Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 9:1

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Judges 9:1” utilice nuestra app.

And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,

1. Shechem ] now Nblus (the Roman Flavia Neapolis), 30 miles N. of Jerusalem, 5 miles S.E. of Samaria, situated in a narrow, fertile valley, at the entrance to which rise the two mountains, Ebal on the N. and Gerizim ( Jdg 9:7) on the S. The town lies on the watershed (1870 ft.) between the Mediterranean and the Jordan basins, hence perhaps its name, shoulder. Easily dominated from the heights on either side, it could never defend itself against attack ( Jdg 9:44 f.); but it had the great advantage of lying close to the crossing of the two main routes which traverse the country from N. to S. and from E. to W.; this accounts for the highway robbery in lawless times ( Jdg 9:25, cf. Hos 6:9). The ancient Canaanite city is often mentioned in the patriarchal stories (Gen 12:6 J, Gen 33:18 P, Gen 33:19-20 E, Gen 33:34 J and P, Gen 37:12 ff. J): how and when it passed into Israelite possession cannot be learnt with certainty, for the traditions differ; thus Gen 48:22 E does not agree with Gen 33:19 E, Jos 24:32 E; and while Jos 24:1; Jos 24:25-26; Jos 24:32 implies that the town was entirely Israelite before the death of Joshua, the present narrative shews that it was still largely Canaanite.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

We are not told how soon after the death of Gideon these events happened. There must have been time for the apostacy and establishment of Baal-worship, and for the development of ill-will between Abimelech and his brethren.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Jdg 9:1-22

Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal.

The election of the usurper to be king

I. Contrasts in the history of Gods own people. After Gideon–Abimelech!

II. The best of fathers may have the worst of sons.

III. useful purposes are served in recording a wicked mans life in the book of God.

1. The record is given as a curse, and not as a blessing.

2. Such a record illustrates the truth of Gods testimony respecting human character.

3. It shows by practical example the frightfully evil nature of sin when allowed to develop itself unchecked.

4. Wicked deeds recorded are beacons set up to warn us from the rocks and whirlpools of sin.

IV. God can bring accusers against the wicked when they fancy themselves most secure. (J. P. Millar.)

Abimelech, the adventurer

Abimelech is the Oriental adventurer, and uses the methods of another age than ours; yet we have our examples, and if they are less scandalous in some ways, if they are apart from bloodshed and savagery, they are still sufficiently trying to those who cherish the faith of Divine justice and providence. How many have to see with amazement the adventurer triumph by means of seventy pieces of silver from the house of Baal or even from a holier treasury. He in a selfish and cruel game seems to have speedy and complete success denied to the best and purest cause. Fighting for his own hand in wicked or contemptuous hardness and arrogant conceit, he finds support, applause, an open way. Being no prophet, he has honour in his own town. He knows the art of the stealthy insinuation, the lying promise, and the flattering murmur; he has skill to make the favour of one leading person a step to securing another. When a few important people have been hoodwinked, he too becomes important, and success is assured. The Bible, most entirely honest of books, frankly sets before us this adventurer, Abimelech, in the midst of the judges of Israel, as low a specimen of success as need be looked for; and we trace the well-known means by which such a person is promoted. His mothers brethren spake of him, etc. That there was little to say, that he was a man of no character, mattered not the least. The thing was to create an impression, so that Abimelechs scheme might be introduced and forced. So far he could intrigue and then, the first steps gained, he could mount. But there was in him none of the mental power that afterwards marked Jehu, none of the charm that survives with the name of Absalom. It was a jealousy, pride, ambition, he played, as the most jealous, proud, and ambitious; yet for three years the Hebrews of the league, blinded by the desire to have their nation like others, suffered him to bear the name of king. And by this sovereignty the Israelites who acknowledged it were doubly and trebly compromised. Not only did they accept a man without a record, they believed in one who was an enemy to his countrys religion–one, therefore, quite ready to trample upon its liberty. This is really the beginning of a worse oppression than that of Jabin or of Midian. It shows on the part of Hebrews generally, as well as those who tamely submitted to Abimelechs lordship, a most abject state of mind. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)

Ambition destroys the finer feelings of men

The love of power and supremacy absorbed, consumed Napoleon. Before this duty, honour, love, humanity, fell prostrate. Josephine, we are told, was dear to him; but the devoted wife, who had stood firm and faithful in the day of his doubtful fortunes, was cast off in his prosperity to make room for a stranger, who might be more subservient to his power. He was affectionate, we are told, to his brothers and mother; but his brothers, the moment they ceased to be his tools, were disgraced; and his mother, it is said, was not allowed to sit in the presence of her imperial son. He sometimes softened, we are told, by the sight of the field of battle strewn with the wounded and dead. But if the Moloch of his ambition claimed new heaps of slain to-morrow it was never denied. With all his sensibility he gave millions to the sword with as little compunction as he would have brushed away so many insects which had infested his march. (H. E. Channing.)

The trees went forth . . . to anoint a king.

The parable of the trees

This Divine parable is full of interest. It is the oldest complete example of a parable blending with literal history. It was spoken by Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon, to expose the unworthy conduct of the Israelites, and to arrest them in their course. The olive, the vine, and the fig-tree, in the metaphorical application, would be his father, his brethren, and himself, none of whom would be king. The bramble would be Abimelech, who would either reign or destroy, and who would in the end, as the parable teaches, introduce so wretched a system as to entail upon himself and people mutual destruction. And so it happened. And such is the eternal law. He whose throne is reached through falsehood and blood, who has no foundation of virtue and right and worth to rest upon, must continue to cement with fresh crime the edifice he has reared, and so to add to the fire of vengeance that is secretly gathering around him, until at length some additional blow breaks the cover under which it has been smouldering, and it bursts upon the wicked tyrant and destroys, as it was with this Abimelech, both reign and life. Such is the lesson yielded by this parable in its letter, as a warning against that destructive ambition which has so often desolated the earth, in ancient and in modern times. Before quitting this part of the subject, allow me to call your attention to the difference between metaphor and correspondence. Metaphor is a certain likeness which is perceived by the mind, between two natural things, which have in other respects no connection with one another. Correspondence is the analogy which exists between two things, one spiritual and the other natural, and which answer to one another in all their uses and in all respects. We might go further, and attempt to show that in all cases of true and complete correspondences the spiritual is to the natural as the cause to the effect, the soul to the body; but upon this we cannot now enlarge. We have dwelt upon the parable as a metaphor. The olive-tree stands in this respect for Gideon. Like him, it was most valuable and honoured, and like him it would not reign. In other respects there was no connection or relation between them, and both were natural visible objects. We come now to the spiritual sense of the parable, and to bring this out we must employ, not metaphor, but correspondence. Perceptions, or acknowledged principles of truth or error, grow up in the mind like trees in the soil, and answer to trees in all their progress. Instruction is like seed. Instruction in Divine things is the seed of all that is great and good in the soul. The seed, the Divine Saviour said, is the Word of God (Luk 8:11). If we watch the reception and growth of knowledge in the mind, until it becomes a clear and enlarged view, and at length a productive principle, we shall discern the closest analogy to the progression of a tree from seed to fruit. In our text, however, we have not only the subject of trees in general placed before us, but three trees especially are singled out as valuable, but declining to reign–the olive, the fig-tree, and the vine: and one as worthless determined to rule or to destroy–the bramble. Let us examine these singly; and first, the olive. It is the tree most esteemed in Eastern countries, and especially in Palestine. Its wood yields a precious gum, its fruits are delightful and nutritious, and its oil, which is as it were the essence of the fruit pressed out, is used in food, also to give light, and as holy oil in the offerings of worship. As trees correspond to truths perceived as principles in the mind, the most worthy tree will correspond to the most valuable principle, that is, the wisdom which teaches love to the Lord. This principle when it has grown up in the soul, and given us to know the true character of our heavenly Father, shows us that He is not only loving, but love itself, infinite love unutterably tender, unchangeably merciful, good to all, whose tender mercies are over all His works. This is the celestial olive-tree which yields the oil, honoured both by God and man. It is of the olive-tree corresponding to the interior wisdom which conjoins the soul and its God together, and through which holy love descends, that we are informed in our text it refused to be king over the trees. The Divine Word teaches us by this that the spirit of rule is opposed to the spirit of love. Love desires to aid, to serve, to bless, but not to rule. If placed in positions of government and responsibility, it accepts them that it may minister, not that it may reign. If it were to enter into the desire of ruling it would lose its fatness; or, in other words, its richness and its joy. The fig-tree is next brought under notice. It was one of the most common fruit trees in Palestine, growing often on the wayside. It corresponds therefore to that natural perception which teaches the ordinary virtues of daily life. But even the common virtues of life, to be genuine, must be separated from the love of dominion. It is not always so. But unless this is really the case, there is no sweetness in doing good. Our good in fact is not good, but self in a disguise. A person will sometimes be liberal in his support of charities. He will profess the utmost sympathy for the poor. He will be generous in his support of public institutions for education and general improvement. His fig-tree seems to hear fine fruit, and yet it is quite possible that the love of applause, the desire to be paid by the suffrages of his fellow-citizens, being given to confer upon him political power, may be his aim. And if so, his figs have no sweetness, and are not good fruit. And oh, what is the applause of men compared with the sweetness of heaven? What are fruits worth if they are only gilded dust? (Jer 24:8). Such, then, is the lesson conveyed in the reply of the fig-tree spiritually understood. Should we leave the sweetness of heavenly virtue, and the real goodness of works which will abide the scrutiny of eternity, for the empty pageantry of place and power, sought only from the love of rule, and entailing bitterness here, and misery hereafter? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou and reign over us. Vines correspond to the truths of faith. The Church, especially as to its principles of faith, is commonly called in the Scriptures a vineyard. The reason is, no doubt, that the influence of principles of true faith is to the mind what wine is to the body–it strengthens the exhausted and cheers the weary. There are more that be with us than all that be against us: why then should we faint or despair? A God of love has created and prepared us for our work. His creation consists of innumerable channels, through which His benevolence descends. Loving friends are around, and a heaven of love before us. All things cheer us on. The mountains run down with new wine. The vine, in our text, speaks of its wine as cheering God and man. And when we perceive that wine is the emblem of encouraging truth, we appreciate the force of the Divine words. For when man is cheered by truth and saved, God rejoices with him. But the vine intimates that, if she sought to be ruler over the trees, she would leave her wine. Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? And so it is. If any one, by means of heavenly truth seeks dominion, his truth ceases to be saving. It is poison, not wine, to him. We come now, however, to a plant of very different character, and you will find the reply quite different. Then said all the trees to the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us. The reply takes it for granted that he is willing, and expresses his determination either to rule or destroy. This bramble is a low bushy tree with strong thorns, and whose wood is of a fiery nature easily set in flames. It is the emblem of the lust of dominion, which is also essentially unbelieving. The ambitious man believes in nothing but himself and his cunning. Everything which will contribute to his earthly aggrandisement is welcome; but he hates what will not come down to his level. Let us hear him. If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust in my shadow: and, if not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon. What an extraordinary invitation was that! The olive, the vine, the fig-tree, the lofty cedar, and all the noble trees of the forest, were to come and put themselves under the shadow of this contemptible shrub! How ridiculous an idea! Yet it is paralleled, in all respects, by the demands of ambition. It will deign to lend its protection to Divine things, only they must be subservient, and it must be chief. This principle in politicians makes religion an instrument of state policy; the ministers of religion a superior kind of police. But woe to the religion which stoops to it. It loses its own native life and vigour: it leaves its oil, and its figs, and its wine. The principle in an ambitious priest uses all the semblances of earnest piety to attain his selfish ends. He cares, however, nothing for them in themselves. That which he cannot bend to his selfish rule he burns to destroy. He says, like this miserable plant, If not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon. He burns with the mad rage of frenzy against whatever will not stoop to gratify his insane whim to rule over all things. From the whole of this Divine lesson we may gather the most invaluable impressions. We cannot too strongly imbue ourselves with the conviction that all heaven breathes humility, and everything heavenly is humble. The moment any sacred principle is turned to a selfish purpose, it loses its richness, its sweetness, its holiness, and worth. Love becomes flattery, virtue hypocrisy, faith deception. Oh let us shun this awful, desolating, soul-destroying sin. And, on the contrary, let us attend to Him who is at once the humblest and the highest. Bring often to mind the impressive and beautiful scene, when, surrounded by His disciples, He took a little child, and placed it in the midst of them. It was the day following that of the grand scene of the Transfiguration. (J. Bayley, Ph. D.)

The parable of Jotham

I. Its intention and success. When William Penn was carrying on negotiations with the Indians he used to gain their respect and attention by exhibiting to them his skill as a swordsman. This was an acquirement which the red man could appreciate. So Jotham here clothes the truths he wishes to utter in the form of parable, and gains the attention of the men of Shechem by his skilful use of imagery.

II. The contents of the parable. In it we have the national life of Israel set forth under the similitude of the natural life of the tree. In the kingdom of trees we notice–

1. The individuality of each tree.

2. The diversities of size, and form, and worth, found among them.

3. The manifest dependence of some trees upon others.

III. The teaching which underlies it. The parable implies that there were men in Israel at this time who possessed the qualifications necessary to a good ruler set forth in the excellences peculiar to the trees mentioned. But these men, the most fitted to rule, refused to do so because there is no honour in ruling where excellence is held in dishonour. They were in the soil of private life, which was congenial to their nature, and to be transplanted to a soil in which only a bramble could flourish, would be to lose their power of imparting light and sweetness. The nation, the city, or the congregation in which a bramble is held in estimation is not the soil in which to plant an olive-tree, a vine, or a fig-tree.

Lessons:

1. The honour of a leader depends, not upon the fact that he is chosen to rule, but upon who chooses him.

2. It is the man who gives honour to the position, and not the position which gives honour to the man.

3. In choosing a position in the world, we should be most solicitous to obtain that which will be favourable to the development of our character, and that in which character will be appreciated.

4. The ruler of a nation is a mirror in which is reflected the character of the people.

5. The true leaders of men have resources within for themselves, and therefore for others. Such men can afford to remain in obscurity, their mind is to them kingdom, they are their own society. (A London Minister.)

The parable of the trees

(to Young Men):–This parable of Jotham is, it is supposed, the very oldest in existence. We reach here, in a literary sense, almost to the source of fictitious writing. It is a question sometimes put to religious teachers, Do you object to works of fiction? For myself I can answer at once. I do not. If I did I should condemn perhaps all the peoples that ever lived, simple and cultured alike. In the snow hut of the Laplanders, in the warm wooden house of the Norse peasant, in the sunny islands of the Southern Sea, and all through the burning East, genius has in this way expressed itself, and men have been pleased and improved by its ministries. But question me further. Ask me if I object to much of the sensational literature of the day, and I answer, I do; not because it is fictitious, but because of the evil in more or less degree which it contains, and because it is sorry nourishment for human minds or hearts. To return to Jothams parable. The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them. There must have been a good deal of talk among them before it came to that, much wagging of arboreous tongues, twittering of leaf, and groaning of branch. They did not need a king. But the procession has started. We must follow and make part of it, if we want to see and hear.

I. Now there is a halt before an olive-tree. And they said to the olive-tree, Reign thou over us. A splendid offer, to be the anointed king over the whole vegetable world! We listen to hear the reply, couched in the deprecating, cautious phraseology usual in such cases. No such answer is given; but a clear, distinct refusal of the proffered honour. Should I leave my fatness? etc. Must I tear up my roots from the kindly soil where I have had my home for a thousand years, and cease to receive the secret but willing ministries of the earth, and close up the channels along which they have come? Must I shake the hard grain of my body by locomotion, and have my leaves withered in a triumphal progress, and see my berries grow scant and shrivelled, and produce no more oil for God or man, and all this that I may be a king? Wise olive-tree! Keep thy roots where they have struck and spread! Build up in concentric rings, as the years come and go, the hard pile of the serviceable wood! Store the secret fragrance! Distil the precious oil for many uses! Give men the annual harvest and God the continual glory of thy growing! Can we miss the lesson? Usefulness is better than honour. Usefulness, if it be of the higher kind, is attained through long growing and long striving. But when it is attained, when there is a normal, regulated usefulness flowing steadily out of a mans life, when he serves God and man where he is and by what he is, the offer of promotion ought to carry with it some very strong and clear enforcements to induce him to think of acceptance.

II. Here is a fig-tree by the wayside. It belongs to an old and most respectable family. It traces its pedigree up to Eden. It leads a useful life, and yet it has much less to give up and leave than the olive. But no! The fig-tree has not much, but it has something substantial and good. It has beautiful leaves of deep shining green, and better still–for the fig-tree makes no mention of its leaves–it has figs which carry in them a wonderful sweetness when they are fully ripe. Sweetness is the one quality which the fig-tree felt that it possessed. There is in some human souls a sweetness which imparts a fig-tree flavour to the whole life. When you meet one who possesses this gift moving about among rough ways and persons, consider that you see something far more than merely pleasant, something of exceeding value to the world.

III. Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou and reign over us. Surely there will be no refusal now! The vine cannot stand alone, it needs to be propped. It will leap at the offer of a throne, up which to climb and on which to hang its nodding clusters. It can only do one thing: it can bear clusters of grapes. Ah! but that one thing is of force and value enough to keep the vine steady under temptation. Should I leave my wine, etc. As there are some human lives with sweetness in them as their main element, so there are some with this brighter, racier quality, which cheers and animates the spirits of others. Be a vine if you can be nothing more; distil and distribute the wine of life.

IV. Now, at length, we go to the coronation. The trees have found a king. Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou and reign over us. Accepted as soon as offered! The bramble needs no time for deliberation. It accepts the crown at once. Look at the bramble or spiky thorn of Palestine with its long straggling branches. It has no fatness to leave, like the olive-tree; no sweetness, like the fig-tree; no clusters, like the vine. It casts no shadow, like the oak. It has nothing but sharp, piercing spikes, and of these it has abundance; every branch is full of them–and yet hear how the mean creature speaks! If in truth ye anoint me king over you–as if it were the most natural thing in the world that they should; as if it were thinking of its ripe baskets of fruit, and of the weary pilgrims it had sheltered. if in truth ye anoint me king! Think of it, in presence of them all! The cedar, nodding his dark plumes; the oak, with castled strength of stem and branch; the beech, in its sylvan beauty; the palm-tree, with its cylindrical stem and feathery leaves, and bounteous burden of dates; and the fir-tree and the pine-tree and the box together; and those that have declined the honour–to all these it says, Come and put your trust in my shadow! The unbounded impudence of this address is remarkable, and would be amusing if it were not connected with peril to the whole arboreous kingdom. This peril the bramble knows, and has the art to hold it out in audacious menace. If not, think of it well. You have gone too far to go back, you are now in my power; and that the noblest among you shall feel the first, in case of the least show of opposition. Society, in all its sections, is full of bramble men, who are striving for every sort of personal elevation and advantage. By the picture in this parable I want you to scorn the principles they act upon; and to despise the honours and advantages they win! (A. Raleigh, D. D.)

Jothams parable

We find instruction in the parable by regarding the answers put into the mouth of this tree and that when they are invited to wave to and fro over the others. There are honours which are dearly purchased, high positions which cannot be assumed without renouncing the true end and fruition of life. One for example, who is quietly and with increasing efficiency doing his part in a sphere to which he is adapted, must set aside the gains of long discipline if he is to become a social leader. He can do good where he is. Not so certain is it that he will be able to serve his fellows well in public office. It is one thing to enjoy the deference paid to a leader while the first enthusiasm on his behalf continues, but it is quite another thing to satisfy all the demands made as years go on and new needs arise, When any one is invited to take a position of authority he is bound to consider carefully his own aptitude. He needs also to consider those who are to be subjects or constituents, and make sure that they are of the kind his rule will fit. The olive looks at the cedar and the terebinth and the palm. Will they admit his sovereignty by and by though now they vote for it? Men are taken with the candidate who makes a good impression by emphasising what will please and suppressing opinions that may provoke dissent. When they know him, how will it be? When criticism begins, will the olive not be despised for its gnarled stem, its crooked branches and dusky foliage? The fable does not make the refusal of olive and fig-tree and vine rest on the comfort they enjoy in the humbler place. That would be a mean and disbonourable reason for refusing to serve. Men who decline public office because they love an easy life find here no countenance. It is for the sake of its fatness, the oil it yields, grateful to God and man in sacrifice and anointing, that the olive-tree declines. The fig-tree has its sweetness, and the vine its grapes to yield. And so men despising self-indulgence and comfort may be justified in putting aside a call to office. The fruit of a personal character developed in humble, unobtrusive natural life is seen to be better than the more showy clusters forced by public demands. Yet, on the other hand, if one will not leave his books, another his scientific hobbies, a third his fireside, a fourth his manufactory, in order to take his place among the magistrates of a city or the legislators of a land, the danger of bramble supremacy is near. Next a wretched Abimelech will appear; and what can be done but set him on high and put the reins in his hand? Unquestionably the claims of Church or country deserve most careful weighing, and even if there is a risk that character may lose its tender bloom, the sacrifice must be made in obedience to an urgent call. For a time, at least, the need of society at large must rule the loyal life. The fable of Jotham, in so far as it flings sarcasm at the persons who desire eminence for the sake of it and not for the good they will be able to do, is an example of that wisdom which is as unpopular now as ever it has been in human history, and the moral needs every day to be kept full in view. It is desire for distinction and power, the opportunity of waving to and fro over the trees, the right to use this handle and that to their names, that will be found to make many eager, not the distinct wish to accomplish something which the times and the country need. Those who solicit public office are far too often selfish, not self-denying, and even in the Church there is much vain ambition. But people will have it so. The crowd follows him who is eager for the suffrages of the crowd, and showers flattery and promises as he goes. Men are lifted into places they cannot fill, and after keeping their seats unsteadily for a time they have to disappear into ignominy. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)

Forms of usefulness in life

What special advantages of life, what particular forms of usefulness and comfort, Jotham had in view, if he had any, in choosing these particular trees, it is not easy to say. But it is obvious that he meant in a general way to point out that there are two or three functions, or employments, or ways of spending life, so much worth a mans while continuing, that he is wise in refusing to abandon them for the sake of what may seem a better position. It is very desirable that men should see the advantages of their own position, for nothing is more enervating than a craving after change, and nothing more delusive than the fancy that almost any other position would be better than our own. The fatness which the olive was not disposed to forsake in exchange for high position, may very naturally be supposed to symbolise the usefulness which belongs to many obscure positions in life. If we are filling a place that somebody must fill, if we are doing work which some one must do, then we should be cautious how we seek change. Moreover, in the life of most of us, the usefulness of our daily occupation is by no means the whole measure of our usefulness. We are mixed up in life with persons who are entangled in difficulties, who are full of faults, who are needing help: wherever we go, in whatever occupation we spend our time, we find this to be the case; and he is a happy man who can disentangle the sinner from the meshes of his sin and pluck his feet out of the net, who can let some tempted person have the strengthening influence of his society, who can give advice that saves from misery or loss. Again, many lives are soured and rendered wretched to all connected with them, because it is not recognised that sweetness is that to which they are specially called. The fig-tree did not think it was a necessary of life; it did not flatter itself men could not live without figs; but it was modestly and reasonably conscious that by bearing figs year after year it did add an element of a most desirable kind to the life of man. Taking the mere word of the fable, the sweetness of the fig, every one knows what a blessing in a household is even one sweet temper, one disposition that is not ruffled, that does not take offence, that does not think every one else in the wrong, that does not vaunt itself, but is quiet, reasonable, patient, meek. Peremptoriness is not always equivalent to efficiency. Any one who has tried to catch an unbridled horse in a field knows how little persuasive power there is in violent language. The assumption of a tone of authority or infallibility defeats the ends of persuasion quite as certainly as the admission of a tone of entreaty destroys the authority of one who should rightfully command. But a third lesson for individuals in private life, which we gather from this fable, is how contemptible a thing is display and worldly honour, and what is called style. People will not be content to live comfortably, to be moderate in their expenses, quiet in their ways; but must be doing as other people do, must commit the same extravagancies, even though they have really no taste for them; must deny themselves the enjoyments they prefer, that they may seem to enjoy themselves like their neighbours; bind themselves religiously to do many troublesome things, for no other reason whatever than that it is expected of them. The consequence is that the spirit becomes false, and the life is worn out by useless forms and meaningless labour; the useful services which might be rendered are neglected, and time cannot be found for them. In conclusion, Jotham shall not have spoken this parable in vain for us if we carry away from its perusal the settled conviction that in life there is something better than mere show or the mere attainment of the rewards accorded by the world to its successful men. The real value of human life does not lie on the surface; lies, indeed, so deep that very many people never see it at all. There are circumstances so afflicting and straitened, so very tormenting and hampering, that we are apt to think we do well if only we do not cry out and let all the world know how we suffer; but there is a better thing to do always, and that is, to set ourselves with patience and humble self-crucifixion to think of others and do our best for them. In the worst circumstances, in circumstances so perplexing we know not how to act, there always remains some duty we are aware of, some kind and loving thing we can do, and by doing which other duties become clearer. (Marcus Dods, D. D.)

The olive-tree said . . . Should I leave my fatness?—

The refusing of leadership

I. The varieties which God has made among men.

II. The temptations to which we are exposed to be untrue to our distinctive nature and position.

III. The evil which would arise from our going out of our true place to obtain a vulgar power.

IV. The wise conduct of some in resisting the injurious temptations addressed to them.

V. Those who refuse formal rule may be kings in their spheres notwithstanding–nay, all the more.

VI. The worlds king is often the bramble after all. (W. Morison, D. D.)

The faithful olive-tree

The fable teaches that temptations will come to us all, however sweet, or useful, or fruitful, even as they came to the fig, the olive, and the vine. These temptations may take the shape of proffered honours; if not a crown, yet some form of preferment or power may be the bribe.

I. Apparent promotions are not to be snatched at. The question is to be asked, Should I? Let us never do what would be unbecoming, unsuitable, unwise (Gen 39:9). Emphasis is to be laid on the I. Should I? If God has given me peculiar gifts or special grace, does it become me to trifle with these endowments? Should I give them up to gain honour for myself? (Neh 6:11). A higher position may seem desirable, but would it be right to gain it by such cost? (Jer 45:5). It will involve duties and cares. Go up and down among the trees implies that there would be care, oversight, travelling, etc. These duties will be quite new to me; for, like an olive, I have been hitherto planted in one place. Should I run into new temptations, new difficulties, etc., of my own wanton will? Can I expect Gods blessing upon such strange work? Put the question in the case of wealth, honour, power, which are set before us. Should we grasp at them at the risk of being less at peace, less holy, less prayerful, less useful?

II. Actual advantages are not to be trifled with. Should I leave my fatness? I have this great boon, should I lightly lose it? It is the greatest advantage in life to be useful both to God and man: By me they honour God and man. We ought heartily to prize this high privilege. To leave this for anything which the world can offer would be great loss (Jer 18:14; Jer 2:13). Our possession of fatness meets the temptation to become a king. We are happy enough in Christ, in His service, with His people, and in the prospect of the reward. We cannot better ourselves by the move; let us stay as we are. We may also meet it by the reflection that the prospect is startling: Should I leave my fatness? For an olive to do this would be unnatural: for a believer to leave holy living would be worse (Joh 6:68). That the retrospect would be terrible: leave my fatness. What must it be to have left grace, and truth, and holiness, and Christ? Remember Judas. That even an hour of such leaving would be a loss. What would an olive do even for a day if it left its fatness? That it would all end in disappointment; for nothing could compensate for leaving the Lord. All else is death (Jer 17:13). That to abide firmly and reject all baits is like the saints, the martyrs, and their Lord; but to prefer honour to grace is a mere bramble folly.

