Ch. 1Sa 11:1-11<\/span>. Saul’s victory over the Ammonites<\/p>\n 1<\/strong>. Then<\/em> ] Simply And.<\/strong> There is nothing in the Hebrew text to mark whether the interval was long or short. The Sept. however omits the words “But he held his peace” at the close of ch. 10, and begins this chapter “And it came to pass after about a month that Nahash, &c.” This rendering represents a very slight variation in the consonants of the Hebrew text, and possibly preserves the original reading. At any rate we may gather from ch. 1Sa 12:12<\/span> that an Ammonite attack was threatened before Saul’s election, and probably the actual invasion took place not long after.<\/p>\n Nahash<\/em> ] The king of the Ammonites (ch. 1Sa 12:12<\/span>). This Nahash can hardly have been the Nahash who “shewed kindness to David” during his wanderings (2Sa 10:2<\/span>), but probably his father or grandfather. According to Josephus he was slain in the battle.<\/p>\n the Ammonite<\/em> ] South and East of the Israelite settlements on the Eastern side of the Jordan dwelt the powerful tribes of the Ammonites and Moabites. The limits of their respective territories cannot be exactly defined, but the Ammonites appear to have lived north and the Moabites south of the Arnon. The Ammonites were a fierce marauding tribe: the Moabites a settled and civilised nation. United by the tie of common descent from Lot, they were generally in alliance against Israel. Twice during the period of the Judges they “oppressed Israel” (Jdg 3:12-14<\/span>; Jdg 10:11<\/span>), and even crossed the Jordan and occupied Jericho (1Sa 3:13<\/span>, 1Sa 10:9<\/span>). After their defeat by Jephthah, the Ammonites are not mentioned until the present occasion. During the early part of David’s reign they were on friendly terms with him, but the studied insult offered by Hanun to his ambassadors (2Sa 10:1<\/span> ff.) led to a war which resulted in the capture of their metropolis Rabbah (2Sa 12:26<\/span>). In the reign of Jehoshaphat they once more invaded Judah in conjunction with the Moabites (2 Chronicles 20<\/span>), but were signally defeated, and became tributary to Uzziah and Jotham (2Ch 26:8<\/span>; 2Ch 27:5<\/span>). Even after the Return their old hostility survived (Neh 4:7-8<\/span>). Judas Maccabaeus found them “a mighty power,” and “fought many battles with them until at length they were discomfited before him” ( 1Ma 5:6-7 ).<\/p>\n Jabesh-Gilead<\/em> ] i.e. Jabesh in Gilead<\/em>, the extensive district lying immediately E. of the Jordan between Bashan on the N. and Moab and Ammon on the S. and S. E. To the southern portion of this district the Ammonites laid claim (Jdg 11:13<\/span>). A terrible vengeance had been executed on Jabesh for its neglect to join the levy of Israel in the war against Benjamin (Jdg 21:8<\/span> ff.), but from this blow it had recovered, and Nahash now attacked it as the capital of Gilead, and the key to the possession of the country. The name of Jabesh still survives in the Wady Ybis<\/em>, which runs down into the Jordan valley a few miles below Beth-shan. It is a lovely valley, full of straggling old olives, patches of barley, and rich pasture. Tristram’s Land of Israel<\/em>, p. 556.<\/p>\n Nahash was king of the children of Ammon, as appears from 1Sa 12:12<\/span>. He seems to have been connected with the family of David, since Abigail, Davids sister, was the daughter (perhaps granddaughter) of Nahash 2Sa 17:25<\/span>; 1Ch 2:16-17<\/span>; and, perhaps, in consequence of this connection, he and his family were very friendly to David 2Sa 17:27<\/span>.<\/P> Jabesh-Gilead must have been re-populated after its destruction (see marginal reference). The Ammonites and Moabites resented the possession of Gilead by the Israelites Jdg 10:6-18<\/span>; 11<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n 1Sa 11:1-11<\/span><\/p>\n Then Nahash the Ammonite came up.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n The immediate consequences of a national rejection of God<\/strong><\/p>\n In the opening verses of this chapter we see the result of disobedience. Instead of happiness for Israel; we fear that the invasion of which we now read, is but too prophetic of those awful retributions which Samuel declared should come upon their wilful rejection of the Divine Being. We take these words as illustrative of the consequences of a national rejection of God.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>They were enemies of long standing. It was a deep seated hatred that time had almost rendered chronic. It is easy to settle the dispute of yesterday, but when years have passed they make the breach almost impassable. Thus God rendered dark the hops of Israel through enemies of the longest standing and the most dreaded.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> Would be bitter enemies.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> Would be despotic enemies.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>They were enemies that had been previously defeated. They had been most severely routed by Jephthah. The relatives, friends, and companions of these warriors now threatening Israel with invasion were slain in that conflict. Truly, Israel had need to fear such a foe.