that the Hebrew word etymologically means “base, reckless, lawless.” And it is also true that the Hebrew idiom “son of,” “daughter of,” “man of” does not imply a person when associated with “Belial.” Yet the atrocious and unnatural crime against Jehovah here and in some other cases implies a devilish origin. Particularly is this true when associated with idolatrous worship. It is certainly so interpreted in the New Testament, 1Co 10:27 ; 1Co 10:20-22 , and 2Co 6:15-18 . It was on account of these awful associations, being a part and practice of the religious worship of the Canaanite gods, as later of Greek and Roman gods, that idolatry was made a capital offense under the theocracy. When Milton, therefore, in Paradise Lost, makes Belial a person, a demon, it is not a case of poetic personification, but is the expression of a profound philosophical truth as well as scriptural truth in both Testaments. The ghastly, beastly, obscene, and loathsome debaucheries of heathen worship would never have been counted religion except under the promptings of the devil.
17. What steps did the wronged and horrified Levite take to make this local crime a national affair?
Ans. He divided the murdered woman’s body into twelve parts and sent one part to each tribe with the story of the wrong.
18. What impression was made by this horrible method of accusation?
Ans. “And it was so that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day. Consider it, take counsel and speak,” Jdg 19:30 .
19. Was he justified in making it a national affair?
Ans. Yes, otherwise the whole nation would have perished. Compare the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah. Compare the solemn declarations of Jehovah that on account of such abominations the measure of the iniquity of the Canaanites was so full that that very “land was ready to spew them out of its mouth.” Read carefully the solemn charge to the nation in Deu 13:12-18 , and the awful judgment of God on Eli because he merely admonished but did not restrain his sons for so corrupting Jehovah’s worship, 1Sa 2:12 ; 1Sa 2:17 ; 1Sa 2:22-25 ; 1Sa 3:11-14 .
20. What the result of the Levite’s ghastly method of accusation?
Ans. The whole nation was at once aroused. The public conscience was quickened and they assembled before the Lord at Mizpah to learn and do his will, and they strictly followed the direction of his oracle. Four hundred thousand warriors assembled as executors of God’s judgment.
21. Show how this was no mob action stirred by an impulse of sudden passion.
Ans. (1) They assembled under all the forms of law.
(2) They carefully examined the simple testimony of the Levite (Jdg 20:4-9 ), its very simplicity constituting its power.
(3) They deliberated gravely.
(4) They submitted every step proposed to God’s oracle.
(5) They sent messengers through all the tribe of Benjamin, giving notification of the crime, and giving opportunity for the tribe to clear itself by surrendering the criminals to justice according to the law of Jehovah.
22. What awful comment on the moral condition of Benjamin?
Ans. The whole tribe deliberately sided with the adulterous murderers and determined to protect them.
23. How was Israel taught the awful solemnity of acting as executors of Jehovah’s will?
Ans. They were humiliated by two disastrous defeats, losing 40,000 men in two battles, 14,000 more than Benjamin’s whole army. After each defeat they carried the case again to the Lord, with fastings, weeping, and sacrifices, which indicated their consciousness of their own sins.
24. What the result of the third battle?
Ans. The tribe of Benjamin was almost blotted out. They were surrounded, driven hither and thither with relentless pursuit and desperate battle. First 18,000, then 5,000, then 2,000, i.e., 25,000 out of Benjamin’s veterans perished on the battlefield and still Israel pursued, devoting to sweeping destruction city after city, men, women, children and cattle, until only 600 fugitives remained, who sheltered in the rocks of the wilderness four months.
25. What evidence that Israel fought not with malice against Benjamin?
Ans. (1) Their weeping cry before Jehovah: “Shall I go up again to battle against the children of Benjamin, my brother?” (2) After the victory they come again before the Lord in tears: “O Lord God of Israel, why is this come to pass that there should be today one tribe lacking in Israel?” (Jdg 21:3 ). There is no exultation. They mourn more over fallen Benjamin than over the thousands of their own dead. As this was a national assembly to accomplish a purgation by which alone the nation could be saved, what oaths had been sworn before Jehovah?
Ans. (1) That no man of the eleven tribes should give his daughter as a wife to a man of Benjamin.
(2) That whosoever would not come up before the Lord in the crusade for national salvation should be put to death.
27. What was their dilemma in view of the first oath and how were they preserved from it by the second oath?
Ans. By the first oath the 600 fugitives were barred from marriage and the tribe would have utterly perished, but by investigation they found that the city of Jabesh-Gilead had refused to obey the national oath and in virtue of the second oath was doomed. A detachment of 12,000 men smote it to destruction, reserving 400 virgins to be the wives of the two-thirds of the 600.
28. What expedient was adopted to provide wives for the remaining two hundred?
Ans. In Jdg 21:19-23 , the expedient is set forth by which, without technical violation of the oath, the 200 managed, at the suggestion of the elders, to capture a wife apiece from the dancing daughters of Shiloh.
29. What legend of early Rome is something similar?
Ans. The Romans captured the Sabine women at a festival. See Roman History , by Myers, pp. 58-59.
30. How is it alluded to in Scott’s lvanhoe?
Ans. DeBracy plots to carry off Rowena. Fitzurse said, “What on earth dost thou purpose by this absurd disguise at a moment so urgent?”
DeBracy replied: “To get me a wife after the manner of the tribe of Benjamin.”
31. Why is one left-handed called a Benjaminite?
Ans. Because the men of the tribe of Benjamin were left-handed.
32. What prophecy by Jacob fits the Benjaminites of this story?
Ans. “Benjamin is wolf that raveneth: In the morning he shall devour the prey. And at even he shall divide the spoil.” Gen 49:27 .
33. Who was the high priest through whom Jehovah makes known his will in the story of Benjamin, and what proof does the fact afford that the two stories of Dan and Benjamin occurred in the early period of the judges?
Ans. Phinehas was high priest (Jdg 20:28 ) who is referred to in Num 25:7 and Jos 22:13 ; Jos 22:30 . These last passages refer to an early period of the judges.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Jdg 17:1 And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name [was] Micah.