III. Temptation should be turned to account. Let us take deeper root. The mere proposal to leave our fatness should make us hold the faster to it. Let us be on the watch that we lose not our joy, which is our fatness. If we would not leave it, neither can we bear that it should leave us. Let us yield more fatness, and bear more fruit: he who gains largely is all the further removed from loss. The more we increase in grace the less are we likely to leave it. Let us feel the more content, and speak the more lovingly of our gracious state, that none may dare to entice us. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The fig-tree said . . . Should I forsake my sweetness?—

Self-fulfilment

There was to the fig-tree no excellency like that of meeting adequately its own ends and of fulfilling its own inborn purpose. The fig-tree was not created to be a king among the trees. That was not its selected part or its appointed task. The oak and the cedar might be great in strength, the ash and the willow might be exalted for beauty, but in its own way of being great the fig-tree had a dignity all its own; measured by what it was meant to be and by what it was meant to do it might rest, secure for all time of usefulness and of honour. The real measure of the success or failure of each life is thoroughly and exactly the measure of its self-fulfilment. Centuries afterwards a Greek philosopher laid hold of this same principle, and he gave to it a more philosophical interpretation, a profounder application to the life of man; but Aristotle did not teach the lesson of it more finely, he did not illustrate it more happily, than had been done before in this passage. The measure of the success or failure of each life is thoroughly and exactly the measure of its self-fulfilment. As with the fig-tree, it is the excellency of man to live and to be fruitful in those powers which are distinctly his own; to be rational because he alone is truly rational; to be moral because he alone is moral; to be spiritual because he alone within the earth is breathed upon from a higher world, and hears with a deeper hearing a music and a song which hath not been uttered, Nature and God alike ask of man not the life of the tree or of the brute or of the angel, but the life of man as man. For man to turn from the culture of that rational and moral life which is distinctively his own, for man to yield his own peculiar task, for him to forsake the high inheritances of rational freedom and of moral purpose, is to tear from his own experience, to cut from out his history, the very justification of his existence in the world. Let him look well to that. It is not his life to be merely strong. When we look for strength we will not look to him. We will not look for strength to man, but to the deep-settled hills laid strong and sure among the rocks; to the wild waters of the flood as they beat and scream in their ruin of the land; to the winds of heaven as they fall sharply upon the sea; to the great fish within the deep; to the huge beast within the forest; to a thousand things in earth and sky; but we will not look for strength to man. Nor is it mans life or womans to be merely beautiful. When we look for beauty we will not look to man, but we will look far out upon some deep blue quiet of the hills, to the unfolding glories of the new day, to the sweet radiance of those tears which the dying night has left upon the flowers; we will look to corals of the sea, to diamonds from the under-world, to the waving shadows of the forest and the fields. To these we will look for beauty, but not to man. Let man keep and wear the graces which as man are his; let woman be dowered in those beauties which are all and peculiarly her own; but let that motive die within us which has no task for man or woman but those sad and empty services of flesh, those weak apparent shows of lust or ease or wealth. Oh, for men whose first and thorough task will be that of being men! Oh, for women whose souls and hearts are set deeply in the purpose of being and of serving under womans name in those causes which are all her own, among those dignities and sanctities which make with men her queenliness and saintliness for ever! If there is need to-day for a humanity which is human–for manly men, for womanly women, for childlike children–there is need also for a churchly Church. Institutions as well as individuals have their primary uses and their distinctive life. The Church, too, if she is to continue among men, must act truly and deeply from her own powers, must be strong in a Churchs spirit, instinct and eager with the Churchs mission. The life of the Church may have its social aspect, it may have in a sense its business aspect, it has been forced to have in certain quarters an aspect which is purely political; but the measure of her exclusive and especial triumphs along lines like these is exactly the measure of mans detestation of her cause. The Church, to be the Church, must be primarily and essentially religious. There are individual Churches which are not successful in any sense, but the Church which is successful in the life God sends her out to live, that Church which in a religious sense is a success must be a success in all senses and for all wise and honourable work. (E. G. Murphy.)

The bramble said.–

Bramble rule; or, the people and their leaders

I. That the people have a conscious want of leaders, and they are not particular in their choice of them.

1. The people in every age have needed leaders in every department of life–mercantile, artistic, political, and especially religious. The uncultured masses have ever been ignorant, credulous, servile.

2. And they are conscious of their want. This arises from–

(1) An instinctive faith that there is somewhere an unpossessed good for them.

(2) A consciousness that they are incapable of reaching it themselves.

(3) A conviction that there are members of the race superior to themselves,

3. That the people are not particular in their choice of leaders. They do not generally follow the greatest men. Men of inferior capacity and uncultivated nature are scarcely qualified to appreciate the highest form of greatness. Great men to them are masters whom they martyr.

II. That inferior men are often more ready to assume the responsibility of leadership than great ones. The greater a man is, the less taste he has for a conventional greatness, the greater resources he has in himself, and more disposed is he to work in the glorious realms of principles than amidst the din of social parties. Great men build their own thrones, and establish their own empires.

III. That leadership in the hands of inferior men is ever fraught with mischief.

1. Small men can do great mischief.

2. The higher the office they reach, the greater the mischief they can effect.

Learn–

1. The sad condition of the world.

2. The transcendent worth of the gospel. Christ is just the Leader needed. (Homilist.)

Pulpit brambles; or, a vacant Church making a choice of a minister

1. Jothams parable is full of interest.

(1) On account of its antiquity. First on record.

(2) The spirit of its delivery. Full of the humorous.

(3) The sarcasm it contains. The satiric is a most useful gift to the Christian teacher, when guided by the hand of wisdom.

2. The principle contained in the parable is, that the highest places ought to be occupied by the best of men, and that the bramble people should never be allowed to occupy a position of greatness.

3. From Jothams parable the following remarks are suggested–

(1) That it is a time of great responsibility to Churches when making choice of a minister. Christ spent a night in prayer before He ordained His apostles.

(2) That Churches sometimes show a great want of shrewdness in their choice of a minister.

(3) That Churches ought to keep a view to the practical in giving a call to a minister.

(4) That very often we find the most insignificant ministers are the most ready to accept invitations from large Churches.

(5) That a stated ministry is advantageous to Churches.

(6) That great evils follow in the choice of unsuitable ministers.

(7) That Churches will never reach their true position while their pulpits are filled with brambles.

Conclusion–

1. That the ministerial life is one of great sacrifice.

2. That most frequently the ministerial brambles are blessed with unanimous calls.

3. That the men of small talent, almost without exception, are full of vanity.

4. That the great force of the bramble pulpit is in destruction.

5. Some of our large Churches have frequently been deservedly punished when they have lost their old minister. (Homilist.)

King Bramble and his subjects

Why were the trees so willing to enthrone Bramble? The trees argued: If we make Bramble king, he will never find fault, and never dare chide us for shortcomings–he is so puny and worthless compared with us. So men reason, all over the globe. Do you know why men possessing just as much good common-sense as you have, still cling to idols in heathen lands? Many of them know as well as we do that their idols are worthless. Why keep them? Because with these for gods, they make religion as base and sensual as they desire. But we need not search heathen lands. In our own midst are people who serve King Bramble rather than King Jesus.

I. The bramble of intemperance. Do you suppose that any boy ever starts out in life with the intention of being a drunkard? He who yields in the least degree is in danger of being overpowered and ruined by this King Bramble.

II. Bramble of mammon. Just enough affords more happiness than too much.

III. Most dangerous bramble of all is self. We all need to pray for deliverance from the evil which is in our own hearts. One of the most cunning devices by which Satan entraps men is that of making them worship themselves rather than God. (A. F. Vedder.)

The bramble

1. How proud the bramble was! Come and put your trust in my shadow. Are boys and girls proud? I think so. And yet they have no more reason to be proud than the foolish bramble. They are entirely dependent on the bounty of a gracious Providence, and He hates pride. But why are we proud? We cannot boast of our clothes–these are given to us by animals. Why, what is more beautiful than the butterfly, that flits about in the sunshine, or the tiny flower growing by the roadside? Both insect and flower appear in better coats than we.

2. Another thing we may notice about the bramble–its insufficiency for shelter. It said to all the trees: Come, put your trust in my shadow. The lesson to be learnt from this parable is the folly of false trust. The Bible in many places warns us against false trusts. It warns us against trusting ourselves. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool. Some trust in riches. This is not safe. For riches sometimes take to themselves wings and fly away; moreover, they profit not in the day of wrath. Then in whom shall we trust? In the Lord, for we read: It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in princes. We should trust in Him for our salvation. There is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.

3. Then, the weakness of the bramble reminds us of its insufficiency for defence. Such a plant could easily be trodden down. The careless ox cannot crush the cedar, or the olive, or the fig-tree so easily as it can crush the bramble. A defence indicates the existence of enemies. You and I have enemies, and it is necessary that we should be guarded against them. They are round us–on every hand. Jesus Christ is not only a shelter, but a defence.

4. The bramble reminds us of sin. Sin is like a thorn. It pierces, it irritates, it wounds. (H. Whittaker.)

Misleading self-judgments

Many are misled, because they judge themselves too much by the impression they make upon those around them. To them, in that sense, vox populi is vox Dei. If they are popular in their own circle, they think proportionately well of themselves. But this is manifestly an empirical judgment. It depends very much on the circle to which we belong; on the mental and moral attainments of those in it; on the natural affection they cherish towards us, which predisposes them in our favour; and on the ideal they hold generally of character and worth. A solid is buoyant in a liquid in proportion as it is light, and the liquid heavy, floating or sinking according as it is heavier or lighter, bulk for bulk, than the liquid it is in. And similarly we may judge of a mans moral and intellectual weight by the kind of society he floats in. The company which will buoy up one man will not sustain another, and in light, frivolous society, a silly, empty fellow may successfully keep on the surface, inflated only with his own self-conceit. In judging ourselves by the opinions of those around us, therefore, let us ask what their opinions are worth, and how far they are determined by principles which will decide eternal destiny. (A. Rowland, B. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER IX

Abimelech is made king; and, to secure himself tn the kingdom,

slays his brethren; Jotham, the youngest only escapes, 14.

Jotham reproves him and the Shechemites by a curious and

instructive parable, 7-21.

Abimelech having reigned three years, the Shechemites, headed

by Gaal the son of Ebed, conspire against him, 22-29.

Zebul, governor of the city, apprises Abimelech of the

insurrection, who comes with his forces, and discomfits Gaal,

30-40.

Abimelech assaults the city, takes, beats it down, and sows it

with salt, 41-45.

Several of the Shechemites take refuge in the temple of

Baal-berith; Abimelech sets fire to it, and destroys in it

about one thousand men and women, 46-50.

He afterwards besieges and takes Thebez; but while he is

assaulting the citadel, a woman threw a piece of millstone

upon his head, and killed him. Thus God requited him and the

men of Shechem for their wickedness, and their ingratitude to

the family of Gideon, 51-57.

NOTES ON CHAP. IX

Verse 1. Abimelech – went to Shechem] We have already seen that Abimelech was the son of Gideon, by his concubine at Shechem. His going thither immediately after his father’s death was to induce his townsmen to proclaim him governor in the place of his father. Shechem was the residence of his mother, and of all her relatives.

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

1. Abimelech the son of Jerubbaalwent to ShechemThe idolatry which had been stealthily creepinginto Israel during the latter years of Gideon was now openlyprofessed; Shechem was wholly inhabited by its adherents; at least,idolaters had the ascendency. Abimelech, one of Gideon’s numeroussons, was connected with that place. Ambitious of sovereign power,and having plied successfully the arts of a demagogue with hismaternal relatives and friends, he acquired both the influence andmoney by which he raised himself to a throne.

communed . . . with all thefamily of the house of his mother’s fatherHere is a strikinginstance of the evils of polygamyone son has connections andinterests totally alien to those of his brothers.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem, unto his mother’s brethren,…. It seems that though the mother of Abimelech lived at Shechem, he was taken and brought up in his father’s house at Ophrah, where he was when he died; and from hence he came to Shechem, to pay a visit to his uncles there; whether his mother was now living, is not certain:

and communed with them; about the death of his father, the state of his family, and the government of Israel:

and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father; that descended from his grandfather, the several branches of them, and of the family, the heads of them at least:

saying, as follows.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Jdg 9:1-2

Having gone to Shechem, the home of his mother (Jdg 8:31), Abimelech applied to his mother’s brothers and the whole family (all the relations) of the father’s house of his mother, and addressed them thus: “ Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the lords of Shechem, ” i.e., speak to them publicly and solemnly. , the lords, i.e., the possessors or citizens of Shechem (compare Jdg 9:46 with Jdg 9:49, where is interchangeable with a ; also Jdg 20:5, and Jos 24:11): they are not merely Canaanitish citizens, of whom there were some still living in Shechem according to Jdg 9:28, but all the citizens of the town; therefore chiefly Israelites. “ What is better for you, that seventy men rule over you, all the sons of Jerubbaal, or (only) one man (i.e., Abimelech)? and remember that I am your flesh and bone ” (blood relation, Gen 29:14). The name “sons of Jerubbaal,” i.e., of the man who had destroyed the altar of Baal, was just as little adapted to commend the sons of Gideon to the Shechemites, who were devoted to the worship of Baal, as the remark that seventy men were to rule over them. No such rule ever existed, or was even aspired to by the seventy sons of Gideon. But Abimelech assumed that his brothers possessed the same thirst for ruling as he did himself; and the citizens of Shechem might be all the more ready to put faith in his assertions, since the distinction which Gideon had enjoyed was thoroughly adapted to secure a prominent place in the nation for his sons.

Jdg 9:3

When his mother’s brethren spake to the citizens of Shechem concerning him, i.e., respecting him and his proposal, their heart turned to Abimelech.

Jdg 9:4-5

They gave him seventy shekels of silver from the house of Baal-berith, i.e., from the treasury of the temple that was dedicated to the covenant Baal at Shechem, as temple treasures were frequently applied to political purposes (see 1Ki 15:18). With this money Abimelech easily hired light and desperate men, who followed him (attached themselves to him); and with their help he murdered his brethren at Ophrah, seventy men, with the exception of Jotham the youngest, who had hidden himself. The number seventy, the total number of his brethren, is reduced by the exception mentioned immediately afterwards to sixty-nine who were really put to death. , empty, i.e., without moral restraint. lit. gurgling up, boiling over; figuratively, hot, desperate men. “ Upon (against) one stone,” that is to say, by a formal execution: a bloody omen of the kingdom of ten tribes, which was afterwards founded at Shechem by the Ephraimite Jeroboam, in which one dynasty overthrew another, and generally sought to establish its power by exterminating the whole family of the dynasty that had been overthrown (see 1Ki 15:27., 2Ki 10:1.). Even in Judah, Athaliah the worshipper of Baal sought to usurp the government by exterminating the whole of the descendants of her son (2 Kings 11). Such fratricides have also occurred in quite recent times in the Mohammedan countries of the East.

Jdg 9:6

“ Then all the citizens of Shechem assembled together, and all the house of Millo, and made Abimelech king at the memorial terebinth at Shechem. ” Millo is unquestionably the name of the castle or citadel of the town of Shechem, which is called the tower of Shechem in Jdg 9:46-49. The word Millo (Chaldee ) signifies primarily a rampart, inasmuch as it consisted of two walls, with the space between them filled with rubbish. There was also a Millo at Jerusalem (2Sa 5:9; 1Ki 9:15). “ All the house of Millo ” are all the inhabitants of the castle, the same persons who are described in Jdg 9:46 as “all the men ( baale) of the tower.” The meaning of is doubtful. , the thing set up, is a military post in Isa 29:3; but it may also mean a monument of memorial, and here it probably denotes the large stone set up as a memorial at Shechem under the oak or terebinth (see Gen 35:4). The inhabitants of Shechem, the worshippers of Baal-berith, carried out the election of Abimelech as king in the very same place in which Joshua had held the last national assembly, and had renewed the covenant of Israel with Jehovah the true covenant God (Jos 24:1, Jos 24:25-26). It was there in all probability that the temple of Baal-berith was to be found, namely, according to Jdg 9:46, near the tower of Shechem or the citadel of Millo.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Usurpation of Abimelech.

B. C. 1209.

1 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying, 2 Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? remember also that I am your bone and your flesh. 3 And his mother’s brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words: and their hearts inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. 4 And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, which followed him. 5 And he went unto his father’s house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone: notwithstanding yet Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself. 6 And all the men of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo, and went, and made Abimelech king, by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem.

We are here told by what arts Abimelech got into authority, and made himself great. His mother perhaps had instilled into his mind some towering ambitious thoughts, and the name his father gave him, carrying royalty in it, might help to blow up these sparks; and now that he has buried his father nothing will serve his proud spirit but he will succeed him in the government of Israel, directly contrary to his father’s will, for he had declared no son of his should rule over them. He had no call from God to this honour as his father had, nor was there any present occasion for a judge to deliver Israel as there was when his father was advanced; but his own ambition must be gratified, and its gratification is all he aims at. Now observe here,

I. How craftily he got his mother’s relations into his interests. Shechem was a city in the tribe of Ephraim, of great note. Joshua had held his last assembly there. If that city would but appear for him, and set him up, he thought it would go far in his favour. There he had an interest in the family of which his mother was, and by them he made an interest in the leading men of the city. It does not appear that any of them had an eye to him as a man of merit, who had any thing to recommend him to such a choice, but the motion came first from himself. None would have dreamed of making such a one king, if he had not dreamed of it himself. And see here, 1. How he wheedled them into the choice, Jdg 9:2; Jdg 9:3. He basely suggested that Gideon having left seventy sons, who made a good figure and had a good interest, they were designing to keep the power which their father had in their hands, and by a joint-influence to reign over Israel. “Now,” says he, “you had better have one king than more, than many, than so many. Affairs of state are best managed by a single person,” v. 2. We have no reason to think that all or any of Gideon’s sons had the least intention to reign over Israel (they were of their father’s mind, that the Lord should reign over them, and they were not called of him), yet this he insinuates to pave the way to his own pretensions. Note, Those who design ill themselves are commonly most apt to suspect that others design ill. As for himself, he only puts them in mind of his relation to them (verbum sapienti–A word to the wise is sufficient): Remember that I am your bone and your flesh. The plot took wonderfully. The magistrates of Shechem were pleased to think of their city being a royal city and the metropolis of Israel, and therefore they inclined to follow him; for they said, “He is our brother, and his advancement will be our advantage.” 2. How he got money from them to bear the charges of his pretensions (v. 4): They gave him seventy pieces of silver; it is not said what the value of these pieces was; so many shekels are less, and so many talents more, than we can well imagine; therefore it is supposed they were each a pound weight: but they gave this money out of the house of Baal-berith, that is, out of the public treasury, which, out of respect to their idol, they deposited in his temple to be protected by him; or out of the offerings that had been made to that idol, which they hoped would prosper the better in his hands for its having been consecrated to their god. How unfit was he to reign over Israel, because unlikely to defend them, who, instead of restraining and punishing idolatry, thus early made himself a pensioner to an idol! 3. What soldiers he enlisted. He hired into his service vain and light persons, the scum and scoundrels of the country, men of broken fortunes, giddy heads, and profligate lives; none but such would own him, and they were fittest to serve his purpose. Like leader like followers.

II. How cruelly he got his father’s sons out of the way.

1. The first thing he did with the rabble he headed was to kill all his brethren at once, publicly and in cold blood, threescore and ten men, one only escaping, all slain upon one stone. See in this bloody tragedy, (1.) The power of ambition what beasts it will turn men into, how it will break through all the ties of natural affection and natural conscience, and sacrifice that which is most sacred, dear, and valuable, to its designs. Strange that ever it should enter into the heart of a man to be so very barbarous! (2.) The peril of honour and high birth. Their being the sons of so great a man as Gideon exposed them thus and made Abimelech jealous of them. We find just the same number of Ahab’s sons slain together at Samaria, 2Ki 10:1; 2Ki 10:7. The grand seigniors have seldom thought themselves safe while any of their brethren have been unstrangled. Let none then envy those of high extraction, or complain of their own meanness and obscurity. The lower the safer.

2. Way being thus made for Abimelech’s election, the men of Shechem proceeded to choose him king, v. 6. God was not consulted whether they should have any king at all, much less who it should be; here is no advising with the priest or with their brethren of any other city or tribe, though it was designed that he should reign over Israel, v. 22. But, (1.) The Shechemites, as if they were the people and wisdom must die with them, did all; they aided and abetted him in the murder of his brethren (v. 24), and then they made him king. The men of Shechem (that is, the great men, the chief magistrates of the city), and the house of Millo (that is, the common-council, the full house or house of fulness, as the word signifies), those that met in their guildhall (we read often of the house of Millo, or state-house in Jerusalem, or the city of David, 2Sa 5:9; 2Ki 12:20), these gathered together, not to prosecute and punish Abimelech for this barbarous murder, as they ought to have done, he being one of their citizens, but to make him king. Pretium sceleris tulit hic diadema–His wickedness was rewarded with a diadem. What could they promise themselves from a king that laid the foundation of his kingdom in blood? (2.) The rest of the Israelites were so very sottish as to sit by unconcerned. They took no care to give check to this usurpation, to protect the sons of Gideon, or to avenge their death, but tamely submitted to the bloody tyrant, as men who with their religion had lost their reason, and all sense of honour and liberty, justice and gratitude. How vigorously had their fathers appeared to avenge the death of the Levite’s concubine, and yet so wretchedly degenerate are they now as not to attempt the avenging of the death of Gideon’s sons; it is for this that they are charged with ingratitude (ch. viii. 35): Neither showed they kindness to the house of Jerubbaal.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Judges – Chapter 9
Abimelech’s Intrigue, vs. 1-6
With the introduction of Abimelech one calls to mind the weaknesses of Gideon, or Jerubbaal as he is now called. They are beginning to bear evil fruit. First, his weakness relative to the golden ephod he made is seen as a possible reason for the institution of Baal worship again in the land. After all, what is the difference in wrong worship of one god over another? Second, Gideon’s weakness for women had caused him to father a good-for-nothing son, Abimelech, who now reacts against his family tragically. One good point about Gideon, however, is also to be recalled. When the people came to him desiring to make him king over. Israel and to install his descendants as a dynasty after him he steadfastly refused, saying that God should be Israel’s ruler.
From what now occurred it would seem that a lot of people so respected the reputation of Gideon that his influence continued in his sons. People continued to look to Gideon’s family for leadership. It is commendable of them that none of the legitimate sons insisted on ruling over the people, even though some, as witness the Shechemites, expected them to.
Abimelech, the concubine son, however, was differently minded. He played on the people’s expectation, going to his mother’s brothers in Shechem and enlisting them on his side to make himself king. Of course, it was not difficult to persuade them that their own kinsman would be preferable over the other sons. So taking the cue the Shechemite uncles went to the other men of the city and persuaded them to put their money on Abimelech. Here we have what is probably the start of their disillusionment with their kinsman. Abimelech took the silver, which they took from the Baal temple, and used it to hire a band of rough and worthless men to be his followers. These he took to Ophrah, Gideon’s home, and murdered all of his brothers except for the youngest, Jotham, who managed to conceal himself.
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