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>These enemies were most opportune in their attack upon Israel.<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> As regards the place. It was near to their own country, and was also extremely weak.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> As regards the time of this threatened invasion. Israel was in a most unsettled condition. The people were in a transition state, just changing an old form of government for a new one, consequently were very much occupied with their own affairs. There were new arrangements to make adapted to the changed condition of things. All the strength, skill, and time that the nation could command was required to be expended upon itself, to give it permanency, and to give freedom from civil faction. Hence the Israelites were totally unprepared for woe, and especially with so powerful a foe.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>These people are about to degrade the noble achievements of their ancestors. And this is a true characteristic of a nation that has rejected God. When they have rejected Him, the next thing to do is to throw away all the sacred memories of the past, and to nullify their meaning.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>These people are far more careful about their own comfort than the memories of their past history. They would a great deal rather undo the achievements of their ancestors than lose their own eyes.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>These people were willing to degrade themselves by the breaking of a Divine Law. They wanted to make a covenant with the Ammonites, which bad been strictly forbidden by God. This is just what we might have expected. It is only natural that, after they had dethroned the Divine Being, they should infringe His law.<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>These people are degraded by doubting the bravery of their country. When citizens lose confidence in their defenders it is a sure sign that elements of weakness are mining the society prejudicial to its welfare. May we never lose faith in the heroism of our country!<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>As a reminder. To make the Israelites very careful in their revolution, and to give them to feel that although they had got a king, he could not remove them from the touch, nor could he shelter them from the displeasure of God.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>As a prognostication. That notwithstanding their rejoicing at the public recognition of the new king, the future history of the nation could not be altogether smooth and glad. It was the calm before the tempest, and the invasion by the Ammonites was the first peal of thunder announcing the nearing storm. Lessons–<\/p>\n (1)<\/strong> For a nation to reject God is for it, truly to forsake its best welfare–political, social, and moral.<\/p>\n (2)<\/strong> That a nation rejecting God is sure to meet with numerous difficulties.<\/p>\n (3)<\/strong> That a nation by rejecting God introduces into its history the true element of its ruin.<\/p>\n (4)<\/strong> This national destruction or sorrow may be delayed, but it is certain. (Joseph S. Exell, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The relic of Jabesh-Gilead<\/strong><\/p>\n Primitive though the state of society was in those days in Israel, we are hardly prepared to find Saul following the herd in the field after his election as king of Israel. We are compelled to conclude that the opposition to him was far from contemptible in number and in influence, and that he found it expedient in the meantime to make no demonstration of royalty, but continue his old way of life. Human life was of so little value in those Eastern countries, and the crime of destroying it was so little thought of, that if Saul had in any way provoked hostility, he would have been almost certain to fall by some assassins hand. It was therefore wise of him to continue for a time his old way of living, and wait for some opportunity which should arise providentially, to vindicate his title to the sceptre of Israel. Apparently he bad not to wait long–according to Josephus, only a month. The opportunity arose in a somewhat out-of-the-way part of the country, where disturbance had been brewing previous to his election (1Sa 12:12<\/span>). Very probably the Ammonites had never forgotten the humiliation inflicted on them by Jepthah, when he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and till thou come to the plain of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter. Naturally the Ammonites would be desirous both to avenge these defeats and to regain their cities, or at least to get other cities in lieu of what they had lost. The history of the Israelites in time of danger commonly presents one or other of two extremes: either pusillanimous submission, or daring defiance to the hostile power. In this case it was pusillanimous submission, as indeed it commonly was when the people followed the motions of their