Ver. 1. And there was a man. ] The Vulgate hath it, And at that time there was a man, &c. And some Rabbins say that this fell out soon after Samson’s death. But they do better who place this story and the rest that follow, to the end of this book, in the interim between the elders that survived Joshua and the judges that next followed. See Jdg 2:11 ; Jdg 5:14 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
mount = hill country of Ephraim, where Joshua dwelt and was buried (Jos 24:30).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
At this point the book of Judges, as far as its history, ends. What remains in the book of Judges is not now in chronological order. This is an appendix to the book of Judges as we get into chapter seventeen. And it tells us basically of the moral conditions of the nation of Israel during this time after Joshua, and the stories, some of them, take us clear back to the time immediately after Joshua. So if you can now shift gears in your mind and go in reverse, we come to the end of the historic chronological order with Samson.
After Samson there arises then Samuel. We’ll get that after we get through the book of Ruth. But now we’re going to get into an appendix and we’re going to go back in the next few chapters and examine some of the moral decay that was going on in Israel during the time of the period of the judges. It just gives us an insight to the moral corruptness that existed among God’s people during this time when they lacked a real conscienceness of God as their king.
So the first story begins in chapter seventeen.
There was a man who lived on Mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah. And he said to his mother, You remember those eleven hundred shekels of silver that were stolen from you, and you cursed the person who stole them, you said, Let the person who stole this be cursed. He said, Hey mom, I did it. And here are the eleven hundred shekels back, and she said, O blessed be thou my son of the LORD [and all]. I had really intended to take that silver and make some little idols for you. And so she gave him a portion of the silver in order that he might make a little image and he gave them to the founder, who made a graven image and they were in the house of Micah. [the molten images] And the man Micah had a house of god, and he made an ephod, and a teraphim, and he consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest. For in those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes ( Jdg 17:1-6 ).
And therein is an insight into the moral degeneracy. They had lost the fact that God was to be their king. They lost the conscienceness of that fact. And every man, rather than being ruled by God, was doing that which was right in his own eyes. It was a period of anarchy. Everybody just did what he wanted to do, what was right in his own eyes. It is sort of what they are trying to bring to pass in this essentialism. Everybody just relate to experience as you feel that you should relate to it. There really isn’t any right or wrong way. If it feels good, do it, you know. If it feels right, do it. And this is the kind of chaotic condition that was going on in Israel. This kind of anarchy where everyone was just doing what was right in their own eyes, not really following the government of God or the law of God.
Now Micah in making these images was not making really pagan kinds of images but images, no doubt, that would represent God to him. But in the second commandment God had expressly forbidden making any graven images or likeness of God, to bow down and worship. So he was violating the commandment of God but trying to make an image of God. He was not turning from Jehovah in that sense of making an image of Baal or Molech or one of the pagan gods but he was trying to make an image of God. And then with the teraphim and the ephod, seeking to tie the whole worship of Jehovah together, making a little worship center in his house where he has his own little idols in the house where he goes to pray and goes to worship. Now this was expressly forbidden by God, and yet, having lost the conscienceness of God’s presence, he is wanting something to remind him of the presence of God. And thus, he’s made his little worship center in his house with his little idols and all, the place where he can go and pray, his own little private altar.
Now whenever a person makes an idol, the very fact that he has made an idol indicates that that person has lost the conscienceness of the presence of God. The second thing it indicates is that he is desiring to regain that conscienceness of God’s presence, and thus, he has set up this as a reminder to him of God’s presence. And thus it is actually speaking of a desire to regain something that is lost, a vitality of relationship with God. Whenever a person has to set up an image or an idol, it is a testimony that that person has lost something vital in his relationship with God and he needs some kind of a little reminder to remind him of God’s presence. And thus, it is always a mark of spiritual deterioration; any image, any idol of any thing is a mark of spiritual deterioration. So it is important to note that Micah wasn’t really turning his back on Jehovah, for he even speaks of Jehovah, but he has lost something vital in his relationship with Jehovah which causes him to make these little images and set up a worship center as a place for his prayers.
Now there was a young man who lived in Bethlehem, who was a Levite: and he was living there but he departed from Bethlehem just sort of looking for a place to live. And he came to Mount Ephraim to the house of Micah, on his journey. And Micah said to him, Where you coming from? And he said, I’m a Levite from Bethlehem, and I journeying that I can find a place. Micah said unto him, If you’ll dwell with me, and be a priest in my house, I will give you ten shekels of silver annually, and a new suit, and all your food. So the Levite went in ( Jdg 17:7-10 ).
Now here is a deterioration in the Levite, in that he is becoming now a professional religionist. Sort of selling himself for religious purchases for an annual salary of ten shekels of silver and a new suit and his daily food.
And the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young man was unto him as one of his own sons. And Micah consecrated the Levite; the young man became his priest, and he was in the house of Micah. Then said Micah, Now I know that Jehovah will do me good, seeing that I have Levite as my priest ( Jdg 17:11-13 ).
So it was a mercenary thing, you know. I know I’m gonna prosper now because I got a Levite for a priest. And that’s the only reason why he wanted the Levite is so he could prosper. In other words, it was the idea of using God for gain.
Paul speaks in the New Testament of the error of those who think that godliness is a way to gain. He calls it a pernicious doctrine. He said, “turn away from such people who say that godliness is a way to get rich, that godliness is a way to prosperity, that godliness is a way to gain.” Paul calls it an evil doctrine. Micah has that concept, “Awe, God’s gonna prosper me now I’ve got a Levite for my priest.” So he’s buying his way, in a sense, into prosperity in hiring the priest. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Here begins the final section of the Book of Judges which is of the nature of an appendix. The events here recorded must have taken place closely following the death of Joshua. They give us a picture of the internal condition of the people, and it is probable that they were added with that intention by the historian.
Micah’s act was a violation of the second commandment. He made to himself and for his household certain images. In doing so he was not adopting the idolatries of the heathen. His mother’s language reveals her recognition of Jehovah as she said, “Blessed be my son of Jehovah.” Moreover, Micah’s own words, when persuading a Levite to act as his priest, show the same thing, “Now know I that Jehovah will do me good. . . .” The images were intended to aid him in the worship of Jehovah but were distinctly forbidden, as we have said, in the second commandment.
