Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 19:25

But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

25. If the offer of the host strikes us as immoral, the conduct of the Levite makes an even worse impression: he sacrifices his concubine-wife to save himself. The same despicable behaviour appears in the stories of Abraham and Isaac, Gen 12:10 ff. J, Gen 12:20 E, Gen 26:6-11 J; no blame or condemnation is attached to any one; we must not expect to find even the elements of chivalry in the ancient Hebrew estimate of womanhood. Our standards of morality are inapplicable.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Verse 25. So the man took his concubine] The word yachazek, which we here translate simply took, signifies rather to take or seize by violence. The woman would not go out to them; but her graceless husband forced her to go, in order that he might save his own body. He could have but little love for her, and this was the cause of their separation before.

The men of Gibeah who wished to abuse the body of the Levite; the Levite who wished to save his body at the expense of the modesty, reputation, and life of his wife; and the old man who wished to save his guest at the expense of the violation of his daughter; are all characters that humanity and modesty wish to be buried in everlasting oblivion.

When the day began to spring] Their turpitude could not bear the full light of the day; and they dismissed the poor woman when the day began to break.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The man took his concubine; being willing to expose her rather than the daughter of his host, who had expressed such a singular care and affection for him.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

But the men would not hearken to him,…. Especially with respect to his daughter, whom they knew very well, and had no affection for, perhaps was not handsome enough for them:

so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; that is, not the old man, but the Levite took his own wife or concubine, and put her forth to them, very probably with her consent, to try if that would pacify them, she being a fair and beautiful woman, as Ben Gersom and Abarbinel suggest; and Josephus u intimates, that some young men of the city had seen her in the street, and were captivated with her beauty, and came on purpose for her, and would not be satisfied unless she was delivered to them; and upon which her husband, perceiving this, laid hold on her by main strength, as the word signifies, and brought her out whether she would or not, as Kimchi notes:

and they knew her, and abused her all night until the morning; had carnal knowledge of her, and used her in a most shocking manner one after another, all the night long, until the morning appeared:

and when the day began to spring; at break of day, when the light dawned: they let her go; their works being works of darkness, and would not bear the light.

u Antiqu. l. 5. c. 2. sect. 8.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Jdg 19:25 a

‘But the men would not listen to him, so the man laid hold on his concubine, and brought her out to them.’

Nothing would at this point divert them from their purpose. They continued beating at the door in their dreadful lust.

“So the man laid hold on his concubine, and brought her out to them.” The Levite presumably thrust her through the doorway, for had he gone out to them they would have achieved their purpose. The concubine was handed over. We must remember that she may well have been a cult prostitute and if so may have been used to multiple sex. It may therefore be that she volunteered to go out to them, not aware of quite how bestial they would be, otherwise the old man would surely have given his daughter first. Yet the force of ‘laid hold’ is against this. It suggests that she was unwilling.

Thus it seems that the Levite acted to save the man’s daughter, and he may certainly have had in mind that his wife was a concubine, and was also used to multiple sex. He certainly expected her to be alive in the morning. All through the emphasis has been on the fact that she was his concubine. He no doubt considered his own worth, and the worth of the daughter, as being superior. The concubine, though beautiful, was more expendable. That she was beautiful comes out in that once the men had seen her they forgot about their chief prey.

It is easy to criticise the Levite. But he was a man who believed he knew his own worth, and whom others respected and looked up to. He was conscious of his social class, and the thought of being sodomised would to such a man have been unbearable. On the other hand his wife was ‘only a concubine’, had already revealed her sexual propensities and was still under the shadow of guilt. And he had the example of Lot to go by.

Jdg 19:25 b

‘And they knew her, and abused her all night until the morning, and when the day began to spring they let her go.’

What followed demonstrated their bestiality. They lined up to have sex with her, passing her from one to the other, and no doubt treated her roughly as such men will. And this went on all night. And when day came they let her go, a spent wreck, and disappeared to their homes.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jdg 19:25. But the men would not hearken to him It is plain, from Jdg 19:5 of the next chapter, that all the particulars of this matter are not related. The Levite, resolutely bent to defend his own chastity, probably found no other way to save that and his life, than by giving up his concubine, and therefore of two evils chose the least.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Jdg 19:25 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

Ver. 25. But the men would not hearken ] Unruly lust hath no ears. Fertur equis aurigo, nec audit currus habenis: like heavy bodies down steep hills, which once in motion, move themselves, and know no ground but the bottom.

And abused her all the night. ] Factitarunt in ea; vel occuparunt sese in ea: opus abominabile fecerunt in ea in coitu. a This was a just hand of God upon her for her former filthiness and unfaithfulness. Lais, that notorious harlot, died in the act of uncleanness: so did Pope Paul IV, of whom the proverb went, Eum per eandum partem vitam profudisse per quam acceperat. b

a Piscat. Vatab.

b Jac. Revius, De Vit. Pontiff

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)