ABIMELECH MADE KING
Jdg. 9:1-21
CRITICAL NOTES.
Jdg. 9:1. And Abimelech.] Some little time may have elapsed after Gideons death, so that the air was again filled with tendencies to idolatry. Before certain acts can be done, the times must be ripe for them. Abi signifies my father, Melech a king. The name was probably given by the mother, who was probably a woman of energetic or aspiring spirit, if it is her character that we see reflected in her eon. Probably, being an only son, she wished to make the most of the situation for him; and as her husband, though not de jure, was yet de facto king over the land, she determined to keep this fact as a mark before the eyes of her son day by day in his being always addressed by the words, My father was a king.
Son of Jerubbaal.] How strange! that the man who earned the proud title of being the destroyer of Baal, should have a son who promised to be the most zealous supporter of Baals interests in the land!
Went to Shechem.] A historical city, and one of the chief cities of Ephraim, from its central position and the many attractions of its situation. Here God first appeared to Abraham when he arrived in Canaan, and here Abraham first raised the altar (Genesis 12); near this both Abraham and Jacob lie buried; between the two hills on which the city was built all Israel were assembled to hear the law read, in its blessings and curses, when they first entered the land of promise; here Israels greatest captain most solemnly called on the people to stand firm by their covenant with Jehovah with his dying breath; and this was the place, and the well of Sychar the spot, where the Saviours ever memorable conversation with the woman of Samaria took place. It is one of the oldest towns of Palestine.
The house of his mothers father.] Blood is thicker than water. Abimelech reckoned it better to have a surrounding of relatives than of general acquaintances.
Jdg. 9:2. Men of Shechem.] Not the inhabitants generally, but the leading men, the heads, those who had a standing in the town, either as regards property and therefore owners, or as regards guildry and so citizensthe guildry or burgesses. Hence we read elsewhere of the men of Jericho, the men of Keilah, etc. Or the reference may be to the Israelites, as opposed to the Canaanites.
Reign over you. He assumes that the people wished some one to be their king, and also that the thirst for rule was in the breasts of all Gideons sons as well as in his own.
I am your bone and your flesh.] This is a subtle argument; it implies two things
(1) that he was of the same kindred with them (Gen. 29:14, 2 Samuel 6), but also
(2) I have Ephraimite blood flowing in my veins, so that if you elect me to be king you will be giving Ephraim the sovereignty, and Manasseh shall no longer rule. Shechem will be the royal city, and Orphah will be eclipsed.
Jdg. 9:3. For they said, He is our brother.] Abimelech had read well the dominating sentiment in the hearts of his people, for the bait at once took. They knew that the story about the brothers wishing to reign over them was false, but the pill was too temptingly gilded to be refused. They raised the shout at once for Abimelech.
Jdg. 9:4. 70 pieces of silver] or shekelsthe shekel being two shillings of our money. This was all the price at which each head of Gideons sons was valued! The money was given by the worshippers of Baal-berith, and doubtless was given willingly, when it was hinted that the use to be made of it was to destroy utterly the house of him who had destroyed Baal. Temple treasures were indeed often applied to political purposes [Bertheau]. 1Ki. 15:18; 2Ki. 18:15-16. Small sum indeed, yet such soldiers might be got for trifling wages.
Vain and light persons] Vain means either those who were fond of dash and show, like Absaloms fifty men, who ran before him (2 Samuel 16), men who would not bear the yoke of any steady employment in the occupations of life, or men of no worth of character, and kept lounging about ready for any dark or foul deed that might come in their way. Light persons of no principle or conscience, unscrupulous desperadoes. These are sometimes called Men of Belial (2Sa. 20:1; 1Ki. 21:10).
5. Slew his brethren] in cold blood. They had committed no crime, but the usurper feared lest they should one day disturb him in his unlawful possession of the throne. Thus did Jehoram, the unworthy son of the good Jehosaphat (2Ch. 21:4). So did Jehu to the 70 sons of Ahab (2Ki. 10:7), Athaliah to the seed royal of Judah (2Ki. 11:1), Baasha to the house of Jeroboam (1Ki. 15:29), and Zimri to the house of Baasha (1Ki. 16:11-12). Timour, on his conquest of Persia, destroyed the whole male family of the king. At the conquest of Bagdad he is said to have made a pyramid of 90,000 human heads. Even in modern Persia, it is said, until quite of late, to have been the custom for the new king either to kill, or to put out the eyes of all his brothers and near male relatives. Abimelech did indeed live in a barbarous age, and a sterner code prevailed then than now, yet we dare not do less than brand his conduct on this occasion as the atrocious act of an inhuman monster. Dim as was the light which the Israelitish religion shed on the value of human life compared with that which we now enjoy, it was sufficient to teach its worshippers to ostracise such a man, and put him beyond the pale of human fellowship. This system of wholesale murder of the innocents is one of the natural results of polygamy, and the lust of power.
Jdg. 9:6. House of Millo] not family as some make it, but fortress. It was in fact a large rampart or castle. Its walls were filled in with stones and earth. We hear of something similar in 2Sa. 5:9, also 1Ki. 9:15; 1Ki. 9:24; 2Ki. 12:20 (see also Jdg. 9:46). The house of Millo, means probably those who garrisoned the fortress.
Gathered together and made Abimelech king.] The ruling class in Shechem, or the citizens, and those who belonged to the fortress, assembled. We hear of no dissentients, though such a dark tragedy had just been perpetrated, but, on the contrary, this assembly are unanimous in electing the man whose hands were reeking with the blood of so many of his brethren to be their king, that is to occupy the most exalted post of honour they could give him. What a picture of the times in even Gods Israel! If anything could add to the frightful depravity of this whole transaction, it is to be told, that all this happened on, or around, the spot where stood the oak of the pillar (not the plain of the pillar) or monumental stone under the oak, which Joshua set up as a witness of the solemn covenant, which the people entered into to take Jehovah alone to be their God (Jos. 24:1; Jos. 24:26-27comp. also Gen. 25:4). As to the custom of holding councils under wide-spreading oaks in olden times, see Pict. Bible in loco. That the men of Shechem aided Abimelech in this slaughter of Gideons family is manifest from Jdg. 9:24.
Jdg. 9:7. On the top of Mount Gerizim.] This hill stood on the south-west side of Shechem as a huge rock, about 800 feet above the valley below. The town, however, was not built at the bottom of the valley, but on one of the shoulders of the hill, and therefore not so far distant, but that a person speaking from the top of the rock might be heard by those in the town. The facilities for a person being heard, who might speak from the height to those below, were greatly increased by the fact, that there was another rock-hill immediately opposite, called Mount Ebal, which threw back the sound and sent it downwards (see Pict. Bible). (1Sa. 26:13; 2Sa. 2:25-26.)
Jotham was told all that had taken place. The cruel blow aimed at Gideons house called forth no protest. It was clear that Israel had fallen again into an idolatrous stupor. Every nerve of gratitude was deadened. Steps were taken to make the usurper king. He has only a few spirits left who are likeminded with himself, but the spirit of his father is still in him. The instinct of self-preservation is strong in him, but he will speak one firm and faithful word ere he disappear from view. He chooses his time and placethe rock Gerizim, and the coronation-day of Abimelech. There, as the impersonation of conscience, he suddenly appears to the masses below to warn them of the heavy retribution, which such high-handed sins must bring down on their heads at no distant day. The speaker appeared, probably, on some projecting crag, near enough to be heard, yet distant enough to be not easily caught. The fact that he was supposed to be killed, while now he appears suddenly with a message of vengeance on his lips, at the supreme moment of the coronation, must have staggered all but the conscience-hardened in that guilty multitude.
This address ought to be called a fable, not a parable, for that never transgresses the limits of actual occurrences. [Douglas.] It is the oldest of all known fables, and was spoken 700 years before the days of sop, the most ancient of heathen fabulists. A similar one, though more brief, occurs in 2Ki. 14:9. Compare also the Agrippan fable, in Livy, Book 2, chap. 30, as to the rebellion of the members of the body against the belly. Of parables there are examples in 1Ki. 20:39-40, and especially 2Sa. 12:1-4; and 2Sa. 14:5-11. This was the most ancient instruction of any, for oftentimes it was only in this veiled form that wholesome truths could be conveyed to the ears of men of power, or those of the unreasoning multitude. Evils were thus reproved, and the multitude was admonished.
In this fable two things are put in contrast, and thus a severe censure is passed on the conduct of both Abimelech and his friends. The high character of Gideons sons who had been slain, and the strong pretensions they might have put forward, while yet they stood quietly in the background, are contrasted with the rough character and worthless pretensions of the illegitimate son.
Jotham we believe spoke this message from God, so that we are to regard it as the fruit of Divine inspiration (see Adam Clarke at end of chap. 9; see also Dr. Cassel on chap. 9).
Jdg. 9:8. The trees went forth.] This states the matter in hand. The trees are supposed to want a king, and they go first to those that might respectably wear the dignity of the office. They begin with the olive, but the olive declines.
Jdg. 9:9. My fatness they honour God and man.] It has excellent qualities, the one specially referred to here being its oil-producing power. This oil is used to consecrate both kings and priests; it also feeds the light that burns in the sanctuary of God. Thus it honours both God and man. Its leaf and branch are also signs of reconciliation and peace. Strong are the claims of the olive to reign, but it aspires not to that distinction. Should I give up my vocation in bearing oil, that I might wave over the trees!
Jdg. 9:11. Promoted over the trees.] The fig-tree is also invited and also declines. The word promoted means to shake, or be shaken. It seems to refer to the instability of royalty or worldly greatness, and the many cares and distractions that attend it.
Jdg. 9:13. That cheereth God and man.] This is hyperbolical language. The wine may be said to give delight to God, because He was always well pleased with the offerings of His people when they were presented in a right spirit, and in the appointed way. The hin of wine as a drink-offering came up with a sweet savour unto the Lord (Num. 15:7; Num. 15:10). The purport of these verses is, that should these treesthe olive, the fig, and the vinecomply with the request made, and occupy themselves with waving their branches over the other trees, it would take them away from the far more useful occupation of producing oil, and figs, and grapes.
Jdg. 9:14. The bramble.] The largest of thorns, with dreadful spikes like darts. It bears no fruit, has no leaves, and casts no shadow under which one might shelter himself from the burning heat of the sun. It is indeed not a tree, but a mere shrub, prickly, barren, base, and good for nothing, save to burn or kindle a fire. It is the symbol of a worthless man, who lives only to do harm. At the moment that Jotham was speaking, these trees filled the valley in profusion, and the brambles in large numbers were climbing up among the rocks.
Jdg. 9:15. The thornbush said to the trees, etc.] Thorns easily catch fire. If you do truly anoint me to be your king, then put your trust in my shadow. Spoken ironically, for shadow it has none. It refers to the hard character of Abimelechs rule. It must be a real submission. If not, the alternative will be that the bramble shall set fire to the other trees, not even excepting the noblest of them allthe cedars of Lebanon. For the most worthless man can do much harm to the most distinguished. He will have no mercy on rebels.
Jdg. 9:16. If ye have done truly and sincerely, etc.] Acted honestly and fairly with Jerubbaal and his house, then take your fill of joy over your newly made king, though it is only a thornbush you have got. This is said with a caustic irony and also with a bitter personal grief.
Jdg. 9:20. But if not.] If you have not acted fairly and properly by that house, then, as a righteous consequence, let fire break out between you mutually, from Abimelech to devour the men of Shechem, and from these again to destroy Abimelech. There is a recompense which is meet for compacts which are entered into over falsehood, robbery, the shedding of innocent blood, and the exalting of false gods to the place of the true and only Jehovah.
Jdg. 9:21. Beer.] A place supposed to have been in the tribe of Benjamin. Jotham is not heard of more, but his words now spoken will not die till the end of time. It was something of the spirit of his father that spoke in him. How truly his words came to pass, the parties concerned on both sides knew to their dire experience, ere they were three years older. Abimelech began his reign, not on principles of truth and honour, justice and uprightness, but with open rebellion against Israels Divine King, with assassination of those he was bound most sacredly to love, and with the fixed resolution to gain his own aggrandisement at whatever cost or ruin to those around him. With such a beginning, the end must be truly disastrous; nor was it long delayed.
MAIN HOMILETICS.Jdg. 9:1-21
THE ELECTION OF THE USURPER TO BE KING
I. Contrasts in the history of Gods own people.
This chapter, though a long one, contains a miserable history. Apart from names, it looks like the career of a roving bandit, who, setting the laws of God and man alike at defiance, could commit with cool barbarity the most unnatural crimes, to gratify an inordinate lust of power. Yet the first line reminds us that Abimelech, the actor in this tragedy, was the son of Jerubbaal. What a deplorable sequel to the glorious sun-setting recorded at the close of the previous chapter! The gold has become dim indeed, and the most fine gold is changed. As the gloomiest of nights sometimes follows the brightest of days, so does the short and reckless career of this unprincipled young man follow the long and honourable course of life of Israels greatest hero. In passing from the one chapter to the other, it seems as if we had dropped all at once, from the highest pinnacle of Solomons temple, which overlooked all the glories of that matchless building, and had fallen down among the dead bones, the disgusting offal, and many abominations of the valley of Hinnom, which required the constant action of fire to prevent the atmosphere from being poisoned.
Striking contrasts occur also at different intervals in the history of this people, both before and after this period. One occurs in comparing the generation that conquered Canaan under Joshua, in the exercise of a strong faith in their covenant God, with the degenerate generation of their descendants, who could not drive out the Canaanites, from the want of that faith, but permitted them to dwell among them, and, ere long, they intermarried with the idolaters, and became as they were. We have another case, in the few thousands who followed the guilty king of Israel, trembling through the land in the days of Saul, compared with the lion-like host that gathered around David shortly afterwards, and went on conquering and to conquer.
The contrast of such a history as that of Abimelech following that of so excellent a man as Gideon, teaches several lessons, such as
(1.) It was a punishment on the people for their misimprovement of so just a rule as that of Gideon. To have had such a man bearing rule among them, and placed at the top of society for so long a time, was a great privilege conferred by the God of Providence on His chosen people. But they seem to have had no eye to see the Divine mercy extended to them. They did not realise that there was any favour being shown to them; when at last God withdrew His Gideon, and sent them an Abimelech. Between these the people soon found, to their bitter experience, there was the difference between an angel of light, and a demon of darkness.
(2.) The thoroughly corrupt state of the people of God apart from renewing grace. Israel was really no better in character before God than the members of any other nation. By nature they, too, were children of wrath, even as others. There was in them the same evil heart of unbelief, departing from the living God. The renewing grace of God alone made the difference. What, then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise; for we have already proved, both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. (See also Eph. 2:3.) It was but a few centuries before this when Job wrote these words, Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one. And Bildad responded, How can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman? And it was but a few generations subsequent to this when David wrote thus, Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Create in me a clean heart, renew a right spirit within me. (Psa. 40:12; Eze. 36:26-27.)
These Israelites proved that when Gideon was no more, and the only remaining barrier removed out of the way, they could run on headlong in the old idolatrous course as before, keeping pace with any of the Canaanite nations themselves. As for Abimelech, we believe, were all the habitations of these native idolaters searched to find a character worse than his fellows, it would have been impossible to discover a monster in human form more detestable than we have in this son of Jerubbaal. And as for the people in general, we never read of any generation among them growing up in righteousness and the fear of God, as an essential part of their character, to whom, therefore, it was unnatural to be guilty of sin. There was no generation of Israel without their sins against the God of Israel. Had there been so, how meaningless to them would have been the elaborate ceremonial of their sanctuary service!
(3.) Gods mercy is not like mans in the measure of its forbearance. Were but half the provocation which men are giving every day to God to be given to each other, they would instantly bring down on the heads of the transgressors the full vials of their wrath. Mans patience is so soon exhausted; Gods patience is like Himself, inexhaustible (Mal. 3:6). That patience is not even exhausted when He leaves the sinner, or when He proceeds to inflict on him the sentence of doom. His course usually is, to wait long enough till mercy has had full display, and till it be shown that He is not willing that any should perish, but rather come to repentance, and live; but if that long and patient dealing is made in vain, a time must come, when reasons of righteousness and wisdom require that sin be dealt with as it deserves, and that justice be allowed to take its course. Yet patience is not properly exhausted.
(4.) The deep debt of gratitude every saved man owes to the grace of God. It was a wise habit of the good John Bradford to say, when he saw any very striking personification of human wickedness in the worst of men around himThere goes John Bradford, but for the grace of God. And well might any believer in the doctrine of renewing grace have said, when he saw this wicked young man going on in a career of unbridled sinThere goes I, myself, but for the grace of God. Meaning that he, too, has a wicked heart by nature, and that it requires to be made the subject of Gods renewing grace, ere it become fit for entering the holy world above. For we are to judge character, not by the measure of its present development, but by the direction it is taking. The development is now rapidly going on, and ere long it will reach a point or degree in wickedness, which at one time would have astonished the man himself, could he have foreseen it. Thus it was with Hazael, when the prophet foretold him of the atrocities, of which he would one day be guilty towards the people of God. Is thy servant a dog, he exclaimed, when the prophet held up to him the picture of his future deeds, that he should do this thing? He was at that time horrified at the thought of perpetrating such cruelties; yet, some years afterwards, as his wicked character became developed, he showed by the fact, that he could do all that the prophet predicted.
To every saved man who enters the world of perfect purity and bliss, it will be made clear, as with a thousand sunbeams, that it is not to any supposed goodness of his own, or to any worth in his own works, that he owes his admission to that bright home. All the outbreaks of depravity of which he has been conscious, from day to day during his whole life, and these occurring in the face of every possible restraint, will be as so many strong lights to flash on him the conviction, that it is by grace alone that he is savedthat salvation is not the thing which he deserves, but that which God is loving enough through Christ to give.
II. The best of fathers may have the worst of sons. This is another truth suggested by the paragraph (see pp. 95, 96).
(1.) No good father can impart his renewed nature to his son. What the father is by nature, he may, and does, more or less, convey to his son. The conditions of his body, its healthy or sickly state, whether it is strong or weak, its character in other respects, the fathers temperaments, his likeness, his natural dispositions and tendencies, his constitutional peculiarities, with other features, but above all his fallen spiritual condition, both in his depraved desires and affections, and in his liability to condemnation as a guilty beingthese the parent confers more or less on the child. Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image (Gen. 5:3). It is not said after Gods likeness and in His image, as in the case of Adam himself (chap. 5). To grant the renewed nature is a thing in Gods special gift; and so we are expressly informed, that all who become sons of God are made so directly by God Himself. They are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God (Joh. 1:13). Not indeed without the use of means, for we are expressly told in the previous verse, that it is those who receive Christ and believe in His name, that are honoured with the privilege of being made sons of God (comp. also Gal. 4:4-6; Joh. 3:5).
(2.) A good father may often neglect the training of his child. The child of a pious parent, though he derive no advantage directly in his natural birth, is yet open to many advantages otherwisein respect of example, of superintendence and training, of prayers many and sincere, of special promises, and mixing with the fellowship of the righteous, to which might be added a fuller and more regular enjoyment of the means of grace. Thus a good man may have the formation of his sons character in a great measure in his own hands; that is, so far as means are concerned.
Yet we often know that, as a matter of fact, a pious father sometimes neglects the proper upbringing of his son; as did Eli, when his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not; and as did David, when he never said to Adonijah, what doest thou? If the tree, when it is young, is permitted to grow up crooked and misshapen, it will remain crooked and misshapen during its whole existence. So is it with the child, Trained up in the way that it should go, when it is of mature age, it will not depart from it. But, if neglected as to training and the use of means, the result desired cannot be expected, even if many prayers from a godly father should be laid on the altar. Thus it was with Absalom, and thus it was with Abimelech.
3. A perverse son may receive a wicked training away from his pious fathers eye. Thus it was apparently with Abimelech. His mother seems to have had most to do with his training, and she was a Canaanite and idolater. He would naturally be kept separate from the other sons, who were all children of Israelitish mothers, and must have regarded Abimelech as a son of the bondwoman. Thus he was cradled in an idolatrous circle in reality, though this was concealed from the public eye by the fact that Gideon was his father, and that, during the season of his youth he lived in his fathers house. Naturally also, he would attract to himself idolatrous companions, of whom there were only too many everywhere, notwithstanding all that Gideon could do to reduce the number. These were the circumstances that determined the general aspect of his religious character. His natural force of action, selfwilledness, and towering ambition would do all the rest. Hence we have in him one of the worst characters in Scripture history. We do not find in the picture one single redeeming element, and there is scarcely a single element of wickedness awanting.
4. The course of Gideons son was one of unmitigated wickedness.
(1.) He begins with casting off all fear of God. Conscience must be either satisfied or seared, if a man would act with thorough decision, says a wise thinker. Abimelech chose the latter course; and, as the most effectual way to sear it, he would not recognise the existence of the true God at all.
(2.) He dares to usurp the sacred seat which was reserved for Jehovah alone, in being king over His chosen people. Had this been merely a vacant secular throne, like one of those on which any of the other kings of the earth sat, it had even then been an act of impertinent presumption, when there were 70 persons, of far more legitimate title than he possessed, ready to occupy it if necessary. But the act becomes one of daring irreverence, when, without warrant, and in the face of a direct prohibition from the jealous Jehovah, he thrusts himself into the holiest office on earth, except that of the High Priest alone, if indeed that is to be excepted.
(3.) Self-aggrandisement was his only object. He could not assign a single reason of right or of merit for what he had done. On the contrary, his character was so full of blemishes, that to exalt him to a throne was the last thought that would have occurred to other minds, had he not made the suggestion himself. Self-worship is the meanest of all kinds of idolatry, and for a man to push himself forward to occupy the first place, when he ought to take the last, only exposes his memory to infamy in the future. Yet with him every sacred interest was cast to the winds to gratify an inordinate ambition.
(4.) His first step to accomplish his purpose is falsehood. He insinuates that Gideons sons were, each and all, ambitious to become king in Israel, and that matters had gone so far that the men of Israel must make their choicethe fact being, that in no breast save his own was any such thought cherished.
(5.) His second step is to hire money from the headquarters of idolatry to serve his wicked purposes (Jdg. 9:4). This was like going to the forge of Satan to find means to kill the servants of Jehovah (Trapp).
(6.) His third step was to make bosom friends of the vilest of characters. If a man is to be judged by the company he keeps, what can we think of the son of the noblest man in Israel choosing for his associates the desperadoes of society! In place of saying, as a true son of Gideon ought to do, Gather not my soul with sinners, &c., we see him looking about for characters vile enough to assist him in accomplishing his Satanic devices.
(7.) His fourth step, and the darkest of all, is to commit murder wholesale on the family of his father. As if it were a light thing to take the life of one brother, another, and another follow, until 70 lives are takenall sons of his father, and every son he hadevery one of them innocent, and an utter stranger to the thought of aspiring to the crown of Israel! How expensive is the work of sin! Blood must flow in streams, and the nearest relatives must be sacrificed, ere its ends can be attained!
(8.) Finally, he gets himself elected King by an apostate city, in the interests of idolatry. The Shechemites utter no protest against the hydra-headed crime, but rather strengthen the perpetrators hands for its commission, and even regard it as a recommendation for their suffrages, that he had destroyed the house of him who had destroyed Baal. Say not that a mans religious belief has nothing to do with the colour of his conduct. Like king, like people!
Examples of more decidedly opposite characters are not to be found in the Book of God, than those of Gideon and his son Abimelech. They are wide as the poles asunder. We can hardly imagine how such a son could be reared under such a paternal roof. But it forms a palpable condemnation of Gideons sin, in having married a Canaanite.
III. Useful purposes are served in recording a wicked mans life in the Book of God.
It might be said, such a record would only be a blur on the page. And it might farther be objected, that, as the name of the wicked is destined to rot, it seems inconsistent with this to inscribe it in the book of true immortality. But
1. The record is given as a curse and not as a blessing. Gladly would the wicked man hail the announcement that his deeds were not to be recorded. It would be accepted by him as a valuable boon, that his name were allowed to lie in perpetual oblivion. But God puts a brand on it, and holds it up to the execration of all coming time. It was so with Cain, when a mark was set upon him; so with Ahaz, when the finger was pointed emphatically to his sin (2Ch. 28:22); so with Jezebel, Pharaoh, Judas, etc. Their names go down to posterity, with a character of infamy indelibly stamped on them. Thus they are made a mark for perpetual hissing to the whole world of men in after times. Gladly would the wicked dead continue to lie in their graves if they could, when the great voice is heard, Let the earth and sea give up their dead. For when they awake it will be to shame and everlasting contempt (Dan. 12:2). How beautiful is the reverse experience of those who accept of the Saviour, and trust in His glorious redemptionyour sins and iniquities will I remember no more. The man is blessed whose sin is covered (Psa. 32:1).
2. Such a record illustrates the truth of Gods testimony respecting human character. It is put down that God may be justified when He speaks, and clear when He judges. Has He said that the heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; in this dark history is the proofhas He said, there is no fear of God before the wicked mans eyes, his mouth is full of cursing, deceit, and fraud, etc. (Psa. 10:7-11); in such a history as that here set down we see it all realised.
3. It shows by practical example the frightfully evil nature of sin when allowed to develop itself unchecked. It is a frightful thing for a creature to give up his Creator, as all sin implies. The consequences cannot fail to be of the most serious character. There must be a fearful perversion of his moral nature, in abandoning a fellowship so pure, in despising a friendship so essential to his happiness, in violating an authority so sacred, and in wantonly forsaking the infinitely Good One. The immediate effect must be to come under the Divine frown, and to lose the Divine image. According to the excellence of the object despised, so must be the deep-rootedness of the evil disposition in the heart that rejects it. And as the law of progress applies to character, the longer this disposition is cherished, or the more unreservedly it is brought into exercise, it must become more and more inveterate. Sin becomes exceeding sinful, and more and more sinful (Rom. 7:13).
In Abimelech we see sin developing itself unchecked. He throws the reins on his lusts, especially his lust of power, and we see before us a monster rather than a man. For here there is everything to shock the moral sense. An exhibition is made of what sin naturally leads to, when allowed to operate without restraint. It turns man into an evil spirit, it makes a fearful wreck of our moral nature. This illustrates the greatness of the deliverance wrought by the Saviour, when He gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
4. Wicked deeds recorded are beacons set up, to warn us off from the rocks and whirlpools of sin. They show that a course of sin is like sailing among sunk rocks, or falling under the destructive sweep of a vortex. The full malignity of sin is not to be told in words, but has to be seen in acts. It is a headlong rush, a maddening rage, a possession of seven devils, a bursting through all bounds, a rampant and reckless career of treading under foot the sacred commands of the Most Highas seen in the chapter of life here recorded. Abimelech is a finger post set up in Gods Providence, with the words inscribed, Beware of the broad road that leadeth to destruction! When allowed full scope, it becomes so virulent, that almost every word in the vocabulary which is expressive of an evil quality would be required to tell its many sides and degrees of evil. It is venomous and baneful, a desolating scourge, a withering blight. It is savage in its conceptions against the innocent, and merciless in carrying its designs into execution. It is a destructive force marring and crushing everything that comes in its waycorrupting, corroding and polluting whatever is most fertile and beautiful in Gods world.
All this exhibited in actual life is a most emphatic testimony, that the end of these ways is death, and carries in its bosom the warning, Avoid the evil way, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away.
IV. God can bring accusers against the wicked when they fancy themselves most secure.
On the very coronation day, when this vile aspirant to the throne of Israel had just got the consummation of all his wishes gratified, and saw himself hailed by the thousands of one of the chief cities of the land as their king, suddenly a messenger from Jehovah appears on the scene with the language of solemn warning on his lips. It was as if the very rocks were made to cry out against such hideous wickedness. Had his heart been less hard, Abimelech could, like Herod after the murder of John (Mar. 6:16), have exclaimedThis is one of my brothers whom I have put to death. Standing on an eminence among the rocks which overhung the valley, one of the seventy sons, all of whom were supposed to have been massacred, appears, as if risen from the dead, to act the part of an accusing conscience. The occasion was so strong, that the very Mount of Blessing (Gerizim, where Jotham stood) must for once thunder out a curse, against the perpetrators of the awful deeds, which had that day culminated in the unheard of act, of an impious mortal rushing forward to occupy the throne which, of all others, was reserved for the God of Israel alone!
Thus did God meet Adam, on the very day when he sinned, and hid himself among the trees of the garden. Thus suddenly was Haman caught in a snare by that very queen who had honoured him by inviting him to a special banquet, where none but the king, queen, and Haman were present. At the moment when his proud wishes were being gratified to the full, his fall came swiftlyin the twinkling of an eye, from a hand that he least of all expected. So did Ahab encounter Elijah, at the very moment he entered to take possession of that long-coveted vineyard of Naboth. At the moment, when the man, who tried to crush the Church of God in its infancy, was receiving honours from the people as a god, the angel of the Lord smote him, and he was eaten of worms and gave up the ghost (Act. 12:21-23; Job. 20:23; Hab. 2:11; 2Ki. 5:26; Jos. 7:18-21).
V. Silent nature is full of lessons of wisdom for irrational men. It needs only a Jotham to bring them out, and apply them. Long before our poet told us in words, there were
Tongues in trees, books in the running brooks,
Sermons in stones, and good in everything.
Ask now the beasts, and they shall teach theeor speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee, etc. (Job. 12:7-9). If the fable (which this paragraph is supposed to be) be the work of fancy, or a narrative woven by fancy from the elements of nature, in order to press home some important truth, it is not the less instructive; for nature is in all its aspects essentially a teacher. It not only contains illustrations of spiritual truth, happy but accidental likenesses of it, but its very framework is so constructed, as to furnish emblems to the eye of sense of the great spiritual meaning which lies in the background. The world of spirit which is unseen, and which existed before the material world, repeats itself in that world; so that, what we see in nature is the counterpart of what exists in the realm of spirits. It bears witness for that realm, and shadows it forth. Mans body is so fashioned, as to shadow forth in its curves and features and noble upright form, especially too in its expression of the countenance, the higher qualities of his spirit. In some sense, the things of earth are the copies of things in heaven. The objects in the mart, by the wayside, or in the field, are instruments through which man is educated to know much more of God. This entire visible world, with its kings and subjects, parents and children, sun and moon, sowing and harvest, light and darkness, life and death, is a mighty parablea great teaching of supersensuous truth, a help at once to our faith, and our understanding.
LESSONS TAUGHT US BY THE TREES
1. Humility. None of the really good trees aspire to have a distinction above the others. They are content to remain in the place where their Creator has put them. The lofty and umbrageous tree does not boast itself above those that are small and tender, but rather flings its arms around them to shelter them.
2. Sense of responsibility. Each tree feels it has an office to fulfil, which is specially given to it to do, and which it must not leave undone.
3. Obedience and submission. There is no rebellion among the trees, against the authority of Him who appointed them their places, and assigned them their duties. That which is scantily laden, or bears a more common sort of fruit, does not murmur because it is not covered with rich clusters; but each seems content to bear that which is expected of it. It is obedient and submissive.
4. Mutual good-will. No tree wishes to despoil another tree of its glory. There is no joining together of those that are less favoured, against those that are renowned for fertility and beauty. There is neither a strife for precedence, nor do the others show jealousy, if any one is likely to have the precedence. So ought it to be among men of all classes, but especially among those who form the Church of God. All should feel they have the same nature, are trees planted by the same hand, watered by the same clouds, and warmed by the same sun; and so, being united by many ties in common, should grow peaceably together as one vineyard of the Lord of Hosts.
5. Entire dependence of each on the provision God has made for it. It is but in a secondary manner, that any one tree derives benefit from another. One may to some extent protect another from the fury of the blast, or contribute to it somewhat of heat. But all the primary conditions of health and strength to any tree, belong to the soil in which it is placed, to the air around it, to the sun that shines upon it, and to the rain or dew that falls upon it. Its root must be fastened in the soil, and on that everything depends in the first instance. The soil must be sufficient and rich in order to a luxuriant growth. The rain and dew must fall copiously, and the sun must send forth heat. In the spiritual vineyard these conditions are essentially required. Fellow Christians may in many ways be helpful to each other, but each one is dependent, for all that is primary, on God alone. Each one is rooted by Gods own hand in Christ, and built up in him; it is from Him that the rain and due of spiritual influences come down; and it is he who causes the Sun of Righteousness to arise with warmth and healing in his beams (Gal. 1:15-16; Col. 2:6-7; Hos. 14:5; Hos. 14:3-4; Mal. 4:2). The great practical lesson taught by the trees therefore is, that the Christians primary duty is to look after his relations to his God, and see that these are all right, for it is on that that all which is essential to his growth depends.
VI.To be useful is better than to reign.
All the good trees gave it as a reason for their refusal to wave their tops over the other trees, that they had each a useful vocation to fulfil, and, that the fulfilment of that vocation was a far more important thing, than to reign over others. To reign, is to live for the glorification of ones self; to be useful, is to be a fountain head from which blessings might flow out to others. All the objects of Nature seem to say, we exist not for ourselves, but for the benefit of others around us. The sun shines not for itself, but to enlighten and warm the planets that revolve around him. The clouds float in the firmament, not on their own account, but to distil their watery treasures on the thirsty ground. The birds sing among the branches, and fill the grove with melody, to give delight to many a listening ear. The flowers put forth their blossom, and convey a pleasing sense of view to the eye; while the trees and shrubs grow, and wave their branches in the breeze, not on their own account, but to glorify Him who created them, for the gracefulness of their form, the richness of their hues, the sweet fragrance they emit, or the excellent fruit they bear.
It is the law also for all true ChristiansNone of us liveth to himself, &c., Ye are the salt of the earth, Ye are the light of the world. And the rule they have to follow is, It is more blessed to give than to receive (Rom. 14:7-8; Mat. 5:13-14; Act. 20:35) He who lives to do good to others around him, and especially to advance the cause of God on the earth, has the consciousness that he lives not in vain, that he is not a cypher but a valuable integer in society, that he is spending the talents given to him to a profitable accountwith the two gaining other twothat he has thought more of Gods glory while passing through the world than of his own, and that his place will be missed when he is gone.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Abimelech Made King Jdg. 9:1-6
And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mothers brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mothers father, saying,
2 Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? remember also that I am your bone and your flesh.
3 And his mothers brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words: and their hearts inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother.
4 And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, which followed him.
5 And he went unto his fathers house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone: notwithstanding yet Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself.
6 And all the men of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo, and went, and made Abimelech king, by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem.
1.
Who was Abimelech? Jdg. 9:1
Abimelech was the son of Gideon and the grandson of Joash. He was born to Gideon and a concubine of Gideons who lived in Shechem. He was thus of the family of Manasseh and pressed his claim to a place of leadership on the basis of being a son of Gideon. Although his father had declined to fill the office of king over Israel, he coveted the office, first winning the support of the members of his mothers family, and then murdering all the sons of his father to protect his claim to the inheritance of Gideon.
2.
Why did he go to Shechem? Jdg. 9:1 b
His mother was Gideons concubine. She was also called a handmaid (Jdg. 9:18). A concubine was a woman with whom the man cohabited lawfully. She apparently enjoyed no other connubial right but that of cohabitation until the time of the Law when her state was protected by laws and regulations (Exo. 21:7-9 and Deu. 21:10-14). The old Jewish rabbis differ as to what constitutes concubinage; some regard its distinguishing feature as the absence of the betrothing ceremonies and of the dowry. In Roman times, concubinage was an allowed custom. It was sometimes referred to as a marriage of conscience. It was not Gods intention from the beginning that man should have more than one wife; but some of the patriarchs, including Abraham and Jacob, had these handmaids, or concubines. Abimelechs mother was Gideons concubine in Shechem.
3.
Why did the men of Shechem follow Abimelech? Jdg. 9:3
Abimelech had very cunningly approached his relatives in Shechem. They are called his mothers brethren (Jdg. 9:1). These men evidently had a mistaken idea of the nature of the judgeship in Israel; for Abimelech approached them by suggesting he should succeed his father, Gideon, in the place of leadership. There is nothing in any of the narrative of the book of Judges to indicate that the office of judge was hereditary. Nevertheless, fooled by Abimelech as they were, these men who were relatives of Abimelech persuaded the other men of Shechem to allow Abimelech to take the leadership over them.
4.
Why did they give him seventy pieces of silver? Jdg. 9:4
These dishonorable men of Shechem supported Abimelechs campaign by providing seventy pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, their pagan god. With this money, Abimelech was able to hire vain and wicked men who would follow him. Since there were seventy sons of Gideon, we are left to suppose Abimelech was paid one piece of silver each for the sons of Gideon whom he killed.
5.
Which son of Gideon escaped? Jdg. 9:5
Jotham, the youngest of Gideons sons, escaped by hiding from Abimelechs assassins. We learn that Jether was Gideons oldest son (Jdg. 8:20), and Jotham and Jether are the only other sons named here except Abimelech himself. Gideons sons were many, being seventy in number; and they would doubtless have been a blessing to the people of Israel if they had been allowed to live. Abimelechs purge was similar to the attempt of Athaliah to rid Judah of any heir to the throne in Jerusalem (2Ki. 11:1).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(1) And Abimelech.This narrative of the rise and fall of Abimelech, the bramble king, is singularly vivid in many of its details, while at the same time material facts are so briefly touched upon that parts of the story must remain obscure. The general bearing of this graphic episode is to illustrate the slow, but certain, working of Divine retribution. The two main faults of the last phase of Gideons career had been his polygamy and his dangerous tampering with unauthorised, if not idolatrous, worship. The retribution for both errors falls on his house. The agents of their overthrow are the kinsmen of his base-born son by a Canaanite mother. Abimelech seems to have taken his first steps very soon after Gideons death. Doubtless he had long been secretly maturing his plans. The narrative bears on its surface inimitable marks of truthfulness. We can trace in the character of Abimelech a reflection of his fathers courage and promptitude, overshadowed by elements which he must have drawn from his maternal origin.
Unto his mothers brethren.His Canaanite kith and kin, who doubtless had great influence over the still powerful aboriginal element of the Shechemite population.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

ABIMELECH’S USURPATION, Jdg 9:1-6.
1. Abimelech Son of Gideon by his concubine, who lived in Shechem.
Jdg 8:31. His mother’s family evidently possessed great influence in the city.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Chapter 9. Abimelech.
Abimelech Becomes Sole Prince of The Gideon Tribes – His Rise and Fall.