The whole story is a (revelation of a degenerate condition. Micah had robbed his mother. On making restitution he accompanied the act, at her instigation, with what she supposed to be a religious movement. The consent of the Levite to become a priest in the house of Micah for the sake of a living is a further revelation of degeneracy. Micah was attempting to maintain his relationship with God by violating the commands of God. The Levite degenerated into an attempt to secure his own material comfort by compromise.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
III. THE APPENDIX: ISRAELS INTERNAL CORRUPTION
1. Micahs and Dans Idolatry and Its Punishment
CHAPTER 17 The Images Made and the Hired Priest
1. The stolen money restored and the images (Jdg 17:1-6)
2. The Levite hired for a priest (Jdg 17:7-13)
The last five chapters of the book form an appendix. The events given did not occur after Samsons death, but they happened many years before. These chapters are not in chronological order but arranged in this way to teach the root of the evil and its results. This answers much, if not all, of the objections of the critics. These chapters reveal the internal corruption which existed in Israel during the different declensions. Idolatry and lawlessness are the two characteristic features. True worship and dependence on God is given up and then follows the dreadful fruit of this, which is hatred, strife culminating in lawlessness. The predictions in the New Testament reveal the same two phases. Departure from the faith is followed by moral corruption (1Ti 4:1; 2Ti 3:1-4). Then we find in these chapters a statement which does not appear elsewhere in the book. There was no king in Israel is the statement made four times (17:6; 18:1, 19:1; 21:25). A king was needed to remedy these sad internal conditions, this departure from God and strife of one against the other. This is an evident link with and preparation for the history which follows. Even so in this age of evil, darkness and cunning lawlessness; what the world needs is a king, the King of Righteousness and Peace. When He comes, order will be brought out of chaos, all strife and war, all bloodshed and lawlessness will cease.
Into what a scene this chapter introduces us! The thieving son, the cursing mother. He, for the fear of the curse (true faith was not there, but superstition), restores the money and that ungodly woman can say, Blessed be thou of the LORD, my son. Then she used two hundred shekels of silver and has two images made. Micah, whose wicked life belies his name (Micah means who is like Jehovah), had a house full of gods, made an ephod, teraphim and then ordained one of his sons for a priest. Then a wandering Levite passed by and to make his idolatrous worship a little more religious he hires the Levite to be a father and a priest. He also promises him a yearly salary, his board and clothing. Then he settled down and said, Now know I that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my priest.
There is no need of much comment. The typical application is seen at a glance. Here is a man-made god, a man-made worship and a man-made priest. Such is the state of ritualistic Christendom. Much of that which is called worship is simply man-made and dishonors God as much, or even more, than the idolatry of heathendom. And how the false priesthood is here typified! We have but one Priest as the people of God and that is our gracious Lord. Through His infinite grace all true believers are constituted priests with Him. We are a holy and a royal priesthood. Any other priesthood is man-made and a wicked assumption which has corrupted and is corrupting Christianity. The hirelings too are represented in this scene. Religious service is so much reduced to a commercial basis. And there is the delusion of thinking that the Lord must surely bless and give prosperity.
The Levite himself is another sign of the times. He is of the Levites of Judah, has been for a while in Bethlehem-judah and wandered away again to find, where he may, another temporary resting place. His is the restless foot of a stranger where he might have claimed inheritance, and he is ready to find a home where he should have been a stranger. Little solicitation prevails with him: his sustenance, a suit of clothes, a salary, has prevailed with many in all ages of the world, and the Levite exchanges his ministry for priesthood in the house of Micah, where the idolatry of the place is sanctified with Jehovahs name. All this is simple enough to read by those that care, and Christendom has exhibited every detail of this transformation–not, alas, as it would seem, a long process: a manufactured priesthood for manufactured gods, all covered with a fair name of orthodoxy, and men doing with great satisfaction what is right in their own eyes!
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
judged
The character and work of Samson are alike enigmatical. Announced by an angel Jdg 13:1-21. He was a Nazarite; Num 6:1-27; Jdg 13:5 who constantly defiled his Nazarite separation through fleshly appetites. Called of God to judge Israel, and endued wonderfully with the Spirit, he wrought no abiding work for Israel, and perished in captivity to his enemies the Philistines. What was real in the man was his mighty faith in Jehovah in a time of doubt and apostasy, and this faith God honoured Heb 11:32.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
am 2585, bc 1419, An, Ex, Is, 72
there was: It is extremely difficult to fix the chronology of this and the following transactions. Some think them to be here in their natural order; others that they happened in the time of Joshua, or immediately after the ancients who outlived him. All that can be said with certainly is, that they happened when there was no king in Israel; that is, about the time of the judges, or in some time of the anarchy – Jdg 17:6.
mount: Jdg 10:1, Jos 15:9, Jos 17:14-18
Reciprocal: Jdg 3:27 – mountain Jdg 18:2 – mount Jdg 18:13 – mount Ephraim Jdg 19:1 – mount 1Sa 1:1 – mount 1Sa 9:4 – mount 1Ki 4:8 – The son of Hur Hos 2:8 – which they prepared for Baal
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Division 3. (Jdg 17:1-13; Jdg 18:1-31; Jdg 19:1-30; Jdg 20:1-48; Jdg 21:1-25.)
The corruption at heart manifest.
We have now reached the last division of the book, in which we have the revelation of the internal condition of the people, Godward and manward, -the clear illumination of the whole history. For this, therefore, we go back before the history; for of this it is not the consequence, but the cause, and an abiding cause: for the Danite idolatry lasts, as we are told, quite through the whole period of the book. Not that this, by itself, is anything more than a sample of the state in general, having just its significance in this -that it is but a sample.
Another thing is manifested in connection with this -the need of a king. Men are, indeed, very far from doing even what is right in their own eyes; but to do this also is not enough. Give man a law, he cannot be trusted as to the interpretation of the law. It needs that there should be one apart from the influence of private ends and motives, to interpret for him, as well as with power adequate to the enforcement of the interpretation. This shows us how the book of Judges prepares the way for those of Kings; although in these, also, it is soon evident that among all that follow, the best are but the shadows of the true King, for whom all creation waits. Thus history becomes prophecy, and Messianic: for the longing born of the Spirit must have its accomplishment, and the “Desire of all nations” come. The Old Testament is but an unfinished and broken utterance apart from the New, -a witness to its own utter barrenness.
Yet though Christ has come, we are still typically in the days of Judges merely, as we have seen, and the want of a king is not less manifest now than then. Even Christianity has no perfection apart from the personal presence of Him whom it has made necessary to us. If the light has brightened -how much! -since those Old Testament days, the shadows, too, have darkened. We, too, that have the first fruits of the Spirit groan within ourselves, waiting for the manifestation of the power to be put forth when He who is to come shall come, and change our bodies into the likeness of His glorious body, and take the whole world into His almighty new-creative hands. “Amen! Even so, come, Lord Jesus!”