own hearts, and were not electrified into opposition by some great hero, full of faith in God. But it was not mere cowardice they displayed in offering to become the servants of the Ammonites; there was impiety in it likewise. For of their relation to God they made no account whateverse By covenant with their fathers, ratified from generation to generation, they were Gods servants, and they had no right voluntarily to transfer to another master the allegiance which was due to God alone. And it was not a case of necessity. Instead of humbling themselves before God and confessing the sins that had brought them into trouble, they put God altogether aside, and basely offered to become the servants of the Ammonites. How often do men virtually say to the devil, Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee! Men and women, with strong proclivities to sin, may for a time resist, but they get tired of the battle; they long for an easier life, and they say in their hearts, We will resist no longer; we will become your servants. They are willing to make peace with the Ammonites, because they are wearied of fighting. Anything for a quiet life! They surrender to the enemy, they are willing to serve sin, because they will not surrender the ease and the pleasures of sin. But sin is a bad master; his wages are terrible to think of. The terms which Nahash offered to the men of Jabesh-Gilead combined insult to injury. On this condition will I make a covenant with thee: that I, may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it for a reproach unto all Israel. The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. But Nahash was comparatively merciful. He was willing to let the men of Jabesh off with the loss of one eye only. But as if to compensate for this forbearance, be declared that he would regard the transaction as a reproach upon all Israel. All the people lifted up their voices and wept. It was just the way in which their forefathers had acted at the Red Sea; and again, it was the way in which they spent that night in the wilderness after the spies brought back their report of the land. But, as in the two earlier cases, there was a man of faith to roll back the wave of panic. As we are thinking how well Saul has acted on this occasion, we perceive that an old friend has come on the scene who helps us materially to understand the situation. Yes, he is all the better of Samuels guidance and prayers. The good old prophet has no jealousy of the man who took his place at the bead of the nation. But knowing well the fickleness of the people, he is anxious to turn the occasion to account for confirming their feelings and their sins. Seeing how the king has acknowledged God as the Author of the victory, he desires to strike while the iron is hot. Come, he says, let us go to Gilgal, and renew the kingdom there. <\/em>(W. G. Blaikie, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Practical royalty<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>It is often true in life that circumstances drive us to make approaches which are not congenial. Men are driven by stress of health or poverty, or some form of perplexity not easily to be named in words, to offer to nut themselves into relations with people whom under other circumstances they would never treat with. Such facts in life we are bound to recognise. And it would betoken a poor quality of nature on our part to associate with such recognitions too severe a moral condemnation. Our common proverb is to the effect that adversity has strange bedfellows. The men of Jabesh-Gilead, therefore, must be regarded as persons who are under oppressive circumstances, and who are willing to make the best of conditions which are very galling and humiliating.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>No language is too severe to condemn the barbarous cruelty of Nahash; at the same time he only shows what we might be under circumstances of equal temptation and pressure. When we see how man can treat man, we are enabled to reason upwards, and to see how possible it is for man to treat God profanely and blasphemously. When man loves God he loves his neighbour also; but when man ceases to love his neighbour, and then passes from mere displeasure to positive and cruel hatred, it is easy for him to carry the spirit of hostility further and to include in its base action even all that is heavenly and Divine. The moment we can treat a man unjustly and cruelly we have disqualified ourselves for true prayer and real communion with Heaven. Let there be no mistake about this matter. We cannot give up our philanthropy and retain our Christianity.