This chapter contains an account of the craft and cruelty of Abimelech, by which he had himself made a prince of Israel and king of the Shechemites; of the parable of Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon, concerning the trees, in which he exposes their folly in making Abimelech king, and foretells the ruin of them both; of the contentions which arose between Abimelech, and the men of Shechem, which were increased by Gaal the son of Ebed, who was drawn into a battle with Abimelech, and defeated and forced to flee. But the quarrel between Abimelech and the men of Shechem still continued, which resulted in the entire ruin of the city and its inhabitants, and in the death of Abimelech himself, in accordance with Jotham’s curse.
Shechem was an ancient city situated in the hill country of Ephraim. It was mentioned in the 19th century BC Egyptian execration texts, and excavations show it to have been strongly fortified, covering fourteen acres. It was very prosperous in the Hyksos period (1700-1550 BC) during which a massive fortress-temple was built. This may well have been ‘the house of Baal-berith’. In the Amarna letters (including correspondence between the Pharaohs and their vassals in Canaan in the 15th century BC) its king Labayu is said by an enemy (Abdi Heba) to have given Shechem to the Habiru (‘Should we do as Lab’aya, who gave Shechem to the enemy (Habiru)?’)? Labayu and his sons were spasmodically rebel leaders against Egypt with influence as far as Gezer and Taanach and they even threatened Megiddo, who wanted a hundred troops to assist in defending against them (‘ Let the king give a hundred garrison men to protect the city. Truly Lab’aya has no other intention. To take Megiddo is that which he seeks!’). Thus Shechem contained a non-Canaaanite section of population at this time. Later there is evidence of specific Israelite occupation, from 11th century BC.
There is no record of Joshua ever having had to take the city and yet it was there that he held a ceremony for the renewing of the covenant (Joshua 8; Joshua 24). It may well be that, when ‘Simeon and Levi’ destroyed the inhabitants of the city in Genesis 34, some from their households were allowed to settle there as a reward for assisting in the attack, and in order to look after Jacob’s land rights (Gen 33:19; Gen 37:12 compare Jos 24:32), marrying the bereaved women to obtain their land rights and introducing the worship of Yahweh. They may well have been seen elsewhere as ‘Habiru’. This was possibly when the idea of Baal-berith, ‘the lord of the covenant’, originated as genuine worship of Yahweh, or there may have been a gradual compromise and amalgamating of ideas. Habiru (stateless, non-Canaanite peoples) appear to have been settled there in the time of Labayu (see above). Thus when Joshua arrived and was welcomed and found non-Canaanites willing to submit to the covenant he was probably satisfied to incorporate them into the covenant rather than treating them as Canaanites (consider Jos 24:23).
Abimelech Usurps The Princeship of Israel and the Throne of Shechem ( Jdg 9:1-6 ).
Jdg 9:1
‘ And Abimelech, the son of Jerubbaal, went to Shechem, to his mother’s brothers, and spoke with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father.’
One problem with kingship was that on the death of the king there was usually unrest while the claimants to the throne settled their differences. The fact that this happened here supports the idea that Gideon had been made the equivalent of a ‘king’. Abimelech certainly saw it that way. It would appear that Abimelech had been brought up with his brothers. But he was always aware of his inferior status and when his father died he seized his opportunity. He went to Shechem to seek the assistance of his mother’s side of the family to gain the throne for himself.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jdg 9:23 Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:
Jdg 9:23 Comments – In Jdg 9:23 the parable of Jotham came to pass (Jdg 9:7-21). This was a curse spoken by Jotham (Jdg 9:57).
Jdg 9:57, “And all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads: and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jerubbaal.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Abimelech Becomes King
v. 1. And Abimelech, the son of Jerubbaal, by his concubine, Jdg 8:31, went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, all her nearest relatives, and communed with them and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,
v. 2. Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shechem, Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you? He presumes that the position of judge in Israel is hereditary, and craftily suggests that it would be of advantage to have only one man in that office rather than many. Remember also that I am your bone and your flesh, for he, through his mother, was a blood-relative of the citizens of Shechem. These two points he wanted them to consider carefully.
v. 3. And his mother’s brethren, acting upon the suggestion of Abimelech, spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem all these words; and their hearts, those of all the Shechemites, inclined to follow Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. They permitted themselves to be led astray by his perversion of the facts.
v. 4. And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver (barely $45) out of the house of Baal-berith, for as idolaters they were opposed to Jerubbaal and his family, who had abolished idolatry wherever his influence extended, wherewith Abimelech hired vain and light persons, a body-guard from the idle rabble, the town-bums, easily enough converted into thugs, which followed him.
v. 5. And he went unto his father’s house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren, the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone, dragging them forth for a formal slaughter; notwithstanding yet Jotham, the youngest son of Jerubbaal, was left; for he hid himself.
v. 6. And all the men of Shechem, after this bloody deed, gathered together, and all the house of Millo, the name of the fort or citadel of Shechem, and went and made Abimelech king by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem, at the great stone, set up by Joshua under the oak, Jos 24:25-26. Thus the followers of Baal, thugs and murderers, had triumphed over the followers of the true God. It is always a heavy chastisement in both Church and State if the enemies of the Lord obtain the power.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION
Jdg 9:1
The son of Jerubbaal. Throughout this chapter Gideon is spoken of by the name of Jerubbaal. There must be some cause for this. The simplest and most probable cause is that this whole history of Abimelech is taken from some other source than the preceding chapters. And a considerable difference in the style of the narrative, which is feebler and more obscure, seems to bear out this inference. Went to Shechem. This revolt from the house of Gideon in favour of Abimelech seems to partake of the nature of an Ephraimite rising against the supremacy of Manasseh. It was doubtless galling to the pride of the great tribe of Ephraim (Jdg 8:1, Jdg 8:2; Jdg 12:1-6) that Ophrah of the Abi-ezrites should be the seat of government, and Gideon’s ephod the centre of religion for the tribes of Israel. And so they seem to have taken advantage of Gideon’s death, and of Abimelech’s connection with Shechem, to make a league with the Hivite inhabitants of Shechem (see verses 27, 28) to set up Abimelech as king, and to restore the worship of Baal, under the title of Baal-berith (Jdg 8:33; Jdg 9:4, Jdg 9:27, Jdg 9:46), at Shechem for all Israel to resort to.
Jdg 9:2
All the sons, which are threescore and ten persons. Mark the evils of polygamyproducing family discord, extinguishing natural affection, causing civil strife, multiplying pretenders, and producing an ignoble and contemptible herd of helpless princes.
Jdg 9:3
His mother’s brethren. Presumably the Hivite population of Sheehem.
Jdg 9:4
Threescore and ten of silver, i.e. shekels, which is always understood. Equal in value to about seven pounds; quite enough with which to hire a band of “vain and light persons,” who would afterwards maintain themselves by plunder. Out of the house of Baal-berith. The custom of collecting treasures at the temple, both that of the true God and of idols, whether they were offerings and gifts for the service of the temple, or treasures deposited there for safety, was very general (see Jos 6:19; 1Ki 15:18; 1Ch 29:8; Dan 1:2, etc.). The treasures belonging to the temple of Apollo at Delphi were very great, and excited the cupidity of Xerxes, who sent an army to plunder the temple, but was foiled in the attempt. The Phocians are related to have seized 10,000 talents from the treasury of Delphi, nearly two and a half millions sterling. The temple of Diana at Ephesus had considerable treasures in money, as well as other valuable articles. Many other notices of the riches of temple treasures occur in classical writers. Vain and light persons. Of. Jdg 11:3; 1Sa 22:2; 2Sa 15:1; 2Ch 13:7. Vain, literally, empty; light, literally, boiling over. Applied to the false prophets (Zep 3:4). In German, sprudel-kopf is a hot-headed, hasty man.
Jdg 9:5
Upon one stone. Used as a block, on which the victims were executed one after another. Compare the similar wholesale murders of the seventy sons of Ahab by order of Jehu (2Ki 10:7), of the seed royal of Judah by Athaliah (2Ki 11:1), of the whole house of Jeroboam by Baasha (1Ki 15:29), of the whole house of Baasha by Zimri (1Ki 16:11, 1Ki 16:12). Timour, on his conquest of Persia, is said to have destroyed the whole male family of the king. At the conquest of Bagdad he is said to have made a pyramid of 90,000 human heads. In Persia and Turkey in modern times it has been a common practice for the sovereign to slay or put out the eyes of all his brothers and cousins. So destructive of natural affection is polygamy, and so cruel is power.
Jdg 9:6
The house of Millo. Millo must have been some strongly fortified post in the neighbourhood of Shechem, and no doubt the place where the tower was, mentioned in Jdg 9:46, Jdg 9:47. At Jerusalem we read of Millo as a part of the city of David in 2Sa 5:9, apparently so called by the Jebusites, and the strengthening of it was one of Solomon’s great works (1Ki 9:15, 1Ki 9:24). It is called the house of Millo in 2Ki 12:20, where it is mentioned as the scene of the murder of King Joash. Here, therefore, the house of Millo probably means the citadel or keep of Sechem, a fortress analogous to the Bala-hissar in relation to Cabul, though possibly at a distance of a mile or two (verse 46, note). The phrase, all the house of Millo, means all the men who dwelt in the house of Millo, probably all men of war. Made Abimelech king. We seem to see the hand of the Canaanite population in this term king, which was proper to the Canaanites (Jos 11:1-23; Jos 12:1-24.), but was not yet domesticated in Israel. The plain of the pillar. This translation is clearly wrong. The word translated plain means an oak or terebinth tree. The word translated pillar is thought to mean a garrison, or military post, in Isa 29:3 (A.V. mound); but, according to its etymology and the meaning of other forms of the same root, may equally well mean a monument, or stone set up and this is probably the meaning here. The translation will then be the oak of the monument, a sense supported by the modern names of the mosque there, of which one is “the Oak of Moreh,” and another “the Saint of the Pillar”. And we are very strongly led to this conclusion by the further fact that there was a famous oak at Shechem, mentioned Gen 35:4 as the place where Jacob hid the idols of his household; and that Joshua took a great stone and “set it up under the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord” at Shechem (Jos 24:1, Jos 24:25, Jos 24:26). It marks a sad declension in the condition of Israel at this time, as compared with the days of Joshua, that the Shechemite Abimelech should be made king with a view to the restoration of Baal-worship on the very spot where theft fathers had made a solemn covenant to serve the Lord. It is remarkable that the narrative in this chapter gives us no clue as to the relations of the rest of Israel with Abimelech.
HOMILETICS
Jdg 9:1-6
Self-aggrandisement.
If we study the characters of men famous either in profane or sacred history with a view not merely to their capacity, but to their moral worth, we shall observe one very marked distinction between them. Some, the few, evidently used their great powers and their great opportunities with entire disinterestedness, with singleness of purpose to promote God’s glory and the happiness and welfare of their country, and not in any wise for self-aggrandisement. Such men, for example, as Moses, and Joshua, and Samuel, though they wielded all the power of the state, were entirely above the littleness of self-seeking. They had each a great mission, and they fulfilled it to the utmost of their ability with unswerving fidelity; they had each a weighty task intrusted to them, and they executed it with unflagging perseverance; but the idea of enriching themselves, or exalting their own families, seems never to have entered into their heads, or, at all events, never to have influenced their conduct. We can say the same of a few great names in profane history. It was true to a certain extent of Charlemagne; it was true pre-eminently of Alfred the Great; it was true of some of the early patriots of Rome, like Scipio Africanus, or Cincinnatus; of Washington, of Pitt, and of the Duke of Wellington. But in the bulk of the great men of history we cannot help seeing that the motive force which called forth their energies and stimulated their powers was ambition, the lust of conquest, the desire of wealth and greatnessin a word, self-aggrandisement. The career of such men of might as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Louis Quatorze, Napoleon Buonaparte, whatever eminent qualities of head or heart they may have displayed, gave unmistakable signs that they were really pursuing their own greatness as the end of their performances in the cabinet or in the field. We may trace the same distinction between men who have filled much less important places in the world. Compare, for example, Dunstan with Wolsey. The first, though we may think him mistaken, pursued a disinterested purpose with concentrated energy; the second had constantly in view the royal favour or the Papal throne. A comparison of Gideon and Abimelech presents the same sharp contrast. Gideon was roused by the call of God to seek his country’s deliverance from a galling yoke, and to restore the worship of the true God in his native land. With the self-devotion of a Hofer, and the unflinching enthusiasm of a Luther, he gave himself to his double task, and accomplished it at the risk of his life without a thought of himself or any selfish ends. Abimelech, seeking power for himself, pretended to have in view the people’s interest, and, to secure their favour, restored an abominable idolatry. His kingdom, founded in bloodshed, abetted by falsehood, and fostered by a base and cruel policy, had no end or motive but self-aggrandisement. There is exactly the same difference in the characters and conduct of men in the commonest affairs of every-day life. Some men have high aims, and pursue them by righteous paths. Others have selfish ends, and pursue them in unscrupulous ways. Be it ours to aim at doing the will of God in the commonest as well as in the greatest actions of our lives. Let us steadily set before us the thing that is right as the end which we are to seek. Let us consider that our powers, be they great or small, are given to us that in the exercise of them we may give God glory and do good to man. Without calculation of selfish interests let us follow God’s call, devote ourselves to do his good pleasure, seek our neighbour’s welfare, and trust to God’s loving-kindness to order for us what seems best to his godly wisdom. In so doing we shall be meet for the kingdom of God.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR
Jdg 9:1-6
Ambitious usurpation.
Nothing shows the extent and significance of Gideon’s influence so much as the anarchy that followed his death. The presence of one may check, restrain, direct, etc. in a degree wholly inexplicable until its removal. The retrogression of peopleshow difficult to comprehend! Sometimes a single individual (at most a few) concentrates in himself all the highest tendencies of his time, the only original of what appears a common possession. The weaknessmental, spiritual, political, and religiousof the nation now reveals itself. A time like that following upon Gideon’s judgeship tries men and declares their real motives. Of the usurpation now attempted, notice
I. THE AIM. Worthy men seek to emulate the moral and intellectual excellence of the great deceased; unworthy, merely to succeed to their office and to enjoy their honours. It was a splendid opportunity which now presented itself to carry on, and to higher issues, the work initiated by Gideon. Instead of this, personal aggrandisement is the all-absorbing aim. Unscrupulous advantage is taken of the interregnum in the judgeship. And the more utterly base appears the project, inasmuch as it is not only what Gideon enjoyed that is sought, but what he rejected, as considering himself unworthy.
II. THE SPIRIT.
1. Irreligious. No betaking of himself to the oracle; no recognition of God as Supreme Arbiter and Judge-maker.
2. Immodest. Personal fitness is not questioned, nor is the superior qualification of others considered.
3. Selfish. The rights of others are trampled upon, human blood is spilled like water, and the nation is regarded only as a corpus vile for political experiments and ambitious aims.
III. THE MEANS AND METHODS. Arguments. Falsehood and sophistry. The alternatives presented”Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you?”are not real. Charging others with the same aims as his own. Appeals not to the nation’s sense of right, but to expediency, and kinship, etc:Its occasion is the misfortune and weakness of others. Its instrumentality, unhallowed gold and a mercenary soldiery. Its method, a series of wrongs culminating in murder.
IV. THE. SUCCESS. Apparently sudden, complete, absolute; really hollow, involving constant distrust and fear, and ever new outrages, and having in itself the elements of ultimate judgment.M.
Jdg 9:2, Jdg 9:3
Unrighteous claims of kindred.
A great force in the arrangements and promotions of human life. The unrighteousness of it often felt when it cannot be explained. As much to be deprecated in the endeavour to secure the ordinary advantages of life as in the competition for its great prizes and honours. Let us look closely at this plea, “He is our brother.”
I. IT IS THE EXAGGERATION AND PROSTITUTION OF A NATURAL AND PROPER AFFECTION. Of the true claims of “our brother” how much might be said! A basis for moral obligations, and rights, and duties seldom fairly acknowledged. But to the desirable things of the world and “out in the open” there are many claimants whose title has to be weighed. The fond mother, desirous of such things for her son, may be asked, “Why your son, and not another’s?”
II. IT IGNORES AND TRAMPLES UPON GENERAL INTERESTS FOR THE SAKE OF INDIVIDUAL ADVANCEMENT. Next to the absolute appointment by God, and often indicative of it, is the “greatest good of the greatest number.” The king or other public officer is for the people, not vice versa. Although absolute right may be sometimes waived because of general advantage, when both are wanting the claim is weak.
III. THE TRUE TITLE–DEEDS TO ADVANCEMENT ARE NOT RECOGNISED OR APPEALED TO. Divine appointment; unique capacity; desire for the good of others rather than the advantage of self; service rather than office; duty than right.M.
Jdg 9:5
Shortcomings of unscrupulous schemes.
That there are instances of seemingly complete and permanent success cannot be denied. But the cases in which the act just falls short of success are too frequent and dramatically striking not to be pondered.
I. A MORAL GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD IS WITNESSED TO.
II. IF EVIDENT IN SOME CASES, MAY NOT THE SAME LAW EXIST WHERE NOT CLEARLY VISIBLE?
III. IN THIS IS ILLUSTRATED THE ESSENTIALLY MORAL CHARACTER OF HIGHEST REASON. The wicked always leave something unconsidered or unprovided for. The lives and schemes of the wicked are based on fallacies. Truth and righteousness coincide.M.
HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY
Jdg 9:6
Abimelech.
The character and life of Abimelech furnish us with a terrible picture of ambition in its bad origin, wicked character, temporary triumph, and fatal issues.
I. THE BAD ORIGIN OF AMBITION. This is illustrated in the circumstances which were associated with the early days of Abimelech.
1. Irregular social habits. The parentage of Abimelech would
(1) stir in him a sense of injustice, and
(2) incline him to lawless conduct (Jdg 8:30).
Loose morals undermine the peace of society. Whatever desecrates the sanctity of the home tends to derange the order of the state.
2. Parental vanity. The high-sounding name of Abimelech is significant as an index to the character of his mother, and the thoughts she would instil into his mind. The vanity of the parent may be the curse of the child.
II. THE WICKED CHARACTER OF AMBITION. Abimelech displays some of the worst features of ambition.
1. Selfishness. The ambitious upstart has no thought of his nation’s prosperity, his sole aim is his own aggrandisement.
2. Deceit. Abimelech deceives his brothers and the men of Shechem. True greatness is simple and frank; the bastard greatness of ambition is mean, false, treacherous.
3. Cruelty. The new king soon abuses the confidence of his brethren, and develops into a murderous tyrant. Ambition inclines to cruelty
(1) because it isolates the ambitious man, and destroys the safeguard of the sympathy and influence of equals, and
(2) because it creates dangers from which there seems no escape but by violence.
III. THE TEMPORARY TRIUMPH OF AMBITION. Abimelech reaches the throne at which he aims.
1. We must not be surprised at the temporary success of wickedness. It is easier for the unscrupulous to obtain a low worldly triumph than for the conscientious to reach their more noble goal. The irony of providence is apparent in the fact that these men “have their reward” (Mat 6:2).
2. We must not judge of conduct by worldly success. Success is no vindication of character. Bad conduct is not to be justified because it proves to have been expedient. The syco-phancy which flatters triumphant ambition, while it execrates the ambition which fails, is one of the meanest characteristics of popular opinion.
IV. THE FATAL RESULTS OF AMBITION.
1. To the people who shamefully countenance it it brings disaster. Israel was the worse for tolerating Abimelech, and Shechem, which accepted and encouraged him, suffered the heaviest calamities at his hand. Instead of securing strength and peace, the new throne only flung disorder and misery into the nation.
2. To the ambitious man his conduct brought ultimate defeat, shame, and death. Greed of power is punished by a triumph of weakness. Pride and vanity meet with humiliation and ridicule.A.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

CHAP. IX.
Abimelech is made king, and puts his brethren to death. Jotham, the only surviving one, rebuketh Abimelech and the men of Shechem by a parable, and fortels their ruin. At the siege of Thebez, Abimelech is killed by a piece of a mill-stone cast upon his head.
Before Christ 1231.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