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
APPENDIX TO THE BOOK
The chapters concluding the book detail certain incidents at various periods during the preceding history, when the whole nation was disordered and corrupt, and every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
A MAN-MADE PRIEST (Judges 17)
Chapter 17 tells of Micah who established his own imitation of the tabernacle. Of course it was contrary to the law and evinced ignorance and superstition, although the motive may not have been bad.
ORIGIN OF THE CITY OF DAN (Judges 18)
Chapter 18 carries the story further. It shows how Micah lost his tabernacle, and his priest obtained a broader field. The Danites wanted more territory and dispatched five men to search out a good place (Jdg 18:1-2). By accident they discovered Micahs self-made priest and sought counsel of him, which was as ambiguous as the heathen oracles (Jdg 18:3-6). Nevertheless they came to a town called Laish, which seemed a desirable and easy prey, and which they persuaded the men of war of their tribe to advance upon (Jdg 18:7-12). Passing through Micahs town on their errand, they impressed his priest into their service (Jdg 18:13-21), and, although Micah and his fellow townsmen pursued them, it was without avail (Jdg 18:22-26). They overcame Laish at the end, built their city there and called it Daniel They also continued their idolatrous worship introduced by Micahs priest, down to the captivity (Jdg 18:27-31).
AN AWFUL DEED AND AN AWFUL RETRIBUTION (Judges 19-21)
Chapters 19-21 tell an awful story of lust, civil war and pillage fearfully illustrative of a world without God.
A Levite, after the manner of those days, married a secondary wife who proved unfaithful. Returning to her fathers house at Bethlehem, he followed her to persuade her to come back (19:1-4). After a few days they start their journey accompanied by a servant, lodging the first night at Gibeah (Jdg 19:5-21). Here wicked men abuse the concubine until she dies; her husband, his servant and his host acting so discreditably as to be almost unbelievable, were it not for the sacred record of the fact (Jdg 19:22-28).
Subsequently her husband took a remarkable way of obtaining redress, explicable only on the absence of regular government among the tribes. He divided the corpse into twelve pieces and distributed them with the story of the wrong among all the tribes, so that the latter came together saying: There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day; consider of it, take advice, and speak your minds (Jdg 19:29-30).
The result was a conference of the tribes at Mizpeh (Jdg 20:1). The phrase unto the Lord is possibly explained by the circumstance that Mizpeh was near Shiloh, the place of the tabernacle, and that the leaders went there to consult Jehovah, if haply he would reveal His mind at this crisis, through the high priest.
The Levite is now given an opportunity to state his case formally, in which he inferentially lodges a complaint against the whole tribe of Benjamin, as Gibeah was in its territory (Jdg 20:4-7).
The decision is to punish that city (Jdg 20:8-11), but first to demand that the perpetrators of the crime be surrendered for execution, which Benjamin, through pride or some other reason refuses to do (Jdg 20:12-13). Internecine war follows, in which the Benjamites are at first successful, but in the end succumbed to the greater numbers and the strategy of the united tribes (Jdg 20:14-48).
Humbling Experiences and Their Cause
But why, if the united tribes asked counsel of the lord, and acted on it were they so unsuccessful at first, and why did they suffer so heavily? Perhaps they did not seek it early enough. Their own plans seem to have been formed first, and all they sought of the Lord was to name their leader (Jdg 20:18). It was their disasters that seemed to bring them to their senses and to the Lord, in real earnestness, and then the tables were turned (Jdg 20:26-28).
It is notable that Phineas, the grandson of Aaron, was their high priest, indicating the time to be not long after Joshuas death.
Folly upon Folly
All that was left of Benjamin was six hundred men (Jdg 20:47), for it appears that all the women and children were slain. Now, the other tribes had sworn that they would not give their daughters to the Benjamites for wives, and the result was that the whole of that tribe was likely to become extinct another illustration of a rash vow.
Ashamed of their folly, they repented of it, but not to the extent of taking back their vows (Jdg 21:1-8). Instead of this, having discovered that none of the men of Jabesh-gilead had gathered to the battle, they determined to destroy its inhabitants, with the exception of the unmarried women, and give the latter to the Benjamites (Jdg 21:8-15).
But there were not enough of these to suffice. Therefore, they decided upon the expedient of permitting 200 more to be stolen by the Benjamites from the other tribes under the circumstances narrated in Jdg 21:16-23.
No wonder the book closes with the refrain heard several times before, In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
QUESTIONS
1. What designation might be given to the closing chapters of the book?
2. Did these events come presumably after the last judgeship, or before?
3. State the history of the city of Dan.
4. What was the occasion of the war between Benjamin and the other tribes?
5. What means were taken to perpetuate Benjamin?
6. How is the disorder in Israel explained?
7. Was a divine or human king required the more?
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Jdg 17:1. Here begins what may be called a supplement to the book of Judges; which gives an account of several memorable transactions, in or about the time of the judges: whose history the author would not interrupt, by intermixing these matters with it, but reserved them to be related apart by themselves, in the five following chapters. In these he first gives an account how idolatry came into the tribe of Ephraim; which he doth in this chapter: secondly, How it came to be introduced in the tribe of Dan, chap. 18. And then he relates, in chap. 19., a most barbarous and shameful act done by some Benjamites, and the entire destruction of that tribe, except six hundred men, for countenancing it, chap. 20. And lastly, in chap. 21., he relates how the tribe of Benjamin was kept from being extinguished. Whose name was Micah When Micah lived, and did what is related in this chapter, we may with some certainty gather from Jdg 17:6, which tells us, there was no king in Israel at that time; that is, no supreme governor, with a power to keep the people to their duty; which is supposed by learned men to have been between the death of those elders who survived Joshua, and the first oppression of Israel by Cushan. In which space of time, it is manifest, the Israelites first fell from the worship of God, and polluted themselves with idolatry, Jdg 2:13, and Jdg 3:7. The beginning of which defection from Gods described briefly in this chapter.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jdg 17:1. A man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah. This was soon after the death of Joshua, says Josephus, and before the civil war with Benjamin.
Jdg 17:2. About which thou cursedst. See on Gen 9:25.