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>Saul was engaged in his usual pursuits. The King of Israel was actually discharging offices with the herd in the field, attending to the wants of his cattle, and otherwise going about his business soberly and quietly. No intimation of unusual circumstances seems to have reached him. How unconscious we sometimes are of the circumstances which are nearest to us–unconscious, that is to say, of their real import and deepest meaning! When we think all is proceeding as usual we may be within touch of some occurrence that will determine all the remaining actions of our life The commonplace and the marvellous often lie closely together. The picture, then, is that of a great man attending to simple daily duties, and it will be a sad day for any people who imagine that simple daily duties are not worthy of the dignity even of the greatest man. Society has a right to expect great things from great men. No greater tribute could be paid to Saul than that; threatened and despairing men should appeal to him in the time of their agony. The men who shouted, God save the king, did not pay Saul so fine a tribute as the men who came to him in their extremity and asked for his sympathy and assistance. No sooner had Saul heard the condition proposed by the King of Ammon than he burned with anger. We can best describe a certain quality of anger by tracing it to the direct action of the Spirit of God. Truly, there is a holy indignation. The sublime enthusiasm of Saul kindled the faith of the people. A modern commentary, referring to this passage, has the following illustrative remarks:–It was owing to some influence of a similar nature that, with scanty numbers, ill-armed, and ill-trained, the Swiss won for their land centuries of freedom on memorable fields like Laupen and Morat, though the proudest chivalry of Europe was arrayed against them. It was the same spirit which impelled the peace-loving traders of the marshes of Holland to rise as one man, and to drive out forever from their loved strip of Fenland the hitherto invincible armies of Spain. No oppressor, though backed by the wealth and power of an empire, has over been able to resist the smallest people in whose heart has burned the flame of the Divine fire of the fear of the Lord All these circumstances would be of little or no concern to us if they did not point to a great spiritual reality. Tremendous foes besiege us on every side. What is our defence in such time of assault? It is the fear of the Lord, the Spirit of God, the Divine energy. God delights in humbling the boastful and vainglorious He that exalteth himself shall be abased. Presumption is always self-defeating; it is so in business, in war, in statesmanship, and in every act and department of rational life.<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>Notice that this was not entered upon without preparation. There was no rush or haste in the matter. Sometimes we proceed most swiftly when we seem to advance most slowly. There should be a time for gathering strength together, measuring the situation in all its dimensions, consulting Divine decrees, and putting the soul into right relations with God. After such preparation everything will go rapidly. Every stroke will be a victory.<\/p>\n 5. <\/strong>A fit ending to a tragical process Gilgal was a sanctuary. After great doings on the field of battle we must return to the house of prayer, we must, indeed, return to the place where we began. We should enter upon no conflict until after we have been in the sanctuary, and having completed the conflict we should return to the altar. Enter upon nothing that cannot be sanctified at holy places and by holy names. There is nothing too insignificant to be associated with the most solemn acts of worship; or if we are conscious of such insignificance, we should not undertake the affairs which admit of its application. Learn the useful lesson that Saul did not thrust himself into prominence, and that even after he was appointed king of Israel he went about his usual avocations until there was something worthy of kingliness to be publicly done. Let us be rebuked in so far as we have supposed that we were released from duty until some great and critical occasion arose. Having obtained our literary prize, let us go home and take up the business of life in a quiet way. Do not think that anything which nature or society requires at us is below our dignity because we have achieved this or that popular success. (J. Parker, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n CHAPTER XI <\/P> Nahash, king of the Ammonites, besieges Jabesh-gilead; and<\/I><\/P> proposes to its inhabitants the most degrading conditions of<\/I><\/P> peace<\/I>, 1, 2.<\/P> They apply to their brethren for help<\/I>, 3, 4.<\/P> Saul hears of their distress; takes a yoke of oxen, hews them<\/I><\/P> in pieces, and sends them throughout the coasts of Israel, with<\/I><\/P> the threat that all who did not come to his standard should<\/I><\/P> have his cattle served in like manner; in consequence of which<\/I><\/P> he is soon at the head of an army of<\/I> three hundred and thirty<\/P> thousand men<\/I>, 5-8.<\/P> He sends to Jabesh-gilead, and promises help<\/I>, 9, 10.<\/P> Saul attacks the Ammonites next morning, and gives them a total<\/I><\/P> overthrow<\/I>, 11.<\/P> The people are greatly encouraged, and propose to put to death<\/I><\/P> those who are opposed to Saul’s government: but this he<\/I><\/P> prevents<\/I>, 12, 13.<\/P> Samuel leads the people to Gilgal: they offer sacrifices, and<\/I><\/P> renew the kingdom to Saul<\/I>, 14, 15. <\/P> NOTES ON CHAP. XI<\/P> <\/P> Verse 1<\/span>. Nahash the Ammonite<\/B><\/I>] In the Vulgate<\/I> this chapter begins thus: Et factum est quasi post mensem<\/I>, “And it came to pass about a month after.” This addition appears also in the principal copies of the Septuagint<\/I>; though it is wanting in the Complutensian edition, both in the Greek<\/I> and Latin<\/I>, and is not acknowledged by any of the Oriental versions<\/I>. But it is in Josephus<\/I>, and probably was inserted from him into some copies of the Septuagint<\/I>, and thence into the Vulgate<\/I>. It appears to be of very little authority.<\/P> <\/P> We know little about Nahash<\/I>; there was a king of this name among the Ammonites in the time of David, 2Sa 10:2<\/span>, but probably not the same person. Nahash<\/I> might have been a common name of the Ammonitish kings.<\/P> <\/P> Make a covenant with us<\/B><\/I>] They found they were in no condition to risk a war; and they wish to have peace, and desire to know his conditions.<\/P><\/p>\n Then, <\/B>i.e. about that time; this particle being used in some latitude, as is frequent; for that this happened before, and was the occasion of their desire of a king, may seem from 1Sa 12:12<\/span>; although it is possible that Nahashs preparation, and declared intention of warring against them, might cause that desire, and that Nahash did not actually come against them (which is here related) till their king was chosen. <\/P> Nahash the Ammonite; <\/B>either the same with him, 2Sa 10:2<\/span>, or his father and predecessor. <\/P> Came up<\/B> to war, probably to revenge and to recover their former great loss by Jephthah, Jdg 11:33<\/span>. Jabesh-gilead<\/I> was beyond Jordan, and near the Ammonites, who dwelt in part of Arabia. <\/P> Make a covenant with us, <\/B>to wit, upon good conditions, so as we shall enjoy our religion and properties. <\/P> We will serve thee; <\/B>in other things we will be thy subjects and tributaries. The occasion of this offer was, that they saw no likelihood of relief from their brethren the Israelites in Canaan, who were remote from them, and then weak and divided, and scarce able to defend themselves from the Philistines. <\/P> <\/p>\n 1. Then Nahash the Ammonite cameup<\/B>Nahash (“serpent”); (see Jud8:3<\/span>). The Ammonites had long claimed the right of originalpossession in Gilead. Though repressed by Jephthah (Jud11:33<\/span>), they now, after ninety years, renew their pretensions;and it was the report of their threatened invasion that hastened theappointment of a king (1Sa 12:12<\/span>).<\/P> Make a covenant with us, andwe will serve thee<\/B>They saw no prospect of aid from the westernIsraelites, who were not only remote, but scarcely able to repel theincursions of the Philistines from themselves.<\/P><\/p>\n Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabeshgilead<\/strong>,…. A month after, as in the Septuagint and Vulgate Latin versions, that is, a month after Saul was chosen king; so Josephus p: this prince was preparing for war against Israel before, which they hearing of, requested they might have a king to go before them in battle, 1Sa 12:12<\/span> but now he actually marched from his own country, and besieged Jabeshgilead, a city in the land of Gilead, from whence it had its name, and lay in the half tribe of Manasseh, on the other side Jordan, see Jud 21:8<\/span>. It lay near to the Ammonites, and was part of the country they laid claim to in the times of Jephthah, which they now renewed, and attempted to gain it by force. This Nahash was king of the Ammonites, as he is called in the Targum, and by Josephus q, and so in the Arabic version, see<\/p>\n 1Sa 12:12<\/span><\/p>\n and all the men of Jabeshgilead said unto Nahash, make a covenant with us<\/strong>; they desired to be his allies and confederates, live in peace and friendship with him, and enjoy their religion and liberties on certain conditions they were willing to come into; and this was the sense of them all, or at least the greatest part, which showed a mean and abject spirit in them, to make no defence of themselves, but as soon as besieged to move for a capitulation. This doubtless arose from a sense of their weakness, not being able to hold it out long, and from an apprehension that their brethren the Israelites, on the other side Jordan, could give them no assistance, being in an unsettled condition, having chosen a king, and he scarcely on the throne, and the Philistines having great power over them:<\/p>\n and we will serve thee<\/strong>; not as slaves, but as tributaries; they were willing to pay a yearly tax to him.<\/p>\n p Antiqu. l. 6. c. 5. sect. 1. q Ibid.<\/p>\n Saul’s Victory over the Ammonites. – Even after the election by lot at Mizpeh, Saul did not seize upon the reins of government at once, but returned to his father’s house in Gibeah, and to his former agricultural occupation; not, however, merely from personal humility and want of ambition, but rather from a correct estimate of the circumstances. The monarchy was something so new in Israel, that the king could not expect a general and voluntary recognition of his regal dignity and authority, especially after the conduct of the worthless people mentioned in 1Sa 10:27<\/span>, until he had answered their expectations from a king (1Sa 8:6<\/span>, 1Sa 8:20<\/span>), and proved himself a deliverer of Israel from its foes by a victorious campaign. But as Jehovah had chosen him ruler over his people without any seeking on his part, he would wait for higher instructions to act, before he entered upon the government. The opportunity was soon given him.