FIFTH SECTION
The Usurped Rule Of Abimelech, The Fratricide And Thorn-bush King.
__________________
The election and coronation of Abimelech. Jothams parable.
Jdg 9:1-21.
1And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mothers brethren, and communed with [spake unto] them, and with [unto] all the family of the house of his mothers father, saying, 2Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men [lords]1 of Shechem, Whether [Which] is better for you, either [omit: either] that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign [rule] over you, or that one reign [rule] over you?2 remember also that I am your bone and your flesh. 3And his mothers brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men [lords] of Shechem all these words: and their hearts inclined to follow [inclined after] Abimelech; for they said, He is our brother. 4And they gave him threescore and ten pieces of silver out of the house of Baal-berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vain [lit. empty, i. e. loose, worthless] and light [wanton, reckless] persons, which [and they] followed him. 5And he went unto his fathers house at Ophrah, and slew his brethren the sons of Jerubbaal, being threescore and ten persons, upon one stone: notwithstanding, yet [and only] Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal was left; for he hid himself. 6And all the men [lords] of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo [all Beth-millo], and went and made Abimelech king, by the 7plain [oak] of the pillar [monument]3 that was in [is near] Shechem. And when [omit: when] they told it to Jotham, [and] he went and stood in [on] the top of mount Gerizim, and lifted up his voice, and cried, and said unto them, Hearken unto me, ye men [lords] of Shechem, that God may hearken unto you.4 8The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive-tree, Reign thou over us. 9But the olive-tree said unto them, Should I leave my fatness,5 wherewith by me they honour God and Man 1:6 and go to be promoted 10[go to wave] over the trees? And the trees said to the fig-tree, Come thou, and reign over us. 11But the fig-tree said unto them, Should I forsake5 my sweetness, 12and my good fruit, and go to be promoted [to wave] over the trees? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou, and reign over us. 13And the vine said unto them, Should I leave5 my wine [must], which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted [to wave] over the trees? 14Then said all the trees unto the bramble 15[thornbush], Come thou, and reign over us. And the bramble [thornbush] said unto the trees, If in truth [i. e. in good earnest] ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust [take shelter] in my shadow: and [but] if not, let fire come out of the bramble [thornbush], and devour the cedars of Lebanon. 16Now therefore, if ye have done truly and sincerely, in that ye have made Abimelech king, and if ye have dealt well with Jerubbaal and his house, and have done unto him according to the deserving of his hands: 17(For my father fought for you, and adventured his life far,7 and delivered you out of the hand of Midian: 18And ye are risen up against my fathers house this day, and have slain his sons, three score and ten persons, upon one stone, and have made Abimelech, the son of his maid-servant, king over the men [lords] of Shechem, because he is your brother:) 19If ye then have dealt truly and sincerely with Jerubbaal and with his house this day, then rejoice ye in Abimelech, and let him also rejoice in you: 20But if not, let fire come out from Abimelech, and devour the men [lords] of Shechem, and the house of Millo [and Beth-millo]; and let fire come out from the men [lords] of Shechem, and from the house of Millo [from Beth-millo], and devour Abimelech. 21And Jotham ran away, and fled, and went to Beer, and dwelt there, for fear of Abimelech his brother.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Jdg 9:2.: used interchangeably with , cf. Jdg 9:46 with 49; 2Sa 21:12, with Jdg 2:4-5. See also Jdg 20:5, and Jos 24:11. Dr. Cassel: Herren; De Wette, and many others, Brger, citizens.Tr.]
[2 Jdg 9:2.The E. V. unnecessarily departs from the order of the Hebrew, and thereby obscures the antithesis which is primarily between seventy and one, and secondarily between sons of Jerubbaal and your bone and flesh, thus: Which is better for you, that seventy men, all sons of Jerubbaal, rule over you, or that one man rule over you? Remember, also, etc.Tr.]
[3 Jdg 9:6.Keil: The explanation of is doubtful. , anything set up, is in Isa 29:3 a military post [garrison], but may also mean a monument, and designates here probably the great stone set up (Jos 24:26) under the oak or terebinth near Shechem (cf. Gen 35:4). De Wette also renders: Denkmal-Eiche, monument-oak.Tr.]
[4 Jdg 9:7.Dr. Cassel translates: and may God hear you. This is very well, but hardly in the sense in which he takes it, see below. Whether we translate as in the E. V., or as Dr. Cassel, the realization of the second member of the address must be regarded as contingent upon that of the first.Tr.]
[5 Jdg 9:9; Jdg 9:11; Jdg 9:13. . According to Ewald (Gram., 51 c.) is a contracted hiphil form (for ), the second being dropped in order to avoid the concurrence of too many gutturals, and the resulting (cf. Ges. Gr. 22, 4) being changed into in order to distinguish the interrogative particle more sharply. Others regard it as hophal (see Green, 53, 2, b). But as there are no traces anywhere else of either of these conjugations in this verb, it is commonly viewed as a simple kal form = . Keil seeks to explain the anomalous vowel under by saying that the obscure o-sound is substituted for the regular a in order to facilitate the pronunciation of successive guttural syllables. Dr. Cassel renders: Have I then lost [better: given up] my fatness? But as the notion of futurity must manifestly be contained in the following , the ordinary rendering, Should I give up? is preferable.Tr.]
[6 Jdg 9:9. : which God and men honor (esteem) in me. Compare Jdg 9:13. Dr. Cassel renders as the E. V.Tr.]
[7 Jdg 9:17. : literally, cast his life from before (him); cf. the marginal reading of he E. V.: i. e. disr garded his own life..Tr..]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
Jdg 9:1. Shechem was a chief city in Ephraim cf. Jos 24:1). That tribe still continued to be jealous of the consideration to which under Gideon Manasseh had attained. Though Gideon was now dead, the ephod was still in Ophrah, and the house of Gideon continued to hold a certain degree of authority. The narrative distinguishes between the sons of Gideon and Abimelech. While Jdg 8:30 stales that Gideon had seventy sons by many wives (), Jdg 9:31 remarks that the mother of Abimelech was a concubine () in Shechem.8 Just this son, an Ephraimite on his mothers side, bore the name of Abimelech, My Father is King. The origin of that lust after power, which manifests itself in his wild and ambitious heart, is thus psychologically explained.
Jdg 9:2-3. For they said, He is our brother. Abimelech, when he turned to Shechem with his criminal plans, was perfectly acquainted with the vain-glorious lust after power indulged in by the Ephraimites. He knew that it irritated them, to hear of the rule of the seventy sons of Gideon. Gideon, it is true, desired no dominion, nor could his sons exercise it; but the centre of distinction was nevertheless at Ophrah, in his house, where the ephod was. The negotiations into which Abimelech now enters with Shechem are very instructive. They show, first, that the distinction which the ephod conferred on the house of Gideon, although it implied no claim to dominion, properly speaking, was yet the very thing which, by exciting envy, became a snare to that house; and, secondly, that Shechem, as Gideons heir, will nevertheless not surrender this distinction, but desires to transfer it to one of its own people. The narrative is throughout of a tragic cast. Precisely those things which should exhort to greatness and faithfulness, are shamefully metamorphosed by sin into incentives to treason and mischief. In the hearts of the lords of Shechem, no voice of truth or justice raises itself against the unnatural plan of Abimelech. They convict him not of falsehood, by pointing out that his brothers do not exercise dominion, but support his project, because he is their brother, and by him they will rule. It is manifest that the whole of Shechem is morally depraved. As Abimelech, so his kindred; and as they, so all the Shechemites were disposed.
Jdg 9:4-5. And they gave him seventy silver-pieces out of the house of Baal-berith. Israel was forbidden to enter into covenant (berith) with the nations round about (cf. Jdg 2:2). The first symptom of apostasy among them, was always the inclination to remove the barriers between themselves and their heathen neighbors. The concessions required to make the establishment of covenant relations possible, were altogether one-sided: it was always Israel, and Israel only, that surrendered any part of its faith. The worship of a Baal-berith was the symbol of fellowship with the heathen, whereby the command to make no covenants was violated. His temple was the point of union for both parties. The support of Abimelech in his undertaking came from all the worshippers of Baal-berith; for was it not directed against the house of Jerubbaal, the declared enemy of Baal? Such being its character, it had moreover a proper claim on the treasures of the temple of Baal-berith. What a disgrace, when the son of the Baal-vanquisher takes money from the temple of that same Baal, for the purpose of murdering his brothers! What a victory of Satan over the youthful votary of ambition! And cheap enough was the price of blood. The idle rabble who hired themselves as body-guard to Abimelech, received a silver-piece, i. e. a shekel, for the head of each of Gideons sons. However vague the impression we get of a piece of money in that age by computing its equivalent in our coin, it is nevertheless frightful to think how little it cost (scarcely more than half a dollar), to procure the performance of the most horrible deed.
And he slew his brethren. Abimelech is a perfect type of the tyrant, as he frequently appears in Greek history, continental and insular, and also, in more recent times, on Italian soil. Machiavelli (Prince, ch. viii.) says, that whoever seizes a crown, unjustly and violently, must, if cruelty be necessary, exercise it to the full at once, in order to avoid the necessity of beginning it anew every day. In support of this maxim, he refers, first to Agathocles, and then to the petty tyrant of Fermo, Oliverotto, who in order to become master of the city, caused his uncle, who was also his foster-father, friend, and benefactor, to be traitorously slain at a banquet.Only one escaped, the youngest, Jotham by name. The confession of Jehovah, which this name of his youngest son implies, evidences the constant piety and faithfulness of Gideon, and confirms our conjecture that not he, but Shechem, invented the name Abimelech.
Jdg 9:6. And all the lords of Shechem held an assembly. Gideons sons being murdered, an election of a king now takes place. As the electors, so their king. The noble undertaking had succeeded; the house of Gideon was destroyed. What a contrast! After the glorious victory over Midian, Gideon, though urgently besought by the men of many tribes, will not consent to continue to be even their imperator; now, the Shechemites raise the assassin of his brothers to the dignity of a king! A kingship like that of the heathen cities on the coast, with no law, but with plenty of blood, without the oil of consecration, but steeped in sin, is thus violently and vain-gloriously set up by Shechem and its fortress (Beth-Millo9); and that too, with a reckless hardihood as great as that which characterized the preliminary murders, in a spot consecrated by sacred memories. There where Joshua, before he died (Jos 24:25-26), made a covenant with the people on Gods behalf, where he had solemnly bound them to the observance of the law, and where they had promised to obey God alone,there, at the great stone, set up by Joshua under the oak, two apostate, self-seeking cities, stained with murder and unbelief, elect a son of Jerubbaal, who suffered himself to be bought in the interest of Baal, to be their king! For the coronation, the narrative tells us, took place , at the monument-oak, near Shechem.10 And though nothing further is said about the place, it may nevertheless be inferred, from the connection and the tragic character of the occurrence, that the narrator, in bringing its locality to the mind of the reader, designs to make the shameful character of the transaction more strikingly evident, just as throughout this passage he constantly writes Jerubbaal, not Gideon, in order to render more prominent the contrast between these servants and that great victor of Baal.11
Jdg 9:7. And they told it to Jotham. While the preparations for the coronation are in progress, tidings of them are brought to Jotham, the last scion of the stock of Gideon. What shall he do? The whole nation is fallen into listlessness and inactivity. The horrible massacre has called forth no rising. Even those tribes who had perhaps heard of it, but took no part in it, continue quiescent. Sin has dulled every nerve of courage and gratitude. The son of the hero still receives intelligence; a few helpers are with him in his flight; a few others perhaps sigh with him in secret: but beyond this, he is alone. The spirit, however, of his father, has not left him. While below they crown the fratricide, he appears above, on the rock, like an impersonation of conscience. So the modern poet, with like grandeur of conception, makes Tell appear on the rock above the tyrant. Jothams arrow, however, is not sped from the fatal bow, but from a noble spirit. It is the arrow of parabolic discourse, dipped in personal grief and divine retribution, that he sends down among them. Mount Gerizim was the mount of blessing (Deu 27:12); but through the sin of Shechem, it becomes, in the parable of Jotham, a mount of judgment. Its present name, already borne in the Middle Ages, is el Tr (the Mountain). It rises to a height of eight hundred feet above the present Nblus (Rob. ii. 276). Jotham probably appeared on some projecting point, near enough to be heard, and distant enough to be not easily caught.12Hearken unto me, he says, and may God hear you. He wishes them to hear his parable, as he desires God (Elohim) to hear the coronation rejoicings that rise up from the valley.
Jdg 9:8-21. The parable belongs to the most remarkable productions of Israelitish life, not only on account of its political significance, but also for what may be called its literary character. Fable and so-called apologue are of oriental, non-Israelitish, as also non-Grecian, origin. They spring from a pantheism in which trees and animals furnished symbols for expressing the popular ideas. Although rooted in the religious vivification of nature, their employment was nevertheless brought to maturity by the pressure of social necessities. In the East, fable and tale were always the weapons of mind against violence and tyranny (cf. my Eddischen Studien, p. 15). They furnished the people with individual consolation against general misery. In their original appearance among the Greeks also, they fail not to exhibit this character. In the same way, Jotham speaks to the tyrants of Shechem in this popular language, which all understand. He does not speak like a prophet, for he is none, and Baal has stopped the ears of his auditors. He does not even speak of the power and mighty deeds of Jehovah, from whom his own name is derived. He speaks of Elohim and his retributionsof the Deity in the general sense in which the heathen also acknowledge him. He speaks altogether in their language, popularly, with popular wisdom. But what a difference between the moral strength which justifies Jotham to put forth his parable, and (for instance) the motives of the Greek Archilochus. There we hear the wounded vanity of a rejected suitor; here, one solitary voice of indignation and truth against the tyrant and murderer. By this moral motive, Jotham elevates the parable to the level of the divine word, and furnishes the first illustration of how a popular form of discourse, the offspring of directly opposite principles, could be employed for moral purposes, and (in the parables of Christ) become a medium for the highest doctrines and mysteries. Jotham gives a parable and points out its application (from Jdg 9:16 onward); but also apart from the latter, the narrative conveys an independent political idea with a force which has scarcely been equaled by any subsequent expression of it. It manifests a political consciousness so mature, as to surprise one who looks at the apparently simple and common-place relations of the time and people.
The trees will have a king. No reason is given, but the history of Israel, to which reference is had, furnishes one. People felt that in the dangers of war, one common leadership was important. They supposed that their frequent sufferings at the hands of Moab and Midian, were owing to defects in their form of government. They would have a king, in order to be able, as in their folly they think they shall be, to dispense with obedience to the commands of God. Gideon says: God is your Ruler. The apostate people will fill his place with a king, and think that in their selection, they act in accordance with the will of God.
Offers of kingly dignity are seldom refused. Solon, properly speaking, never received a tender of royalty; and Otto, Duke of Saxony, the father of Henry I. was already too old to bear such a burden (as Widukind says, Ipse vero quasi jam gravior annis recusabat imperii onus). The good trees, however, notwithstanding their strength, will not be elected; they deem the species of royalty which is offered them, too insignificant to warrant the sacrifice of what they already possess. The olive tree, fig tree, and grape-vine, enjoy sufficient honor, happiness, and distinction, not to prefer this sort of coronation to their present activity. They will rather continue in a condition which secures their personal worth, than go to wave over the trees. It is a beautiful image of popular favor, uncertain, unequal, affected by every wind, which is afforded by the branches of trees, never at rest, always waving. The proffered royalty is dependent on popular favor. It is a royalty which must bend to every breeze, if it would avoid a fall. For they to whom the office is offered, are too noble to use the means necessary to maintain their authority when popular favor deserts them. They must first have lost their nobility of nature, before they can follow the call now made to them. It was a noble king of recent times, who, from similar motives, strenuously resisted to accept what was offered him.
It is very significant that this doctrine proceeds from Jotham, the son of Gideon. He has his eye of course, on the refusal of the crown by his father; only he brings the negative side of that refusal into special prominence. He makes it evident that even then the fickle and discordant character of popular favor and popular will was thoroughly apprehended. But one needed to be the son of a divinely called hero, to be able to set forth with cutting force the unprincipled conduct of revolutionary malcontents. Against a true kingship, as afterwards established in Israel, and which in its idea forms the highest perfection of the theocracy, Jotham says nothing. The people that applies to Samuel for a king, is a very different one from these criminal Shechemites, who attempt to get a king in opposition to God. These latter, for this reason, can only use a king who has nothing to lose, and is worthy of them: whose fit symbol is the thorn-bush. Sin loves arbitrariness; therefore they deserve a tyrant. The thorn-bush is the type of persons who, after they have accepted power offered by bloody hands, are qualified to preserve it by bloody means.
The sthetic beauty of the parable is also to be noted. Trees afford the best representation of a republic; each tree has its own sphere of action, and no one is in a position to exercise any special influence over the others. Whoever among them would attempt this in the character of king, must, so to speak, leave the soil in which he is planted, and hover over them all. Their will would then be for him, what otherwise the nourishing earth is for all. Any productive tree would thereby lose its fruit. For the unfruitful thorn-bush alone, the office would involve no loss. The fable is especially beautiful as typical of Israelitish relations. The tribes are all equal. Like the trees, they all receive their strength from God. If they withdraw themselves from Him, in order to crown the thorn-bush, they will experience that which issues from the thorn-bushnamely, fire.
The profound significance of the parable is inexhaustible. Its truth is of perpetual recurrence. More than once was Israel in the position of the Shechemites; then especially, when He whose kingdom is not of this world, refused to be a king. Then, too, Herod and Pilate became friends. The thorn-bush seemed to be king when it encircled the head of the Crucified. But Israel experienced what is here denounced: a fire went forth, and consumed city and people, temple and fortress.
And they said to the olive-tree. The olive tree is already a king among trees in his own right; hence, Columella calls it the first among trees. His product is used to honor both God and man. His oil consecrates kings and priests, and feeds the light that burns in the sanctuary of God. The olive tree is the symbol of peaceful royalty; its leaf and branch are signs of reconciliation and peace: hence, Israel in its divine glory is compared to the beautiful olive tree (Hos 14:6).
Denying the request of the trees, the olive tree says: Have I then lost (, an unusual form, which with Keil I regard as a simple Kal) my oil, that I should wave over the trees? Has Israel then lost its life of peace in God, its sacred anointing through Gods servants, its pious light and life in Gods law? Has it grown poor as to its God, that it must suffer itself to be governed by heathen arts? The product of the olive tree and the deeds of Abimelech stand in the sharpest contrast with each other.
The same result follows an application to the fig tree. This also is a symbol of that divine peace which fills the land when God governs. The ancients believed that if a wild, untamed bullock were fastened to a fig tree, he would become quiet and gentle (Plutarch, Symposion, lib. vi. qust. 10). Athens, on similar symbolical grounds, had a sacred fig tree as well as olive tree. In Scripture, especially, the fig tree appears as a symbol of holy peace, as the prophet Micah says (Jdg 4:4): They shall sit every man under his vine and fig-tree, and none shall make them afraid. So Jotham makes the fig tree say suggestively: Have I thenIsraellost the possibility of sitting in the peace of God? Was there not an abundance of rest and happiness during forty years under Gideon? shall I surrender all that in order to fall into the arbitrariness of sin? For it can act like Shechem only when the peace of God no longer exists; but, in that case, it withers away, like the fig tree rebuked by Christ, and ceases to bring forth fruit.
The same is true of the grape-vine. The oriental vine attains the height of elms and cedars, and affords a grateful shade. Hence it is the widely-diffused symbol of government, as that which gives peace and comfort. The mountains, says the Psalmist (Psa 80:11), are covered with the shadow of it. A golden vine canopied the throne of the Persian monarch. Vines of gold were frequently presented to kings in recognition of their sovereignty (cf. my essay, Der Goldene Thron Salomos, in Wiss. Bericht, l. p. 124). A celebrated golden vine, mention of which is made by Tacitus also, stood in the temple at Jerusalem. The Mishna says of it: At the entrance to the temple porch there stood a golden vine, trained on poles; whenever any one consecrated anything, he consecrated it as leaf or grape. Elieser b. R. Zadok related, that once it was so vast, that 300 priests were necessary to take it away (Mishna, Middot. iii. 8).
The olive tree said that with him God and men were honored; the vine expresses the same thing when he speaks of the joy which God and men find in him. Usually all that is said of wine is, that it makes glad the heart of man; it is, however, also over wine, and wine only, that the blessing of God is pronounced,13 and Melchizedek, as priest of the Most High God, brings bread and wine (Gen 14:18). Nevertheless, the phrase God and men, is probably to be regarded as proverbial, and as signifying that wine cheers all persons, not excepting the highest and noblest. Since the Middle Ages, we [Germans] use the expression Gott und die WeltGod and the worldin a similar manner. Hartmann von Aue (in his Iwein, 9:262) says: Verlegeniu mezekeit ist gate und der werlte leit (mouldering idleness is offensive to God and the world).
The transition from the shade-giving vine to the thorn-bush presents us with a very striking contrast. It is indeed in connection with the thorn-bush, that the narrative displays its nicest shading. While the trees say to the olive tree, and to the fig tree and vine, unusual forms of the imperative which convey, as it seems to me, the idea of a respectful petition, they address the thorn-bush in common style: . When it comes to calling on the thorn-bush to be king, the respect which was felt for the olive tree and his compeers, has no longer any place. It may also be remarked that the shady vine is often at no great distance from the thorn-bush. Not unfrequently, even at this day, fertile wine-hills in the holy land, rejoicing also in olive and fig trees, are hedged in by thorn-bushes (cf. Rosenmller, Morgenland, on Pro 15:19).
And the thorn-bush, said: If you really anoint me king over you. There lies in this the sharpest censure for the trees. The thorn-bush itself can scarcely believe that its election as king is honestly meant (). Equally striking is it, that Jotham makes the thorn-bush speak of the trees as wishing to anoint him. Anoint with what? With oil. But the oil tree has already refused to be king over such subjects! The idea is: they anoint with oil, the symbol of peace, while they have murder and the opposite of peace in their hearts.The thorn-bush declares his readiness to give them all he has. They are at liberty to shelter themselves in his shadow. But he gives no protection against the sun, and his branches are full of thorns. In case of disobedience and apostasy, he will cause fire to go forth, and without respect of persons consume all rebels, even the cedars of Lebanon. For these are his only arts and abilitiesto prick and to burn. sop has a fable (No. 8) which teaches a similar moral, albeit playfully weakened. It treats of the Fox and the Thorn-bush. The fox, to save himself from falling, lays hold of the thorn-bush, and gets dreadfully torn by the sharp needles. In answer to his outcry, the thorn-bush says: How canst thou hope to lay hold of me, who am accustomed only to lay hold of others.
Jothams application in Jdg 9:16 forms a perfect parallel to the speech of the thorn-bush in Jdg 9:15. A minute explanation, that the Shechemites are the trees; that the heroes who heretofore benefited Israel (not merely Gideon, nor as the Rabbis think, Othniel and Barak only), correspond to the olive tree and his equals; and that the thorn-bush means Abimelech, is altogether unnecessary. The scene which he delineates, is it not transpiring before him in the valley below? All he needs to do, is to call their attention to the certainty that the threatening of the thorn-bush will be fulfilled on them; for that is yet future.
As the thorn-bush says to the trees, If you honestly anoint me king, so Jotham, with crushing irony, says to the people: If now you have acted honestly and sincerely in making Abimelech king. The heathen, as well as the worshippers of the true God, believed that good or evil deeds are recompensed by good or evil results. Even when the Persian Oroetes unlawfully murders the tyrant Polycrates, and afterwards perishes himself in a similar manner, Herodotus (iii. 128) remarks: Thus did the avenging spirits of Polycrates the Samian overtake him. It was maintained that the tyrant Agathocles had perished on the same day in which he had committed his horrible treason against his confederate Ophellas. This belief, prevalent even among heathen, pointed out the most vulnerable side of conscience. Though they turn away from the altar of Jehovah, they will not be able to escape the law of Elohim, who is even now listening to their loud acclamations. If they thinksuch is the bitter irony of Jothams indignant heartthat the collective trees (Jdg 9:14, ) an mean it honestly, when they anoint a thorn-bush, then they also, perhaps, acted honestly and sincerely when they called Abimelech their king, slew the house of the hero who regarded not his own life to save them, and crowned the murderer, the son of the bondwoman. Such honesty and virtue will not fail of their appropriate recompense. The words of the thornbush will be fulfilled. The sequel will show the reward. Israel will then perceive the enormity of that which in its present state of moral prostration it allows to pass unchallenged. If such a horrible deed can be deemed good, he repeatsand the repetition marks the intensity of his griefthen may you rejoice in Abimelech, as now down there in the valley you (hypocritically) shout for joy; but if not, then may you experience what it means to have the thorn-bush for king! Then will sin dissolve what sin began; crime will dissever what treason bound together. Then will fire from the thorn-bush consume the sinful trees, and fire from the trees the tyrannical king. Thus he spake, and thus they heard. But sin and excitement drowned the voice of conscience. The friendship between them and their king, and the joy they felt in him, were yet young. Israel kept silence, and Jotham, the heros son, fled to Beer. Where this place lay, cannot be determined. Probably in the southnear the desert, which would afford the fugitive security against Abimelechs persecution. Of Jotham, nothing more is known; but from amidst the tragedy which throws its dark shadows over the house of his father, his discourse sounds forth, an imperishable call to repentance, addressed to the world in the language of the world, and an admonisher to kings and nations of the certainty of retribution.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Abimelech the Fratricide. Gideon doubtless excelled in power all previous Judges; the deliverance wrought out by him surpassed all previous deliverances. This fact perhaps helps to explain the greatness of the shadow that fell upon the land after his death. The story of Abimelech displays before us a terrible contrast to the government of Gideon. It exhibits strength attended by the most abominable lust after power, energy with ungodliness, victorious talents with utter criminality. Such was the contrast offered by Abimelech with the memory of his father, in whom strength was united to humility, energy to piety, and victory to righteousness. The history of Abimelech teaches that sin (1) forgets good deeds; and (2) inspires misdeeds; but also, (3) that one abomination punishes another, even to destruction. If Gideon had not taken a concubine, this misery would not have come upon Israel! Why did he take her, and from Shechem, a city whose character he must have known! Why did he allow her son to be called My Father is King! The little weaknesses of a great man, become the great temptations of small men. Against the murderous fury of sin, there is no protection. The true sons of Gideon were peaceable. They were sons of a hero, but not trained to bloodshedding (Jdg 8:20). They had among them the ephod, reminder of Gideons victory. They were related to Abimelech, related more closely than the Shechemites; for they were his brothers, and brothers by such a father: but it availed them nothing. Piety, says the great poet (Goethe), is a close bond, but ungodliness still closer. The hand once lifted up to murder, does not spare its own brothers. Bloodthirstiness beclouds both eye and heart. It makes no distinction. Thus, sin lies lurking at the door, until its victim bids it enter. Abimelechs conduct has found imitators among Christians. The murderous deeds committed since his day, some of them at the bidding of church authorities, lie like a blood-cloud over the face of history. Only the love of Jesus Christ can penetrate through it, with the sunbeam of his reconciliation.
Abimelech was tyrant, and Jotham must flee. The bloody knife reigns and the spirit which speaks in parables and lives in faith is banished. But Abimelech comes to shame, smitten by a desperate woman (Jdg 9:53), while Jothams parable, like a winged arrow, pierces all fratricides, from Abimelech down to Richard III. of England. While Abimelech, a false king, passed on, burdened by a load of hatred, Jotham spent his life, as befitted a mourner, in a profound quiet. Seb. Schmidt says, that God knows how to give peace and safety to those who innocently become fainthearted, although men fail to espouse their righteous causes. Such is the preaching of the word of God concerning the worlds condition, (1) when a Gideon reigns; (2) when an Abimelech rules. The government of the faithful is the salvation of all; and likewise sin is the destruction of men, not excepting those who commit it. There is a judgment. God is not mocked.
Starke: Those are ignoble souls, who seek to reach an office, not through their own gifts and virtues, but through the favor and influence of their friends.The same: To lift ones self up by unlawful and sinful means, is sure to bring a curse. The same: Good men are all alike in this, that they do what is godly and righteous, because they know well that there is but one godliness and one righteousness.The same: The unity of bad men can speedily be changed, by the judgment of God, into enmity and mutual destruction.Gerlach: Jotham stands forth like a warning prophet, who interprets coming events before they occur, and who is at the same time a sign that the Lord has not left the faith of Gideon unrewarded, notwithstanding the terrible judgment that overtakes his house.
[Bp. Hall: Those that are most unworthy of honor, are hottest in the chase of it; whilst the consciousness of better deserts bids men sit still, and stay to be either importuned or neglected. There can be no greater sign of unfitness, than vehement suit. It is hard to say whether there be more pride or arrogance in ambition.The same: The Shechemites are fit brokers for Abimelech: that city which once betrayed itself to utter depopulation, in yielding to the suit of Hamor, now betrays itself and all Israel in yielding to the request of Abimelech.The same: Natural respects are the most dangerous corrupters of all elections. What hope can there be of worthy superiors in any free people, where nearness of blood carries it from fitness of disposition? Whilst they say, He is our brother, they are enemies to themselves and Israel.The same: Who would not now think that Abimelech should find a hell in his breast, after so barbarous and unnatural a massacre? and yet, behold, he is as senseless as the stone upon which the blood of his seventy brethren was spilt. Where ambition hath possessed itself thoroughly of the soul, it turns the heart into steel, and makes it incapable of a conscience. All sins will easily down with the man that is resolved to rise.Henry: Way being thus made for Abimelechs election, the men of Shechem proceed to choose him king. God was not consulted, there was no advising with the priest, or with their brethren of any other city or tribe, though it was designed he should rule over Israel.Scott: If parents could foresee their childrens sufferings, their joy in them would be often turned into lamentations; we may therefore be thankful that we cannot penetrate futurity, and are reminded to commit those whom we most love into the hands of the Lord, and to attend to our present duty, casting our care upon Him, respecting ourselves and them.Bush: The general moral of Jothams parable is, (1.) That weak and worthless men are ever forward to thrust themselves into power, while the wise and good are more prone to decline it. (2.) That they who unduly affect honor, and they who unjustly confer it, will prove sources of misery to each other.Kitto: There are indeed legitimate objects of the highest ambition, and of the most exalted aspirations. Crowns and kingdoms lie beneath the feet of him who pursues with steady pace his high career toward the city of the Great King, where he knows there is laid up for him a crown of glory that fadeth not awaya crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will bestow upon all that love his appearing.Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][Jdg 9:2.: used interchangeably with , cf. Jdg 9:46 with 49; 2Sa 21:12, with Jdg 2:4-5. See also Jdg 20:5, and Jos 24:11. Dr. Cassel: Herren; De Wette, and many others, Brger, citizens.Tr.]
[2][Jdg 9:2.The E. V. unnecessarily departs from the order of the Hebrew, and thereby obscures the antithesis which is primarily between seventy and one, and secondarily between sons of Jerubbaal and your bone and flesh, thus: Which is better for you, that seventy men, all sons of Jerubbaal, rule over you, or that one man rule over you? Remember, also, etc.Tr.]
[3][Jdg 9:6.Keil: The explanation of is doubtful. , anything set up, is in Isa 29:3 a military post [garrison], but may also mean a monument, and designates here probably the great stone set up (Jos 24:26) under the oak or terebinth near Shechem (cf. Gen 35:4). De Wette also renders: Denkmal-Eiche, monument-oak.Tr.]
[4][Jdg 9:7.Dr. Cassel translates: and may God hear you. This is very well, but hardly in the sense in which he takes it, see below. Whether we translate as in the E. V., or as Dr. Cassel, the realization of the second member of the address must be regarded as contingent upon that of the first.Tr.]
[5][Jdg 9:9; Jdg 9:11; Jdg 9:13. . According to Ewald (Gram., 51 c.) is a contracted hiphil form (for ), the second being dropped in order to avoid the concurrence of too many gutturals, and the resulting (cf. Ges. Gr. 22, 4) being changed into in order to distinguish the interrogative particle more sharply. Others regard it as hophal (see Green, 53, 2, b). But as there are no traces anywhere else of either of these conjugations in this verb, it is commonly viewed as a simple kal form = . Keil seeks to explain the anomalous vowel under by saying that the obscure o-sound is substituted for the regular a in order to facilitate the pronunciation of successive guttural syllables. Dr. Cassel renders: Have I then lost [better: given up] my fatness? But as the notion of futurity must manifestly be contained in the following , the ordinary rendering, Should I give up? is preferable.Tr.]
[6][Jdg 9:9. : which God and men honor (esteem) in me. Compare Jdg 9:13. Dr. Cassel renders as the E. V.Tr.]
[7][Jdg 9:17. : literally, cast his life from before (him); cf. the marginal reading of he E. V.: i. e. disr garded his own life..Tr..]
[8]Jotham, also, speaks of Abimelech, with special contempt, as the son of the slave-woman (Jdg 9:18).
[9][Keil: Millo is unquestionably the name of the fortress or citadel of the city of Shechem, the same with the Tower of Shechem in Jdg 9:46-49. The word (Millo), as also the Chaldee , filling, signifies a tampart formed of two walls, the space between which is filled up with rubbish. There was also a Millo at Jerusalem, 2Sa 5:9 1Ki 9:15. All the house of Millo, are all the inhabitants of the citadel, the same who in Jdg 9:46 are spoken of as all the citizens of Migdol or the Tower. Bertheau: The high plateau of Mt. Gerizim, by which the city (Shechem) is commanded, seems to offer the most suitable site for this Millo, as it also did for later fortifications (Rob. ii. 277, 278, comp. p. 294). This location of the fortress, at some little distance from the city, which lay in the narrow valley, would explain the distinction constantly maintained in our chapter between the inhabitants of Shechem and the house, i.e. population, of Millo or the Tower.Tr.]
[10] is most probably to be taken as or .
[11][Kitto (Daily Bible Illustrations: Moses and the Judges, p. 365]:It will occur to the reader to ask what right the people of Shechem had to nominate a king, by their sole authority. In the first place, it must be remembered that the land had formerly been governed by a number of petty kings, ruling over some strong town and its immediate district and dependent villages; and it is likely that the Shechemites claimed no more than to appoint Abimelech as such a king over themselves, assuming that they for themselves, whatever might be the view of others, had a right to choose a king to reign over them. Besides, Shechem was one of the chief towns of Ephraim; and that proud and powerful tribe always claimed to take the leading part in public affairs, if not to determine the course of the other tribesexcept, perhaps, of those connected with Judah in the south. It was under the influence of this desire for supremacy, that the revolt against the house of David was organized in that tribe, and resulted in the establishment of the separate kingdom for the ten tribes, in which Ephraim had the chief influence. Indeed, that establishment of a separate monarchy was accomplished at this very place where Abimelech is now declared king. Taking all this into account, it may seem reasonable to conclude that the Shechemites had the support of the tribe in this transaction, or might at least reckon with reasonable confidence upon its not being withheld. Then, again, a king chosen at Shechem, and supported by this powerful tribe, might reasonably calculate that the other tribes would soon give in their adhesion, seeing that, in the time of his father their monarchical predilections had been so strongly manifested.Tr.]
[12][Cf. Thomson, The Land and the Book, ii. 209.Tr.]
[13][The third cup at the Passover meal was called the Cup of Blessing, because it was accompanied by a prayer of praise and thanksgiving. Cf. 1Co 10:16.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS
This chapter prosecutes the history of Israel, after the death of Gideon. Abimelech, the natural son of Gideon, usurps the government; slays all his brethren, except the youngest, who hid himself from him. His reign, did not, however, terminate according to his wishes, for his evil conduct produced at length his own ruin. These are the contents of this chapter.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Observe how by iniquity, the plan is laid for obtaining the government. Here is no lawful right, no just claim, no call of God; and at the same time it is in direct opposition to his father ‘ s own promise. See Jdg 8:23 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Jdg 9:11
A tallow dip, of the long-eight description, is an excellent thing in the kitchen candlestick, and Betty’s nose and eye are not sensitive to the difference between it and the finest wax; it is only when you stick it in the silver candlestick, and introduce it into the drawing-room, that it seems plebeian, dim, and ineffectual. Alas for the worthy man who, like that candle, gets himself into the wrong place!
George Eliot, Amos Barton.