Jdg 17:4. Two hundred shekels. The little idol would weigh about a hundred and twenty ounces; small indeed, but pregnant with the most disastrous consequences. Satan could not draw Micah to gross idolatry all at once, but was obliged to mask it with the worship of Jehovah.
Jdg 17:5. Ephod; in imitation of Aarons, or of Gideons. Teraphim; a human figure intended to resemble the angel of God. Michal, Sauls daughter, put one of these into her bed, that it might be taken for David, in case Saul should send to kill him. 1Sa 19:13. To those idols the gentiles committed the care of their families, and consulted them on secret and future events; and vocal answers were sometimes returned. Zec 10:2. Eze 21:21. So they joined the worship of God with that of devils; and they were not unfrequently deceived in the answers which Satan returned. Those penates or household gods, with other detestable consequences of idolatry, the good Josiah removed. 2Ki 23:24. This Teraphim of Micah laid the foundation of Israels ruin. See Hos 3:4.Micah consecrated one of his sons to be a priest; his firstborn, no doubt. Here was a total recession from the Mosaic law, to the patriarchal rights of the firstborn.
Jdg 17:6. No king in Israel; for they were all kings. This agrees best with an approximation to Samsons times; or had it happened during the presidency of Othniel, he might have visited Micahs house with a military force. The magistrate who is supine in the suppression of vice and irreligion betrays his country.
REFLECTIONS.
Idolatry, we here find, began in Israel by a superstitious woman, and was aided by an immoral son, who robbed his mother of all her hoarded wealth. The evil entered in the tribe of Ephraim; it was confirmed by Jeroboam; and never wholly eradicated till the Babylonians, and other previous visitations had exterminated, or nearly so, the whole of this great tribe; for we find no mention of Ephraim sealed in the seventh chapter of the Revelations. Truly the God of Israel kept faith with an apostate people, by inflicting upon them all the denunciations of his law. Idolatry originated also in covetousness, which is in itself an idolatry of a fatal kind. This superstitious woman, it is probable, oppressed her family to hoard up money. What a pity that any aged people should become more and more attached to the world, as the time approaches when they must leave it. How much does any inordinate passion, lurking in the heart, and fostered from youth, degrade old age.
This woman loved her hoard to so great an excess, that she cursed her own son as the thief for taking it away. And is it possible for the heart to become so deeply attached to earth? Surely then St. Paul has wisely said, that the covetous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Mark the arguments which operated on Micah to restore his mothers plundered hoard. She cursed the thief; and conscious of his guilt, he feared the curse would fall upon him. She averred also that the crime was sacrilege, for she had devoted this money to the Lord; and he feared the more for the anger of heaven. Fear, combined with the power of conscience, is the most powerful motive of reforming the wicked; they can have no rest in their minds for secret wickedness, till confession and restitution are made.
Mark how Satan introduced idolatry into this family; it was by affecting to imitate the tabernacle in the ephod, and the teraphim. He would suggest to this woman that she was aged and infirm; that Shiloh, though not very distant, was yet too far for her to travel; that Laban had gods of this kind, Gen 31:19; and that God would bless her in this way, as he had blessed the patriarchs. So this family would serve God for corn and wine. They would love him for his gifts, but not for himself. But how dreadful the crime, notwithstanding the ignorance of the times, to make an inroad on religion revealed from heaven, and figurative of the glory of Christ. How dreadful to violate the ritual law, accompanied with so many blessings, guarded by so many curses, and sealed by so many miracles.
The cause of sin being introduced, and not nipped in the bud, is ascribed to the want of a judge, and of vigour in the civil government. Every man did, not that which was right in the Lords eyes, but what was right in his own corrupt imagination. Had Moses been alive, he would have showed an indignation like that when the calf was made, or when Israel committed fornication with the women of Moab. Had Josiah now reigned, he would have visited this house with his guards, and either reformed or burnt it with fire. By the removal of this abomination in its infancy, Israel might have been saved from the curse which spread more and more till the nation was destroyed.
See lastly, how Micah was mistaken in his piety. Now, I know that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a levite for my priest. No, Micah: thy soul shall be impoverished, and thy house robbed of its gold, and its gods. But had his piety been according to the will of God, blessed he surely would have been: for that house shall indeed be blessed where the fear and the worship of God are preserved.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Judges 17-18. This section is the first of two supplements. It explains the origin of the famous shrine at Dan, and the navet of its moral and religious ideas proves how ancient it is. In not a few places the text has evidently been tampered with by scribes, who took offence at practices which were from a later point of view irregular. The events in question must have occurred before the time of Deborah (Jdg 5:17).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
17:1 And there {a} was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name [was] Micah.
(a) Some think this history was in the time of Othniel, or as Josephus writes, immediately after Joshua.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
1. The idolatry of Micah ch. 17
The story of Micah (ch. 17) introduces the account of the setting up of image worship in the North (ch. 18).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Micah’s unlawful worship 17:1-6
The writer told us nothing about Micah’s background, except that he originally lived in the Hill Country of Ephraim, with or near his mother (Jdg 17:1-2). Micah’s name means "Who is like Yahweh." As is true of so many details in this story, Micah’s name is ironic. He was anything but like Yahweh. The fact that Micah’s mother blessed him in the name of Yahweh creates a positive impression, but other features of the story demonstrate that her veneer of orthodox Yahwism was extremely thin.
Micah was a thief who stole a fortune from his own mother. The amount of silver he stole could have sustained one person for a lifetime in Israel (cf. Jdg 17:10). Apparently he confessed his theft because he feared his mother’s curse (Jdg 17:2). Instead of cursing him she blessed him, a very unusual reaction in view of the amount of money involved. Perhaps she believed that her blessing would undo her previous curse. [Note: Wolf, p. 481.] Micah’s mother then claimed to dedicate all 1,100 pieces of the recovered silver to Yahweh. However she gave only 200 pieces to a silversmith to make an image. The Lydians first produced coined money in the sixth century B.C. Therefore these were not 1,100 silver coins but 1,100 measures of silver. The writer did not identify how much silver was in each measure, but this was a fortune by any estimate. [Note: See The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed., s.v. "Money," by A. F. Walls.] She stole from God as her son had stolen from her. Micah had evidently learned dishonesty at home.
The "graven image" (Heb. pesel) was apparently the idol, and the "molten image" (massekah) was its base. Both of these words occur at the head of the list of curses (Deu 27:15) to describe what the law forbade making for idolatrous purposes. The Hebrew word that describes the graven image occurs almost exclusively in relation to the golden calves that Aaron made (Exo 32:4) and King Jeroboam made (1Ki 12:28-30). Micah’s mother evidently intended this image to represent either Yahweh or the animal on which pagan people visualized gods standing. [Note: See Amihai Mazar, "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite ’High Place’ From the Time of the Judges," Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):34-40; Hershel Shanks, "Two Early Israelite Cult Sites Now Questioned," Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-February 1988):48-52; and Amihai Mazar, "On Cult Places and Early Israelites: A Response to Michael Coogan," Biblical Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):45.]
"The gods were often depicted as standing, or more rarely sitting, on the back of a bull, which by its strength and power of fertility well represented the essence of the nature cults." [Note: Cundall and Morris, p. 184.]
Obviously Micah and his mother were either ignorant of, or more probably chose to disregard, God’s law against making graven images (Exo 20:4; Exo 20:23; Deu 4:16). They also seem to have been unaware of, or unconcerned about, Israel’s tragic experience with the golden calf at Mt. Sinai (Exo 32:19-35).
"Micah and his mother are sharply distinguished from Samson and his mother [and even more from Samuel and his mother] by their materialism and idolatry. Here there is no evidence of the presence or call of the Spirit in their lives." [Note: Lewis, p. 88.]
God commanded the Israelites not to multiply sanctuaries in Canaan (Deu 12:1-14), but Micah built one in or near his house (Jdg 17:5). He did not need to do this because he lived close to Shiloh, where the tabernacle stood (cf. Jdg 17:1; Jdg 18:31). In his convenient shrine Micah kept an ephod that he had made, probably for divination (cf. Gideon’s ephod, Jdg 8:27). This was evidently an imitation of the high priest’s ephod (cf. Jdg 8:27). He also kept household gods that probably had some connection with ancestor veneration and divination (cf. Gen 31:19). [Note: Davis and Whitcomb, p. 144.] He also disregarded the Aaronic priesthood by ordaining his son as the family priest.
"The by-passing of the Levitical priesthood by Micah may be due either to a breakdown in the distribution of the Levites amongst the community or to an overlooking, wilful [sic] or ignorant, of the provisions of the law." [Note: Cundall and Morris, p. 185.]
The writer explained editorially that there was no king in Israel at this time and everyone did as he pleased (Jdg 17:6). That is the reason Micah could get away with such flagrantly disobedient behavior. Even though there was not yet a human king, Yahweh reigned as Israel’s monarch from heaven. Since His people paid no attention to His authority by disregarding His Law, Israel was practically without a king. Kings enforce standards, but in Israel the people were setting their own standards.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
THE STOLEN GODS
Jdg 17:1-13, Jdg 18:1-31
THE portion of the Book of Judges which begins with the seventeenth chapter and extends to the close is not in immediate connection with that which has gone before. We read {Jdg 18:30} that “Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.” But the proper reading is, “Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses.” It would seem that the renegade Levite of the narrative was a near descendant of the great lawgiver. So rapidly did the zeal of the priestly house decline that in the third or fourth generation after Moses one of his own line became minister of an idol temple for the sake of a living. It is evident, then, that in the opening of the seventeenth chapter, we are carried back to the time immediately following the conquest of Canaan by Joshua, when Othniel was settling in the south and the tribes were endeavouring to establish themselves in the districts allotted to them. The note of time is of course far from precise, but the incidents are certainly to be placed early in the period.
We are introduced first to a family living in Mount Ephraim consisting of a widow and: her son Micah, who is married and has sons of his own. It appears that on the death of the father of Micah a sum of eleven hundred shekels of silver, about a hundred and twenty pounds of our money-a large amount for the time-was missed by the widow, who after vain search for it spoke in strong terms about the matter to her son. He had taken the money to use in stocking his farm or in trade and at once acknowledged that he had done so and restored it to his mother, who hastened to undo any evil her words had caused by invoking upon him the blessing of God. Further she dedicated two hundred of her shekels to make graven and molten images in token of piety and gratitude.
We have here a very significant revelation of the state of religion. The indignation of Moses had burned against the people when at Sinai they made a rude image of gold, sacrificed to it and danced about it in heathen revel. We are reading of what took place say a century after that scene at the foot of Sinai, and already those who desire to show their devotion to the Eternal, very imperfectly known as Jehovah, make teraphim and molten images to represent Him. Micah has a sort of private chapel or temple among the buildings in his courtyard: He consecrates one of his sons to be priest of this little sanctuary. And the historian adds in explanation of this, as one keenly aware of the benefits of good government under a God-fearing monarch-“in those days there was no king in Israel. Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”
We need not take for granted that the worship in this hill chapel was of the heathen sort. There was probably no Baal, no Astarte among the images; or, if there was, it may have been merely as representing a Syrian power prudently recognised but not adored. No hint occurs in the whole story of a licentious or a cruel cult, although there must have been something dangerously like the superstitious practices of Canaan. Micahs chapel, whatever the observances were, gave direct introduction to the pagan forms and notions which prevailed among the people of the land. There already Jehovah was degraded to the rank of a nature divinity, and represented by figures.`
In one of the highland valleys towards the north of Ephraims territory Micah had his castle and his ecclesiastical establishment-state and church in germ. The Israelites of the neighbourhood, who looked up to the well to do farmer for protection, regarded him all the more that he showed respect for religion, that he had this house of gods and a private priest. They came to worship in his sanctuary and to inquire of the ecclesiastic, who in some way endeavoured to discover the will of God by means of the teraphim and ephod. The ark of the covenant was not far away, for Bethel and Gilgal were both within a days journey. But the people did not care to be at the trouble of going so far. They liked better their own local shrine and its homelier ways; and when at length Micah secured the services of a Levite the worship seemed to have all the sanction that could possibly be desired.
It need hardly be said that God is not confined to a locality, that in those days as in our own the true worshipper could find the Almighty on any hill top, in any dwelling or private place, as well as at the accredited shrine. It is quite true, also, that God makes large allowance for the ignorance of men and their need of visible signs and symbols of what is unseen and eternal. We must not therefore assume at once that in Micahs house of idols, before the widows graven and molten figures, there could be no acceptable worship, no prayers that reached the ear of the Lord of Hosts. And one might even go the length of saying that, perhaps, in this schismatic sanctuary, this chapel of images, devotion could be quite as sincere as before the ark itself. Little good came of the religious ordinances maintained there during the whole period of the judges, and even in Elis latter days the vileness and covetousness practised at Shiloh more than countervailed any pious influence. Local and family altars therefore must have been of real use. But this was the danger, that leaving the appointed centre of Jehovah worship, where symbolism was confined within safe limits, the people should in ignorant piety multiply objects of adoration and run into polytheism. Hence the importance of the decree, afterwards recognised, that one place of sacrifice should gather to it all the tribes and that there the ark of the covenant with its altar should alone speak of the will and holiness of God. And the story of the Danite migration connected with this of Micah and his Levite well illustrates the wisdom of such a law, for it shows how, in the far north, a sanctuary and a worship were set up which, existing long for tribal devotion, became a national centre of impure worship.
The wandering Levite from Bethlehem-Judah is one, we must believe, of many Levites, who having found no inheritance because the cities allotted to them were as yet unconquered spread themselves over the land seeking a livelihood, ready to fall in with any local customs of religion that offered them position and employment. The Levites were esteemed as men acquainted with the way of Jehovah, able to maintain that communication with Him without which no business could be hopefully undertaken. Something of the dignity that was attached to the names of Moses and Aaron ensured them honourable treatment everywhere unless among the lowest of the people; and when this Levite reached the dwelling of Micah beside which there seems to have been a khan or lodging place for travellers, the chance of securing him was at once seized. For ten pieces of silver, say twenty-five shillings a year, with a suit of clothes and his food, he agreed to become Micahs private chaplain. At this very cheap rate the whole household expected a time of prosperity and divine favour. “Now know I,” said the head of the family, “that the Lord will do me good seeing I have a Levite to my priest,” We must fear that, he took some advantage of the mans need, that he did not much consider the honour of Jehovah yet reckoned on getting a blessing all; the same. It was a case of seeking the best religious privileges as cheaply as possible, a very common thing in all ages.
But the coming of the Levite was to have results Micah did not foresee. Jonathan had lived in Bethlehem, and some ten or twelve miles westward down the valley one came to Zorah and Eshtaol, two little towns of the tribe of Dan of which we have heard. The Levite had apparently become pretty well known in the district: and especially in those villages to which he went to offer sacrifice or perform some other religious rite. And now a series of incidents brought certain old acquaintances to his new place of abode.
Even in Samsons time the tribe of Dan, whose territory was to be along the coast west from Judah, was still obliged to content itself with the slopes of the hills, not having got possession of the plain. In the earlier period with which we are now dealing the Danites were in yet greater difficulty, for not only had they Philistines on the one side but Amorites on the other. The Amorites “would dwell,” we are told, “in Mount Heres, in Aijalon and in Shaalbim.” It was this pressure which determined the people about Zorah and Eshtaol to find if possible another place of settlement, and five men were sent out in search. Travelling north they took the same way as the Levite had taken, heard of the same khan in the hill country of Ephraim, and made it their resting place for a night. The discovery of the Levite Jonathan followed and of the chapel in which he ministered with its wonderful array of images. We can suppose the deputation had thoughts they did not express, but for the present they merely sought the help of the priest, begging him to consult the oracle on their behalf and learn whether their mission would be successful. The five went on their journey with the encouragement, “Go in peace; before the Lord is your way wherein ye go.”
Months pass without any more tidings of the Danites until one day a great company is seen following the hill road near Micahs farm. “There are six hundred men girt with weapons of war with their wives and children and cattle, a whole clan on the march, filling the road for miles and moving slowly northward. The five men have indeed succeeded after a fashion. Away between Lebanon and Hermon, in the region of the sources of Jordan, they have found the sort of district they went to seek. Its chief town Laish stood in the midst of fertile fields with plenty of wood and water. It was a place, according to their large report, where was no want of anything that is in the earth.” Moreover the inhabitants, who seem to have been a Phoenician colony, dwelt by themselves quiet and secure, having no dealings or treaty with the powerful Zidonians. They were the very kind of people whom a sudden attack would be likely to subdue. There was an immediate migration of Danites to this fresh field, and in prospect of bloody work the men of Zorah and Eshtaoi seem to have had no doubt as to the rightness of their expedition; it was enough that they had felt themselves straitened. The same reason appears to suffice many in modern times. Were the aboriginal inhabitants of America and Australia considered by those who coveted their land? Even the pretence of buying has not always been maintained. Murder and rapine have been the methods used by men of our own blood, our own name, and no nation under the sun has a record darker than the tale of British conquest.
Men who go forth to steal land are quite fit to attempt the strange business of stealing gods that is appropriating to themselves the favour of divine powers and leaving other men destitute. The Danites as they pass Micahs house hear from their spies of the priest and the images that are in his charge. “Do you know that that there is in these houses an ephod and teraphim and a graven image and a molten image? Now therefore consider what ye have to do.” The hint is enough. Soon the court of the farmstead is invaded, the images are brought out and the Levite Jonathan, tempted by the offer of being made priest to a clan, is fain to accompany the marauders. Here is confusion on confusion. The Danites are thieves, brigands, and yet they are pious; so pious that they steal images to assist them in worship. The Levite agrees to the theft and accepts the offer of priesthood under them. He will be the minister of a set of thieves to forward their evil designs, and they, knowing him to be no better than themselves, expect that his sacrifices and prayers will do them good. It is surely a capital instance of perverted religious ideas.
As we have said, these circumstances are no doubt recounted in order to show how dangerous it was to separate from the pure order of worship at the sanctuary. In after times this lesson was needed, especially when the first king of the northern tribes set his golden calves the one at Bethel, the other at Dan. Was Israel to separate from Judah in religion as well as in government? Let there be a backward look to the beginning of schism in those extraordinary doings of the Danites. It was in the city founded by the six hundred that one of Jeroboams temples was built. Could any blessing rest upon a shrine and upon devotions which had such an origin, such a history?
May we find a parallel now? Is there a constituted religious authority with which soundness of belief and acceptable worship are so bound up that to renounce the authority is to be in the way of confusion and error, schism and eternal loss? The Romanist says so. Those who speak for the Papal church never cease to cry to the world that within their communion alone are truth and safety to be found. Renounce, they say, the apostolic and divine authority which we conserve and all is gone. Is there anarchy in a country? Are the forces that make for political disruption and national decay showing themselves in many lands? Are monarchies overthrown? Are the people lawless and wretched? It all comes of giving up the Catholic order and creed. Return to the one fold under the one Shepherd if you would find prosperity. And there are others who repeat the same injunction, not indeed denying that there may be saving faith apart from their ritual, but insisting still that it is an error and a sin to seek God elsewhere than at the accredited shrine.
With Jewish ordinances we Christians have nothing to do when we are judging as to religious order and worship now. There is no central shrine, no exclusive human authority. Where Christ is, there is the temple; where He speaks, the individual conscience must respond. The work of salvation is His alone, and the humblest believer is His consecrated priest. When our Lord said, “The hour cometh and now is-when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth”; and again, “Where two or three are gathered together in My name there am I in the midst of them”; when He as the Son of God held out His hands directly to every sinner needing pardon and every seeker after truth, when He offered the one sacrifice upon the cross by which a living way is opened into the holiest place, He broke down the walls of partition and with the responsibility declared the freedom of the soul.
And here we reach the point to which our narrative applies as an illustration. Micah and his household worshipping the images of silver, the Levite officiating at the altar, seeking counsel of Jehovah by ephod and teraphim, the Danites who steal the gods, carry off the priest and set up a new worship in the city they build-all these represent to us types and stages of what is really schism pitiful and disastrous-that is, separation from the truth of things and from the sacred realities of divine faith. Selfish untruth and infidelity are schism, the wilderness and outlawry of the soul.
1. Micah and his household, with their chapel of images, their ephod and teraphim, represent those who fall into the superstition that religion is good as insuring temporal success and prosperity, that God will see to the worldly comfort of those who pay respect to Him. Even among Christians this is a very common and very debasing superstition. The sacraments are often observed as signs of a covenant which secures for men divine favour through social arrangements and human law.
2. The spiritual nature and power of religion are not denied, but they are uncomprehended. The national custom and the worldly hope have to do with the observance of devout forms rather than any movement of the soul heavenward. A church may in this way become like Micahs household, and prayer may mean seeking good terms with Him who can fill the land with plenty or send famine and cleanness of teeth. Unhappily many worthy and most devout persons still hold the creed of an early and ignorant time. The secret of nature and providence is hid from them. The severities of life seem to them to be charged with anger, and the valleys of human reprobation appear darkened by the curse of God. Instead of finding in pain and loss a marvellous divine discipline they perceive only the penalty of sin, a sign of Gods aversion, not of His Fatherly grace. It is a sad, a terrible blindness of soul. We can but note it here and pass on, for there, are other applications of the old story.
3. The Levite represents an unworthy worldly ministry. With sadness must confession be made that there are in every church pastors unspiritual, worldlings in heart, whose desire is mainly for superiority of rank or of wealth, who have no vision of Christs cross and battle except as objective and historical. Here, most happily, the cases of complete worldliness are rare. It is rather a tendency we observe than a developed and acknowledged state of things. Very few of those in the ranks of the Christian ministry are entirely concerned with the respect paid to them in society and the number of shekels to be got in a year. That he keeps pace with the crowd instead of going before it is perhaps the hardest thing that can be said of the worldly pastor. He is humane, active, intelligent; but it is for the church as a great institution, or the church as his temporal hope and stay. So his ministry becomes at the best a matter of serving tables and providing alms-we shall not say amusement. Here indeed is schism; for what is farther from the truth of things, what is farther from Christ?
Once more we have with us today, very much with us, certain Danites of science, politics, and the press who, if they could, would take away our God and our Bible, our Eternal Father and spiritual hope, not from a desire to possess but because they hate to see us believing, hate to see any weight of silver given to religious uses. Not a few of these are marching, as they think triumphantly, to commanding and opulent positions whence they will rule the thought of the world. And on the way, even while they deride and detest the supernatural, they will have the priest go with them. They care nothing for what he says; to listen to the voice of a spiritual teacher is an absurdity of which they would not be guilty; for to their own vague prophesying all mankind is to give hoed, and their interpretations of human life are to be received as the bible of the age. Of the same order is the socialist who would make use of a faith he intends to destroy, and a priesthood whose claim is offensive to him, on his way to what he calls the organisation of society. In his view the uses of Christianity and the Bible are temporal and earthly. He will not have Christ the Redeemer of the soul, yet he attempts to conjure with Christs words and appropriate the power of His name. The audacity of these would be robbers is matched only by their ignorance of the needs and ends of human life.
We might here refer to the injustice practised by one and another band of our modem Israel who do not scruple to take from obscure and weak households of faith the sacraments and Christian ministry, the marks and rights of brotherhood. We can well believe that those who do this have never looked at their action from the other side, and may not have the least idea of the soreness they leave in the hearts of humble and sincere believers.
In fine, the Danites with the images of Micah went their way and he and his neighbours had to suffer the loss and make the best of their empty chapel, where no oracle thenceforth spoke to them. It is no parable, but a very real example of the loss that comes to all who have trusted in forms and symbols, the outward signs instead of the living power of religion. While we repel the arrogance that takes from faith its symbolic props and stays we must not let ourselves deny that the very rudeness of an enemy may be an excellent discipline for the Christian. Agnosticism and science and other Danite companies sweep with them a good deal that is dear to the religious mind and may leave it very distressed and anxious-the chapel empty, the oracle as it may appear lost forever. With the symbol the authority, the hope, the power seem to be lost irrecoverably. What now has faith to rest upon? But the modern spirit with its resolution to sweep away every unfact and mere form is no destroyer. Rather does it drive the Christian to a science, a virtue far beyond its own. It forces we may say on faith that severe truthfulness and intellectual courage which are the proper qualities of Christianity, the necessary counterpart of its trust and love and grace. In short, when enemies have carried off the poor teraphim and fetishes which are their proper capture they have but compelled religion to be itself, compelled it to find its spiritual God, its eternal creed and to understand its Bible. This, though done with evil intent, is surely no cruelty, no outrage. Shall a man or a church that has been so roused and thrown back on reality sit wailing in the empty chapel for the images of silver and the deliverances of the hollow ephod? Everything remains, the soul and the spiritual world, the law of God, the redemption of Christ, the Spirit of eternal life.