<\/p>\n 1Sa 11:1-5<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Nahash, the king of the Ammonites (cf. 1Sa 12:12<\/span>; 2Sa 10:2<\/span>), attacked the tribes on the east of the Jordan, no doubt with the intention of enforcing the claim to part of Gilead asserted by his ancestor in the time of Jephthah (Jdg 11:13<\/span>), and besieged Jabesh<\/em> in Gilead,<\/p>\n ( Note: The time of this campaign is not mentioned in the Hebrew text. But it is very evident from 1Sa 12:12<\/span>, where the Israelites are said to have desired a king, when they saw that Nahash had come against them, that Nahash had invaded Gilead before the election of Saul as king. The Septuagint, however, renders the words (1Sa 10:27<\/span>) by , and therefore the translators must have read , which Ewald<\/em> and Thenius would adopt as an emendation of the Hebrew text. But all the other ancient versions give the Masoretic text, viz., not only the Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, but even Jerome<\/em>, who renders it ille vero dissimulabat se audire <\/em>. It is true that in our present Vulgate text these words are followed by et factum est quasi post mensem; <\/em> but this addition has no doubt crept in from the Itala. With the general character of the Septuagint, the rendering of by is no conclusive proof that the word in their Hebrew Codex was ; it simply shows that this was the interpretation which they gave to . And Josephus (vi. 5, 1), who is also appealed to, simply establishes the fact that stood in the Sept.<\/em> version of his day, since he made use of this version and not of the original text. Moreover, we cannot say with Ewald<\/em>, that this was the last place in which the time could be overlooked; for it is perfectly evident that Nahash commenced the siege of Jabesh shortly after the election of Saul at Mizpeh, as we may infer from the verb , when taken in connection with the fact implied in 1Sa 12:12<\/span>, that he had commenced the war with the Israelites before this. And lastly, it is much more probable that the lxx changed into , than that the Hebrew readers of the Old Testament should have altered into , without defining the time more precisely by , or some other number.)<\/p>\n – according to Josephus the metropolis of Gilead, and probably situated by the Wady Jabes (see at Jdg 21:8<\/span>); from which we may see that he must have penetrated very far into the territory of the Israelites. The inhabitants of Jabesh petitioned the Ammonites in their distress, “ Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee<\/em>;” i.e., grant us favourable terms, and we will submit.<\/p>\n 1Sa 11:2<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> But Nahash replied, “ On this condition<\/em> ( , lit. at this price, pretii) will I make a covenant with you, that I may put out all your right eyes, and so bring a reproach upon all Israel<\/em>.” From the fact that the infinitive is continued with , it is evident that the subject to is Nahash, and not the Israelites, as the Syriac, Arabic, and others have rendered it. The suffix to is neuter, and refers to the previous clause: “it,” i.e., the putting out of the right eye. This answer on the part of Nahash shows unmistakeably that he sought to avenge upon the people of Israel the shame of the defeat which Jephthah had inflicted upon the Ammonites.<\/p>\n 1Sa 11:3-4<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> The elders of Jabesh replied: “ Leave us seven days, that we may send messengers into all the territory of Israel; and if there is no one who saves us, we will come out to thee<\/em>,” i.e., will surrender to thee. This request was granted by Nahash, because he was not in a condition to take the town at once by storm, and also probably because, in the state of internal dissolution into which Israel had fallen at that time, he had no expectation that any vigorous help would come to the inhabitants of Jabesh. From the fact that the messengers were to be sent into all the territory of Israel, we may conclude that the Israelites had no central government at that time, and that neither Nahash nor the Jabeshites had heard anything of the election that had taken place; and this is still more apparent from the fact that, according to 1Sa 11:4<\/span>, their messengers came to Gibeah of Saul, and laid their business before the people generally, without applying at once to Saul.<\/p>\n 1Sa 11:5<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Saul indeed did not hear of the matter will he came (returned home) from the field behind the oxen, and found the people weeping and lamenting at these mournful tidings. “ Behind the oxen<\/em>,” i.e., judging from the expression “yoke of oxen” in 1Sa 11:7<\/span>, the pair of oxen with which he had been ploughing.<\/p>\n Extremity of Jabesh-Gilead.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD> B. C.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> 1069.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE> 1 Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabesh-gilead: and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash, Make a covenant with us, and we will serve thee. 2 And Nahash the Ammonite answered them, On this condition<\/I> will I make a covenant<\/I> with you, that I may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it for<\/I> a reproach upon all Israel. 3 And the elders of Jabesh said unto him, Give us seven days’ respite, that we may send messengers unto all the coasts of Israel: and then, if there be<\/I> no man to save us, we will come out to thee. 4 Then came the messengers to Gibeah of Saul, and told the tidings in the ears of the people: and all the people lifted up their voices, and wept.<\/P> The Ammonites were bad neighbours to those tribes of Israel that lay next them, though descendants from just Lot, and, for that reason, dealt civilly with by Israel. See Deut. ii. 19<\/span>. Jephthah, in his time, had humbled them, but now the sin of Israel had put them into a capacity to make head again, and avenge that quarrel. The city of Jabesh-Gilead had been, some ages ago, destroyed by Israel’s sword of justice, for not appearing against the wickedness of Gibeah (Judges xxi. 10<\/span>); and now being replenished again, probably by the posterity of those that then escaped the sword, it is in danger of being destroyed by the Ammonites, as if some bad fate attended the place. Nahash, king of Ammon (1 Chron. xix. 1<\/span>) laid siege to it. Now here,<\/P> I. The besieged beat a parley (v.<\/I><\/span> 1<\/span>): “Make a covenant with us, and we will<\/I> surrender upon terms, and serve thee.<\/I>” They had lost the virtue of Israelites, else they would not have thus lost the valour of Israelites, nor tamely yielded to serve an Ammonite, without one bold struggle for themselves. Had they not broken their covenant with God, and forsaken his service, they needed not thus to have courted a covenant with a Gentile nation, and offered themselves to serve them.<\/P> II. The besiegers offer them base and barbarous conditions; they will spare their lives, and take them to be their servants, upon condition that they shall put out their right eyes,<\/I> v.<\/span> 2<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. The Gileadites were content to part with their liberty and estates for the ransom of their blood; and, had the Ammonites taken them at their word, the matter would have been so settled immediately, and the Gileadites would not have sent out for relief. But their abject concessions make the Ammonites more insolent in their demands, and they cannot be content to have them for their servants, but, 1. They must torment them, and put them to pain, exquisite pain, for so the thrusting out of an eye would do. 2. They must disable them for war, and render them incapable, though not of labour (that would have been a loss to their lords), yet of bearing arms; for in those times they fought with shields in their left hands, which covered their left eye, so that a soldier without his right eye was in effect blind. 3. They must put a reproach upon all Israel,<\/I> as weak and cowardly, that would suffer the inhabitants of one of their chief cities to be thus miserably used, and not offer to rescue them.<\/P> III. The besieged desire, and obtain, seven days’ time to consider of this proposal, v.<\/I><\/span> 3<\/span>. If Nahash had not granted them this respite, we may suppose the horror of the proposal would have made them desperate, and they would rather have died with their swords in their hands than have surrendered to such merciless enemies: therefore Nahash, not imagining it possible that, in so short a time, they should have relief, and being very secure of the advantages he thought he had against them, in a bravado gave them seven days, that the reproach upon Israel, for not rescuing them, might be the greater, and his triumphs the more illustrious. But there was a providence in it, that his security might be his infatuation and ruin.<\/P> IV. Notice is sent of this to Gibeah. They said they would send messengers to all the coasts of Israel<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 3<\/span>), which made Nahash the more secure, for that, he thought, would be a work of time, and none would be forward to appear if they had not one common head; and perhaps Nahash had not yet heard of the new-elected king. But the messengers, either of their own accord or by order from their masters, went straight to Gibeah, and, not finding Saul within, told their news to the people, who fell a weeping upon hearing it, v.<\/I><\/span> 4<\/span>. They would sooner lament their brethren’s misery and danger than think of helping them, shed their tears for them than shed their blood. They wept, as despairing to help the men of Jabesh-Gilead, and fearing lest, if that frontier-city should be lost, the enemy would penetrate into the very bowels of their country, which now appeared in great hazard.<\/P> <\/p>\n First Samuel – Chapter 11<\/strong><\/p>\n Proposal of Nahash, vs. 1-3<\/em><\/p>\n At some time soon after the anointing of Saul <\/em>as king over Israel the Ammonites, who lived east of the two and a half tribes across the Jordan, invaded the tribe of Gad, or Gilead as it was being called. These people had been enemies of Israel before. They were descendants of Lot by his younger daughter (Gen 19:30-38<\/span>). They had been decisively beaten by Israel during the days of the judges, when they had invaded the land. It was then that Jephthah was raised up to lead Israel, and under his judgeship they were totally vanquished (Judges, chap. 11). Now they were back, threatening the eastern tribes again, and this time there was no Jephthah to come to their rescue.<\/em><\/p>\n Nahash was the king of the Ammonites. <\/em>His name means “serpent,” and some have found significance in this. His siege of Jabesh and evil proposal have been made analogous to the attacks of Satan and his maiming influence on those who do not resist him. Yet, Nahash was a kind of sporting fellow. When the Israelites offered to become subservient to him he agreed only upon their subjection to have the right eye of all the men of Jabesh punched out. It would be a reproach to Israel, for it would say that they were still disunited, lacking concern for one another, so that a whole city’s men were made one eyed because their brethren would not help them.<\/em><\/p>\n The Jabeshites agreed to his proposal if Nahash would allow them seven days in which to seek help, and if unsuccessful, they would submit to this cruelty. Nahash sportingly agreed, for if, as he probably thought likely, no Israelite help was forthcoming it would make the reproach even more shameful.<\/p>\n CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES.<\/strong><\/p>\n 1Sa. 11:1<\/span>. Nahash.<\/strong> He was king of the children of Ammon, as appears from 1Sa. 12:12<\/span>; 2Sa. 10:1-2<\/span>; 2Sa. 17:27<\/span>. He seems to have been connected with the family of David, since Abigail, Davids sister, was the daughter (perhaps meaning grand-daughter<\/em>), of Nahash (2Sa. 17:25<\/span>; 1Ch. 2:16-17<\/span>), and perhaps, in consequence of this connection, was very friendly to David. Even after the destructive war with his son Harun, in which Uriah fell, and when David was in flight and banishment, we find another son of Nahash, Shobi, showing him marked kindness, (Biblical Dictionary.)<\/em> According to 1Sa. 12:12<\/span>, the threatening war with the Ammonites was the immediate occasion of the demand for a king. Naturally therefore, Nahash, having before made his preparations, entered the Israelitish territory soon after the king was chosen and confirmed. (Erdmann.)<\/em> Jabesh-Gilead.<\/strong> According to Josephus<\/em>, this city was the capital of Gilead, and was probably on the site of the present ruins of El-Deir, on the south side of the Wady Jabis, not far to the north of Helaweh, near the ancient road that leads to Beisan. The Ammonites had long claimed the right to the possession of Gilead, and had been subdued by Jephthah.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 11:2<\/span>. On this condition, etc<\/strong>. The left eye would be covered with the shield in battle: the right eye was needed for aiming the spear; they would therefore be no better than blind if they lost their right eye. (Wordsworth,)<\/em> Lay it for a reproach, etc.<\/strong> He sought to avenge upon the people of Israel the shame of the defeat which Jephthah had inflicted on the Ammonites. (Kiel.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 11:3<\/span>. If there is no one who saves us.<\/strong> The assumption of this as possible, and the fact that they sent to every region<\/em> of Israel, shows that in this transition-period from the Judges to the King-dom, in spite of what Samuel had done to inspire unity of action, the old division of powers in tribal isolation and the consequent weakness against enemies still continued. Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I. <\/strong>That when a nation rejects God it may very naturally expect to be troubled by enemies. There appears to have existed an old land quarrel between these two peoples, which had occasioned the battle just mentioned, and which at this time they strive to revenge and recoverse In the light of this history we gather that–<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>That when a nation rejects God its degradation is certain to follow. Nahash assumes the weakness of the men of Jabesh-Gilead, and their consequent inability to defend themselves from his army. He therefore commences at once to propose the most painful and humiliating condition of peace. A condition indeed which would involve the whole nation in disgrace.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>These enemies and this degradation came immediately after the nation had rejected God in proclaiming the new king.<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n