Does he not drink more sweetly that takes his beverage in an earthen vessel, than he who looks and searches into his golden chalices, for fear of poison, and looks pale at every sudden noise, and sleeps in armour, and trusts no body, and does not trust God for his safety?
Jeremy Taylor.
Verily, I swear ’tis better to be lowly born,
And range with humble livers in content,
Than to be perk’d up in a glistering grief,
And wear a golden sorrow.
Anne Bullen in King Henry VIII.

Reference. IX. 14, 15. C. F. Aked, The Courage of the Coward, p. 205.
Jdg 9:17-18
As I re-read the chapter of Judges now, except in my memory, unread, as it chances, for many a year the sadness of that story of Gideon fastens on me, and silences me. This the end of his angel visions, and dream-led victories, the slaughter of all his sons but this youngest and he never again heard of in Israel.
You Scottish children of the Rock, taught through all your once pastoral and noble lives by many a sweet miracle of dew on fleece and ground once servants of mighty kings and keepers of sacred covenant; have you indeed dealt truly with your warrior kings and prophet saints?
Ruskin in Proserpina.

Reference. IX. 48. S. Baring-Gould, Village Preaching for a Year, vol. i. p. 270.
Jdg 9:53
There now lies the greatness of Abimelech! upon one stone had he slain his seventy brethren, and now a stone slays him.
Bishop Hall.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Abimelech
The Bramble King
Jdg 9

IS Abimelech dead? Has he reappeared in our own days? Or after the devil made Abimelech did he throw the mould away? These questions are not difficult. We can easily determine them, either in the positive or in the negative. It would be something worth doing to be able to establish as a fact the absolute certainty of the death of Abimelech and all his progeny. But we must take the evidence as we find it, and abide by the issue to which it points, whatever that issue may be. This is the only just way of reading human history, and we must not suspend it, or pervert it, simply to confirm our own prejudices or inclinations. The broad lines of the career of Abimelech are written in this chapter, and are easy of comprehension. Abimelech was the son of Gideon. So far that may be put down to his credit. But his mother was only a concubine, or a wife of the second rank. So Abimelech stands somewhat on one side in history. It is often awkward to have incidental relations in life: they surprise the parties interested at unexpected times; they flash out light in the darkness; they make a noise when deep sleep falleth upon man. Still, Abimelech had advantages arising from the concubinage of Gideon. He was related to the Ephraimites on the one hand and to the Canaanites on the other. It has been pointed out in the case of our own Henry II. that he boasted that he was the first Norman son of a Saxon mother. Abimelech may make use of this peculiarity in his history, and may work along that line of policy and adventure. Still, we must not blame Abimelech where no blame is due. We are not asked how we will be born into the world, or where; otherwise some of us would never have been born at all. Do not throw a man’s disadvantages in his face. There are misfortunes as well as crimes, and a just criticism of character and of history will ever distinguish between the one and the other. Abimelech must speak for himself. When he begins to talk we shall understand somewhat of the quality of his mind, but even there we must make critical and perhaps generous allowance. We do not now begin the human race. Even now we are tainted or blessed by our past Only God, therefore, can judge the world. We see but the individual man, the narrow and open circumstances of life; and the basis of inference is too narrow to justify us in supposing that it is in our power to form a comprehensive and final judgment. “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” Abimelech himself may illustrate these fundamental principles.
Abimelech was ambitious. By so much he lives today. He would be king; who would not? There is a taking of the lowest seat at the feast which is the veriest pride. When Diogenes trampled upon the robe of Plato he said, “Thus I tread on Plato’s pride;” Plato answered, “With greater pride of your own.” So if we find Abimelech wanting to be king, the air is full of Abimelechs. There are various kingdoms and thrones and primacies for which men are striving night and day. Who has not his own little ambition? It looks innocent enough in some cases: it is but to add a letter or two to the name; or to live in a larger house; or to be able to give hospitality that will create a reputation for itself; or to be named by some distinguished writer; it does not lie at all along the high line which is supposed to be terminated by a throne: but, as a mere matter of analysis the action or purpose underlying it is as full of ambition as if the man, actuated by that motive, had fixed his eyes upon the supreme throne of the world. Abimelech was adroit. He put a question. Are interrogators dead? He put a question that was noble and unselfish in its letters, namely, “Whether is better for you?” as if to say, It is no matter of mine; your interests are supreme: I open my business on the public highway for the good of the public; it is of no consequence to me whether you buy my goods or not; I lay them before you and give you the golden opportunity, and you must say what you will do in the matter. Is that man dead? Why, he is a thousand strong in nearly every great thoroughfare! Time cannot kill him; he can be found at a moment’s notice. But Abimelech was unjust in his benevolence. The question he put had no right to be put, because it involved others, namely, “Whether is better for you, either that all the sons of Jerubbaal, which are threescore and ten persons, reign over you, or that one reign over you?” ( Jdg 9:2 ). Would you like to have seventy kings, or one king? Now the spirit of Abimelech was false, because the seventy men had never said anything about wishing to be kings. Why do we first credit men with bad motives, and then charge those bad motives upon them as accusations, as if they had originated in the spirit of the men themselves? We must not put one another into false positions. If the seventy sons of Jerubbaal had said, “We would all like to be kings,” the case would have been put precisely in the terms which Abimelech used. But Gideon had refused the kingship. Long ago, when the Israelites said, Rule thou over us, and thy house, he said, No, I will not rule over you, nor my house: the Lord is your king. How subtle is the temptation to misconstrue a man’s purposes, and then to treat him as if he had actually originated those purposes! We transfer ourselves to the man, and having invested him with an enforced personality we judge him by that investiture. The spirit of injustice is a cruel spirit.
The action which Abimelech took was to kill the sons of Gideon. That was the rude method of the times. Seventy men were in the way, and the answer to the embarrassment was Murder! So the sons of Gideon, seventy in number, were murdered “upon one stone” probably flung from one rock and dashed to pieces. How will Abimelech die? We must wait to see. But one son escaped, namely, the youngest, Jotham by name. How is it that one always does escape? Account for the one little Fleance always getting out of the way and coming back at unexpected times, and facing society like a living judgment. It is in so-called little things that the providence of God is vividly shown. Not the oldest, strongest son, but little Jotham, we may call him, for he certainly was the youngest. He came upon a given day, and spake a parable upon the top of Mount Gerizim. He “lifted up his voice, and cried, and said” and then comes the parable, or fable, of the trees. It is rather a fable than what we now understand by a parable. It is more after, as we should say, the lines of sop than the lines of Christ. But a fable may be the larger truth. How is it that the men living at the time cannot write the history of what they see? We say, This statesman, or that reformer, must be left for critical judgment to the historian. Or we say, The event is too near us to be correctly judged. That is to say, a man who is not yet born will arise and tell the world the exact meaning of what we are now doing! Why, then, this wonderful objection to Biblical prophets and Biblical judgments? It is the very principle upon which we ourselves operate day by day. There can be nothing much more startling to what we call common-sense than that a man who is not yet born shall arise and give a true version of the men’s motives, purposes, and histories who lived a thousand years before he himself was born. So fable takes up the real meaning of things, that marvellous composition we call fiction, dramatic interpretation, the lifting of things up from low levels, into right line and colour, that most wondrous of all God’s gifts to man, the gift of Imagination. Jotham displayed amazing intellectual sagacity, and expressed himself with exquisite verbal beauty. It required an attentive mind to follow him. The man speaks about trees; the trees going forth to anoint a king over them; the trees asking the olive, and the olive declining; then asking the fig-tree, and the fig-tree saying No; then asking the vine, and the vine refusing the throne; last of all, the bramble lean, prickly, sharp asking in a taunting tone if they were willing to put their trust in his shadow; if so, he, the bramble, would reign over the cedars of Lebanon. Pride at first says, Who shall we have to reign over us? At last Pride says, Who can we get to be our king? God humbles pride. The first inquiry made by a Church may be, Who shall we have for our minister? and the last may be, Who can we get? who will come? It is right: all really good people are pre-engaged. The olive-tree says, “Should I leave my fatness, wherewith by me they honour God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?” The fig-tree says, “Should I forsake my sweetness, and my good fruit, and go to be promoted over the trees?” The vine says, “Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?” All the good trees are pre-occupied. All the men worth having to reign over us are already enthroned. Kings are not falling about the streets to be picked up by any passer-by. Last of all, the trees becoming a little disappointed, actually renounced their courtesy, and said to the bramble, somewhat brusquely, “Come thou, and reign over us.” No question was asked; no opportunity of declining was given; but, with a kind of satiric brutality, the trees said, We must have a king here, come, and take the throne. The parable is spoken. It is sprinkled, so to say, on the air, and is apparently lost. No; the air is full of sermons yet to be applied. They will take fire some day, and come back upon us with startling, if not destructive, energy No wise word is lost; no fable charged with sacred meaning has vanished with the smoke of the day in which it was spoken. Cheer thy heart, godly teacher; the sermons appear to be all lost They are listened to, but not answered. The appeal, warm with thy very blood, accentuated by the fire of life, may apparently be lost. But there is a time of resurrection in these things, and swift application, a day of judgment before the judgment day, and then it will be known what every man has done in endeavouring to serve his age. Again and again in the life of Christ we read such words as these, “Then remembered they,” that is to say, circumstances had gathered themselves into such proportions, and had addressed themselves with such vigour to the mind and the memory, that something within was awakened, the old word was sounded in the ear, and it came with its full and noble meaning. The man who can make a beautiful parable can make a beautiful sermon also. Jotham made a magnificent appeal:
“Now therefore, if ye have done truly and sincerely [a bitterly ironical supposition], in that ye have made Abimelech king, and if ye have dealt well with Jerubbaal and his house, and have done unto him according to the deserving of his hands; (for my father fought for you, and adventured [cast, “he hath poured out his soul unto death,”] his life far, and delivered you out of the hand of Midian: and ye are risen up against my father’s house this day, and have slain his sons, threescore and ten persons [Jotham himself is counted in this number], upon one stone, and have made Abimelech, the son of his maidservant [intentionally contemptuous], king over the men of Shechem, because he is your brother;) if ye then have dealt truly and sincerely with Jerubbaal and with his house this day, then rejoice ye in Abimelech, and let him also rejoice in you: but if not, let fire come out from Abimelech, and devour the men of Shechem, and the house of Millo; and let fire come out [exactly fulfils Jdg 9:45-49 ] from the men of Shechem, and from the house of Millo, and devour Abimelech” ( Jdg 9:16-20 ).

The epimuthion , or application of the fable, was magnificent in moral tone. Jotham comprehended the great philosophy that water cannot rise above its level: men cannot rise above the honour that is in them. Little men cannot be great; ungrateful men cannot be just; mean souls can never be majestic. Jotham said in effect: If this is your idea of honour, so be it, take the consequences; if this is your reading of history, and this your tribute to the illustrious dead, let it be so. Men must act according to their own quality. Men do not gather grapes of thorns, nor figs of thistles. The criticism with which your life is followed will be according to the quality of the critics: tainted men will see putridity in you; men of ungenerous mind will never write or speak one glowing word about your action. They are hardly to be blamed; they cannot help it: every tree grows after its own kind, so does every man. The appeal of Jotham is the appeal which men may address to the ages, though they run away as Jotham did, and flee into darkness; but the appeal will abide when the speaker has gone. Children, if this is your idea of what is due to your father and your mother who lived for you, suffered for you, had but one thought, and that a thought for your comfort and progress, if this is your idea of gratitude and justice to their memory, carry out your programme, and let the times that are coming judge you. Nations, if this is the way in which you treat your statesmen, your patriots, your reformers, so be it: nations cannot rise above their level: by your treatment of your leaders and patriots we shall know your own quality. Nations write themselves in the deeds which they do to those who have led and instructed them. Congregations, if this be your idea of what is due to your ministers and teachers, so be it; if after the men have prayed themselves into agony for you, studied your distresses that they might heal your wounds, lived for you, thought for you, sacrificed themselves on the altar of your welfare, if you care to forget the past, to throw out the old men and let them die where they may, so be it: congregations cannot rise above their level. Congregations must carry out their own idea of honour. They find it convenient to forget, to obliterate, the noblest service which man can render to man. Be it so. Do not reason with them. It is an inevitable meanness. Then the other side is true: there are grateful children; there are nations loyal to their chiefs; there are congregations greater than the ministers. So be it. On both sides we can but say with Jotham, So be it; rejoice, and rejoice in one another.
After three years peace was broken. Abimelech conquered until he came to Thebez, where there was a strong tower; and full of his father’s intrepidity and daring courage, he went straight up to the tower and said he would destroy it, or overthrow it, or burn it The people went to the top of the tower, and a woman among them looked out, and saw this man fighting against its very walls, and she dropped a stone, and it crushed the head of Abimelech. He killed the sons of Gideon with a stone: God also can throw stones. Let us take care: “With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” When Adoni-bezek had his thumbs and great toes cut off he said, “As I have done, so God hath requited me.” The treacherous idolaters had their temple burned by the treachery of their enemies. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
“Thus,” we read:
“God rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren: and all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads: and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jerubbaal” ( Jdg 9:56-57 ).

Selected Notes

Cast a piece of millstone. So that ambitious King Pyrrhus was at last slain with a tile-stone thrown upon his head by a woman. And the like deadly blow by a like hand, upon the head of Hermanius, Earl of Lucelberg, whom Pope Hildebrand had set up in opposition to Henry the Emperor, whom he had excommunicated. Simeon De’ Monteforti also, another of the Pope’s champions, fighting against those ancient Protestants, the Waldenses, was brained with a stone at the siege of Toulouse. That scholar that took his death by the falling of a letter of stone from the Earl of Northampton’s house at the funeral of Queen Anne, was to be pitied. But commentators observe it for a just hand of God upon Abimelech, that upon one stone he had slain his seventy brethren, and now a stone slayeth him: his head had stolen the crown of Israel, and now his head is smitten.
The vengeance which he had wreaked upon Shechem, he intended also for Thebez, a town placed by the Onomasticon thirteen Roman miles from Neapolis (Shechem) on the road to Beth-Shean, or Beisn; which is therefore the modern Tbs, twelve miles e.n.e. of Shechem. One might infer from this that the son considered himself the lawful successor of his father in the government of Israel, and meant to punish these two cities as Succoth and Penuel had been punished for their rebellion. But his utter failure, his death by the hand of a woman (like Sisera, Jdg 4:9 ), and his miserable effort to escape by suicide from this disgrace, to a bold warrior, were the tokens in providence that he wanted the moral and spiritual qualities of Gideon. And his personal ruin, together with the immediately resulting collapse of the government which he had established over Israel, marked the fulfilment of Jotham’s curse. It is mere ignorance of old English which in many copies of the Bible changed “alto brake,” that is, “altogether brake,” into “all to break” in ver. 53.
In the providence of God a spirit of rebellion and hatred was allowed to work its influence upon the Shechemites. Gaal, probably a Canaanite, came to the city, and excited the inhabitants at the time of the vintage festival, urging that Abimelech was half an Israelite, and that it behoved them to establish a pure native rule. Abimelech was privately informed of the conspiracy by Zebul, one of his followers, whom he had made ruler of Shechem; and with an energy and promptitude that recall the military abilities of his father, at once proceeded to quell the revolt. He defeated Gaal, who attempted to exclude him from Shechem, and on the following day took the city with much slaughter of his former subjects. The temple-citadel in which the rest took refuge he burned to the ground, and then besieged Thebez, which had borne a part in the insurrection. The people fled to the citadel, and Abimelech proceeded to lay fire at the gate. Here, however, his reign and his life came suddenly to an end. A piece of a millstone, flung by a woman from the battlements, fractured his skull, and, at his own request, his armour-bearer thrust him through with a sword. Thus ended the dark, dishonourable career of “the Bramble King,” after a tyranny of three years, and thus closed one of the most degrading chapters in the history of Israel.
Prayer

Almighty God, we are part of thy purpose in the creation of the world. We know not why we are here. We are here by no will of our own: the times are hard, the temptations are a million in number, the chances are that we may be lost. We cannot tell what all this means. Thou didst not ask us to be here. We are often full of pain and sore distress, hardly knowing the right hand from the left; mocked in our prayers; disappointed, not only in our ambitions, but in our rational hopes; borne down by a great weight, threatened by an immeasurable cloud, full of blackness, charged with thunder. What we love we lose: we grow flowers only to see them wither, and rear children that they may break our hearts, and pet the household lamb that it may be stolen. This is a great mystery. We knew not any of its meaning in ourselves. We bless thee for a book which interprets the riddle. We hear in that Gospel-book music from heaven, voices from beyond, assurances that the darkness is but for a moment, and that a great light has already started from the eternal throne and will be here presently. We have read the story of thy Son, and we know it to be true: this Man receiveth sinners; this Man talks to the broken heart, and holds up pictures of the kingdom long enough for us to see them through our tears. He loved us: he preached in our towns and villages; he gave us bread when we were hungry; he cured the sick man whom the physicians had abandoned; he allowed us to approach him by night when we dared not go by day: he saved others, himself he did not save; he forgave his enemies dying, and he sent gospels to them living; and now he is exalted, a King, a Prince, a Saviour, to give repentance unto Israel and remission of sins; and he carries the little earth in his heart like a thing loved with all heaven’s love. We know Jesus Christ. We love him. His name is wrought into the very texture of our life: to take it away is to take away our breath. He was our visitor when none else would come near the house; he lighted the lamp when the chamber was all darkness; he came out into the wilderness to seek and to save that which was lost. We cannot forget his cross: if we forget that cross, may our right hand forget its cunning; if we cease to remember that death, may our tongue cleave to the roof of our mouth. Lead us to see that all other deliverances point to the one redemption. As we move along the line of Biblical story, may we feel that One greater is yet to come than any deliverer who has appeared. May we find our way through providence to redemption, through history to revelation, and through the altars built by men to the cross set up from before the foundation of the world; thus will our reading be profitable, full of spiritual nutriment, and our souls shall grow in the school of God, and around them shall be wrought the mystery of grace, as we spend our nights and days with Jesus. We put our hands into thine. The way is too long for us, and too rough; who made the road we cannot tell, but our feet are weary, and our eyes are distressed by the vast monotony. But in thy society there is no weariness; in thine inspiration, O Holy Spirit of the living God, heaven begins. Feed us; lead us; keep us; may no wanderer be lost! Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXIX
THE STORY OF ABIMELECH, THE USURPER, AND OF JEPHTHAH
Judges 9-12

1. Who was Abimelech, and was he one of Israel’s judges sent out by the Lord?
Ans. Abimelech was the natural son of Gideon, not the legal son, and evidently a godless case. He was not sent of the Lord to be a judge. Whatever rule he obtained he obtained by murder, unsurpation, and conspiracy. So we don’t count him at all in the list of the judges, but his history only as an episode in the period of the judges.
2. How was his usurpation effected?
Ans. By conspiracy with the city of Shechem, and by the murder and assassination of all his father’s legal children except one, the youngest, Jotham, who escaped.
3. Analyze the sin of Abimelech and Shechem.
Ans. (1) The sin consisted in the attempt to establish a monarchy while God was the ruler of the theocracy. (2) It consisted of murder in order that no competition might arise between the real, legal children of their great leader, Gideon.
4. Through whom and how came a protest against the sin?
Ans. The protest came from Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon. He took his position on top of Mount Gerizirn, and from the top of that mountain all the valley could hear him and all on the highest mountains, so he occupied a high pulpit. He stated his case in the form of a parable, or in the strictest sense of fable. He said that the trees of the field called upon the fig tree to be their king, and it had better things to attend to than to be king; they called on the olive tree, and the olive tree had better things to do than to be king; so finally they applied to the bramble, and it agreed that it would be king if they would rest under its shadow. Now the briar doesn’t make much of a shadow, but they agreed to it.
5. Was Jotham’s illustration a fable or a parable, and what the distinction between them?
Ans. Parable is a broader word and includes fable. A fable is a parable of this kind: It attributes intelligent action to either inanimate creation or brute creation. Numerous cases you have of them in Aesop’s Fables. But a parable supposes real people and presents them acting as one would naturally do under the circumstances. But inasmuch as a parable etymologically means, according to the strict Greek word parabola, the putting of one thing down against another for the purpose of contrast, therefore a fable may come within the definition of a parable.
6. What fable of Aesop’s somewhat similar?
Ans. The fable of the frogs who implored Jupiter to send them a king. He dropped a log into the pond and it made a great splash and ripples but later when they found that they could jump upon that log they had no regard for their king and implored Jupiter to send another. Whereupon Jupiter sent a long-necked stork, or crane. And he gobbled up quite a number of his subjects every morning and they much regretted swapping King Log for King Stork.
7. What are the great lessons of Jotham’s fable?
(1) The best and most ambitious men are not ambitious to rule over people. See our Lord’s lesson in the Gospel: “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; it shall not be so with you.” There is something greater than to be king and whoever ministers to others is greater than any king that ever sat on the throne.
(2) The second lesson of the fable is that when the ambitious in their selfishness seek to rule and the people are gullible enough to give them rule, then it means mutual destruction both to the self-seeking ambitious one and the gullible people who put him in power.
8. How did Jotham apply his fable?
Ans. In this way: “Now if you have done the right thing to Gideon in the murder of his children and in the election of this self-seeking assassin, then have joy in him and let him have joy in you; but if you are wrong in that may the fire come out of him that will burn you up and may a fire come out of you that will burn him up.”
9. Cite proof that the fable was inspired.
Ans. The proof is found at the close of this lesson where it is said, “according to the word of Jotham,” and that is exactly what happened. The first time a row came up between him and the people he wiped them off the face of the map, and soon after a remnant in fighting against him killed him; a woman dropped a millstone down on his bead. What an inglorious death! So he perished and they perished, and the record says that it was done according to the word of Jotham.
10. What use does Dr. Broadus make of Jotham in his History of Preaching?
Ans. In citing cases of real pulpit eloquence he mentions Jotham and his high pulpit he stood on, his use of illustrations and his sensational sermon, and then that having created a sensation, he ran away from it. That is about the substance, but you had better read what Dr. Broadus says in his History of Preaching.
11. What Old Testament parables precede Jotham’s fable?
Ans. None; for another fable, see 2Ki 14:9-14 .
12. Cite the names and tribes of the next two judges after Gideon and their respective periods of judging.
Ans. Tolar of the tribe of Issachar, who judged twenty-three years, and Jair of the tribe of Manasseh, who judged twenty-two years.
13. After Tolar and Jair how did Israel increase its idolatries and what the deities?
Ans. Read 10:6. Here is what he says: “And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim, and Ashtaroth [both of these are plural], and the gods of Syria, and the gods of Sidon [Sidon is a part of Phoenicia], and the gods of Moab, and the gods of the children of Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines.” They took in more gods this time than ever before.
14. Find the names of the gods of the Philistines, of Ammon, of Moab, and of Sidon in addition to Baalim and Ashtaroth.
Ans. One god of the Philistines was Dagon; another was Baal-zebub; Milcom, or Moloch of Ammon; Chemosh of Moab; Gerakles and Melkar of Phoenicia.
15. What evidence of their repentance when trouble came?
Ans. (1) The confession of sin Jdg 10:10-15 . (2) Putting themselves in God’s hands to be punished at his will, Jdg 10:15 . (3) Putting away the strange gods. That is good proof of repentance.
We now come to consider the case of JEPHTHAH

16. Cite the story of Jephthah up to the call of the people to make him leader. Where is Tob, what his life there and what the similarity with the case of Abimelech?
Ans. Jephthah, as I have stated, was the son of Gilead, by a harlot, and his brethren or his half-brothers, the legal children of Gilead, denied him the right to any part of the inheritance, and the city of Shechem coincided with them. So he had to leave, and he retired to a great rich country in Syria. The name of the place was Tob, and there, being a valorous man, he gathered about him a company of men, pretty lawless fellows; some of them, regular free-lances. The similarity of his case and Abimelech’s is that he and Abimelech were both natural sons.
17. Considering Gen 21:10 , the case of Hagar; the case of Tamar, Gen 38:12-26 ; and Deu 21:15-17 , was it lawful to deny Jephthah a part of his father’s inheritance, and if so wherein does this case differ from others cited?
Ans. Hagar was really the wife under the law and Tamar’s action was strictly within the law, though Judah did not suppose it at the time. And in the case cited in Deuteronomy there were the children of two wives but they were both wives. So none of them applies to this case. Jephthah was the son of a harlot born utterly out of wedlock, and therefore, it was lawful to deprive him of any inheritance, but it was a mean thing to do.
18. What condition did Jephthah exact of Gilead before he would accept their appeal and how did he certify it?
Ans. He made them enter into a claim covenant at Mizpah that if he came in their extremity and delivered them from this bondage that had come upon them, then he was to be their prince, and he had the word spoken before the Lord at Mizpah. The student of history will remember how Rome pleaded with Coriolanus, whom she expelled, not to destroy Rome, and sent his mother to beg him not to do it. He said, “Mother, you have saved Rome but you have lost your son.”
19. State Jephthah’s negotiation with Ammon, and its results.
Ans. He sent a very able statement to the king of Ammon, who was leading this invasion of Israel, and he put the case this way: “We obtained this territory 300 years ago under Moses; God put it into our hands. Why have you been silent 300 years? We will not surrender what God has put into our hands and which we have held for that long.” They disregarded his negotiation.
20. What the first proof that Jehovah had any part in the leadership of Jephthah?
Ans. Now, heretofore everything that is said in the record shows that it was the plan of the people to go and stand for Jephthah as leader, and the first sign is in Jdg 11:29 , showing that after he took the position of leader the Spirit of the Lord came upon him.
21. What the vow of Jephthah and wherein its rashness?
Ans. When they refused to negotiate, he vowed if God would give him the victory over them that whoever was the first to come out of his house to meet him on his return from battle) he would offer as a burnt offering to Jehovah. The rashness of it was, as all the context goes to show, that he meant persons and Jehovah’s law was against offering people as burnt offerings.
22. State two theories of what became of Jephthah’s daughter, which the older, which best supported by the context and history, and if you say the first, how, then, did the second originate?
Ans. The first theory is that Jephthah said he would offer the one meeting him as a burnt offering and the text shows that just what he vowed, that he did unequivocally. That theory held the fort until 1,200 years after Christ, i.e., from Jephthah’s time until 1,200 years after Christ; all commentaries, Jewish and Christian, stated that Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering to Jehovah, but about 1,200 years after Christ a Jewish rabbi questioned it and then a few of the sentimental Christians, among them Grotius, the distinguished theologian of Holland, followed by Hengstenberg, a German, and a few English people, Adam Clarke for one, and their theory was that Jephthah vowed to the Lord that if something that could be offered as a burnt offering met him it should be burned, but if it were not it was still to be consecrated to God, and what took place was not the death on the altar of sacrifice, but the daughter was shut up to perpetual virginity. The overwhelming majority of the commentaries, and men who have respect for what the Word says, hold to the first theory, but if you want to see both theories stated and your question demands that, you look in Appendix 4 to the “Cambridge Bible,” Book of Judges. Now, that second theory being more and more in fashion was originated by early nunneries, women taking the vow of perpetual virginity for Christian service, and yet the majority of the Catholics do not believe that. They believe that she was put up as a burnt offering.
23. Why, in your judgment, did not Jephthah appeal to Lev 27:2-8 , for commutation of his vow? That is, if one made a vow, a scale of compensation was provided and by paying that compensation in money he could be released from the vow. The question now is why did not Jephthah appeal to the Levitical law?
Ans. A great many people say that Jephthah was ignorant of this law, but that history took place at Mizpah where the high priest lived, and the high priest knew of that law if Jephthah didn’t. He did not appeal to that because the Levitical law did not apply as it does to other kinds of vows.
24. From the context was the vow inspired?
Ans. Jdg 11:29-30 , shows that the Spirit of the Lord rested on him, and inasmuch as in Heb 11:32 , Jephthah is commended as one of the heroes of faith, my answer is that the vow was not inspired and an entirely new subject on the vow question was introduced after the statement that the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. Heb 11:32 has nothing to do with it from the fact that a man may have faith and do many mean things and wrong things, as David did.
25. Is it better to break a vow that involves sin than to keep it?
Ans. Before you answer, compare Psa 15:4 , Ecc 5:4 , with Mat 14:6-11 , where Herod vowed with an oath that he would give the dancing girl anything she asked for, and she asked for the head of John the Baptist. Take the three passages and make out your answer. Let those first two cases refer to cases that are not sin. I heard a man once swear that he would eat the devil in flames and I have always excused him from eating the devil particularly as hot as that.
26. What proverb of English classics applies to Jephthah’s vow?
Ans. This proverb, “This promise is better in the breach than in the observance of it.”
27. Cite the case of Jephthah’s contention with Ephraim, and what use has been made of “Shibboleth”?
Ans. Ephraim as usual (you know, I quoted the prophet who said that Ephraim is a cake not turned), when Jephthah gained that victory, drew out his army and demanded why he did not call on him. Jephthah did not give him a soft answer. He said, “I did call on you and you refused to come and when you refused I wrought the deliverance, and now if you want to fight let us fight.” And he gave him a good beating. In other words, when he got through the cake was cooked on both sides. Now, this “Shibboleth,” that was the word that the enemy had to pronounce. They could not pronounce the sh; they said Sibboleth, and as they were running away and Jephthah’s men found them, they were asked to say “Shibboleth,” and if they said “Sibboleth,” they were known to be the enemy and were killed right there. It has become since that day popular with those who think that others are requiring too hard doctrines. They say, “Well, I don’t pretend to be able to pronounce ‘Shibboleth,’ but you need not want to kill me just because I can’t sound every letter just like you.”
28. What three judges succeeded Jephthah, from what tribes, and the notes of time?
Ans. That is expressed in two or three verses, as follows: Ibzan of the tribe of Zebulon, judged seven years; Elon of the tribe of Zebulon, judged ten years; Abdon of the tribe of Ephraim, judged eight years.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Jdg 9:1 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,
Ver. 1. And communed with them. ] What might be the likeliest means of effecting his design. Ambition rideth without reins; and like the crocodile, groweth as long as it liveth. These uncles of his might haply advise him, whom they saw thirsting after sovereignty, as Calvus once did Vatinius, Perfrica frontem, et digniorem te dic, qui Praetor fieres, quam Catonem. a Set a good face upon it, and say that thou better deservest the office than ever Cato did.

And with all the family. ] Who haply were leading men, and might do much with that people.
a Quintilian.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

brethren. Put by Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Species) for other relatives.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 9
Now here’s what happened. After the death of Gideon, this Abimelech who was the son of his concubine in Shechem. Now you know, they used to say of the sailors “a girl in every port.” Well, Gideon had probably a concubine in every city and so in Shechem this concubine who had born this fellow Abimelech.
Abimelech came to the men of Shechem and he said, “Look, is it better that one man rule over you or seventy that rule over you? One man who is your brother who comes right of Shechem, who understands your needs and all or all of the sons of Jerubbaal? What’s best?”
And so he convinced the men of Shechem that they should come against the sons of Gideon and wipe them all out. And so Abimelech led a group of vain fellows and they came to the houses of Gideon’s sons and they wiped them all out with the exception of just one of his sons, Jotham. But all of the other sons of Gideon were killed. A very reprehensible action on the part of Jerubbaal, unconscionable.
But Jotham hid himself. And all of the men of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo, and they went, and made Abimelech king, by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem. Now when Jotham heard that they had made Abimelech king, he went to the top of mount Gerizim ( Jdg 9:5-7 ),
Which is above the city of Shechem and it is sort of a natural amphitheater. From the top of Gerizim you can call down in the valley and they can hear you quite plainly, sort of a natural amphitheater. It’s an interesting thing to me how far sound travels over there in that land. You think of Jesus speaking to a crowd of ten thousand people and they’re all able to hear Him and that’s without amplifying systems. And it sounds sort of farfetched or preposterous but there are many places in the land where the acoustics are just natural; acoustics are really fantastic.
If you’re standing up on the Herodium there could be children playing two miles away and you can hear their conversations to each other. That’s not an exaggeration. You that go with me this year, I’ll prove it to you, but the acoustics are tremendous. The sound travels. They don’t have their sound pollution like we have here. Here sound decibels are rising year by year and all of the sounds that we’re subjected to the sound pollution. Over there you can hear children miles away, dogs barking and so forth. As the children are playing you hear them laughing, screaming and all a couple miles away. And its sound just really carries over there. And I don’t know what phenomena it is that creates it but sound would have to carry for Jesus to be able to address such large multitudes of people.
Even down by the beach there is Caesarea right near the Mediterranean in an amphitheater that is there that was built by the Romans. I can stand on the stage and drop a pin and you can hear it sitting up there in the amphitheater with several hundred people. The sound just carries very well. The acoustics are quite interesting in many areas of the land. And the Sea of Galilee, same thing, the sound really carries. Of course, that’s where Jesus was addressing so many people, and also they’re at the Temple Mount where Jesus addressed so many people.
So this Jotham, son of Gideon, the one that Abimelech didn’t kill, went up to the top of Mount Gerizim, and here is Shechem down below. Now Mount Gerizim is a pretty good, you know, climb to get up to the top of the mountain and he knew that he had a good running distance on the guy. So he stands up there and really tells them off and rebukes them for what they have done.
Actually, he preaches sort of a parabolic type of a message. He gives a parable how that the trees of the forest came to the olive tree and they said, “Rule over us.”
And the olive tree said, “Should I leave my fatness and so forth and rule over you? No way.”
So they came to the fig trees and said, “Rule over us.” And the fig tree said unto them, “Should I forsake my sweetness, my good fruit? No way.”
And so they came to the vine and said, “Rule over us.”
“Should I forsake the wine and so forth that cheers God and man to rule you? No way.”
And so they came to the bramble and said, “Come rule over us.” Now of course, he’s calling, in an essence this Abimelech a bramble and you guys have, you know, you’re settling for a bramble to rule over you.
And having finished his rebuke and his speech, rebuking them for the evil that they have recompensed to Gideon. Here Gideon had become your deliverer and he freed you from the hand of the Midianites and now this is the way you treat, you know, Gideon and his offspring. And he gave him a real rebuke and then he took off running as fast as he could go. And as I say, from the top of Gerizim you’ve got a good lead on anybody that might want to chase you. So, Jotham got away from them. Now he said, You have done a good thing, great,
rejoice in Abimelech: But if not, then let fire come forth from Abimelech, and devour the men of Shechem, and the house of Millo; and the fire come out from the men of Shechem, and from the house of Millo, and devour Abimelech ( Jdg 9:19-20 ).
In other words, let there come strife between the men of Shechem and Abimelech.
And Jotham ran away, and he fled, to Beer, and dwelt there, for the fear of Abimelech his brother. Now Abimelech reigned for three years. And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: In order that the cruelty that was done by Abimelech might be avenged ( Jdg 9:21-24 ),
And so the men of Shechem began to set an ambush for him and the top of the mountains, or for the people, and they robbed all of those that were going along that way and it was told to Abimelech.
And then this guy Gaal, sort of a big mouth kind of a guy, said to the men, he came with his brothers and he went over to Shechem. And he said to the men of Shechem,
[Now look fellas] who is Abimelech, and who is Shechem, that we should serve them? is he not the son of Jerubbaal? and Zebul his officer? serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem: for why should we serve him? ( Jdg 9:28 )
In other words, he’s an outsider. We ought to be serving Hamor and his family, let them be the kings. And he said to God the people were under my rule, because I can really do a good job here, you know. Who’s Abimelech? And so he said if you would just commit yourself to me I would remove Abimelech.
And so he called to Abimelech and said, Increase your army. And so when Zebul the ruler of the city heard the words of Gaal the son of Ebed, his anger was kindled. And he sent messengers unto Abimelech privately, saying, Behold, Gaal the son of Ebed and his brothers are come to Shechem; and they are fortifying the city against you. Now therefore come by night, and the people that are with you, and lie in wait in the field: And it shall be, in the morning, as soon as the sun is up, you shall rise early, and set upon the city: and, behold, when he and the people that is with him come out against thee, then may you do to them as you find occasion. So Abimelech rose up, and all the people that were with him, by night, and they laid wait at Shechem and four companies. And Gaal the son of Ebed went out, and stood in the entering of the gate of the city: and Abimelech rose up, and the people who were with him, and lying there in wait. And when Gaal saw the people, he said to Zebul, Behold, there come people down from the top of the mountains, And Zebul said, No that’s just an illusion, [that’s just the sun rising and the sun coming down, it looks like people,] just an illusion that you see. So Gaal spake again and said, Look there are people coming down by the middle of the land, another company is coming along the plain of Meonenim. And then said Zebul unto him, Okay where’s your mouth now, and you said, Who is Abimelech, that we should serve him? is not this the people that you have despised? go out, now, and fight with them ( Jdg 9:29-38 ).
And so in one of those instances where positions, “Okay, now where’s your mouth man? You’ve been saying who’s Abimelech? There he is. Go out and take him on. You said, you know, if he were just here I’d handle him.”
So Abimelech chased him, and many were overthrown and wounded, even to the entering of the gate. And Abimelech dwelt in Arumah: and Zebul thrust out Gaal with his brothers, that they should not dwell in Shechem. And it came to pass on the next day, that the people went out into the field; and they told Abimelech. And he took the people, and divided them into three companies, and he laid in wait in the field, and he looked, and, behold, the people were come forth out of the city; he rose up against them, and smote them. And Abimelech, and the company that was with him, rushed forward, and stood at the entering of the gate of the city: and two other companies ran upon all the people that were in the fields, and they killed them. And Abimelech fought against the city all that day; and he took the city, and killed the people that were therein, and he beat down the city, and sowed it with salt. And when all of the men of the tower of Shechem heard that, they had entered into the fortress of the house that god Berith. It was told Abimelech, that all the men of the tower of Shechem were gathered together. Abimelech got up to mount Zalmon, with his people; and he began to with his axe to cut down the boughs from the trees, he laid them on his shoulder, and said to the people, Follow my example. So they all cut down the boughs, and he came to the tower and he laid these boughs around, and set fire to them ( Jdg 9:40-49 );
And actually cremated the people who had sought refuge there in the tower.
about a thousand men and women ( Jdg 9:49 ).
So it was a pretty good-sized tower, actually.
And so then he went to Thebez, and encamped against Thebez. And in Thebez there was a strong tower within the city, and all the men and women, fled to the tower there in Thebez. And so Abimelech came to the tower, he fought against it, he was up against the door trying to burn it with fire. And a certain woman took a piece of a millstone ( Jdg 9:50-53 )
Now millstones are sort of lava kinds of rock and there are millstones-I’ve seen them four feet high. And they have tracks in which the millstone rolls. It is chiseled out to where it’s round, has a hole in the middle of it and then the stick or the post would go through the center of the millstone and it would roll. And they would often hook an oxen to it and they had this stone groove that went around in a circle. And the oxen, as he would go around, would pull the stick and it would cause this millstone to go around the groove. And the ladies would come and just pour their wheat in the little groove and as the millstone would go by and it’d grind the wheat into flour. And so they’d have their stone ground wheat by these millstones. But these millstones, probably, many of them weigh, that I have seen, weigh as much as four, five hundred pounds.
Interesting that Jesus said concerning teachers that would destroy the faith in the heart of a child, it would be better for them if a millstone were hung around their neck and they were tossed in the Sea of Galilee that they to offend one of these little children. “Now gentle Jesus meek and mild, look upon this little child.” Hey, no he wasn’t so meek and mild. He was pretty tough on these false teachers and those that would destroy faith in the heart of a child. He said, “Man, you know, put them in concrete and dump them in the ocean you know.” He would’ve been a good Mafia exterminator. Really he said, “Put a millstone on her neck, throw him in the sea.” You’d never come up for sure.
Well now there was this woman in the tower and she had a piece of a millstone. Here’s old Abimelech down there, you know, trying to set the door on fire and she “knock” drops the millstone and cracks his skull. And so he’s lying there and he says to his armourbearer, “Quick, thrust me through. I don’t want them, I don’t want them to say a woman killed me.” Pride, look what it would do, even when you’re dying, you know. What difference does it make? And so the guy thrust him through anyhow and so they didn’t say a woman killed him. So Abimelech was wiped out. And the evil that he did against Gideon’s sons was sort of recompensed. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

The closing statement of the previous chapter constitutes the introduction to this. The words, “As soon as Gideon was dead” and the declaration that then the people returned to evil courses reveal, first of all, the strength of Gideon and the fact that he had very largely exercised a benificent influence. They show, also, how practically worthless was the external obedience of the people.
Judgment this time cake from within rather than from without. Abimelech, a natural son of Gideon, a man unprincipled and brutal but of great personal force, secured to himself the allegiance of the men of Shechem and practically assumed the position of king. In order to make his position secure he brought about the massacre of all the sons of Gideon, except Jotham, who, escaping, uttered a parabolic prophecy from the height of Mount Gerizim.
This parable was full of a fine scorn for Abimelech, whom Jotham compared to the bramble. In the course of it he indicated the line along which judgment would fall on the sinning people. Abimelech would be the destruction of the men of Shechem and the men of Shechem would be the destruction of Abimelech.
The prophecy of Jotham was not to be immediately fulfilled. The fire smoldered for three years but at last manifested itself. It may well be imagined how such a man’s government would be characterized by oppression and tyranny, and the seeds of discontent sown in the hearts of the oppressed people moved towards a harvest of judgment. Gaal, the son of Ebed, took advantage of this discontent to stir up the men of Shechem against Abimelech. Abimelech retaliated with drastic and brutal measures but met his death by the act of a woman who hurled a piece of upper millstone on him. Almost more terrible than the oppression of those from without was this period of judgment by means of internecine strife.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Through Slaughter to a Throne
Jdg 8:29-35; Jdg 9:1-6
The Children of Israel were guilty of great fickleness and instability. They soon relapsed into Baal worship and forgot to show kindness to the family of their great leader. But such is the frailty of the human heart. However hot we may be for Christ today, we may be cold and distant tomorrow. It seems as if the great adversary taunts us with this as he did John Bunyan, to whom he kept whispering. Ill cool you, Ill cool you. We must take our fickle hearts to our Lord, asking Him to keep us true and hot in our love. There are times when His friendship is the most real thing in life, but then the rainbow-glory fades in the sky. Let it not be so any more, O Lord, we beseech thee!
The terrible crime of Abimelech was extenuated by the people of Shechem, because his mother was one of themselves. Compare Jdg 8:31 with 9:1, 18. But the mills of God were grinding out awful trouble for them all, Jdg 9:56-57. Surely, in his lack of self-control, Gideon had much to answer for, Jdg 8:30! The evil that men do lives after them.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Jdg 9:8-15
I. From the answer of the olive tree we learn that usefulness is better than honour. Usefulness, if it be of the higher kind, is attained through long growing and long striving. But when it is attained, when there is a normal regulated usefulness flowing steadily out of a man’s life, when he serves God and man where he is and by what he is, the offer of promotion ought to carry with it some very strong and clear enforcements to induce him to think of acceptance.
II. Notice, next, the answer of the fig tree. Sweetness is the one quality which the fig tree felt that it possessed. There is in some human souls a sweetness which imparts a fig tree flavour to the whole life. When you meet one who possesses this gift moving about among rough ways and persons, consider that you see something far more than merely pleasant, something of exceeding value to the world.
III. The vine can do only one thing-it can bear clusters of grapes. But that one thing is of force and value enough to keep the vine steady under temptation. “Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?” As there are some human lives with sweetness in them as their main element, so there are some with this brighter, racier quality, which “cheers” and animates the spirits of others. Be a vine if you can be nothing more; distil and distribute the wine of life.
IV. Society, in all its sections, is full of bramble men, who are striving for every sort of personal elevation and advantage. By the picture in this parable I want you to scorn the principles they act upon, and to know that, by God’s grace, you stand on a moral elevation far above them.
A. Raleigh, From Dawn to the Perfect Day, p. 132.
The youngest son of Gideon, Jotham, seems to have inherited the hereditary wit of the family, so conspicuous in Gideon and in his father. He must also have inherited his father’s cool courage and daring; a courage which enabled him to collect his thoughts in the midst of imminent danger, and to utter them in circumstances which would have caused the voice of most men to tremble.
I. The fable requires little explanation. It was meant to be, and it is, self-interpreting. We see, too, that it is a felicitous condensation of the principle which regulates the acceptance of many of the high honours and rewards of life. It will not do for every one to say with the fig tree, should I forsake my sweetness and my good fruit, and go to be promoted over the trees? It is important to recognise on the one hand, that we cannot decline all honour, and ought not to shrink from advancement in life; and on the other hand, we must recognise that it may be humility, but it may also be selfish love of ease, which prompts us to say, Should I leave my fatness and my sweetness and go to be promoted over the trees?
II. A still wider application of the fable will occur to any one who carefully reads it. For what strikes the reader most is perhaps the sagacious contentment of the olive, the fig, and the vine-a contentment and dread of change, which reproach us for our restlessness and craving to be always bettering ourselves. (1) The “fatness” which the olive was not disposed to forsake in exchange for high position, may very naturally be supposed to symbolise the unselfishness which belongs to many obscure positions in life. (2) Again, many lives are soured and rendered wretched to all connected with them, because it is not recognised that sweetness is that to which they are specially called. Few seem to understand the power of sweetness in persuading men, or, if they understand it, cannot control or humble themselves to use it.
III. A third lesson which we gather from this fable is how contemptible a thing is display and worldly honour, and what is called style. There is something better in life than mere show or the mere attainment of the rewards accorded by the world to its successful men. The real value of human life does not lie on the surface, lies indeed so deep that many people never see it at all. If a man will only humbly accept what comes to him, and strive to do good as he has opportunity, he will not lack the blessing of God, but will be like the vine that cheereth God and man.
M. Dods, Israel’s Iron Age, p. 61.
References: Jdg 9:8-15.-S. Cox, Expositor’s Notebook, p. 64; S. Goebel, The Parables of Jesus, p. 9; Parker, vol. vi., p. 51. Jdg 9:48.-Ibid., p. 166; S. Baring-Gould, Village Preaching for a Year, p. 270.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 9 Abimelech the King and His Wickedness
1. The murder of Gideons sons (Jdg 9:1-6)
2. Jothams parable (Jdg 9:7-21)
3. Scenes of strife and destruction of Shechem (Jdg 9:22-49)
4. Abimelechs end (Jdg 9:50-57)
The story of Abimelech is intensely interesting in its typical meaning. Abimelech was the offspring of an unlawful union: the son of Gideon and the concubine in Shechem. He was half Israelite and half Canaanite. Abimelech means my father was king; he claims therefore supremacy, lordship over the people Israel on the basis of succession. His father had refused that honor; the bastard offspring claims it. He gains his object by a conspiracy and by murdering the sons of his father, with the exception of Jotham, who hid himself And this domineerer over the people bears the name of the Philistine kings.
This illustrates perfectly that corrupt system of Christendom which is half Christian and half heathenish–Rome. It is like Abimelech–a bastard system. She is called in Revelation Jezebel, the heathen woman who was married to an Israelitish king. Rome claims apostolic succession through Peter, who disclaimed any preeminence, but rather warned against lording over Gods heritage. Ecclesiastical assumption to control and govern the people of God, so prominent in corrupt Christendom, is dearly indicated in Abimelechs act of putting himself forward as king. And the murderous spirit of Abimelech is there likewise.
Jotham (Jehovah is perfect), the youngest son of Gideon, is the witness against it. He uttered a parable from Gerizim. The olive, the fig-tree and the vine refused to reign over the trees. The bramble becomes king to devour with fire the cedars of Lebanon. He applied the parable to Abimelech, who had been made king.
The tendency of mans heart is to make another king than God, to put leaders in His place, and thus to destroy the use and blessing for which the olive, the fig, the vine, the various gifts of God, are given. But just those who are really worthiest will most surely refuse to leave their spheres of happy service, their sweetness, and their fruit, to go to wave over,–flutter idly in the wind over the trees. Thus royalty comes naturally to the thorn-bush, which need give up nothing, but which has thus nothing in its gift but thorns,–such as, indeed, the men of Succoth (chapter 8:16) were taught with. But worse would come than this–the fire of Gods wrath, which, from this side and from that, would destroy both king and people (Numerical Bible).
Three years later the prediction in Jothams parable comes true; fire came out from Abimelech and devoured the men of Shechem; and fire came out from Shechem and devoured Abimelech. It was God who sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem. Then there is the revolt of Gaal, (loathing), the son of Ebed (servitude), and he opposed Abimelech. Something similar came to pass in Christendom. On account of the domineering rule of Rome there was the revolt against her. The overthrow of the ecclesiastical oppressor was attempted. But Gaals attempt fails. He is overcome. Abimelech and his officer Zebul are victorious. The revolt has failed. Even so today Rome is gaining, and those who protested once against her wickedness, now are following her pernicious ways once more. Abimelechs end was brought about by a piece of a millstone which a woman cast on him, and a young man thrust him through with a sword and he died. It was a fearful end in judgment. Even so it is written of Babylon, the mother of harlots, Rome. And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more. … And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth (Rev 18:21; Rev 18:24).
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Abimelech: Jdg 8:31
Shechem: Gen 33:18, Gen 34:2, 1Ki 12:1
communed: 2Sa 15:6, 1Ki 12:3, 1Ki 12:20, Psa 83:2-4, Jer 18:18
Reciprocal: Gen 12:6 – Sichem Jos 17:7 – Shechem Jos 21:21 – Shechem Jos 24:1 – Shechem 2Sa 15:4 – Oh that I 1Ki 12:25 – Shechem 2Ch 10:1 – Shechem Jer 41:5 – Shechem Dan 11:21 – by flatteries
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

GIDEON TO JAIR
ABIMELECHS USURPATION (Jdg 9:1-6)
The close of the last lesson shows idolatry creeping into Israel, the fruit of which is reaped in the years following. God is forgotten and Gideon also (Jdg 8:34-35), the meaning of the last verse being interpreted by the story of Abimelech.
This Abimelech fraternized with his nearest of kin, the relatives of his mothers side (Jdg 9:1-3), a striking instance, as one says, of the evils of polygamy, where one son of a father has connections and interests totally alien to his brethren. Contrast the verses just alluded to with Jdg 8:22-23 and observe the difference in spirit and motive between father and son.
What is meant by the allusion to the one stone in Jdg 9:5 on which Abimelech slew his brothers, it is difficult to say. Some think he dashed them from one rock, and others that the stone was the pagan altar on which their lives were sacrificed.
JOTHAMS PARABLE (Jdg 9:7-21)
The reason Jotham, the youngest son of Gideon, was spared from the general slaughter is given in Jdg 9:5. The spot chosen for his proclamation was the public place of Shechem, and the parable drawn from the rivalry of the various trees was appropriate to the foliage in the valley below. With a little exertion of voice it is said he could easily be heard in the city.
Someone may ask an explanation of Jdg 9:13, and in what sense wine could be said to cheer God? Jotham not being present to explain the expression, we are at a loss, for it is not God who is here speaking, but man, whose word God is causing to be recorded. Wine was sometimes used in sacrifices as was oil. The latter is said to honor God (Jdg 9:9), and perhaps in the same sense it is meant that wine cheered Him.
Note the malediction Jotham pronounces on Abimelech and Shechem (Jdg 9:20), and the fulfillment we reach at the close of chapter 9. Thus would it appear that Jotham was in this case a prophet and minister of God.
GAULS CONSPIRACY (Jdg 9:22-49)
The combination of Abimelechs usurpation and Shechems idolatry did not work well, for by and by God sent a judgment upon them (Jdg 9:22-25). Gaal, who, some think, represented the original Canaanites of the locality, took advantage of the feeling against Abimelech and raised an insurrection (Jdg 9:26-29). Zebul, the ruler of the city, is loyal, and informs on him (Jdg 9:30-33) with the result following (Jdg 9:34-40). Subsequently Shechem itself is destroyed (Jdg 9:41-45), and the people who took refuge in the stronghold consumed with fire (Jdg 9:46-49).
ABIMELECHS DEATH (Jdg 9:50-57)
A subsequent campaign against Thebez, now called Tubas, was not so successful (Jdg 9:50-55), and Abimelech like Sisera, came to his end at the hand of a woman. Thus his evil deeds met their reward (Jdg 9:56-57).
THE JUDGESHIPS OF TOLA AND JAIR (Jdg 10:1-5)
Not much is said about these two judges, and yet together they ruled forty- five years. As foreign aggression is not spoken of, the probability is that the defense or saving of Israel referred to was from internal dissension of usurpation like that of Abimelech. For this cause they have sometimes been called civil judges.
Something of the magnificence of the second of the two may be gathered from verse 4. To ride on an ass is characteristic of royalty in those times, and if each of these sons did that, and each had his own city to rule, Jairs possessions were extensive. Havoth-jair, interpreted into English, means the towns of Jair.
It will be interesting to compare Num 32:41, Deu 3:14 and 1Ch 2:22 for the story of an earlier Jair. Although the two have points of unusual similarity they were evidently different persons.
QUESTIONS
1. What is the spiritual condition of Israel following Gideons death?
2. Give the history of Abimelechs rise to power.
3. Recite Jothams parable and give its application.
4. What shows Jotham to have been a prophet?
5. Give the history of Shechems destruction.
6. With what earlier military captain may Abimelech be compared in his death?
7. What characteristic has sometimes been given the judgeships of Tola and Jair, and why?
8. What is the meaning of Havoth-jair?
9. Have you compared the histories of the two Jairs?
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

Among Gideon’s 70 sons was Abimelech who was born to him of a concubine from Shechem. He got the people of that city to pay him 70 shekels of silver and used it to enlist the help of some worthless and reckless men. They went out and killed the other sons of Jerubbaal, except for Jotham, the youngest. When he learned of the death of his brothers, he stood on top of Mount Gerizim and told a parable of the trees anointing a king.
When the trees first decided they wanted a king to rule over them, they asked the olive tree to take the job. However, the olive tree said it could not quit providing oil which was used to honor God and men. Next, the trees asked the fig tree to be their ruler, but the fig said it could not cease producing sweet fruit. When they approached the vine, it asked if it should stop producing wine which gave cheer to God and man. Finally, the trees asked the bramble to rule over them. The bramble responded by saying, “If in truth you anoint me as king over you, Then come and take shelter in my shade; But if not, let fire come out of the bramble And devour the cedars of Lebanon!” Jotham then noted the terrible way the men of Shechem had rewarded Gideon for leading in the fight against their enemies and risking his life. He said fire would go out from Abimelech and destroy them and fire would go out from them to destroy Abimelech. Jotham then hid in Beer for fear of his brother ( Jdg 9:1-21 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Jdg 9:1-3. Abimelech went to Shechem unto his mothers brethren That is, her relations; and communed with them To try if he could engage them to favour and aid the design he had conceived to usurp the government of Israel, in direct opposition to his fathers will, who had declared no son of his should rule over them. His mother had, probably, instilled into his mind some ambitious thoughts, and the name his father had given him, carrying royalty in its meaning, might help to blow up these sparks, and excite him to take the steps here mentioned. He had no call from God to this office and honour, as his father had, nor was there any present occasion for a judge to deliver Israel, as there was when his father was advanced; but his own ambition must be gratified, and that is all he aims at. That all the sons of Jerubbaal reign over you He wickedly insinuates, though perhaps without any ground for it, that the sons of Jerubbaal were ambitious of the kingdom which their father refused; and therefore prays them to consider what horrible divisions and confusions it would make, if so many were permitted to pretend to the government, and how much better it would be to choose one from among the rest; pointing them (in the next words) to himself. Remember, I am your bone and your flesh Your kinsman, of the same tribe and city with you; which will be no small honour and advantage to you. Shechem was a city in the tribe of Ephraim, of great note. Joshua had held his last great meeting of the representatives of the tribes there. And no doubt Abimelech thought if that city would but declare for him, and abet his design, it would be a great step toward ensuring the success of it. They said, He is our brother And his advancement will be to our advantage. They were pleased to think of their city becoming a royal city, and the metropolis of Israel, and therefore were easily persuaded to what they believed would serve their interest.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Jdg 9:4. Baal-berith. Berith signifies a covenant, which those bad people had made with Baal. The Greeks had their , their Jupiter, or their Baal, to which they made vows.
Jdg 9:5. Slew threescore and ten upon one stone, as an offering to his God. It is a credit to the Hebrew religion, that Abimelech was an apostate.
Jdg 9:8. The trees went forth to anoint a king. This parable seems to have been divinely inspired. The figures and all the drapery of diction, open in a succession of beauties, alike wise, moral, and rural.
Jdg 9:13. Wine which cheereth God and man. Both the nouns being plural, it should read gods and men. The LXX by translating Elohim, God, have led many into the same error. In Gen 6:2, and Psa 82:6, the word is understood of princes and prophets, as our Saviour affirms. Joh 10:34. Hence wine is here understood to cheer the hearts of the princes, and the poor. Yet some will vainly contend that the gods adored by the heathen being once men, were lovers of wine. Others contend also, that wine being used at the sacrifices of oblations, caused God to rejoice in the oblations of his people.
Jdg 9:45. Sowed it with salt, to detest its memory, like that of Sodom.
Jdg 9:53. Piece of a millstone, or the upper stone of a handmill. God directed the hand of this woman to complete his judgments on an apostate people. Yet the Hebrew apostates always secreted their idols under the best of their kings.
REFLECTIONS.
We have just seen Gideon, immortal in the memory of his country, refuse the crown of Israel. Now we see his illegitimate son, who neither knew himself nor the duties of a king, aspiring through vain glory at the regal dignity. To accomplish this design, how shamefully mean and dreadfully wicked were the steps he pursued. He flattered the elders of Shechem with the advantages of having a relative on the throne; of its becoming a royal city; and urged the insupportable burden of maintaining seventy princes of Gideons house in seventy of the principal towns. Nor was he wanting to urge the civil wars which would immediately follow, on the accession of seventy kings. How dreadful then is ambition, when long fostered in the heart of man. It accounts the meanest intrigues acts of prudence; and canonizes the foulest crimes with the epithet of virtuous deeds. Few men dream of thrones, it is true; but ambition in the acquisition of wealth, and in the aggrandizement of their families, often leads to actions in trade, or in domestic affairs, which cause them to be execrated wherever they are known. Hence one wicked and ruling passion may render the whole of life, as is exemplified in Abimelech, a continued scene of tragedy and crimes.
Though providence suffered Gideons incontinence to be punished with the death of his sons, yet we admire its care in preserving Jotham, to perpetuate the name of his father, and to see his curse of burning devolve on the murderers of his brethren. God showed the same kindness to the house of David, when Athaliah slew all the royal family; Joash, an infant, was preserved in the temple. Hence the greatest overflowings of wickedness are checked and restrained by the hand of heaven.
We learn that the wicked, unhappy by their own propensities, are incapable of enjoying repose. Ambition, which made Abimelech uneasy in private life, made him equally so on the throne, and caused him to be hated of his people. The bonds of wickedness are rusty chains, which presently gall and poison the flesh. Scarcely had he reigned three years before he was driven into exile, where he formed those plots which terminated in the destruction of himself, and all the murderers of his fathers sons. Hence God carefully preserved the life of this wicked man, till the Shechemites were either slain with the sword, or burnt in the tower; then he threw the last bolt of vengeance on Abimelechs head. And mark, reader, mark here the retributive characters of divine justice. The Shechemites had taken money out of the house or tower of Baal to supply Abimelech; and in that house many of them were burnt. They had surprised and slain the sons of Gideon with the sword; and they themselves were surprised and slain in the field when going forth to labour. Abimelech, with their aid, had slain his brethren on a certain stone; and now he is slain by a stone from the tower, and by a woman too! Let us learn to rest our cause with God, to suffer with patience, praying for the conversion of our enemies; otherwise God will surely requite them according to their works. Let the heads of houses learn also, that their efforts in buying land, and forming family establishments, may all be frustrated like those of Gideon. But Christ says, the Father will give us a kingdom.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Judges 9. The Kingship and Fall of Abimelech.The story of Gideons half-Canaanite son does not equal the finest parts of the book in dramatic interest, but the glimpse which it affords of the relations subsisting between the mixed races of Palestine in the time of the Judges is of great value to the historian. The whole narrative is ancient, though not quite uniform. Here D makes no contribution. Apparently he did not regard Abimelech as worthy to rank among the Judges, and therefore he omitted this section, which was restored to its place by R.
Jdg 9:1-6. Abimelech Made King of Shechem.Abimelech probably means the (Divine) King is Father, which throws some light on Gideons conception of his God. He and other Israelites were already feeling after that great truth of the Divine Fatherhood, which is the heart of Christianity. Shechem (1Ki 12:1*), now called Nbls (the Roman Neapolis), lies in a fertile valley between Mount Ebal and Gerizim. Abimelech was not, of course, made king of all the twelve tribes, nor even of one whole tribe, but only of the town of Shechem and its neighbourhood. His rule was on a par with that of the kings who are mentioned in the Song of Deborah (Jdg 5:19).
Jdg 9:2. The young man made a skilful use of his pedigree. Would not the Shechemites prefer that one of themselves, one who had lived among them all his days, rather than a stranger, should reign over them? His mother, as a sadca wife (W. R. Smith, Kinship, 93f.), would be among her own people at Shechem, not among Gideons at Ophrah. The idiom your bone and your flesh answers to the English your flesh and blood.
Jdg 9:4. Abimelech begins his reign, as new kings so often do in the East, by hiring assassins to put all possible rivals out of the way (cf. 2Ki 10:1-11; 2Ki 11:1). For vain and light read reckless and worthless.
[Jdg 9:5. Upon one stone: as if it was an altar and the murder a sacrificial rite (1Sa 14:33-35). Thus presumably the blood was safely disposed of, and would not cry for vengeance.A. S. P.]
Jdg 9:6. The coronation took place at the oak of the pillar, or Monument-tree, i.e. a holy oak beside which there was a standing stone. For the house of Millo read Beth-millo, apparently a town near Shechem.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

9:1 And Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal went to Shechem unto his {a} mother’s brethren, and communed with them, and with all the family of the house of his mother’s father, saying,
(a) To practice with his kinsfolk for attaining the kingdom.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

3. The story of Abimelech ch. 9
The story of Abimelech connects directly with the story of Gideon. It is the sequel to and indeed the climax of the Gideon story, and it portrays the disastrous results of Gideon’s legacy. Though Abimelech sought a place of leadership in Israel, God did not raise him up as a judge. His history is of interest primarily because of the light it throws on this period of Israel’s national life and the continuing decline in Israel. Furthermore we can see what had become of Shechem (cf. Joshua 8; Joshua 24).
". . . in the use of names, Jerubbaal is used throughout for Gideon, and Yahweh is referred to only by the generic Elohim. These features reflect the author’s unambiguous stance toward the nation and the characters: Israel has been totally Canaanized; Baal has contended for himself and prevailed." [Note: Idem, Judges . . ., p. 308.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Abimelech’s murders and election as king 9:1-6
Though Gideon had rejected kingship officially (Jdg 8:23), though not practically, Abimelech desired it for himself. He also hated his half-brothers, presumably because he was the son of a concubine rather than the son of one of Gideon’s wives (Jdg 8:31). Shechem was one of the older city-states in Canaan. Canaanites were its primary inhabitants, as is evident from this story. They seem to have been even more open to having a king over them than the Israelites were (Jdg 9:6). As a local boy, as well as the son of Gideon, the famous military leader, the Shechemites favored accepting Abimelech as their king.
"At least Gideon had said the right thing about God’s sole sovereignty: ’the LORD will rule over you’ (Jdg 8:23). Abimelech, on the other hand, leaves the LORD out of the picture entirely." [Note: McCann, p. 72.]
Evidently Abimelech felt that Gideon’s other sons were ambitious to be king too, though there is no indication in the text that any of them felt this way. He was perhaps projecting his feelings on them, as is often true of ambitious people. They sometimes become paranoid, as Abimelech did (cf. King Saul).
Abimelech was able to secure some popular and financial support by politicking. He hired some assistants who promoted him and probably helped him assemble and assassinate 69 of his 70 brothers (Jdg 9:5). He executed this slaughter on "one stone" (Jdg 9:5) suggesting a well-planned mass murder. Compare and contrast the similar story of Jehu’s slaughter of Ahab’s sons in 2 Kings 10. Note how departure from God, idolatry, and self-assertion result in hatred and violence. [Note: See McCann, who traced the twin themes of idolatry and self-assertion, violations of the Ten Commandments that require submission to the sole sovereignty of Yahweh in one’s person and works, through the Book of Judges in his commentary.]
The men of Shechem must have known about Abimelech’s slaughter of his brothers before they made him king (Jdg 9:6). Perhaps Abimelech’s violent behavior enhanced his value in their eyes. "Beth-millo" was the citadel in Shechem, the most heavily fortified part of the town. The writer also called it the tower of Shechem (Jdg 9:46; Jdg 9:49). It may have been the fortress-temple of Baal-berith (cf. Jdg 9:51; Jdg 8:33). [Note: G. Ernest Wright, Shechem, the Biography of a Biblical City, pp. 123-28.]
"The inhabitants of Shechem, the worshippers of Baal-berith, carried out the election of Abimelech as king in the very same place in which Joshua had held the last national assembly, and had renewed the covenant of Israel with Jehovah the true covenant God (Josh. xxiv. 1, 25, 26). It was there in all probability that the temple of Baal-berith was to be found, namely, according to Jdg 9:46, near the tower of Shechem or the citadel of Millo." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, p. 362.]
Abimelech was the first person ever to be crowned king in Israel, as far as the text records.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

5
ABIMELECH AND JOTHAM
Jdg 8:29-35; Jdg 9:1-57
THE history we are tracing moves from man to man; the personal influence of the hero is everything while it lasts and confusion follows on his death. Gideon appears as one of the most successful Hebrew judges in maintaining order. While he was there in Ophrah religion and government had a centre “and the country was in quietness forty years.” A man far from perfect but capable of mastery held the reins and gave forth judgment with an authority none could challenge. His burial in the family sepulchre in Ophrah is specially recorded, as if it had been a great national tribute to his heroic power and skilful administration.
The funeral over, discord began. A rightful ruler there was not. Among the claimants of power there was no man of power. Gideon left many sons, but not one of them could take his place. The confederation of cities half Hebrew, half Canaanite, with Shechem at their head, of which we have already heard, held in check while Gideon lived, now began to control the politics of the tribes. By using the influence of this league a usurper who had no title whatever to the confidence of the people succeeded in exalting himself.
The old town of Shechem situated in the beautiful valley between Ebal and Gerizim had long been. a centre of Baal worship and of Canaanite intrigue, though nominally one of the cities of refuge and therefore specially sacred. Very likely the mixed population of this important town, jealous of the position gained by the hill village of Ophrah, were ready to receive with favour any proposals that seemed to offer them distinction. And when Abimelech, son of Gideon by a slave woman of their town, went among them with ambitious and crafty suggestions they were easily persuaded to help him. The desire for a king which Gideon had promptly set aside lingered in the minds of the people, and by means of it Abimelech was able to compass his personal ends. First, however, he had to discredit others who stood in his way. There at Ophrah were the sons and grandsons of Gideon, threescore and ten of them according to the tradition, who were supposed to be bent on lording it over the tribes. Was it a thing to be thought of that the land should have seventy kings? Surely one would be better, less of an incubus at least, more likely to do the ruling well. Men of Shechem too would not be governed from Ophrah if they had any spirit. He, Abimelech, was their townsman, their bone and flesh. He confidently looked for their support.
We cannot tell how far there was reason for saying that the family of Gideon were aiming at an aristocracy. They may have had some vague purpose of the kind. The suggestion, at all events, was cunning and had its effect. The people of Shechem had stored considerable treasure in the sanctuary of Baal, and by public vote seventy pieces of silver were paid out of it to Abimelech. The money was at once used by him in hiring a band of men like himself, unscrupulous, ready for any desperate or bloody deed. With these he marched on Ophrah, and surprising his brothers in the house or palace of Jerub-baal speedily put out of his way their dangerous rivalry. With the exception of Jotham, who had observed the band approaching and concealed himself, the whole house of Gideon was dragged to execution. On one stone, perhaps the very rock on which the altar of Baal once stood, the threescore and nine were barbarously slain.
A villainous coup detat this. From Gideon overthrowing Baal and proclaiming Jehovah to Abimelech bringing up Baal again with hideous fratricide-it is a wretched turn of things. Gideon had to some extent prepared the way for a man far inferior to himself, as all do who are not utterly faithful to their light and calling; but he never imagined there could be so quick and shocking a revival of barbarism. Yet the ephod dealing, the polygamy, the immorality into which he lapsed were bound to come to fruit. The man who once was a pure Hebrew patriot begat a half-heathen son to undo his own work. As for the Shechemites, they knew quite well to what end they had voted those seventy pieces of silver; and the general opinion seems to have been that the town had its moneys worth, a life for each piece and, to boot, a king reeking with blood and shame. Surely it was a well spent grant. Their confederation, their god had triumphed. They made Abimelech king by the oak of the pillar that was in Shechem.
It is the success of the adventurer we have here, that common event. Abimelech is the Oriental adventurer and uses the methods of another age than ours; yet we have our examples, and if they are less scandalous in some ways, if they are apart from bloodshed and savagery, they are still sufficiently trying to those who cherish the faith of divine justice and providence. How many have to see with amazement the adventurer triumph by means of seventy pieces of silver from the house of Baal or even from a holier treasury. He in a selfish and cruel game seems to have speedy and complete success denied to the best and purest cause. Fighting for his own hand in wicked or contemptuous hardness and arrogant conceit, he finds support, applause, an open way. Being no prophet he has honour in his own town. He knows the art o! the stealthy insinuation, the lying promise and the flattering murmur; he has skill to make the favour of one leading person a step to securing another. When a few important people have been hoodwinked, he too becomes important and “success” is assured.
The Bible, most entirely honest of books, frankly sets before us this adventurer, Abimelech, in the midst of the judges of Israel, as low a specimen of “success” as need be looked for; and we trace the well known means by which such a person is promoted. “His mothers brethren spake of him in the ears of all the men of Shechem.” That there was little to say, that he was a man of no character mattered not the least. The thing was to create an impression so that Abimelechs scheme might be introduced and forced. So far he could intrigue and then, the first steps gained, he could mount. But there was in him none of the mental power that afterwards marked Jehu, none of the charm that survives with the name of Absalom. It was on jealousy, pride, ambition he played as the most jealous, proud, and ambitious; yet for three years the Hebrews of the league, blinded by the desire to have their nation like others, suffered him to bear the name of king.
And by this sovereignty the Israelites who acknowledged it were doubly and trebly compromised. Not only did they accept a man without a record, they believed in one who was an enemy to his countrys religion, one therefore quite ready to trample upon its liberty. This is really the beginning of a worse oppression than that of Midian or of Jabin. It shows on the part of Hebrews generally as well as those who tamely submitted to Abimelechs lordship a most abject state of mind. After the bloody work at Ophrah the tribes should have rejected the fratricide with loathing and risen like one man to suppress him. If the Baal worshippers of Shechem would make him king there ought to have been a cause of war against them in which every good man and true should have taken the field. We look in vain for any such opposition to the usurper. Now that he is crowned, Manasseh, Ephraim, and the North regard him complacently. It is the world all over. How can we wonder at this when we know with what acclamations kings scarcely more reputable than he have been greeted in modern times? Crowds gather and shout, fires of welcome blaze; there is joy as if the millennium had come. It is a king crowned, restored, his countrys head, defender of the faith. Vain is the hope, pathetic the joy.
There is no man of spirit to oppose Abimelech in the field. The duped nation must drink its cup of misrule and blood. But one appears of keen wit, apt and trenchant in speech. At least the tribes shall hear what one sound mind thinks of this coronation. Jotham, as we saw, escaped the slaughter at Ophrah. In the rear of the murderer he has crossed the hills and he will now utter his warning, whether men hear or whether they forbear. There is a crowd assembled for worship or deliberation at the oak of the pillar. Suddenly a voice is heard ringing clearly out between hill and hill, and the people looking up recognise Jotham, who from a spur of rock on the side of Gerizim demands their audience. “Hearken unto me,” he cries, “ye men of Shechem, that God may hearken unto you.” Then in his parable of the olive, the fig tree, the vine, and the bramble, he pronounces judgment and prophecy. The bramble is exalted to be king, but on these terms, that the trees come and put their trust under its shadow; “but if not, then let fire come out of the bramble and devour the cedars of Lebanon.”
It is a piece of satire of the first order, brief, stinging, true. The craving for a king is lashed and then the wonderful choice of a ruler. Jotham speaks as an anarchist, one might say, but with God understood as the centre of law and order. It is a vision of the Theocracy, taking shape from a keen and original mind. He figures men as trees growing independently, dutifully. And do trees need a king? Are they not set in their natural freedom, each to yield fruit as best it can after its kind? Men of Shechem, Hebrews all, if they will only attend to their proper duties and do quiet work as God wills, appear to Jotham to need a king no more than the trees. Under the benign course of nature, sunshine and rain, wind and dew, the trees have all the restraint they need, all the liberty that is good for them. So men under the providence of God, adoring and obeying Him, have the best control, the only needful control, and with it liberty. Are they not fools then to go about seeking a tyrant to rule them, they who should be as cedars of Lebanon, willows by the watercourses, they who are made for simple freedom and spontaneous duty? It is something new in Israel, this keen intellectualising; but the fable, pointed as it is, teaches nothing for the occasion. Jotham is a man full of wit and of intelligence, but he has no practicable scheme of government, nothing definite to oppose to the mistake of the horn. He is all for the ideal, but the time and the people are unripe for the ideal. We see the same contrast in our own day; both in politics and the church the incisive critic discrediting subordination altogether fails to secure his age.
Men are not trees. They are made to obey and trust. A hero or one who seems a hero is ever welcome, and he who skilfully imitates the roar of the lion may easily have a following, while Jotham, intensely sincere, highly gifted, a true-sighted man, finds none to mind him.
Again the fable is directed against Abimelech. What was this man to whom Shechem had sworn fealty? An olive, a fig tree, fruitful and therefore to be sought after? Was he a vine capable of rising on popular support to useful and honourable service? Not he. It was the bramble they had chosen, the poor grovelling jagged thorn bush that tears the flesh, whose end is to feed the fire of the oven. Who ever heard of a good or heroic deed Abimelech had done? He was simply a contemptible upstart, without moral principle, as ready to wound as to flatter, and they who chose him for king would too soon find their error. Now that he had done something, what was it? There were Israelites among the crowd that shouted in his honour. Had they already forgotten the services of Gideon so completely as to fall down before a wretch red handed from the murder of their heros sons? Such a beginning showed the character of the man they trusted, and the same fire which had issued from the bramble at Ophrah would flame out upon themselves. This was but the beginning; soon there would be war to the knife between Abimelech and Shechem.
We find instruction in the parable by regarding the answers put into the mouth of this tree and that, when they are invited to wave to and fro over the others. There are honours which are dearly purchased, high positions which cannot be assumed without renouncing the true end and fruition of life. One, for example, who is quietly and with increasing efficiency doing his part in a sphere to which he is adapted must set aside the gains of long discipline if he is to become a social leader. He can do good where he is. Not so certain is it that he will be able to serve his fellows well in public office. It is one thing to enjoy the deference paid to a leader while the first enthusiasm on his behalf continues, but it is quite another thing to satisfy all the demands made as years go on and new needs arise. When anyone is invited to take a position of authority he is bound to consider carefully his own aptitudes. He needs also to consider those who are to be subjects or constituents and make sure that they are of the kind his rule will fit. The olive looks at the cedar and the terebinth and the palm. Will they admit his sovereignty by and by though now they vote for it? Men are taken with the candidate who makes a good impression by emphasising what will please and suppressing opinions that may provoke dissent. When they know him, how will it be? When criticism begins, will the olive not be despised for its gnarled stem, its crooked branches and dusky foliage?
The fable does not make the refusal of olive and fig tree and vine rest on the comfort they enjoy in the humbler place. That would be a mean and dishonourable reason for refusing to serve. Men who decline public office because they love an easy life find here no countenance. It is for the sake of its fatness, the oil it yields, grateful to God and man in sacrifice and anointing, that the olive tree declines. The fig tree has its sweetness and the vine its grapes to yield. And so men despising self-indulgence and comfort may be justified in putting aside a call to office. The fruit of personal character developed in humble unobtrusive natural life is seen to be better than the more showy clusters forced by public demands. Yet, on the other hand, if one will not leave his books, another his scientific hobbies, a third his fireside, a fourth his manufactory, in order to take his place among the magistrates of a city or the legislators of a land the danger of bramble supremacy is near. Next a wretched Abimelech will appear; and what can be done but set him on high and put the reins in his hand? Unquestionably the claims of church or country deserve most careful weighing, and even if there is a risk that character may lose its tender bloom the sacrifice must be made in obedience to an urgent call. For a time, at least, the need of society at large must rule the loyal life.
The fable of Jotham, in so far as it flings sarcasm at the persons who desire eminence for the sake of it and not for the good they will be able to do, is an example of that wisdom which is as unpopular now as ever it has been in human history, and the moral needs every day to be kept full in view. It is desire for distinction and power, the opportunity of waving to and fro over the trees, the right to use this handle and that to their names that will be found to make many eager, not the distinct wish to accomplish something which the times and the country need. Those who solicit public office are far too often selfish, not self-denying, and even in the church there is much vain ambition. But people will have it so. The crowd follows him who is eager for the suffrages of the crowd and showers flattery and promises as he goes. Men are lifted into places they cannot fill, and after keeping their seats unsteadily for a time they have to disappear into ignominy.
We pass here, however, beyond the meaning Jotham desired to convey, for, as we have seen, he would have justified every one in refusing to reign. And certainly if society could be held together and guided without the exaltation of one over another, by the fidelity of each to his own task and brotherly feeling between man and man, there would be a far better state of things. But while the fable expounds a God-impelled anarchy, the ideal state of mankind, our modern schemes, omitting God, repudiating the least notion of a supernatural fount of life, turn upon themselves in hopeless confusion. When the divine law rules every life we shall not need organised governments; until then entire freedom in the world is but a name for unchaining every lust that degrades and darkens the life of man. Far away, as a hope of the redeemed and Christ-led race, there shines the ideal Theocracy revealed to the greater minds of the Hebrew people, often restated, never realised. But at present men need a visible centre of authority. There must be administrators and executors of law, there must be government and legislation till Christ reigns in every heart. The movement which resulted in Abimelechs sovereignty was the blundering start in a series of experiments the Hebrew tribes were bound to make, as other nations had to make them. We are still engaged in the search for a right system of social order, and while rearers of God acknowledge the ideal towards which they labour, they must endeavour to secure by personal toil and devotion, by unwearying interest in affairs the most effective form of liberal yet firm government.
Abimelech maintained himself in power for three years, no doubt amid growing dissatisfaction. Then came the outburst which Jotham had predicted. An evil spirit, really present from the first, rose between Abimelech and the men of Shechem. The bramble began to tear themselves, a thing they were not prepared to endure. Once rooted, however, it was not easily got rid of. One who knows the evil arts of betrayal is quick to suspect treachery, the false person knows the ways of the false and how to fight them with their own weapons. A man of high character may be made powerless by the disclosure of some true words he has spoken; but when Shechem would be rid of Abimelech it has to employ brigands and organise robbery. “They set liers in wait for him in the mountains who robbed all that came along that way,” the merchants no doubt to whom Abimelech had given a safe conduct. Shechem in fact became the headquarters of a band of highwaymen, whose crimes were condoned or even approved in the hope that one day the despot would be taken and an end put to his misrule.
It may appear strange that our attention is directed to these vulgar incidents, as they may be called, which were taking place in and about Shechem. Why has the historian not chosen to tell us of other regions where some fear of God survived and guided the lives of men, instead of giving in detail the intrigues and treacheries of Abimelech and his rebellious subjects? Would we not much rather hear of the sanctuary and the worship, of the tribe of Judah and its development, of men and women who in the obscurity of private life were maintaining the true faith and serving God in sincerity? The answer must be partly that the contents of the history are determined by the traditions which survived when it was compiled. Doings like these at Shechem keep their place in the memory of men not because they are important but because they impress themselves on popular feeling. This was the beginning of the experiments which finally in Samuels time issued in the kingship of Saul, and although Abimelech was, properly speaking, not a Hebrew and certainly was no worshipper of Jehovah, yet the fact that he was king for a time gave importance to everything about him. Hence we have the full account of his rise and fall.
And yet the narrative before us has its value from the religious point of view. It shows the disastrous result of that coalition with idolaters into which the Hebrews about Shechem entered, it illustrates the danger of co-partnery with the worldly on worldly terms. The confederacy of which Shechem was the centre is a type of many in which people who should be guided always by religion bind themselves for business or political ends with those who have no fear of God before their eyes. Constantly it happens in such cases that the interests of the commercial enterprise or of the party are considered before the law of righteousness. The business affair must be made to succeed at all hazards. Christian people as partners of companies are committed to schemes which imply Sabbath work, sharp practices in buying and selling, hollow promises in prospectuses and advertisements, grinding of the faces of the poor, miserable squabbles about wages that should never occur. In politics the like is frequently seen. Things are done against the true instincts of many members of a party; but they, for the sake of the party, must be silent or even take their places on platforms and write in periodicals defending what in their souls and consciences they know to be wrong. The modern Baal-Berith is a tyrannical god, ruins the morals of many a worshipper and destroys the peace of many a circle. Perhaps Christian people will by and by become careful in regard to the schemes they join and the zeal with which they fling themselves into party strife. It is high time they did. Even distinguished and pious leaders are unsafe guides when popular cries have to be gratified; and if the principles of Christianity are set aside by a government every Christian church and every Christian voice should protest, come of parties what may. Or rather, the party of Christ, which is always in the van, ought to have our complete allegiance. Conservatism is sometimes right.
Liberalism is sometimes right. But to bow down to any Baal of the League is a shameful thing for a professed servant of the King of kings.
Against Abimelech the adventurer there arose another of the same stamp, Gaul son of Ebed, that is the Abhorred, son of a slave. In him the men of Shechem put their confidence, such as it was. At the festival of vintage there was a demonstration of a truly barbarous sort. High carousal was held in the temple of Baal. There were loud curses of Abimelech and Gaal made a speech. His argument was that this Abimelech, though his mother belonged to Shechem, was yet also the son of Baals adversary, far too much of a Hebrew to govern Canaanites and good servants of Baal. Shechemites should have a true Shechemite to rule them. Would to Baal, he cried, this people were under my hand, then would I remove Abimelech. His speech, no doubt, was received with great applause, and there and then he challenged the absent king.
Zebul, prefect of the city, who was present, heard all this with anger. He was of Abimelechs party still and immediately informed his chief, who lost no time in marching on Shechem to suppress the revolt. According to a common plan of warfare he divided his troops into four companies and in the early morning these crept towards the city, one by a track across the mountains, another down the valley from the west, the third by way of the Diviners Oak, the fourth perhaps marching from the plain of Mamre by way of Jacobs well. The first engagement drove the Shechemites into their city, and on the following day the place was taken, sacked, and destroyed. Some distance from Shechem, probably up the valley to the west, stood a tower or sanctuary of Baal around which a considerable village had gathered. The people there seeing the fate of the lower town, betook themselves to the tower and shut themselves up within it. But Abimelech ordered his men to provide themselves with branches of trees, which were piled against the door of the temple and set on fire, and all within were smothered or burned to the number of a thousand.
At Thebez, another of the confederate cities, the pretender met his death. In the siege of the tower which stood within the walls of Thebez the horrible expedient of burning was again attempted. Abimelech, directing the operations, had pressed close to the door when a woman cast an upper millstone from the parapet with so true an aim as to break his skull. So ended the first experiment in the direction of monarchy; so also God requited the wickedness of Abimelech.
One turns from these scenes of bloodshed and cruelty with loathing. Yet they show what human nature is, and how human history would shape itself apart from the faith and obedience of God. We are met by obvious warnings; but so often does the evidence of divine judgment seem to fail, so often do the wicked prosper, that it is from another source than observation of the order of things in this world we must obtain the necessary impulse to higher life. It is only as we wait on the guidance and obey the impulses of the Spirit of God that we shall move towards the justice and brotherhood of a better age. And those who have received the light and found the will of the Spirit must not slacken their efforts on behalf of religion. Gideon did good service in his day, yet failing in faithfulness he left the nation scarcely more earnest, his own family scarcely instructed. Let us not think that religion can take care of itself. Heavenly justice and truth are committed to us. The Christ life, generous, pure, holy, must be commended by us if it is to rule the world. The persuasion that mankind is to be saved in and by the earthly survives, and against that most obstinate of all delusions we are to stand in constant resolute protest, counting every needful sacrifice our simple duty, our highest glory. The task of the faithful is no easier today than it was a thousand years ago. Men and women cart be treacherous still with heathen cruelty and falseness; they can be vile still with heathen vileness, though wearing the air of the highest civilisation. If ever the people of God had a work to do in the world they have it now.
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles