Judges 3 commentary

As the Israelites were a type of the church on earth, they were not to be idle and slothful. The Lord was pleased to try them by the remains of the devoted nations they spared. Temptations and trials detect the wickedness of the hearts of sinners; and strengthen he graces of believers in their daily conflict with Satan, sin, and this evil world. They must live in this world, but they are not of it, and are forbidden to conform to it. This marks the difference between the followers of Christ and mere professors. The friendship of the world is more fatal than its enmity; the latter can only kill the body, but the former murders many precious souls.

The first judge was Othniel: even in Joshua's time Othniel began to be famous. Soon after Israel's settlement in Canaan their purity began to be corrupted, and their peace disturbed. But affliction makes those cry to God who before would scarcely speak to him. God returned in mercy to them for their deliverance. The Spirit of the Lord came upon Othniel. The Spirit of wisdom and courage to qualify him for the service, and the Spirit of power to excite him to it. He first judged Israel, reproved and reformed them, and then went to war. Let sin at home be conquered, that worst of enemies, then enemies abroad will be more easily dealt with. Thus let Christ be our Judge and Lawgiver, then he will save us.

When Israel sins again, God raises up a new oppressor. The Israelites did ill, and the Moabites did worse; yet because God punishes the sins of his own people in this world, Israel is weakened, and Moab strengthened against them. If lesser troubles do not do the work, God will send greater. When Israel prays again, God raises up Ehud. As a judge, or minister of Divine justice, Ehud put to death Eglon, the king of Moab, and thus executed the judgments of God upon him as an enemy to God and Israel. But the law of being subject to principalities and powers in all things lawful, is the rule of our conduct. No such commissions are now given; to pretend to them is to blaspheme God. Notice Ehud's address to Eglon. What message from God but a message of vengeance can a proud rebel expect? Such a message is contained in the word of God; his ministers are boldly to declare it, without fearing the frown, or respecting the persons of sinners. But, blessed be God, they have to deliver a message of mercy and of free salvation; the message of vengeance belongs only to those who neglect the offers of grace. The consequence of this victory was, that the land had rest eighty years. It was a great while for the land to rest; yet what is that to the saints' everlasting rest in the heavenly Canaan.

The side of the country which lay south-west, was infested by the Philistines. God raised up Shamgar to deliver them; having neither sword nor spear, he took an ox-goad, the instrument next at hand. God can make those serviceable to his glory and to his church's good, whose birth, education, and employment, are mean and obscure. It is no matter what the weapon is, if God directs and strengthens the arm. Often he works by unlikely means, that the excellency of the power may appear to be of God.

CHAPTER 3

Jud 3:1-4. Nations Left to Prove Israel.

1. these are the nations which the Lord left, to prove Israel--This was the special design of these nations being left, and it evinces the direct influence of the theocracy under which the Israelites were placed. These nations were left for a double purpose: in the first instance, to be instrumental, by their inroads, in promoting the moral and spiritual discipline of the Israelites; and also to subserve the design of making them acquainted with war, in order that the young, more especially, who were total strangers to it, might learn the use of weapons and the art of wielding them.

Jud 3:5-7. By Communion with These the Israelites Commit Idolatry.

5-7. the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites--The two peoples by degrees came to be on habits of intercourse. Reciprocal alliances were formed by marriage till the Israelites, relaxing the austerity of their principles, showed a growing conformity to the manners and worship of their idolatrous neighbors.

Jud 3:8-11. Othniel Delivers Israel.

8-11. sold them--that is, "delivered them"

into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim--or, Chushan, "the wicked." This name had been probably given him from his cruel and impious character.

served Chushan-rishathaim eight years--by the payment of a stipulated tribute yearly, the raising of which must have caused a great amount of labor and privation.

Jud 3:12-30. Ehud Slays Eglon.

12-14. the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord--The Israelites, deprived of the moral and political influences of Othniel, were not long in following their native bias to idolatry.

the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab--The reigning monarch's ambition was to recover that extensive portion of his ancient territory possessed by the Israelites. In conjunction with his neighbors, the Ammonites and the Amalekites, sworn enemies of Israel, he first subjected the eastern tribes; then crossing the Jordan, he made a sudden incursion on western Canaan, and in virtue of his conquests, erected fortifications in the territory adjoining Jericho [Josephus], to secure the frontier, and fixed his residence there. This oppressor was permitted, in the providence of God, to triumph for eighteen years.

15. Ehud the son of Gera--descended from Gera, one of Benjamin's sons (Ge 46:21).

left-handed--This peculiarity distinguished many in the Benjamite tribe (Jud 20:16). But the original word is rendered in some versions "both-handed," a view countenanced by 1Ch 12:2.

by him the children of Israel sent a present unto Eglon the king of Moab--the yearly tribute, which, according to Eastern fashion, would be borne with ostentatious ceremony and offered (Jud 3:18) by several messengers.

16. Ehud made him a dagger ... and he did gird it ... upon his right thigh--The sword was usually worn on the left side; so that Ehud's was the more likely to escape detection.

19. quarries--rather, "graven images" (De 7:25; Jr 8:19; 51:52); statues of Moabite idols, the sight of which kindled the patriotic zeal of Ehud to avenge this public insult to Israel on its author.

I have a secret errand unto thee, O king: who said, Keep silence--"Privacy"--a signal for all to withdraw.

20. a summer parlour--Hebrew, "chamber of cooling"--one of those retired edifices which Oriental grandees usually have in their gardens, and in which they repose during the heat of the day.

21-26. Ehud put forth his left hand--The whole circumstance of this daring act--the death of Eglon without a shriek, or noise--the locking of the doors--the carrying off the key--the calm, unhurried deportment of Ehud--show the strength of his confidence that he was doing God service.

27. he blew a trumpet in the mountain of Ephraim--summoned to arms the people of that mountainous region, which, adjoining the territory of Benjamin, had probably suffered most from the grievous oppression of the Moabites.

28. they went down after him, and took the fords--(See on Jos 2:7). With the view of preventing all escape to the Moabite coast, and by the slaughter of ten thousand men [Jud 3:29], Ehud rescued his country from a state of ignominious vassalage.

31. after him was Shamgar--No notice is given of the tribe or family of this judge; and from the Philistines being the enemy that roused him into public service, the suffering seems to have been local--confined to some of the western tribes.

slew ... six hundred men with an oxgoad--This instrument is eight feet long and about six inches in circumference. It is armed at the lesser end with a sharp prong for driving the cattle, and on the other with a small iron paddle for removing the clay which encumbers the plough in working. Such an instrument, wielded by a strong arm, would do no mean execution. We may suppose, however, for the notice is very fragmentary, that Shamgar was only the leader of a band of peasants, who by means of such implements of labor as they could lay hold of at the moment, achieved the heroic exploit recorded.

Now these are the nations - The nations left to prove the Israelites were the five lordships or satrapies of the Philistines, viz., Gath, Askelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gaza; the Sidonians, the Hivites of Lebanon, Baal-hermon, etc.; with the remains of the Canaanites, viz., the Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, and Jebusites. Those who were left to be proved were those Israelites that had not seen all the wars of Canaan.

That - Israel might know, to teach them war - This was another reason why the Canaanites were left in the land, that the Israelites might not forget military discipline, but habituate themselves to the use of arms, that they might always be able to defend themselves against their foes. Had they been faithful to God, they would have had no need of learning the art of war; but now arms became a sort of necessary substitute for that spiritual strength which had departed from them. Thus Gods in his judgments leaves one iniquitous nation to harass and torment another. Were all to turn to God, men need learn war no more.

To know whether they would hearken - This would be the consequence of the Canaanites being left among them: if they should be faithful to God, their enemies would not be able to enslave them; should they be rebellious, the Lord would abandon them to their foes.

And they took their daughters - They formed matrimonial alliances with those proscribed nations, served their idols, and thus became one with them in politics and religion.

Served Baalim and the groves - No groves were ever worshipped, but the deities who were supposed to be resident in them; and in many cases temples and altars were built in groves, and the superstition of consecrating groves and woods to the honor of the deities was a practice very usual with the ancients. Pliny assures us that trees, in old times, served for the temples of the gods. Tacitus reports this custom of the old Germans; Quintus Curtius, of the Indians; and Caesar, and our old writers, mention the same of the Druids in Britain. The Romans were admirers of this way of worship and therefore had their luci or groves in most parts of the city, dedicated to some deity. But it is very probable that the word אשרות asheroth which we translate groves, is a corruption of the word עשתרות ashtaroth, the moon or Venus, (see on Jdg 2:13 (note)), which only differs in the letters ע ת, from the former. Ashtaroth is read in this place by the Chaldee Targum, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Vulgate, and by one of Dr. Kennicott's MSS.

Chushan-rishathaim - Kushan, the wicked or impious; and so the word is rendered by the Chaldee Targum, the Syriac, and the Arabic, wherever it occurs in this chapter.

King of Mesopotamia - King of ארם נהרים Aram naharayim, "Syria of the two rivers;" translated Mesopotamia by the Septuagint and Vulgate. It was the district situated between the Tigris and Euphrates, called by the Arabian geographers Maverannaher, "the country beyond the river," it is now called Diarbek. See the note on Act 2:9.

Served Chushan - eight years - He overran their country, and forced them to pay a very heavy tribute.

Raised up - Othniel, the son of Kenaz - This noble Hebrew was of the tribe of Judah, and nephew and son-in-law to Caleb, whose praise stands without abatement in the sacred records. Othniel had already signalized his valor in taking Kirjath-sepher, which appears to have been a very hazardous exploit. By his natural valor, experience in war, and the peculiar influence of the Divine Spirit, he was well qualified to inspire his countrymen with courage, and to lead them successfully against their oppressors.

His hand prevailed - We are not told or what nature this war was, but it was most decisive; and the consequence was an undisturbed peace of forty years, during the whole life of Othniel. By the Spirit of the Lord coming upon him, the Chaldee understands the spirit of prophecy; others understand the spirit of fortitude and extraordinary courage, as opposed to the spirit of fear or faintness of heart; but as Othniel was judge, and had many offices to fulfill besides that of a general, he had need of the Spirit of God, in the proper sense of the word, to enable him to guide and govern this most refractory and fickle people; and his receiving it for these purposes, shows that the political state of the Jews was still a theocracy. No man attempted to do any thing in that state without the immediate inspiration of God, the pretension to which was always justified by the event.

The children of Israel did evil - They forgat the Lord and became idolaters, and God made those very people, whom they had imitated in their idolatrous worship, the means of their chastisement.

The Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab - The success he had against the Israelites was by the especial appointment and energy of God.

He not only abandoned the Israelites, but strengthened the Moabites against them. Eglon is supposed to have been the immediate successor of Balak. Some great men have borne names which, when reduced to their grammatical meaning, appear very ridiculous: the word עגלון Eglon signifies a little calf!

The city of palm trees - This the Targum renders the city of Jericho; but Jericho had been destroyed by Joshua, and certainly was not rebuilt till the reign of Ahab, long after this, 1Kgs 16:34. However, as Jericho is expressly called the city of palm trees, Deu 34:3, the city in question must have been in the vicinity or plain of Jericho, and the king of Moab had seized it as a frontier town contiguous to his own estates. Calmet supposes that the city of palm trees means En-gaddi.

Ehud the son of Gera - a man left handed - איש אטר יד ימינו ish itter yad yemino, a man lame in his right hand, and therefore obliged to use his left. The Septuagint render it ανδρα αμφοτεροδεξιον, an ambidexter, a man who could use both hands alike. The Vulgate, qui utraque manu pro dextera utebatur, a man who could use either hand as a right hand, or to whom right and left were equally ready. This is not the sense of the original, but it is the sense in which most interpreters understand it. It is well known that to be an ambidexter was in high repute among the ancients: Hector boasts of it: - Αυταρ εγων εν οιδα μαχας τ,ανδροκτασιας τε· Οιδ' επι δεξια, οιδ' επ' αριστερα νωμησαι βων Αζαλεην, το μοι εστι ταλαυρινον πολεμιζειν.

Iliad, lib. vii., ver. 237. "But am in arms well practiced; many a Greek

Hath bled by me, and I can shift my shield

From right to left; reserving to the last

Force that suffices for severest toil."

Cowper.

Asteropaeus is also represented by Homer as an ambidexter, from which he derives great advantages in fight: - Ὡς φατ' απειλησας· ὁ δ' ανεσχετο διος Αχιλλευς Πηλιαδα μελιην· ὁ δ' ὁμαρτη δουρασιν αμφις Ἡρως Αστεροπαιος, επει περιδεξιος ηε.

Iliad, lib. xxi., ver. 161.

So threatened he. Then raised Achilles high

The Pelian ash: - and his two spears at once

Alike, (a practiced warrior), with both hands

Asteropaeus hurled."

Cowper.

We are informed by Aristotle, that Plato recommended to all soldiers to acquire by study and exercise an equal facility of using both hands. Speaking of Plato, he says: Και την εν τοις πολεμικοισασκεσιν, ὁπως αμφιδεξιοι γινωνται κατα την μελετην, ὡς δεον μη την μεν χρησιμον ειναι ταιν χεροιν, την δε αχρηστον. - De Repub., lib. ii., cap. 12. "He (Plato) also made a law concerning their warlike exercises, that they should acquire a habit of using both hands alike; as it is not fit that one of the hands should be useful and the other useless." In Jdg 20:16 of this book we have an account of seven hundred men of Benjamin, each of whom was אטר יד ימינו itter yad yemino, lame of his right hand, and yet slinging stones to a hair's breadth without missing: these are generally thought to be ambidexters.

Sent a present unto Eglon - This is generally understood to be the tribute money which the king of Moab had imposed on the Israelites.

A dagger which had two edges, of a cubit length - The word גמד gomed, which we translate cubit, is of very doubtful signification. As the root seems to signify contracted, it probably means an instrument made for the purpose shorter than usual, and something like the Italian stiletto. The Septuagint translate it by σπιθαμη, a span, and most of the versions understand it in the same sense.

Upon his right thigh - Because he was left-handed. Ordinarily the sword is on the left side, that it may be readily drawn out by the right hand; but as Ehud was left-handed, to be convenient his sword must be on the right side.

Eglon was a very fat man - The איש בריא ish bari of the text is translated by the Septuagint ανηρ αστειος σφοδρα, a very beautiful or polite man, and in the Syriac, a very rude man. It probably means what we call lusty or corpulent.

Made an end to offer the present - Presents, tribute, etc., in the eastern countries were offered with very great ceremony; and to make the more parade several persons, ordinarily slaves, sumptuously dressed, and in considerable number, were employed to carry what would not be a burden even to one. This appears to have been the case in the present instance.

He - turned - from the quarries - פסילים pesilim. Some of the versions understand this word as meaning idols or graven images, or some spot where the Moabites had a place of idolatrous worship. As פסל pasal signifies to cut, hew, or engrave, it may be applied to the images thus cut, or to the place, or quarry whence they were digged: but it is most likely that idols are meant. Some think that trenches are meant, and that pesilim here may mean the boundaries of the two countries: and when Ehud had got thus far, he sent away the people that were with him, under pretense of having a secret message to Eglon, and so got rid of his attendants, in presence of whom he could not have executed his scheme, nor have secured his escape afterwards. But I do not see the evidence of this mode of interpretation.

He was sitting in a summer parlor - Besides the platforms, says Dr. Shaw, which were upon the ancient houses of the East, and which are found there to this day, it is probable that heretofore, as well as at present, most of the great houses had a smaller one annexed, which seldom consisted of more than one or two rooms and a terrace. Others, built as they frequently are above the porch or gateway, have, if we except the ground-floor, all the conveniences belonging to the house, properly so called. There is a door of communication from them into the gallery of the house, kept open or shut at the discretion of the master of the house, besides another door which opens immediately from a privy stairs down into the porch or street, without giving the least disturbance to the house. In these back houses strangers are usually lodged and entertained; hither the men are wont to retire from the hurry and noise of their families, to be more at leisure for meditation or diversions; and they are often used for wardrobes and magazines. These the Arabs call oleah, which exactly answers to the Hebrew word עלית aliyath found in this place; and without doubt such was the apartment in which Eglon received Ehud, by the privy stairs belonging to which he escaped, after having killed Eglon. The doors of the Eastern buildings are large, and their chambers spacious, conveniences well adapted to those hotter climates; but in the present passage something more seems to be meant; at least there are now other conveniences in the East to give coolness to particular rooms, which are very common. In Egypt the cooling their rooms is effected by openings at the top, which let in the fresh air. Mons. Maillet informs us that their halls are made very large and lofty, with a dome at the top, which towards the north has several open windows, so constructed as to throw the north wind down into the rooms; and by this means, though the country is excessively hot, they can make the coolness of those apartments so great, as often not to be borne without being wrapped in furs. Eglon's was a chamber; and some contrivance to mitigate the heat of it was the more necessary, as he appears to have kept his court at Jericho, Jdg 3:13, Jdg 3:28, where the heat is so excessive as sometimes to prove fatal. See Harmer's Observations.

I have a message from God unto thee - דבר אלהים לי אליך debar elohim li aleycha, a word of the gods to me, unto thee. It is very likely that the word elohim is used here to signify idols, or the pesilim mentioned above, Jdg 3:19. Ehud, having gone so far as this place of idolatry, might feign he had there been worshipping, and that the pesilim had inspired him with a message for the king; and this was the reason why the king commanded silence, why every man went out, and why he rose from his seat or throne, that he might receive it with the greater respect. This, being an idolater, he would not have done to any message coming from the God of Israel. I have a message from God unto thee is a popular text: many are fond of preaching from it. Now as no man should ever depart from the literal meaning of Scripture in his preaching, we may at once see the absurdity of taking such a text as this; for such preachers, to be consistent, should carry a two-edged dagger of a cubit length on their right thigh, and be ready to thrust it into the bowels of all those they address! This is certainly the literal meaning of the passage, and that it has no other meaning is an incontrovertible truth.

The haft also went in after the blade - As the instrument was very short, and Eglon very corpulent, this might readily take place.

And the dirt came out - This is variously understood: either the contents of the bowels issued through the wound, or he had an evacuation in the natural way through the fright and anguish. The original, פרשדונה parshedonah, occurs only here, and is supposed to be compounded of פרש peresh, dung, and שדה shadah, to shed, and may be very well applied to the latter circumstance; so the Vulgate understood it: Statinque per secreta naturae alvi stercora proruperunt.

He covereth his feet - He has lain down on his sofa in order to sleep; when this was done they dropped their slippers, lifted up their feet, and covered them with their long loose garments. But the versions, in general, seem to understand it as implying a certain natural act.

Passed beyond the quarries - Beyond the pesilim, which appear to have been the Moabitish borders, where they had set up those hewn stones as landmarks, or sacred boundary stones.

Took the fords of Jordan - It is very likely that the Moabites, who were on the western side of Jordan, hearing of the death of Eglon, were panic-struck, and endeavored to escape over Jordan at the fords near Jericho, when Ehud blew his trumpet in the mountains of Ephraim, and thus to get into the land of the Moabites, which lay on the east of Jordan; but Ehud and his men, seizing the only pass by which they could make their escape, slew ten thousand of them in their attempt to cross at those fords. What is called here the fords was doubtless the place where the Israelites had passed Jordan when they (under Joshua) took possession of the promised land.

All lusty, and all men of valor - Picked, chosen troops, which Eglon kept among the Israelites to reduce and overawe them.

The land had rest fourscore years - This is usually reckoned from the deliverance under Othniel, that being a term from which they dated every transaction, as in other cases they dated from the exodus, from the building of Solomon's temple, etc., and as other nations did from particular events: the Romans, from the building of the city; the Mohammedans, from the Hijreh, or flight of Mohammed to Medina; the Christians, from the birth of Christ, etc., etc. But see the preface, and the different chronological schemes there mentioned.

And after him was Shamgar the son of Anath - Dr. Hales supposes that "Shamgar's administration in the West included Ehud's administration of eighty years in the East; and that, as this administration might have been of some continuance, so this Philistine servitude which is not noticed elsewhere, might have been of some duration; as may be incidentally collected from Deborah's thanksgiving, Jdg 5:6."

Slew - six hundred men with an ox-goad - מלמד הבקר malmad habbakar, the instructer of the oxen. This instrument is differently understood by the versions: the Vulgate has vomere, with the coulter or ploughshare, a dreadful weapon in the hand of a man endued with so much strength; the Septuagint has αροτροποδι των βοων, with the ploughshare of the oxen; the Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, understand it of the goad, as does our translation.

1. That the ox-goad, still used in Palestine, is a sufficiently destructive weapon if used by a strong and skillful hand, is evident enough from the description which Mr. Maundrell gives of this implement, having seen many of them both in Palestine and Syria: "It was observable," says he, "that in ploughing they used goads of an extraordinary size; upon measuring of several I found them about eight feet long, and at the bigger end about six inches in circumference. They were armed at the lesser end with a sharp prickle for driving the oxen, and at the other end with a small spade or paddle of iron, strong and massy, for cleansing the plough from the clay that encumbers it in working." See his Journey from Aleppo, etc., 7th edit., pp. 110, 111. In the hands of a strong, skillful man, such an instrument must be more dangerous and more fatal than any sword. It is worthy of remark that the ox-goad is represented by Homer to have been used prior to this time in the same way. In the address of Diomed to Glaucus, Iliad. lib. vi., ver. 129, Lycurgus is represented as discomfiting Bacchus and the Bacchanals with this weapon. The siege of Troy, according to the best chronologers, happened within the time of the Israelitish judges. Ουκ αν εγωγε θεοισιν επουρανιοισι μαχοιμην· Ουδε γαρ ουδε Δρυαντος υἱος κρατερος Λυκουργος Σευε κατ' ηγαθεον Νυσσηΐον· αἱ δ' ἁμα πασαι Θυσθλα χαμαι κατεχευαν, ὑπ' ανδροφονοιο Λυκουργου Θεινομεναι βουπληγι. "I fight not with the inhabitants of heaven;

That war Lycurgus, son of Dryas, waged,

Nor long survived. - From Nyssa's sacred heights

He drove the nurses of the frantic god,

Thought drowning Bacchus: to the ground they cast

All cast, their leafy wands; while, ruthless, he

Spared not to smite them with his murderous goad."

The meaning of this fable is: Lycurgus, king of Thrace, finding his subjects addicted to drunkenness, proscribed the cultivation of the vine in his dominions, and instituted agriculture in its stead; thus θυσθλα, the thyrsi, were expelled, βουπληγι, by the ox-goad. The account, however, shows that Shamgar was not the only person who used the ox-goad as an offensive weapon. If we translate βουπληξ a cart-whip, the parallel is lost.

2. It appears that Shamgar was merely a laboring man; that the Philistines were making an inroad on the Israelites when the latter were cultivating their fields; that Shamgar and his neighbors successfully resisted them; that they armed themselves with their more portable agricultural instruments; and that Shamgar, either with a ploughshare or an ox-goad, slew six hundred of those marauders.

3. The case of Ehud killing Eglon is a very serious one; and how far he was justified in this action is with all a question of importance, and with not a few a question of difficulty. "Is it right to slay a tyrant?" I, without hesitation, answer, No individual has a right to slay any man, except it be in his own defense, when a person attacks him in order to take away his life. "But may not any of his oppressed subjects put an end to the life of a tyrant?" No. The state alone can judge whether a king is ruling contrary to the laws and constitution of that state; and if that state have provided laws for the punishment of a ruler who is endeavoring to destroy or subvert that constitution, then let him be dealt with according to those laws. But no individual or number of individuals in that state has any right to dispose of the life of the ruler but according to law. To take his life in any other way is no less than murder. It is true God, the author of life and the judge of all men, may commission one man to take away the life of a tyrant. But the pretension to such a commission must be strong, clear, and unequivocal; in short, if a man think he have such a commission, to be safe, he should require the Lord to give him as full an evidence of it as he did to Moses; and when such a person comes to the people, they should require him to give as many proofs of his Divine call as the Hebrews did Moses, before they should credit his pretensions. "But had not Ehud a Divine call?" I cannot tell. If he had, he did not murder Eglon; if he had not, his act, however it succeeded, was a murderous act; and if he had no message from God, (and there is no proof that he had), then he was a most base and hypocritical assassin. The sacred historian says nothing of his motives nor call; he mentions simply the fact, and leaves it without either observation or comment, and every reader is left to draw his own inference. The life of any ruler can only be at the disposal of the constitution, or that system of rules, laws, and regulations, by which the people he rules should be governed; if he rule not according to these, he is, ipso facto, deposed from his government. If he break the constitution, to the great injury or ruin of his subjects, then he is to be judged by those laws according to which he must have pledged himself to govern. If a king be deposed on any other account, it is rebellion. If his life be taken away by any means but those provided by the constitution, it is murder. No pretended or proved tyranny can justify his being taken off in any other way, or on any other account. And what constitution in the civilized world provides for the death of the supreme magistrate? It is true the good people, as they were called, of England and France, have each under a pretense of law, beheaded their king; and they endeavored to justify their conduct on the ground that those kings had broken the constitution: this being proved, they should have been deposed. But by what law, either of those nations or of the civilized world, were their lives taken away? Let it be remembered that the inflation of the punishment of death, either against or without law, is murder.

NOW these are the nations which the LORD left to prove Israel by them, (even as many of Israel as had not known all the wars of Canaan :

i. e. Such who had no experience of those Wars, nor of Gods extraordinary Power and Providence manifested in them.

2 Onely that the generations of the children of Israel might know to teach them war , at the least such as before knew nothing thereof.)

That by the Neighbourhood of such Warlike and Potent Enemies, they might be purged from Sloth and Security, and obliged to inure themselves to Martial Exercises, and to stand continually upon their guard, and consequently to keep close to that God whose Assistance they had so great and constant need of.

3 Namely, five LORDS of the Philistines , and all the Canaanites and the Zidonians , and the Hivites that dwelt in Mount Lebanon, from mount Baal-hermon , unto the entring in of Hamath.

Whereof three had been in some sort subdued, Iudg. 1. 18. But afterwards rescued themselves, and recovered their former strength. See on Iudg. 1. 18.

Properly so called, who were very numerous, and dispersed through several parts of the Land, whence they gave denomination to all the rest of the People.

The people living near Zidon, and subject to its jurisdiction.

Which was the Eastern part of mount Lebanon: See Deut. 3. 8, 9.

Marginal references: Josh. 13. 3.

4 And they were to prove Israel by them, to know whether they would hearken unto the commandments of the LORD, which he commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses.

i. e. That they and others might know by experience.

6 And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods .

Were drawn to Idolatry by the perswasions and examples of their Yoke-fellows, through the just judgment of God, punishing their sinful Marriages by giving them up to Idolatry.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. [illegible: 1 word]. 16. Deut. 7. 3.

7 And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgat the LORD their God, and served Baalim and the groves .

i. e. In the Groves, in which the Heathens usually Worshipped their Baalims or Idols. Or, the Groves are here put Metonymically for the Idols of the Groves, which are distinguished here from their Baalim, which seem to have been Worshipped in other places, as the Prophets of Baal are distinguished from the Prophets of the Groves, 1 King. 18. 19.

8 ¶ Therefore the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia: and the children of Israel served Chushan-rishathaim eight years.

i. e. Were made subject and Tributary to him.

Marginal references: Heb. [illegible: 1+ letters]. 7.; Heb. Aramna [illegible: 1+ letters]araim.

9 And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Calebs younger brother .

i. e. Prayed servently for deliverance.

Of which see on Judg. 1. 13.

Marginal references: Heb. saviour.; Chap. 1. 13.

10 And the spirit of the LORD came upon him , and he judged Israel , and went out to war, and the LORD delivered Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia into his hand; and his hand prevailed against Chushan-rishathaim.

With extraordinary Influences, indowing him with singular wisdom, and courage, and resolution; and stirring him up to this great undertaking. Compare Iudg. 6. 34. and 11. 29.

i. e. Pleaded and avenged the cause of Israel against their oppressors, as that Phrase is oft used, as Deut. 32. 36. Psal. 10. 18. and 43. 1.

Marginal references: See Num. 27. 18.; Heb. was.; Heb. Aram.

11 And the land had rest forty years , and Othniel the son of Kenaz died.

Either First, it rested about Forty Years, or the greatest part of Forty Years: it being most frequent in Scripture to use Numbers in such a Latitude. Thus the Israelites are said to bear their iniquities forty years in the wilderness, Numb. 14. 33. when there wanted near two years of that number; and to dwell in Egypt 430 years, when there wanted many years of that number. Thus Ioseph's kindred sent for, and called by him into Egypt, are numbred Seventy five souls, Act. 7. 14. although they were but Seventy, as is affirmed Gen. 46. 27. Exod. 1. 5. So here the land is said to rest forty years, although they were in servitude Eight of those Years, v. 8. And in like manner the land is said to have rest eighty years, though Eighteen of them they served the King of Moab, v. 18. And so in some other instances. Nor is it strange and unusual either in Scripture or in other Authors, for things to be denominated from the greater part, as here it was; especially, when they did enjoy some degrees of rest and peace even in their times of slavery, which here they did. Or, Secondly, it rested, i. e. began to rest, or recovered its interrupted rest, in the fortieth year, either after Ioshuahs Death, or after that first and famous Rest procured for them by Ioshua, as is noted Heb. 4. 9. when he destroyed and subdued the Canaanites, and gave them quiet possession of the Land; and the land had rest from war, as is said Ios. 11. 23. and 14. 15. So there is this difference between the years of Servitude and Oppression, and those of Rest, that in the former he tells us how long it lasted; in the latter, when it began; by which, compared with the other years, it was easie also to know how long the Rest lasted. To strengthen this Interpretation, two things must be noted: 1. That resting is here put for beginning to Rest, as to beget is put for beginning to beget, Gen. 5. 32. and 11. 26. and to Reign, for to begin to Reign, 2 Sam. 2. 10. and to build, 1 King. 6. 15. 36. for to begin to build, 2 Chron. 3. 1. 2. That forty years is put for the fortieth year: the Cardinal Number for the Ordinal, which is common both in the holy Scripture, as Gen. 1. 5, and 2. 11. Exod. 12. 2. Hag. 1. 1. Mark. 16. 1. and in other Authors.

12 ¶ And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD strengthned Eglon the King of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the LORD.

By giving him Courage, and Power, and Success against them.

Marginal references: 1 Sam. 12. 9.

13 And he gathered unto him the Children of Ammon, and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of Palm-trees .

i. e. Iericho, as may be gathered from Deut. 34. 3. Iudg. 1. 16. 2 Chron. 28. 15. Not the City which was Demolished, but the Territory belonging to it. Here he fixed his Camp, partly for the admirable Fertility of that Soil; and partly, because of its nearness to the passage over Iordan, which was most commodious both for the conjunction of his own Forces which lay on both sides of Iordan; and to prevent the Conjunction of the Israelites in Canaan with their Brethren beyond Iordan; and to secure his Retreat into his own Country, which therefore the Israelites prevented, v. 28.

15 But when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera , a Benjamite , a man left handed ; and by him the children of Israel sent a present unto Eglon the king of Moab.

Heb. the son of Iemini, who was of the Tribe of Benjamin, 2 Sam. 16. 11. and 19. 17. 1 King 2. 8. This Tribe was next to him, and doubtless most Afflicted by him; and hence God raiseth a Deliverer.

Which is here noted, partly, as a mark of his Courage, and Strength, and Activity: See Iudg. 20. 16. and principally, as a considerable Circumstance in the following Story, whereby he might more advantagiously and unsuspectedly give the deadly blow.

Marginal references: Heb. a sa[illegible: 1+ letters] our.; Or, the s[illegible: 1+ letters] of Jemini.; Heb. shut [illegible: 1 word] his right hand▪

16 But Ehud made him a dagger (which had two edges) of a cubit length , and he did gird it under his raiment, upon his right thigh .

Long enough for his design, and not too long for carriage and concealment.

Which was most convenient both for the use of his left hand, and for the avoiding of suspition.

17 And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man .

Which was to be paid to him as a part of his Tribute.

And therefore more unweildy and unable to ward of Ehud's blow.

18 And when he had made an end to offer the present, he sent away the people that bare the present .

He accompanied them part of the way, and then dismissed them, and returned to Eglon alone, that so he might have more easie access to him, and privacy with him; and that he might the better make his escape.

19 But he himself turned again from the quarries that were by Gilgal, and said, I have a secret errand unto thee, O king: who said, Keep silence . And all that stood by him went out from him.

As if he had forgot or neglected some important business.

Either First, Whence they hewed stones: Or Secondly, The Twelve Stones which Ioshua set up there; by the sight whereof he was animated to his Work. Or, Thirdly, The Idols, as the Word also signifies, which that Heathen King might place there, either in spight and contempt to the Israelites who had that place in great Veneration: or, that he might ascribe his Conquest of the Land to his Idols, at the Israelites did to the true God, by setting up this Monument in the entrance or beginning of it.

Till my Servants be gone: whom he would not have acquainted with a business which he supposed to be of great and close importance.

Marginal references: Or, g[illegible: 1+ letters] images.

20 And Ehud came unto him, and he was sitting in a summer parlour , which he had for himself alone : and Ehud said, I have a message from God , unto thee. And he arose out of his seat .

They had divers Houses and Chambers, some for Winter, others for Summer. See Ier. 36. 22. Amos 3. 15.

Into which he used to retire himself from company: which is mentioned as the reason why his Servants waited so long ere they went in to him, v. 25.

To be delivered not in Words, but by Actions: Heb. a Word, or Thing, or Business. So that there is no need to charge Ehud with a Lye, as some do.

This he saith to Amuse him, by raising his expectation and wonder, to divert him from any apprehension of his Danger, and to oblige him to rise out of his Seat, which he knew he would do from the common practise of the Heathens in their entercourses with God. And he designedly useth the name Elohim, which was common to the true God, and false ones; and not Iehovah, which was peculiar to the true God; because Ehud not knowing whether the Message came not from his own false god, he would more certainly rise▪ and thereby give Ehud more advantage for his blow; whereas he would-possibly shew his Contempt of the God of Israel by sitting still to hear his Message.

In token of humble subjection and reverence to God. See Numb. 23. 18. 2 King. 23. 3. which condemns those Christians that behave themselves irreverently in the Presence and Service of the true God.

Marginal references: Heb. a p[illegible: 1+ letters] lour of [illegible: 1 word]; Heb. there▪

22 And the haft went in after the blade: and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger out of his belly, and the dirt came out .

i. e. His Excrements came forth, not at the Wound, which closed up; but at the Fundament, as is usual, when persons Die either a Natural or Violent Death.

Marginal references: Heb. flame, so Gr. see Gen. [illegible: 1+ letters]. 24.; Heb. because he drew not. so Gr.; Or, it came out at the fundament.

23 Then Ehud went forth through the porch, and shut the doors of the parlour upon him , and locked them .

With a composed Countenance and Gate, without any fear; being well assured, that God who by his extraordinary Call had put him upon that enterprise, would by his special Providence preserve him, and carry him through it.

Either upon the King, or upon or after himself.

Either by pulling it close after him, as we do when Doors have spring-Locks; or by taking the Key with him for more caution; and this he did, that they supposing the King to be retired, might wait till he was gone.

24 When he was gone out, his servants came, and when they saw, that behold the doors of the parlour were locked, they said, Surely he covereth his feet in his Summer-chamber.

This phrase is used only here, and 1 Sam. 24. 3. It is commonly understood in both places, of easing nature; because the men not then wearing Breeches as we do, but long Coats, they did in that act cover their feet, as Women do: But a late judicious Interpreter expounds it, of composing himself to take a little Sleep or Rest, as was very usual to do in the day-time in those hot Countreys, 2 Sam. 4. 5. and 11. 2. And when they did so in cool places, such as this Summer-Parlour unquestionably was, they used to cover their Feet, as appears from Ruth 3. 7. And this may seem to be the more probable, both because the Summer-Parlour was more proper for this use, than for the former; and because this was a more likely reason of their long waiting at his Door, lest they should disturb his repose. And this sense best agrees with Saul's case in the Cave, when being asleep David could more securely cut off the lap of his Garment, 1 Sam. 24. 3. where see my Annotations.

Marginal references: Or, doth his easement.

25 And they tarried till they were ashamed : and behold he opened not the doors of the parlour, therefore they took a key , and opened them: and behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth.

Or, confounded, not knowing what to say or think; lest they should either disturb him, or be guilty of neglect towards him.

Another Key, it being usual in Princes Courts to have divers Keys for the same Door.

27 And it came to pass when he was come, that he blew a trumpet in the mountain of Ephraim; and the children of Israel , went down with him from the mount, and he before them.

Whom doubtless he had prepared, and by his emissa [illegible: 1+ letters]ies gathered together in considerable numbers.

28▪ And he said unto them, Follow after me: for the LORD hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the foords of Jordan toward Moab, and suffered not a man to pass over.

Where they passed over Iordan, that neither the Moabites that were got into Canaan, might escape, nor any more Moabites come over Iordan to their succour.

30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel, and the land had rest fourscore years .

How these are to be understood, see on v. 11. instead of eighty, some Copies read eight years.

31 ¶ And after him was Shamgar the son of Anath, which slew of the Philistines six hundred men with an ox-goad , and he also Israel.

As Sampson did a thousand with the Jaw-bone of an Ass; both being miraculous actions, and not at all incredible to him that believes a God, who could easily give strength both to the persons and to their Weapons to effect this.

Marginal references: Heb. saved.

Jdg 3:1-2

The reason, which has already been stated in Jdg 2:22, viz., “to prove Israel by them,” is still further elucidated here. In the first place (Jdg 3:1), את־ישׂראל is more precisely defined as signifying “all those who had not known all the wars of Canaan,” sc., from their own observation and experience, that is to say, the generation of the Israelites which rose up after the death of Joshua. For “the wars of Canaan” were the wars which were carried on by Joshua with the almighty help of the Lord for the conquest of Canaan. The whole thought is then still further expanded in Jdg 3:2 as follows: “only (for no other purpose than) that the succeeding generations (the generations which followed Joshua and his contemporaries) of the children of Israel, that He (Jehovah) might teach them war, only those who had not known them (the wars of Canaan).” The suffix attached to ידעוּם refers to “the wars of Canaan,” although this is a feminine noun, the suffix in the masculine plural being frequently used in connection with a feminine noun. At first sight it would appear as though the reason given here for the non-extermination of the Canaanites was not in harmony with the reason assigned in Jdg 2:22, which is repeated in Jdg 3:4 of the present chapter. But the differences are perfectly reconcilable, if we only give a correct explanation of the two expression, “learning war,” and the “wars of Canaan.” Learning war in the context before us is equivalent to learning to make war upon the nations of Canaan. Joshua and the Israelites of his time had not overcome these nations by their own human power or by earthly weapons, but by the miraculous help of their God, who had smitten and destroyed the Canaanites before the Israelites. The omnipotent help of the Lord, however, was only granted to Joshua and the whole nation, on condition that they adhered firmly to the law of God (Jos 1:7), and faithfully observed the covenant of the Lord; whilst the transgression of that covenant, even by Achan, caused the defeat of Israel before the Canaanites (Josh 7). In the wars of Canaan under Joshua, therefore, Israel had experienced and learned, that the power to conquer its foes did not consist in the multitude and bravery of its own fighting men, but solely in the might of its God, which it could only possess so long as it continued faithful to the Lord. This lesson the generations that followed Joshua had forgotten, and consequently they did not understand how to make war. To impress this truth upon them-the great truth, upon which the very existence as well as the prosperity of Israel, and its attainment of the object of its divine calling, depended; in other words, to teach it by experience, that the people of Jehovah could only fight and conquer in the power of its God-the Lord had left the Canaanites in the land. Necessity teaches a man to pray. The distress into which the Israelites were brought by the remaining Canaanites was a chastisement from God, through which the Lord desired to lead back the rebellious to himself, to keep them obedient to His commandments, and to train them to the fulfilment of their covenant duties. In this respect, learning war, i.e., learning how the congregation of the Lord was to fight against the enemies of God and of His kingdom, was one of the means appointed by God to tempt Israel, or prove whether it would listen to the commandments of God (Jdg 3:4), or would walk in the ways of the Lord. If Israel should so learn to war, it would learn at the same time to keep the commandments of God. But both of these were necessary for the people of God. For just as the realization of the blessings promised to the nation in the covenant depended upon its hearkening to the voice of the Lord, so the conflicts appointed for it were also necessary, just as much for the purification of the sinful nation, as for the perpetuation and growth of the kingdom of God upon the earth.

Jdg 3:3-4

The enumeration of the different nations rests upon Jos 13:2-6, and, with its conciseness and brevity, is only fully intelligible through the light thrown upon it by that passage. The five princes of the Philistines are mentioned singly there. According to Jos 13:4., “all the Canaanites and the Sidonians and the Hivites,” are the Canaanitish tribes dwelling in northern Canaan, by the Phoenician coast and upon Mount Lebanon. “The Canaanites:” viz., those who dwelt along the sea-coast to the south of Sidon. The Hivites: those who were settled more in the heart of the country, “from the mountains of Baal-hermon up to the territory of Hamath.” Baal-hermon is only another name for Baal-gad, the present Banjas, under the Hermon (cf. Jos 13:5). When it is stated still further in Jdg 3:4, that “they were left in existence (i.e., were not exterminated by Joshua) to prove Israel by them,” we are struck with the fact, that besides the Philistines, only these northern Canaanites are mentioned; whereas, according to Judg 1, many towns in the centre of the land were also left in the hands of the Canaanites, and therefore here also the Canaanites were not yet exterminated, and became likewise a snare to the Israelites, not only according to the word of the angel of the Lord (Jdg 2:3), but also because the Israelites who dwelt among these Canaanitish tribes contracted marriages with them, and served their gods. This striking circumstance cannot be set aside, as Bertheau supposes, by the simple remark, that “the two lists (that of the countries which the tribes of Israel did not conquer after Joshua’s death in Judg 1, and the one given here of the nations which Joshua had not subjugated) must correspond on the whole,” since the correspondence referred to really does not exist. It can only be explained on the ground that the Canaanites who were left in the different towns in the midst of the land, acquired all their power to maintain their stand against Israel from the simple fact that the Philistines on the south-west, and several whole tribes of Canaanites in the north, had been left by Joshua neither exterminated nor even conquered, inasmuch as they so crippled the power of the Israelites by wars and invasions of the Israelitish territory, that they were unable to exterminate those who remained in the different fortresses of their own possessions. Because, therefore, the power to resist the Israelites and oppress them for a time resided not so much in the Canaanites who were dwelling in the midst of Israel, as in the Philistines and the Canaanites upon the mountains of Lebanon who had been left unconquered by Joshua, these are the only tribes mentioned in this brief survey as the nations through which the Lord would prove His people.

Jdg 3:5-6

But the Israelites did not stand the test. Dwelling in the midst of the Canaanites, of whom six tribes are enumerated, as in Exo 3:8, Exo 3:17, etc. (see at Deu 7:1), they contracted marriages with them, and served their gods, contrary to the express prohibition of the Lord in Exo 34:16; Exo 23:24, and Deu 7:3-4.

Jdg 3:7-11

II. History of the People of Israel under the Judges - Judges 3:7-16:31

In order that we may be able to take a distinct survey of the development of the Israelites in the three different stages of the their history duringthe times of the judges, the first thing of importance to be done is to determine the chronology of the period of the judges, inasmuch as not only have greatly divergent opinions prevailed upon this point, but hypotheses have been set up, which endanger and to some extent directly overthrow the historical character of the accounts which the book of Judges contains.Rud. Chr. v. Bennigsen, for example, reckons up fifty different calculations, and the list might be still further increased by the addition of both older and more recent attempts (see Winer, Bibl. Real-Wörterb. ii. pp. 327-8). Lepsius (Chronol. der. Aeg. i. 315-6, 365ff. and 377-8) and Bunsen (Aegypten, i. pp. 209ff. iv. 318ff., and Bibelwerk, i. pp. 237ff.), starting from the position maintained by Ewald and Bertheau, that the chronological data of the book of Judges are for the most part to be regarded as round numbers, have sought for light to explain the chronology of the Bible in the darkness of the history of ancient Egypt, and with their usual confidence pronounce it an indisputable truth that the whole of the period of the Judges did not last longer than from 169 to 187 years.

If we take a superficial glance at the chronological data contained in the book, it appears a very simple matter to make the calculation required, inasmuch as the duration of the different hostile oppressions, and also the length of time that most of the judges held their office, or at all events the duration of the peace which they secured for the nation, are distinctly given. The following are the numbers that we find: - 1.Oppression by Chushan-rishathaim,(Jdg 3:8),8 years. Deliverance by Othniel, and rest,(Jdg 3:11),40 years. 2.Oppression by the Moabites,(Jdg 3:14),18 years. Deliverance by Ehud, and rest,(Jdg 3:30),80 years. 3.Oppression by the Canaanitish king Jabin,(Jdg 4:3),20 years. Deliverance by Deborah and Barak, and rest,(Jdg 5:31),40 years. 4.Oppression by the Midianites,(Jdg 6:1),7 years. Deliverance by Gideion, and rest,(Jdg 8:28)40 years. Abimelech’s reign,(Jdg 9:22),3 years. Tola, judge,(Jdg 10:2),23 years. Jair, judge,(Jdg 10:3),22 years. Total,301 years. 5.Oppression by the Ammonites,(Jdg 10:8),18 years. Deliveance by Jephthah, who judged Israel,(Jdg 12:7),6 years. Ibzan, judge,(Jdg 12:9),7 years. Elon, judge,(Jdg 12:11),10 years. Abdon, judge,(Jdg 12:14),8 years. 6.Oppression by the Philistines,(Jdg 13:1),40 years. At this time Samson judged Israel for 20 years(Jdg 15:20; Jdg 16:31 Total,390 years. For if to this we add - (a.)the time of Joshua, which is not distinctly mentioned, and20 years. (b.)the time during which Eli was judge (1Sa 4:18)40 years. We obtain 450 years.The earlier chronologists discovered a confirmation of this as the length of time that the period of the judges actually lasted in Act 13:20, where Paul in his speech at Antioch in Pisidia says, according to the textus receptus, “After that He gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years until Samuel the prophet.” The discrepancy between this verse and the statement in 1Ki 6:1, that Solomon built the temple in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of Egypt, many have endeavoured to remove by a remark, which is correct in itself, viz., that the apostle merely adopted the traditional opinion of the Jewish schools, which had been arrive at by adding together the chronological data of the book of Judges, without entering into the question of its correctness, as it was not his intention to instruct his hearers in chronology. But this passage cannot prove anything at all; for the reading given in the lect. rec. is merely founded upon Cod Al., Vat., Ephr. S. rescr., but according to the Cod. Sinait., ed. Tischendorf and several minuscula, as well as the Copt. Sahid. Arm. Vers. and Vulg., is, καὶ καθελὠν ἔθνη ἑπτὰ ἐν γῇ Χαναὰν κατεκλληρονόμησεν αὐτοῖς τὴν γῆν αὐτῶν ὡς ἔτεσιν τετπακοσίοις καὶ πεντήκοντα, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἔδωκεν κριτὰς ἕως Σαμουήλ τ. πρ. This text is rendered thus in the Vulgate: et destruens gentes septem in terra Chanaan sorte distribuit eis terram eorum quasi post quadringentos et quinquaginta annos: et post haec dedit judices usque ad Samuel prophetam, and can hardly be understood in any other sense than this, that Paul reckoned 450 as the time that elapsed between the call of Abraham (or the birth of Isaac) and the division of the land, namely 215 + 215 (according to the Alex. reading of Exo 12:40 : see the comm. on this passage) + 40 = 470, or about 450.

And if we add still further - (c.)

The times of Samuel and Saul combined, 40 years. (d.)

The reign of David (2Sa 5:4; 1Ki 2:11), 40 years. (e.)

The reign of Solomon to the building of the temple (1Ki 6:1), 3 years.

The whole time from the entrance of Israel into Canaan to the building of the temple amounted to, 533 years.

Or if we add the forty years spent in the wilderness, the time that elapsed between the Exodus from Egypt and the building of the temple 573 years. But the interval was not so long as this; for, according to 1Ki 6:1, Solomon built the house of the Lord in the 480th year after the children of Israel came out of Egypt, and in the fourth year of his reign. And no well-founded objections can be raised as to the correctness and historical credibility of this statement. It is true that the lxx have “the 440th year” instead of the 480th; but this reading is proved to be erroneous by Aquila and Symmachus, who adopt the number 480 in common with all the rest of the ancient versions, and it is now almost unanimously rejected (see Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 479). In all probability it owed its origin to an arbitrary mode of computing the period referred to by reckoning eleven generations of forty years each (see Ed Preuss; die Zeitrechnung der lxx pp. 78ff.). On the other hand, the number 480 of the Hebrew text cannot rest upon a mere reckoning of generations, since the year and month of Solomon’s reign are given in 1Ki 6:1; and if we deduct this date from the 480, there remain 477 of 476 years, which do not form a cyclical number at all.Bertheau has quite overlooked this when he endeavors to make the 480 years from the Exodus to the building of the temple into a cyclical number, and appeals in support of this to 1Ch 6:5., where twelve generations are reckoned from Aaron to Ahimaaz, the contemporary of David. But it is perfectly arbitrary on his part to include Ahimaaz who was a boy in the time of David (2Sa 15:27, 2Sa 15:36; 2Sa 18:19, 2Sa 18:22, 2Sa 18:27.), as the representative of a generation that was contemporaneous with David; whereas it was not Ahimaaz, but his father Zadok, i.e., the eleventh high priest from Aaron, who anointed Solomon as king (1Ki 1:39; 1Ki 2:35), and therefore there had been only eleven high priests from the Exodus to the building of the temple. If therefore this period was to be divided into generations of forty years each on the ground of the genealogies in the Chronicles, there could only be eleven generations counted, and this is just what the lxx have done.

Again, the Exodus of Israel from Egypt was an “epoch-making” event, which was fixed in the recollection of the people as no other ever was, so that allusions to it run through the whole of the Old Testament. Moreover, the very fact that it does not tally with the sum total of the numbers in the book of Judges is an argument in favor of its correctness; whereas all the chronological calculations that differ from this bring us back to these numbers, such, for example, as the different statements of Josephus, who reckons the period in question at 592 years in Ant. viii. 3, 1, and on the other hand, at 612 years in Ant. xx. 10 and c. Ap. ii. 2.Josephus adds together the numbers which occur in the book of JudGes. Reckoning from the invasion of Chushan-rishathaim to the forty years’ oppression of the Philistines (inclusive), these amount to 390 years, if we regard Samson’s twenty years as forming part of the Philistine oppression, or to 410 years if they are reckoned separately. Let us add to this the forty years of the journey through the wilderness, the twenty-five years which Josephus assigns to Joshua (Ant. 5:1, 29), the forty years of Eli, the twelve years which he allots to Samuel before the election of Saul as king (6:13, 5), and the forty years which he reckons to Samuel and Saul together, and lastly, the forty and a half years of David’s reign and the four years of Solomon’s up to the time when the temple was built, and we obtain 40 + 25 + 40 + 12 + 40 + 401/2 + 4 = 2011/2 years; and these added to 390 make 5911/2, or added to 410 they amount to 611 years.

Lastly, it may easily be shown that there are several things assumed in this chronological survey which have no foundation in the text. This applies both to the assumed succession of the Ammonitish and Philistine oppressions, and also to the introduction of the forty years of Eli’s life as judge after or in addition to the forty years that the Philistines ruled over Israel.

The current view, that the forty years of the oppression on the part of the Philistines did not commence till after the death of Jephthah or Abdon, is apparently favored, no doubt, by the circumstance, that this oppression is not described till after the death of Abdon (Jdg 12:15), and is introduced with the usual formula, “ And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord,” etc. (Jdg 13:1). But this formula, taken by itself, does not furnish any certain proof that the oppression which it introduces did not take place till after what has been already described, especially in the absence of any more definite statement, such as the clause introduced into Jdg 4:1, “when Ehud was dead,” or the still more definite remark, that the land had rest so many years (Jdg 3:11, Jdg 3:30; Jdg 5:31; cf. Jdg 8:32). Now in the case before us, instead of any such statement as to time, we find the general remark in Jdg 10:6., that when the Israelites sank into idolatry again, Jehovah sold them into the hands of the Philistines, and into the hands of the children of Ammon; and after this there simply follows an account of the oppression on the part of the Ammonites, and the eventual deliverance effected by Jephthah (Judg 10:8-12:7), together with an enumeration of three judges who succeeded Jephthah (Jdg 12:8-15); but we learn nothing further about the oppression on the part of the Philistines which is mentioned in Jdg 10:7. When therefore, it is still further related, in Jdg 13:1, that the Lord delivered the Israelites into the hand of the Philistines forty years, this cannot possibly refer to another oppression on the part of the Philistines subsequent to the one noticed in Jdg 10:7; but the true explanation must be, that the historian proceeds here for the first time to describe the oppression noticed in Jdg 10:7, and introduces his description with the formula he generally adopted: “And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord,” etc. The oppression itself, therefore, commenced at the same time as that of the Ammonites, and continued side by side with it; but it lasted much longer, and did not come to an end till a short time before the death of Elon the judge. This is confirmed beyond all doubt by the fact, that although the Ammonites crossed the Jordan to fight against Judah, Benjamin, and Ephraim, it was chiefly the tribes of Israel who dwelt on the other side of the Jordan that were oppressed by them (Jdg 10:8, Jdg 10:9), and that it was only by these tribes that Jephthah was summoned to make war upon them, and was elected as their head and prince (Jdg 11:5-11), and also that it was only the Ammonites in the country to the east of the Jordan whom he subdued then before the Israelites (Jdg 11:32, Jdg 11:33). From this it is very evident that Jephthah, and his successors Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, were not judges over all Israel, and neither fought against the Philistines nor delivered Israel from the oppression of the enemies who invaded the land from the south-west; so that the omission of the expression, “the land had rest,” etc., from Judg 11 and Jdg 12:1-15, is very significant.Even Hitzig, who denies that the oppression of the Philistines was contemporaneous with that of the Ammonites, is obliged to acknowledge that “it is true, the author first of all disposed very properly of the Ammonitish war before entering into the details of the war with the Philistines, with which it had no connection, and which was not brought to a close so soon.” When therefore, notwithstanding this, he adduces as evidence that they were not contemporaneous, the fact that “according to the context, and to all analogy (cf. Jdg 4:1; Jdg 3:11, Jdg 3:12), the author intends to write, in Jdg 13:1, that after the death of Abdon, when there was no judge in Israel, the nation fell back into its former lawlessness, and as a punishment was given up to the Philistines,” a more careful study of the passages cited (Jdg 4:1; Jdg 3:11, Jdg 3:12) will soon show that the supposed analogy does not exist at all, since the expression, “the land had rest,” etc. really occurs in both instanced (se Jdg 3:11 and Jdg 3:31), whereas it is omitted before Jdg 13:1. The still further assertion, however, that the account of the Philistine war ought to have followed immediately upon that of the war with the Ammonites, if the intention was to describe this with equal fulness, has no force whatever. If neither Jephthah nor the three judges who followed him had anything to do with the Philistines, if they merely judged the tribes that were oppressed and threatened by the Ammonites, it was natural that everything relating to them should be attached to the account of the defeat of the Ammonites, in order that there might be no unnecessary separation of what was so intimately connected together. And whilst these objections are thus proved to have no force, the objection raised to the contemporaneous occurrence of the two oppressions is wrecked completely upon the distinct statement in Jdg 10:7, that Jehovah sold the Israelites into the hands of the Philistines and Ammonites, which Hitzig can only get over by declaring, without the slightest foundation, that the words “into the hands of the Philistines” are spurious, simply because they stand in the way of his own assumption.

But if the Ammonitish and Philistine oppressions occurred at the same time, of course only one of them must be taken into account in our chronological calculations as to the duration of the period of the judges; and the one selected must be the one to the close of which the chronological data of the next period are immediately appended. But this is not the case with the account of the Ammonitish oppression, of the deliverance effected by Jephthah, and of the judges who succeeded him (Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon), because the chronological thread of this series of events is broken off with the death of Abdon, and is never resumed again. It is so, however, with the Philistine oppression, which is said to have lasted forty years, though the termination of it is not given in the book of JudGes. Samson merely began to deliver Israel out of the power of the Philistines (Jdg 13:5), but did not accomplish their complete deliverance. He judged Israel for twenty years in the days of the Philistines, i.e., during the oppression of the Philistines (Jdg 15:20); consequently the twenty years of his labours must not be taken into account in the chronology of the period of the judges, inasmuch as they are all included in the forty years of the Philistines’ rule. At the death of Samson, with which the book of Judges closes, the power of the Philistines was not yet broken; and in Judg 4 of the first book of Samuel we find the Philistines still fighting against the Israelites, and that with such success that the Israelites were defeated by them, an even lost the ark of the covenant. This war must certainly be a continuation of the Philistine oppression, to which the acts of Samson belonged, since the termination of that oppression is not mentioned in the book of Judges; and on the other hand, the commencement of the oppression referred to in 1Sa 4:9. is not given in the book of Samuel. Consequently even Hitzig supports the view which I have expressed, that the forty years’ supremacy of the Philistines, noticed in Jdg 13:1, is carried on into the book of Samuel, and extends to 1Sa 7:3, 1Sa 7:7, and that it was through Samuel that it was eventually brought to a termination (1Sa 7:10.). But if this is established, then the forty years during which Eli was judge cannot have followed the Philistine oppression and the deeds performed by Samson, and therefore must not be reckoned separately. For since Eli died in consequence of the account of the capture of the ark by the Philistines (1Sa 4:18), and seven months (1Sa 6:1) and twenty years elapsed after this catastrophe before the Philistines were defeated and humiliated by Samuel (1Sa 7:2), only the last half of the forty years of Eli’s judicial life falls within the forty years of the Philistine rule over Israel, whilst the first half coincides with the time of the judge Jair. Eli himself was not a judge in the strict sense of the word. He was neither commander of the army, nor secular governor of the nation, but simply the high priest; and in this capacity he administered the civil law in the supreme court, altogether independently of the question whether there was a secular governor at the time or not. After the death of Eli, Israel continued for more than twenty years utterly prostrate under the yoke of the Philistines. It was during this period that Samson made the Philistines feel the power of the God of Israel, though he could not deliver the Israelites entirely from their oppression. Samuel laboured at the same time, as the prophet of the Lord, to promote the inward and spiritual strength of Israel, and that with such success, that the people came to Mizpeh at his summons, and there put away the strange gods that they had hitherto worshipped, and worshipped the Lord alone; after which the Lord hearkened to Samuel’s prayer, and gave them a complete victory over the Philistines (1Sa 7:2-11). After this victory, which was gained not very long after the death of Samson, Samuel undertook the supreme government of Israel as judge, and eventually at their own desire, and with the consent of God, gave them a king in the person of Saul the Benjaminite. This was not till Samuel himself was old, and had appointed as his successors in the office of judge his own sons, who did not walk in their father’s ways (1 Sam. 8-10). Even under Saul, however Samuel continued to the very end of his life to labour as the prophet of the Lord for the well-being of Israel, although he laid down his office of judge as soon as Saul had been elected king. He announced to Saul how he had been rejected by God on account of his disobedience; he anointed David as king; and his death did not occur till after Saul had began to be troubled by the evil spirit, and to plot for David’s life (1Sa 25:1), as we may learn from the fact that David fled to Samuel at Ramah when Saul resolved to slay him (1Sa 19:18)

How long Samuel judged Israel between the victory gained at Ebenezer (1 Sam. 7) and the election of Saul as king of Israel, is not stated in the Old Testament, nor even the length of Saul’s reign, as the text of 1Sa 13:1 is corrupt. But we shall not be very far from the truth, if we set down about forty years as the time covered by the official life of Samuel as judge after that event and the reign of Saul, and reckon from seventeen to nineteen years as the duration of Samuel’s judgeship, and from twenty to twenty-two as the length of Saul’s reign. For it is evident from the accounts that we possess of the lives and labours of Samuel and Saul, that Saul did not reign forty years (the time given by Paul in Act 13:21 according to the traditional opinion current in the Jewish schools), but at the most from twenty to twenty-two; and this is now pretty generally admitted (see at 1Sa 13:1). When David was chosen king of Judah at Hebron after the death of Saul, he was thirty years old (2Sa 5:1-4), and can hardly have been anointed king by Samuel at Bethlehem before the age of twenty. For though his father Jesse was still living, and he himself was the youngest of Jesse’s eight sons, and was feeding the flock (1Sa 16:6-12), and even after this is still described as נער   (1Sa 17:42, 1Sa 17:55), Jesse was זקן (an old man) at the time (1Sa 17:12), at any rate sixty years old or more, to that his eldest son might be forty years old, and David, the youngest, as much as twenty. For נער was not only applied to a mere boy, but to a young man approaching twenty; and the keeping of sheep was not merely as task performed by shepherd boys, but also by the grown-up sons of a family, among whom we must certainly reckon David, since he had already contended with lions and bears in the steppe, and slain these beasts of prey (1Sa 17:34-36), and shortly afterwards was not only recommended to king Saul by his courtiers, as “a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and wise in speech,” to cheer up the melancholy king by his playing upon the harp (1Sa 16:18), but also undertook to fight with the giant Goliath (1 Sam. 17), and was placed in consequence over the men of war, and was afterwards made captain of a thousand, and betrothed to his daughter Michal (1Sa 18:5, 1Sa 18:13, 1Sa 18:17.). But if David was anointed by Samuel at the age of about twenty years, Saul could not have reigned more than ten years after that time, as David was made king at the age of thirty. And he cannot have reigned much longer before that time. For, apart from the fact that everything which is related of his former wars and deeds could easily have occurred within the space of ten years, the circumstance that Samuel lived till the last years of Saul’s reign, and died but a few years before Saul’s death (1Sa 25:1), precludes the assumption that he reigned any longer than that. For Samuel was already so old that he had appointed his sons as judges, whereupon the people desired a king, and assigned as the reason, that Samuel’s sons did not walk in his ways (1Sa 8:1-4), from which it is very evident that they had already filled the office of judge for some considerable time. If we add to this the fact that Samuel was called to be a prophet before the death of Eli, and therefore was no doubt twenty-five or thirty years old when Eli died, and that twenty years and seven months elapsed between the death of Eli and the defeat of the Philistines, so that Samuel may have been about fifty years old at that time, and that he judged the people from this time forward till he had become an old man, and then gave the nation a king in the person of Saul, we cannot assign more than forty years as the interval between the defeat of the Philistines and the death of Saul, without attributing to Samuel an age of more than ninety years, and therefore we cannot reckon more than forty or thirty-nine years as the time that intervened between the installation of Samuel in his office as judge and the commencement of the reign of Saul.

According to this, the chronology of the times of the judges may be arranged as follows: a.From the oppression of Cushan-rishathaim to the death of Jair the judge (vid. p. 202),301 years. b.Duration of the Philistine oppression,40 years. c.Judgeship of Samuel and reign of Saul,39 years. d.David’s reign (7 ½ and 33 years)40 years. e.Solomon’s reign to the building of the temple,3 years. 423 years. a.The wandering in the desert,40 years. b.the time between the entrance into Canaan and the division of the land,7 years. c.From the division of Canaan to the invasion of Chushan-rishathaim,10 years. 480 years. These numbers are as thoroughly in harmony with 1Ki 6:1, and also with the statement made by Jephthah in his negotiations with the king of the Ammonites, that Israel dwelt in Heshbon and the cities along the bank of the Arnon for three hundred years (Jdg 11:26), as we could possibly expect so general a statement in round numbers to be. For instance, as the chronological data of the book of Judges give 301 years as the interval between the invasion of Chushan-rishathaim and the commencement of the Ammonitish oppression, and as only about ten years elapsed between the division of Canaan, after which the tribes on the east of the Jordan first established themselves firmly in Gilead, and the invasion of Chushan, the Israelites had dwelt 310 years in the land on the other side of the Jordan at the time of Jephthah’s negotiations with the Ammonites, or at the most 328, admitting that these negotiations may possibly not have taken place till towards the end of the eighteen years’ oppression on the part of the Ammonites, so that Jephthah could appeal with perfect justice to the fact that they had been in possession of the land for 300 years.

This statement of Jephthah, however, furnishes at the same time an important proof that the several chronological data contained in our book are to be regarded as historical, and also that the events are to be reckoned as occurring successively; so that we have no right to include the years of oppression in the years of rest, as is frequently done, or to shorten the whole period from Othniel to Jephthah by arbitrary assumptions of synchronisms, in direct opposition to the text. This testimony removes all foundation from the hypothesis that the number forty which so frequently occurs is a so-called round number, that is to say, is nothing more than a number derived from a general estimate of the different periods according to generations, or cyclical periods. For if the sum total of the different chronological notices tallies on the whole with the actual duration of the period in question as confirmed by this testimony, the several notices must be regarded as historically true, and that all the more because the greater part of these data consist of such numbers as 6, 8, 18, 20, 22, 23, which can neither be called round nor cyclical. Moreover, the purely cyclical significance of the number forty among the Israelites must first of all be proved. Even Ewald (Gesh. ii. pp. 480, 481) most justly observes, that “it is very easy to say that the number forty was a round number in the case of different nations; but this round number must first of all have had its origin in life, and therefore must have had its limited application.” If, however, we look more closely at the different occasions on which the space of forty years is mentioned, between the Exodus from Egypt and the building of the temple, we shall find that at any rate the first and last passages contain very definite notices of time, and cannot possibly be regarded as containing merely round or cyclical numbers. In the case of the forty years’ wandering in the wilderness, this is placed beyond the reach of doubt by the fact that even the months are given of both the second and fortieth years (Num 10:11; Num 20:1; Deu 1:3), and the intervening space is distinctly stated to have been thirty-eight years (Deu 2:14). And the forty years that David is said to have reigned also give the precise number, since he reigned seven and a half years at Hebron, and thirty-three at Jerusalem (2Sa 5:4, 2Sa 5:5; 1Ki 2:11). Between these two extreme points we certainly meet with the number forty five times: viz., forty years of rest under Othniel (Jdg 3:11), the same under Barak and Deborah (Jdg 5:31), and the same again Gideon (Jdg 8:28); also forty years of the oppression by the Philistines (Jdg 13:1), and the forty years that Eli was judge (1Sa 4:18); and in addition to these, we find eighty years of rest after Ehud’s victory (Jdg 3:30). But there are also twelve or thirteen passages in which we find either odd numbers, or at all events numbers that cannot be called cyclical or round (viz., Jdg 3:8, Jdg 3:14; Jdg 4:3; Jdg 6:1; Jdg 9:22; Jdg 10:2, Jdg 10:3; Jdg 12:7, Jdg 12:9, Jdg 12:11, Jdg 12:14; Jdg 15:20; Jdg 16:31). What is there then to justify our calling the number forty cyclical or round? It is the impossibility or improbability that in the course of 253 years Israel should have had rest from hostile oppression on three occasions for forty years, and on one for eighty? Is there anything impossible in this? Certainly not. Is there even an improbability? If there be, surely improbabilities have very often been perfectly true. And in the case before us, the appearance itself loses all significance, when we consider that although if we take entire years the number forty is repeated, yet it cannot be taken so literally as that we are to understand that entire years are intended every time. If David’s reign is reckoned as forty years in 2Sa 5:4, although, according to 2Sa 5:5, he reigned seven years and six months in Hebron and thirty-three years in Jerusalem, it may also be the case that, although forty years is the number given in the book of Judges, the period referred to may actually have been only thirty-nine years and a half, or may have been forty and a half. To this must be added the fact that the time during which the war with the enemy lasted is also included in the years of rest; and this must always have occupied several months, and may sometimes have lasted even more than a year.

Now, if we give all these circumstances their due weight, every objection that can be raised as to the correctness and historical credibility of the chronological data of the book of Judges vanishes away, whilst all the attempts that have been made to turn these data into round or cyclical numbers are so arbitrary as to need no special refutation whatever.The principal representatives of this hypothesis are Ewald and his pupil Bertheau. According to Ewald Gesch. ii. pp. 473ff.), the twelve judges from Othniel to Samson form the historical groundwork of the book, although there are distinct traces that there were many more such rulers, because it was only of these that any reminiscences had been preserved. When, therefore, after the expiration of the whole of this period, the desire arose to bring out into distinct prominence the most important points connected with it, the first thing that was done was to group together these twelve judges, with such brief remarks as we find in the case of five of them (Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon) in Jdg 10:1-5 and Jdg 12:8-15. In their case, too, the precise time was given, so far as it could be still remembered. But, independently of this, the attempt was also made to connect the order of the many alternations of war and peace during these 480 years which occurred, according to 1Ki 6:1, between the Exodus from Egypt and the building of Solomon’s temple, to certain grand and easily remembered divisions; and for this the number forty at once presented itself. For since, according to the oldest traditions, Israel spent forty years in the wilderness, and since David also reigned forty years, it might easily be regarded as a suitable thing to divide the whole into twelve equal parts, and to assign to each forty years a great hero and some striking event: e.g., (1) Moses and the wilderness; (2) Joshua and the prosperous rule of the elders; (3) the war with Chushan-rishathaim, and Othniel; (4) the Moabites and Ehud; (5) the Aramaeans and Jair; (6) the Canaanites under Jabin, and Deborah; (7) the Midianites and Gideon; (8) Tola, with whose opponents we are not acquainted; (9) the Ammonites and Philistines, or Jephthah and Samson; (10) the Philistines and Eli; (11) Samuel and Saul; (12) David. “Finally, then these twelve judges from Othniel to Samson were necessarily connected with this different mode of reckoning, so that the several numbers, as well as the order in which the judges occur, which show so evidently (?) that the last editor but one compiled the section extending from Judg 3-16 out of a great variety of sources, must have been the resultant of many chanGes.” But Ewald looks in vain for any reason for this “must”. And the question starts up at once, how could the idea ever have entered any one’s mind of dividing these 480 years, from the Exodus to the building of the temple, among the twelve judges in this particular manner; that to all the judges, concerning whom it was not known how long their period of labour lasted, forty years each were assigned, when it was known that Israel had wandered forty years in the wilderness, that Joshua had governed forty years with the elders, and Samuel and Saul together had ruled for the same time, and David also, so that there only remained for the judges from Othniel to Samson 480 - 4 x 40, i.e., only 320 years, or, deducting the first three or four years of Solomon’s reign, only 317 or 316 years? These years, if divided among twelve judges, would give only twenty-six or twenty-seven years for each. Or how did they come to allot eighty years to Ehud, and only twenty-two to Jair and twenty-three to Tola, if the two latter had also conquered the hostile oppressors of Israel? And lastly, why was Shamgar left without any, when he delivered Israel from the Philistines? To these and many other questions the author of this hypothesis is unable to give any answer at all; and the arbitrary nature of his mode of manufacturing history is so obvious, that it is unnecessary to waste words in proving it. It is not better with Bertheau's hypothesis (Judg. pp. xvi.ff.). According to this hypothesis, out of the twelve generations from Moses to David which he derives from 1Ch 6:5., only six (or 240 years) belong to the judges from Othniel to Samson. These have been variously reckoned. One calculation takes them as six generations of forty years each; another reckons them more minutely, adopting smaller numbers which were assigned to the twelve judges and the son of Gideon. But six generations and twelve judges could not be combined in any other way than by assigning twenty years to each judge. Now there was not a single judge who judged Israel for twenty years, with the exception of Samson And the total number of the years that they judged is not 240, but 296 years (40 + 80 + 40 + 40 + 23 + 22 + 6 + 7 + 10 + 8 +20 + x). Consequently we do not find any trace throughout the book, that the period of the judges was reckoned as consisting of six generations of forty years each. (Compare with this a more elaborate refutation by Bachmann, pp. 3ff.).

The historical character of the chronological data of the book of Judges being thus established, we obtain a continuous chronology for the history of the Israelitish nation, as we may see from the following survey, to which we append a calculation of the years before Christ: -

Chronological Survey of the Principal Events from the Exodus to the Building of Solomon’s Temple The Principle EventsDurationYears before the birth of Christ Exodus of Israel from Egypt-1492 The law given at Sinai-1492-1491 Death of Aaron and Moses in the fortieth year of the wandering in the desert401453 Conquest of Canaan by Joshua71452-1445 From the division of the land to the invasion of Chushan-rishathaim101445-1435 Death of Joshua-c. 1442 Wars of the tribes of Israel with the Canaanites-1442 onwards Oppression by Chushan-rishathaim81435-1427 Deliverance by Othniel, and rest401427-1387 Oppression by the Moabites181387-1369 Deliverance by Ehud, and rest801369-1289 Victory of Shamgar over the Philistines-x Oppression by Jabin201289-1269 Deliverance by Deborah and Barak, and rest401269-1229 Oppression by the Midianites71229-1222 Deliverance by Gideon, and rest401222-1182 Rule of Abimelech31182-1179 Tola, judge231179-1156 Jair, judge221156-1134 Eli, high priest and judge forty years-1154-1114 After repeated apostasy, oppression (a) In the East (b) In the West (a) In the East(b) In the West By the Ammonites, 18 yearsBy the Philistines401134-1094 from 1134 to 1116 b.c.Loss of the Ark-c. 1114 Jephthath, judge 6 yearsSamson’s deeds-1116-1096 from 1116 to 1110 b.c.Samuel’s prophetic labours-1114 onwards Ibzan, judge 7 yearsDefeat of the Philistines- 1094 from 1110 to 1103 b.c.Samuel, judge191094-1075 Elon, judge 10 yearsSaul, king201075-1055 from 1103 to 1093 b.c.David, king at Hebron71055-1048 Abdon, judge 7 yearsDavid, king at Jerusalem331048-1015 from 1093 to 1085 b.c.Solomon’s reign to the building of the temple31015-1012 Total480years. All that is required to establish our calculation as to the period of the judges, is to justify our estimate of ten years as the time that intervened between the division of the land and the invasion by Chushan-rishathaim, since the general opinion, founded upon the statement of Josephus (Ant. v. 1, 29), that Joshua was στρατηγός of the nation for twenty-five years after the death of Moses, and (6:5, 4) that his death was followed by a state of anarchy for eighteen years, is that it was at least thirty-five years. But Josephus at all events ought not to be appealed to, as he had no other sources of information with regard to the earlier portion of the Israelitish history than the Old Testament itself; and he so frequently contradicts himself in his chronological statements, that no reliance can be place upon them even in cases where their incorrectness cannot be clearly proved. And if we consider, on the other hand, that Joshua was an old man when the two great campaigns in the south and north of Canaan were over, and in fact was so advanced in years, that God commanded him to divide the land, although many districts were still unconquered (Jos 13:1.), in order that he might finish this part of his calling before his death, there is very little probability that he lived for twenty-five years after that time. The same words are used to describe the last days of his life in Jos 23:1, that had previously been employed to describe his great age (Jos 13:1.). No doubt the statement in Jos 23:1, to the effect that “many days after that the Lord had given rest unto Israel from all their foes,” Joshua called together the representatives of the nation, to renew the covenant of the nation with the Lord before his death, when taken in connection with the statement in Jos 19:50, that he built the city of Timnathserah, which the tribes had given him for an inheritance after the distribution of the land by lot was over, and dwelt therein, proving very clearly that there were certainly “many days” (Eng. Ver. “a long time”) between the division of the land and the death of Joshua. But this is so comparative a term, that it hardly embraces more than two or three years. And Joshua might build, i.e., fortify Timnath-serah, and dwell therein, even if he only lived for two or three years after the division of the land. On the other hand, there appears to have been a longer interval than the seven or eight years allowed in our reckoning between the death of Joshua and the invasion of Chushan; since it not only includes the defeat of Adoni-bezek, the capture of Jerusalem, Hebron, and other towns, by the tribes of Judah and Simeon (Jdg 1:1-14), and the conquest of Bethel by the tribe of Joseph (Jdg 1:22.), but also the war of the congregation with the tribe of Benjamin (Judg 19-21). But it is only in appearance that the interval allowed is too short. All these events together would not require many years, but might very well have occurred within the space of about five years. And it is quite possible that the civil war of the Israelites might have been regarded by king Chushan-rishathaim as a favourable opportunity for carrying out his design of making Israel tributary to himself, and that he took advantage of it accordingly. The very fact that Othniel delivered Israel from this oppression, after it had continued for eight years, precludes us from postponing the invasion itself to a longer period after the death of Joshua. For Othniel was not Caleb’s nephew, as many suppose, but his younger brother (see at Jos 15:17). Now Caleb was eighty-five years old when the distribution of the land commenced (Jos 14:10); so that even if his brother Othniel was thirty, or even forty years younger, he would still be fifty-five, or at any rate forty-five years old, when the division of the land commenced. If the statements of Josephus were correct, therefore, Othniel would have been ninety-one years old, or at any rate eighty-one, when he defeated the Aramaean king Chushan-rishathaim; whereas, according to our calculation, he would only have been fifty or sixty years old when Debir was taken, and sixty-three or seventy-three when Chushan was defeated. Now, even if we take the lower number as the correct one, this would be a sufficiently great age for such a warlike undertaking, especially when we consider that Othniel lived for some time afterwards, as is evident from the words of Jdg 3:11, “And the land had rest forty years: and Othniel the son of Kenaz died,” though they may not distinctly affirm that he did not die till the termination of the forty years’ rest.

The fact that Caleb’s younger brother Othniel was the first judge of Israel, also upsets the hypothesis which Bertheau has founded upon a mistaken interpretation of Judg 2:11-3:6, that a whole generation of forty years is to be reckoned between the death of Joshua and the invasion of Chushan, and also the misinterpretation of Jdg 2:7, Jdg 2:10 (cf. Jos 24:31), according to which the sinful generation did not grow up until after Joshua and all the elders who lived a long time after him were dead, - an interpretation which has no support in Jdg 2:7, since האריך ימים אחרי does not mean “to live long after a person”, but simply “to survive him.” The “other generation which knew not the Lord,” etc., that arose after the death of Joshua and the elders who outlived him, was not a different generation from the succeeding generations, which were given up to the power of their foes on account of their apostasy from the Lord, but the younger generation generally, which took the place of the older men who had seen the works of the Lord under Joshua; in other words, this is only a comprehensive expression for all the succeeding generations who forgot Jehovah their God and served Baalim. So much may be said in vindication of our calculations as to the period of the judges.

1. Times Of The Judges: Othniel; Ehud And Shamgar, Deborah And Barak - Judges 3:7-5:31

In this first stage of the times of the judges, which embraces a period of 206 years, the Israelites were oppressed by hostile nations on three separate occasions: first of all by the Mesopotamian king Chushan-rishathaim, whom they were obliged to serve for eighteen years, until Othniel brought them deliverance, and secured them rest for forty years (Jdg 3:7-11); secondly by the Moabitish king Eglon for eighteen years, until Ehud slew this king and smote the Moabites, and so humiliated them, that the land had rest for eighty years (Judg 3:12-30), whilst Shamgar also smote a host of Philistines during the same period (Jdg 3:31); and lastly by the Canaanitish king Jabin of Hazor, who oppressed them heavily for twenty years, until Barak gathered an army together at the summons of Deborah the prophetess and with her assistance, and completely defeated the foe (Judg 4). After this victory, which Deborah celebrated in a triumphal song, the land had rest again for forty years (Judg 5).

Oppression of Israel by Chushan-rishathaim, and Deliverance by Othniel - Jdg 3:7-11

Jdg 3:7-8

The first chastisement which the Israelites suffered for their apostasy from the Lord, is introduced with the same formula which had been used before to describe the times of the judges generally (Jdg 2:11-12), except that instead of את־יי ויּעזבוּ (“they forsook the Lord”) we have here את־יי ויּשׁכּחוּ (“they forgot the Lord their God”) from Deu 32:18 (cf. 1Sa 12:9), and Asheroth (rendered “groves”) instead of Ashtaroth (see at Jdg 2:13). As a punishment for this apostasy, the Lord sold them (Jdg 2:14) into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim, the king of Mesopotamia, whom they were obliged to serve for eight years. All that we know about this king of Mesopotamia is what is recorded here. His name, Chushan-rishathaim, is probably only a title which was given to him by the Israelites themselves. Rishathaim signifies “double wickedness,” and the word was rendered as an appellative with this signification in the Targums and the Syriac and Arabic versions. Chushan is also formed as an adjective from Cush, and may denote the Cushites. According to M. v. Niebuhr (Gesch. Assurs u. Babels, p. 272), the rulers of Babylon at that time (1518-1273) were Arabs. “Arabs, however, may have included not only Shemites of the tribe of Joktan or Ishmael, but Cushites also.” The invasion of Canaan by this Mesopotamian or Babylonian king has a historical analogy in the campaign of the five allied kings of Shinar in the time of Abraham (Gen 14).

Jdg 3:12-14

In vv. 12-30 the subjugation of the Israelites by Eglon, the king of the Moabites, and their deliverance from this bondage, are circumstantially described. First of all, in Jdg 3:12-14, the subjugation. When the Israelites forsook the Lord again (in the place of וגו את־הרע ... ויּעשׂוּ, Jdg 3:7, we have here the appropriate expression  ... הרע הרע לעשׂות, they added to do, i.e., did again, evil, etc., as in Jdg 4:1; Jdg 10:6; Jdg 13:1), the Lord made Eglon the king of the Moabites strong over Israel. על חזּק, to give a person strength to overcome or oppress another. כּי על, as in Deu 31:17, instead of the more usual אשׁר על (cf. Jer 4:28; Mal 2:14; Psa 139:14). Eglon allied himself with the Ammonites and Amalekites, those arch-foes of Israel, invaded the land, took the palm-city, i.e., Jericho (see at Jdg 1:16), and made the Israelites tributary for eighteen years. Sixty years had passed since Jericho had been burnt by Joshua. During that time the Israelites had rebuilt the ruined city, but they had not fortified it, on account of the curse pronounced by Joshua upon any one who should restore it as a fortress; so that the Moabites could easily conquer it, and using it as a base, reduce the Israelites to servitude.

Jdg 3:15

But when the Israelites cried to the Lord for help, He set them free through the Benjaminite Ehud, whom He raised up as their deliverer. Ehud was “the son of Gera.” This probably means that he was a descendant of Gera, since Gera himself, according to 1Ch 8:3, was a son of Bela the son of Benjamin, and therefore was a grandson of Benjamin; and Shimei the contemporary of David, a man belonging to the tribe of Benjamin, is also called a son of Gera in 2Sa 16:5; 2Sa 19:17. At the same time, it is possible that the name Gera does not refer to the same person in these different passages, but that the name was repeated again and again in the same family. “A man shut with regard to his right hand,” i.e., hindered in the use of his right hand, not necessarily crippled, but in all probability disabled through want of use from his youth upwards. That the expression does not mean crippled, is confirmed by the fact that it is used again in connection with the 700 brave slingers in the army of the Benjaminites in Jdg 20:16, and it certainly cannot be supposed that they were all actual cripples. So much is certain, however, that it does not mean ἀμφοτεροδέξιος, qui utraque manu pro dextera utebatur (lxx, Vulg.), since אטר signifies clausit (shut) in Psa 69:16. It is merely with reference to what follows that this peculiarity is so distinctly mentioned. -  The Israelites sent a present by him to king Eglon. בידו does not mean in, but through, his hand, i.e., through his intervention, for others were actually employed to carry the present (Jdg 3:18), so that Ehud merely superintended the matter. Minchah, a gift or present, is no doubt a euphemism for tribute, as in 2Sa 8:2, 2Sa 8:6; 1Ki 5:1.

Jdg 3:16

Ehud availed himself of the opportunity to approach the king of the Moabites and put him to death, and thus to shake off the yoke of the Moabites from his nation. To this end he provided himself with a sword, which had two edges (פּיות from פּה, like שׂיו, Deu 22:1, from שׂה), a cubit long (גּמר, ἁπ. λεγ., signified primarily a staff, here a cubit, according to the Syriac and Arabic; not “a span,” σπιθαμή, lxx), and “did gird it under his raiment upon his right thigh.”

Jdg 3:17

Provided with this weapon, he brought the present to king Eglon, who - as is also mentioned as a preparation for what follows - was a very fat man.

Jdg 3:18-20

After presenting the gift, Ehud dismissed the people who had carried the present to their own homes; namely, as we learn from Jdg 3:19, after they had gone some distance from Jericho. But he himself returned from the stone-quarries at Gilgal, sc., to Jericho to king Eglon. הפּסילים מן refers to some place by Gilgal. In Deu 7:25; Isa 21:9; Jer 8:19, pesilim signifies idols. And if we would retain this meaning here, as the lxx, Vulg., and others have done, we must assume that in the neighbourhood of Gilgal there were stone idols set up in the open air-a thing which is very improbable. The rendering “stone quarries,” from פּסל, to hew out stones (Exo 34:1, etc.), which is the one adopted in the Chaldee, and by Rashi and others, is more likely to be the correct one. Gilgal cannot be the Gilgal between Jericho and the Jordan, which was the first encampment of the Israelites in Canaan, as is commonly supposed, since Ehud passed the Pesilim on his flight from the king’s dwelling-place to the mountains of Ephraim (Jdg 3:26, Jdg 3:27); and we can neither assume, as Bertheau does, that Eglon did not reside in the conquered palm-city (Jericho), but in some uncultivated place in the neighbourhood of the Jordan, nor suppose that after the murder of Eglon Ehud could possibly have gone from Jericho to the Gilgal which was half an hour’s journey towards the east, for the purpose of escaping by a circuitous route of this kind to Seirah in the mountains of Ephraim, which was on the north-west of Jericho. Gilgal is more likely to be Geliloth, which was on the west of Jericho opposite to the ascent of Adummim (Kaalat ed Dom), on the border of Judah and Benjamin (Jos 18:17), and which was also called Gilgal (Jos 15:7). Having returned to the king’s palace, Ehud sent in a message to him: “I have a secret word to thee, O king.” The context requires that we should understand “he said” in the sense of “he had him told” (or bade say to him), since Ehud himself did not go in to the king, who was sitting in his room, till afterwards (Jdg 3:20). In consequence of this message the king said: הס, lit. be silent (the imperative of הסה fo); here it is a proclamation, Let there be quiet. Thereupon all who were standing round (viz., his attendants) left the room, and Ehud went in (Jdg 3:20). The king was sitting “in his upper room of cooling alone.” The “room of cooling” (Luther, Sommerlaube, summer-arbour) was a room placed upon the flat roof of a house, which was open to the currents of air, and so afforded a cool retreat, such as are still met with in the East (vid., Shaw, pp. 188-9). Then Ehud said, “A word of God I have to thee;” whereupon the king rose from his seat, from reverence towards the word of God which Ehud pretended that he had to deliver to him, not to defend himself, as Bertheau supposes, of which there is not the slightest intimation in the text.

Jdg 3:21-22

But when the king stood up, Ehud drew his sword from under his garment, and plunged it so deeply into his abdomen that even the hilt followed the blade, and the fat closed upon the blade (so that there was nothing to be seen of it in front, because he did not draw the sword again out of his body), and the blade came out between the legs. The last words have been rendered in various ways. Luther follows the Chaldee and Vulgate, and renders it “so that the dirt passed from him,” taking the ἁπ. λεγ. פּרשׁדנה as a composite noun from פּרשׁ, stercus, and שׁדה, jecit. But this is hardly correct, as the form of the word פּרשׁדנה, and its connection with יצא, rather points to a noun, פּרשׁדן, with ה local. The explanation given by Gesenius in his Thes. and Heb. lex. has much more in its favour, viz., interstitium pedum, the place between the legs, from an Arabic word signifying pedes dissitos habuit, used as a euphemism for anus, podex. The subject to the verb is the blade.At any rate the rendering suggested by Ewald, “Ehud went into the open air, or into the enclosure, the space in front of the Alija,” is untenable, for the simple reason that it is perfectly irreconcilable with the next clause, “Ehud went forth,” etc. (consequently Fr. Böttcher proposes to erase this clause from the text, without any critical authority whatever). For if Ehud were the subject to the verb, the subject would necessarily have been mentioned, as it really is in the next clause, Jdg 3:23.

Jdg 3:23

As soon as the deed was accomplished, Ehud went out into the porch or front hall, shut the door of the room behind him (בּעדו, not behind himself, but literally round him, i.e., Eglon; cf. Gen 7:16; 2Ki 4:4) and bolted it (this is only added as a more precise explanation of the previous verb).

Jdg 3:24-25

When the servants of Eglon came (to enter in to their lord) after Ehud’s departure and saw the door of the upper room bolted, they thought “surely (אך, lit. only, nothing but) he covers his feet” (a euphemism for performing the necessities of nature; cf. 1Sa 24:3), and waited to shaming (cf. 2 King Jdg 2:17; Jdg 8:11), i.e., till they were ashamed of their long waiting (see at Jdg 5:28). At length they opened the door with the key, and found their lord lying dead upon the floor.

Ehud’s conduct must be judged according to the spirit of those times, when it was thought allowable to adopt any means of destroying the enemy of one’s nation. The treacherous assassination of a hostile king is not to be regarded as an act of the Spirit of God, and therefore is not set before us as an example to be imitated. Although Jehovah raised up Ehud as a deliverer to His people when oppressed by Eglon, it is not stated (and this ought particularly to be observed) that the Spirit of Jehovah came upon Ehud, and still less that Ehud assassinated the hostile king under the impulse of that Spirit. Ehud proved himself to have been raised up by the Lord as the deliverer of Israel, simply by the fact that he actually delivered his people from the bondage of the Moabites, and it by no means follows that the means which he selected were either commanded or approved by Jehovah.

Jdg 3:26-28

Ehud had escaped whilst the servants of Eglon were waiting, and had passed the stone quarries and reached Seirah. Seirah is a place that is never mentioned again; and, judging from the etymology (the hairy), it was a wooded region, respecting the situation of which all that can be decided is, that it is not to be sought for in the neighbourhood of Jericho, but “upon the mountains of Ephraim” (Jdg 3:27). For when Ehud had come to Seirah, he blew the trumpet “upon the mountains of Ephraim,” to announce to the people the victory that was placed within their reach by the death of Eglon, and to summon them to war with the Moabites, and then went down from the mountain into the plain near Jericho; “and he was before them,” i.e., went in front as their leader, saying to the people, “Follow me; for Jehovah has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand.” Then they went down and took (i.e., took possession of) the fords near Jericho (see at Jos 2:7), למואב, either “from the Moabites” or “towards Moab,” and let no one (of the Moabites) cross over, i.e., escape to their own land.

Jdg 3:29

Thus they smote at that time about 10,000 Moabites, all fat and powerful men, i.e., the whole army of the enemy in Jericho and on this side of the Jordan, not letting a man escape. The expression “at that time” seems to imply that they did not destroy this number in one single engagement, but during the whole course of the war.

Jdg 3:30

Thus Moab was subdued under the hand of Israel, and the land had rest for eighty years.

Jdg 3:31

After him (Ehud) was, i.e., there rose up, Shamgar the son of Anath. He smote the Philistines, who had probably invaded the land of the Israelites, six hundred men, with an ox-goad, so that he also (like Othniel and Ehud, Jdg 3:9 and Jdg 3:15) delivered Israel. הבּקר מלמד, ἁπ. λεγ., signifies, according to the Rabbins and the ancient versions, an instrument with which they trained and drove oxen; and with this the etymology agrees, as למד is used in Hos 10:11 and Jer 31:18 to denote the training of the young ox. According to Rashi, בּקר מלמד is the same as דּרבן, βούκεντρον, in 1Sa 13:21. According to Maundrell in Paulus’ Samml. der merkw. Reisen nach d. Or. i. p. 139, the country people in Palestine and Syria use when ploughing goads about eight feet long and six inches in circumference at the thick end. At the thin end they have a sharp point to drive the oxen, and at the other end a small hoe, to scrape off any dirt that may stick to the plough. Shamgar may have smitten the Philistines with some such instrument as this, just as the Edonian prince Lycurgus is described by Homer (Il. vi. 135) as putting Dionysius and the Bacchantines to flight with a βουπλήξ. Nothing is recorded about the descent of Shamgar, either here or in the Song of Deborah, in Jdg 5:6. The heroic deed recorded of him must be regarded, as O. v. Gerlach affirms, as “merely the result of a holy inspiration that suddenly burst forth within him, in which he seized upon the first weapon that came to his hand, and put to flight the enemy when scared by a terror for God, just as Samson did on a later occasion.” For he does not seem to have secured for the Israelites any permanent victory over the Philistines. Moreover, he is not called judge, nor is the period of his labours taken into account, but in Jdg 4:1 the renewed apostasy of Israel from the Lord is dated from the death of Ehud. Oppression of Israel by Jabin, and Deliverance by Deborah and Barak - Judges 4-5

This fresh oppression of the Israelites, and the glorious victory which they obtained over Sisera, Jabin’s general, through the judge Deborah and the heroic warrior Barak, are so fully described in Deborah’s triumphal song in Judg 5, that this song may be regarded as a poetical commentary upon that event. It by no means follows from this fact, however, that the historical account in Judg 4 was first of all founded upon the ode, and was merely intended to furnish an explanation of the song itself. Any such assumption is overthrown by the fact that the prose account in Judg 4, contains, as even Bertheau acknowledges, some historical details which we look for in vain in the song, and which are of great assistance in the interpretation of it. All that we can infer with any probability from the internal connection between the historical narrative and the Song of Deborah is, that the author of our book took both of them from one common source; though the few expressions and words which they contain, such as שׂמיכה in Jdg 4:18, תּצנח in Jdg 4:21, משׁכתּ in Jdg 4:6, and ויּהם in Jdg 4:15, do not throw any light upon the source from which they were derived. For, with the exception of the first, which is not met with again, the whole of them occur in other passages-the second in Jdg 1:14 and Jos 15:18, the third in the same sense in Jdg 20:37, and the fourth in Exo 14:24 and Jos 10:10. And it by no means follows, that because in the passages referred to, “yaahom is found in close association with songs or poetical passages” (Bertheau), the word itself must be borrowed from the same source as the songs, viz., from the book of Jasher (Jos 10:13). For המם is found in the same signification in 1Sa 7:10; Exo 23:27, and Deu 2:15, where we look in vain for any songs; whilst it always occurs in connection with the account of a miraculous overthrow of the foe by the omnipotent power of God.

The Idolatry of the Israelites. (b. c. 1406.)

1 Now these are the nations which the Lord left, to prove Israel by them, even as many of Israel as had not known all the wars of Canaan; 2 Only that the generations of the children of Israel might know, to teach them war, at the least such as before knew nothing thereof; 3 Namely, five lords of the Philistines, and all the Canaanites, and the Sidonians, and the Hivites that dwelt in mount Lebanon, from mount Baal-hermon unto the entering in of Hamath. 4 And they were to prove Israel by them, to know whether they would hearken unto the commandments of the Lord , which he commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses. 5 And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites: 6 And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods. 7 And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord , and forgat the Lord their God, and served Baalim and the groves.

We are here told what remained of the old inhabitants of Canaan. 1. There were some of them that kept together in united bodies, unbroken (v. 3): The five lords of the Philistines, namely, Ashdod, Gaza, Askelon, Gath, and Ekron, 1 Sam. vi. 17. Three of these cities had been in part reduced (ch. i. 18), but it seems the Philistines (probably with the help of the other two, which strengthened their confederacy with each other thenceforward) recovered the possession of them. These gave the greatest disturbance to Israel of any of the natives, especially in the latter times of the judges, and they were never quite reduced until David's time. There was a particular nation called Canaanites, that kept their ground with the Sidonians, upon the coast of the great sea. And in the north the Hivites held much of Mount Lebanon, it being a remote corner, in which perhaps they were supported by some of the neighbouring states. But, besides these, 2. There were every where in all parts of the country some scatterings of the nations (v. 5), Hittites, Amorites, &c., which, by Israel's foolish connivance and indulgence, were so many, so easy, and so insolent, that the children of Israel are said to dwell among them, as if the right had still remained in the Canaanites, and the Israelites had been taken in by their permission and only as tenants at will.

Now concerning these remnants of the natives observe,

I. How wisely God permitted them to remain. It is mentioned in the close of the foregoing chapter as an act of God's justice, that he let them remain for Israel's correction. But here another construction is put upon it, and it appears to have been an act of God's wisdom, that he let them remain for Israel's real advantage, that those who had not known the wars of Canaan might learn war, v. 1, 2. It was the will of God that the people of Israel should be inured to war, 1. Because their country was exceedingly rich and fruitful, and abounded with dainties of all sorts, which, if they were not sometimes made to know hardship, would be in danger of sinking them into the utmost degree of luxury and effeminacy. They must sometimes wade in blood, and not always in milk and honey, lest even their men of war, by the long disuse of arms, should become as soft and as nice as the tender and delicate woman, that would not set so much as the sole of her foot to the ground for tenderness and delicacy, a temper as destructive to every thing that is good as it is to every thing that is great, and therefore to be carefully watched against by all God's Israel. 2. Because their country lay very much in the midst of enemies, by whom they must expect to be insulted; for God's heritage was a speckled bird; the birds round about were against her, Jer. xii. 9. It was therefore necessary they should be well disciplined, that they might defend their coasts when invaded, and might hereafter enlarge their coast as God had promised them. The art of war is best learnt by experience, which not only acquaints men with martial discipline, but (which is no less necessary) inspires them with a martial disposition. It was for the interest of Israel to breed soldiers, as it is the interest of an island to breed sea-men, and therefore God left Canaanites among them, that, by the less difficulties and hardships they met with in encountering them, they might be prepared for greater, and, by running with the footmen, might learn to contend with horses, Jer. xii. 5. Israel was a figure of the church militant, that must fight its way to a triumphant state. The soldiers of Christ must endure hardness, 2 Tim. ii. 3. Corruption is therefore left remaining in the hearts even of good Christians, that they may learn war, may keep on the whole armour of God, and stand continually upon their guard. The learned bishop Patrick offers another sense of v. 2: That they might know to teach them war, that is, they shall know what it is to be left to themselves. Their fathers fought by a divine power. God taught their hands to war and their fingers to fight; but now that they have forfeited his favour let them learn what it is to fight like other men.

II. How wickedly Israel mingled themselves with those that did remain. One thing God intended in leaving them among them was to prove Israel (v. 4), that those who were faithful to the God of Israel might have the honour of resisting the Canaanites' allurements to idolatry, and that those who were false and insincere might be discovered, and might fall under the shame of yielding to those allurements. Thus in the Christian churches there must needs be heresies, that those who are perfect may be made manifest, 1 Cor. xi. 19. Israel, upon trial, proved bad. 1. They joined in marriage with the Canaanites (v. 6), though they could not advance either their honour or their estate by marrying with them. They would mar their blood instead of mending it, and sink their estates instead of raising them, by such marriages. 2. Thus they were brought to join in worship with them; they served their gods (v. 6), Baalim and the groves (v. 7), that is, the images that were worshipped in groves of thick trees, which were a sort of natural temples. In such unequal matches there is more reason to fear that the bad will corrupt the good than to hope that the good will reform the bad, as there is in laying two pears together, the one rotten and the other sound. When they inclined to worship other gods they forgot the Lord their God. In complaisance to their new relations, they talked of nothing by Baalim and the groves, so that by degrees they lost the remembrance of the true God, and forgot there was such a Being, and what obligations they lay under to him. In nothing is the corrupt memory of man more treacherous than in this, that it is apt to forget God; because out of sight, he is out of mind; and here begins all the wickedness that is in the world: they have perverted their way, for they have forgotten the Lord their God.

The Government of Othniel. (b. c. 1336.)

8 Therefore the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia: and the children of Israel served Chushan-rishathaim eight years. 9 And when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord , the Lord raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother. 10 And the Spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he judged Israel, and went out to war: and the Lord delivered Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia into his hand; and his hand prevailed against Chushan-rishathaim. 11 And the land had rest forty years. And Othniel the son of Kenaz died.

We now come to the records of the government of the particular judges, the first of which was Othniel, in whom the story of this book is knit to that of Joshua, for even in Joshua's time Othniel began to be famous, by which it appears that it was not long after Israel's settlement in Canaan before their purity began to be corrupted and their peace (by consequence) disturbed. And those who have taken pains to enquire into the sacred chronology are generally agreed that the Danites' idolatry, and the war with the Benjamites for abusing the Levite's concubine, though related in the latter end of this book, happened about this time, under or before the government of Othniel, who, though a judge, was not such a king in Israel as would keep men from doing what was right in their own eyes. In this short narrative of Othniel's government we have,

I. The distress that Israel was brought into for their sin, v. 8. God being justly displeased with them for plucking up the hedge of their peculiarity, and laying themselves in common with the nations, plucked up the hedge of their protection and laid them open to the nations, set them to sale as goods he would part with, and the first that laid hands on them was Chushan-rishathaim, king of that Syria which lay between the two great rivers of Tigris and Euphrates, thence called Mesopotamia, which signifies in the midst of rivers. It is probable that this was a warlike prince, and, aiming to enlarge his dominions, he invaded the two tribes first on the other side Jordan that lay next him, and afterwards, perhaps by degrees, penetrated into the heart of the country, and as far as he went put them under contribution, exacting it with rigour, and perhaps quartering soldiers upon them. Laban, who oppressed Jacob with a hard service, was of this country; but it lay at such a distance that one could not have thought Israel's trouble would come from such a far country, which shows so much the more of the hand of God in it.

II. Their return to God in this distress: When he slew them, then they sought him whom before they had slighted. The children of Israel, even the generality of them, cried unto the Lord, v. 9. At first they made light of their trouble, and thought they could easily shake off the yoke of a prince at such a distance; but, when it continued eight years, they began to feel the smart of it, and then those cried under it who before had laughed at it. Those who in the day of their mirth had cried to Baalim and Ashtaroth now that they are in trouble cry to the Lord from whom they had revolted, whose justice brought them into this trouble, and whose power and favour could alone help them out of it. Affliction makes those cry to God with importunity who before would scarcely speak to him.

III. God's return in mercy to them for their deliverance. Though need drove them to him, he did not therefore reject their prayers, but graciously raised up a deliverer, or saviour, as the word is. Observe, 1. Who the deliverer was. It was Othniel, who married Caleb's daughter, one of the old stock that had seen the works of the Lord, and had himself, no question, kept his integrity, and secretly lamented the apostasy of his people, but waited for a divine call to appear publicly for the redress of their grievances. He was now, we may suppose, far advanced in years, when God raised him up to this honour, but the decays of age were no hindrance to his usefulness when God had work for him to do. 2. Whence he had his commission, not of man, nor by man; but the Spirit of the Lord came upon him (v. 10), the spirit of wisdom and courage to qualify him for the service, and a spirit of power to excite him to it, so as to give him and others full satisfaction that it was the will of God he should engage in it. The Chaldee says, The spirit of prophecy remained on him. 3. What method he took. He first judged Israel, reproved them, called them to account for their sins, and reformed them, and then went out to war. This was the right method. Let sin at home be conquered, that worst of enemies, and then enemies abroad will be the more easily dealt with. Thus let Christ be our Judge and Law-giver, and then he will save us, and on no other terms, Isa. xxxiii. 22. 4. What good success he had. He prevailed to break the yoke of the oppression, and, as it should seem, to break the neck of the oppressor; for it is said, The Lord delivered Chushan-rishathaim into his hand. Now was Judah, of which tribe Othniel was, as a lion's whelp gone up from the prey. 5. The happy consequence of Othniel's good services. The land, though not getting ground, yet had rest, and some fruits of the reformation, forty years; and the benefit would have been perpetual if they had kept close to God and their duty.

Israel Oppressed by Eglon; Eglon Slain by Ehud. (b. c. 1336.)

12 And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord : and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the Lord . 13 And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees. 14 So the children of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years. 15 But when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord , the Lord raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera, a Benjamite, a man left-handed: and by him the children of Israel sent a present unto Eglon the king of Moab. 16 But Ehud made him a dagger which had two edges, of a cubit length; and he did gird it under his raiment upon his right thigh. 17 And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man. 18 And when he had made an end to offer the present, he sent away the people that bare the present. 19 But he himself turned again from the quarries that were by Gilgal, and said, I have a secret errand unto thee, O king: who said, Keep silence. And all that stood by him went out from him. 20 And Ehud came unto him; and he was sitting in a summer parlour, which he had for himself alone. And Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee. And he arose out of his seat. 21 And Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly: 22 And the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt came out. 23 Then Ehud went forth through the porch, and shut the doors of the parlour upon him, and locked them. 24 When he was gone out, his servants came; and when they saw that, behold, the doors of the parlour were locked, they said, Surely he covereth his feet in his summer chamber. 25 And they tarried till they were ashamed: and, behold, he opened not the doors of the parlour; therefore they took a key, and opened them: and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth. 26 And Ehud escaped while they tarried, and passed beyond the quarries, and escaped unto Seirath. 27 And it came to pass, when he was come, that he blew a trumpet in the mountain of Ephraim, and the children of Israel went down with him from the mount, and he before them. 28 And he said unto them, Follow after me: for the Lord hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of Jordan toward Moab, and suffered not a man to pass over. 29 And they slew of Moab at that time about ten thousand men, all lusty, and all men of valour; and there escaped not a man. 30 So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest fourscore years.

Ehud is the next of the judges whose achievements are related in this history, and here is an account of his actions.

I. When Israel sins again God raises up a new oppressor, v. 12-14. It was an aggravation of their wickedness that they did evil again after they had smarted so long for their former iniquities, promised so fair when Othniel judged them, and received so much mercy from God in their deliverance. What, and after all this, again to break his commandments! Was the disease obstinate to all the methods of cure, both corrosives and lenitives? It seems it was. Perhaps they thought they might make the more bold with their old sins because they saw themselves in no danger from their old oppressor; the powers of that kingdom were weakened and brought low. But God made them know that he had variety of rods wherewith to chastise them: He strengthened Eglon king of Moab against them. This oppressor lay nearer to them than the former, and therefore would be the more mischievous to them; God's judgments thus approached them gradually, to bring them to repentance. When Israel dwelt in tents, but kept their integrity, Balak king of Moab, who would have strengthened himself against them, was baffled; but now that they had forsaken God, and worshipped the gods of the nations round about them (and perhaps those of the Moabites among the rest), here was another king of Moab, whom God strengthened against them, put power into his hands, though a wicked man, that he might be a scourge to Israel. The staff in his hand with which he beat Israel was God's indignation; howbeit he meant not so, neither did his heart think so, Isa. x. 6, 7. Israelites did ill, and, we may suppose, Moabites did worse; yet because God commonly punishes the sins of his own people in this world, that, the flesh being destroyed, the spirit may be saved, Israel is weakened and Moab strengthened against them. God would not suffer the Israelites, when they were the stronger, to distress the Moabites, nor give them any disturbance, though they were idolaters (Deut. ii. 9); yet now he suffered the Moabites to distress Israel, and strengthened them on purpose that they might: Thy judgments, O God! are a great deep. The king of Moab took to his assistance the Ammonites and Amalekites (v. 13), and this strengthened him; and we are here told how they prevailed. 1. They beat them in the field: They went and smote Israel (v. 13), not only those tribes that lay next them on the other side Jordan, who, though first settled, being frontier-tribes, were most disturbed; but those also within Jordan, for they made themselves masters of the city of palm-trees, which, it is probable, was a strong-hold erected near the place where Jericho had stood, for that was so called (Deut. xxxiv. 3), into which the Moabites put a garrison, to be a bridle upon Israel, and to secure the passes of Jordan, for the preservation of the communication with their own country. It was well for the Kenites that they had left this city (ch. i. 16) before it fell into the hands of the enemy. See how quickly the Israelites lost that by their own sin which they had gained by miracles of divine mercy. 2. They made them to serve (v. 14), that is, exacted tribute from them, either the fruits of the earth in kind or money in lieu of them. They neglected the service of God, and did not pay him his tribute; thus therefore did God recover from them that wine and oil, that silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal, Hos. ii. 8. What should have been paid to the divine grace, and was not, was distrained for, and paid to the divine justice. The former servitude (v. 8) lasted but eight years, this eighteen; for, if less troubles do not do the work, God will send greater.

II. When Israel prays again God raises up a new deliverer (v. 15), named Ehud. We are here told,

1. That he was a Benjamite. The city of palm-trees lay within the lot of this tribe, by which it is probable that they suffered most, and therefore stirred first to shake off the yoke. It is supposed by the chronologers that the Israelites' war with Benjamin for the wickedness of Gibeah, by which that whole tribe was reduced to 600 men, happened before this, so that we may well think that tribe to be now the weakest of all the tribes, yet out of it God raised up this deliverer, in token of his being perfectly reconciled to them, to manifest his own power in ordaining strength out of weakness, and that he might bestow more abundant honour upon that part which lacked, 1 Cor. xii. 24.

2. That he was left-handed, as it seems many of that tribe were, ch. xx. 16. Benjamin signifies the son of the right hand, and yet multitudes of them were left-handed; for men's natures do not always answer their names. The LXX. say he was an ambi-dexter, one that could use both hands alike, supposing that this was an advantage to him in the action he was called to; but the Hebrew phrase, that he was shut of his right hand, intimates that, either through disease or disuse, he made little or no use of that, but of his left hand only, and so was the less fit for war, because he must needs handle his sword but awkwardly; yet God chose this left-handed man to be the man of his right hand, whom he would make strong for himself, Ps. lxxx. 17. It was God's right hand that gained Israel the victory (Ps. xliv. 3), not the right hand of the instruments he employed.

3. We are here told what Ehud did for the deliverance of Israel out of the hands of the Moabites. He saved the oppressed by destroying the oppressors, when the measure of their iniquity was full and the set time to favour Israel had come.

(1.) He put to death Eglon the king of Moab; I say, put him to death, not murdered or assassinated him, but as a judge, or minister of divine justice, executed the judgments of God upon him, as an implacable enemy to God and Israel. This story is particularly related.

[1.] He had a fair occasion of access to him. Being an ingenious active man, and fit to stand before kings, his people chose him to carry a present in the name of all Israel, over and above their tribute, to their great lord the king of Moab, that they might find favour in his eyes, v. 15. The present is called mincha in the original, which is the word used in the law for the offerings that were presented to God to obtain his favour; these the children of Israel had not offered in their season to the God that loved them; and now, to punish them for their neglect, they are laid under a necessity of bringing their offerings to a heathen prince that hated them. Ehud went on his errand to Eglon, offered his present with the usual ceremony and expressions of dutiful respect, the better to colour what he intended and to prevent suspicion.

[2.] It should seem, from the first, he designed to be the death of him, God putting it into his heart, and letting him know also that the motion was from himself, by the Spirit that came upon him, the impulses of which carried with them their own evidence, and so gave him full satisfaction both as to the lawfulness and the success of this daring attempt, of both which he would have had reason enough to doubt. If he be sure that God bids him do it, he is sure both that he may do it and that he shall do it; for a command from God is sufficient to bear us out, and bring us off, both against our consciences and against all the world. That he compassed and imagined the death of this tyrant appears by the preparation he made of a weapon for the purpose, a short dagger, but half a yard long, like a bayonet, which might easily be concealed under his clothes (v. 16), perhaps because none were suffered to come near the king with their swords by their sides. This he wore on his right thigh, that it might be the more ready to his left hand, and might be the less suspected.

[3.] He contrived how to be alone with him, which he might the more easily be now that he had not only made himself known to him, but ingratiated himself by the present, and the compliments which perhaps, on this occasion, he had passed upon him. Observe, how he laid his plot. First, He concealed his design even from his own attendants, brought them part of the way, and then ordered them to go forward towards home, while he himself, as if he had forgotten something behind him, went back to the king of Moab's court, v. 18. There needed but one hand to do the execution; had more been engaged they could not so safely have kept counsel, nor so easily have made an escape. Secondly, He returned from the quarries by Gilgal (v. 19), from the graven images (so it is in the margin) which were with Gilgal, set up perhaps by the Moabites with the twelve stones which Joshua had set up there. Some suggest that the sight of these idols stirred up in him such an indignation against the king of Moab as put him upon the execution of that design which otherwise he had thought to let fall for the present. Or, perhaps, he came so far as to these images, that, telling from what place he returned, the king of Moab might be the more apt to believe he had a message from God. Thirdly, He begged a private audience, and obtained it in a withdrawing-room, here called a summer parlour. He told the king he had a secret errand to him, who thereupon ordered all his attendants to withdraw, v. 19. Whether he expected to receive some private instructions from an oracle, or some private informations concerning the present state of Israel, as if Ehud would betray his country, it was a very unwise thing for him to be all alone with a stranger and one whom he had reason to look upon as an enemy; but those that are marked for ruin are infatuated, and their hearts hid from understanding; God deprives them of discretion.

[4.] When he had him alone he soon dispatched him. His summer parlour, where he used to indulge himself in ease and luxury, was the place of his execution. First, Ehud demands his attention to a message from God (v. 20), and that message was a dagger. God sends to us by the judgments of his hand, as well as by the judgments of his mouth. Secondly, Eglon pays respect to a message from God. Though a king, though a heathen king, though rich and powerful, though now tyrannizing over the people of God, though a fat unwieldy man that could not easily rise nor stand long, though in private and what he did was not under observation, yet, when he expected to receive orders from heaven, he rose out of his seat; whether it was low and easy, or whether it was high and stately, he quitted it, and stood up when God was about to speak to him, thereby owning God his superior. This shames the irreverence of many who are called Christians, and yet, when a message from God is delivered to them, study to show, by all the marks of carelessness, how little they regard it. Ehud, in calling what he had to do a message from God, plainly avouches a divine commission for it; and God's inclining Eglon to stand up to it did both confirm the commission and facilitate the execution. Thirdly, The message was delivered, not to his ear, but immediately, and literally, to his heart, into which the fatal knife was thrust, and was left there, v. 21, 22. His extreme fatness made him unable to resist or to help himself; probably it was the effect of his luxury and excess; and, when the fat closed up the blade, God would by this circumstance show how those that pamper the body do but prepare for their own misery. However, it was an emblem of his carnal security and senselessness. His heart was a fat as grease, and in that he thought himself enclosed. See Ps. cxix. 70; xvii. 10. Eglon signifies a calf, and he fell like a fatted calf, by the knife, an acceptable sacrifice to divine justice. Notice is taken of the coming out of the dirt or dung, that the death of this proud tyrant may appear the more ignominious and shameful. He that had been so very nice and curious about his own body, to keep it easy and clean, shall now be found wallowing in his own blood and excrements. Thus does God pour contempt upon princes. Now this act of Ehud's may justify itself because he had special direction from God to do it, and it was agreeable to the usual method which, under that dispensation, God took to avenge his people of their enemies, and to manifest to the world his own justice. But it will by no means justify any now in doing the like. No such commissions are now given, and to pretend to them is to blaspheme God, and made him patronize the worst of villanies. Christ bade Peter sheathe the sword, and we find not that he bade him draw it again.

[5.] Providence wonderfully favoured his escape, when he had done the execution. First, The tyrant fell silently, without any shriek or out-cry, which might have been overheard by his servants at a distance. How silently does he go down to the pit, choked up, it may be, with his own fat, which stifled his dying groans, though he had made so great a noise in the world, and had been the terror of the mighty in the land of the living! Secondly, The heroic executioner of this vengeance, with such a presence of mind as discovered not only no consciousness of guilt, but a strong confidence in the divine protection, shut the doors after him, took the key with him, and passed through the guards with such an air of innocence, and boldness, and unconcernedness, as made them not at all to suspect his having done any thing amiss. Thirdly, The servants that attended in the antechamber, coming to the door of the inner parlour, when Ehud had gone, to know their master's pleasure, and finding it locked and all quiet, concluded he had lain down to sleep, had covered his feet upon his couch, and gone to consult his pillow about the message he had received, and to dream upon it (v. 24), and therefore would not offer to open the door. Thus by their care not to disturb his sleep they lost the opportunity of revenging his death. See what comes of men's taking state too much, and obliging those about them to keep their distance; some time or other it may come against them more than they think of. Fourthly, The servants at length opened the door, and found their master had slept indeed his long sleep, v. 25. The horror of this tragical spectacle, and the confusion it must needs put them into, to reflect upon their own inconsideration in not opening the door sooner, quite put by the thoughts of sending pursuers after him that had done it, whom now they despaired of overtaking. Lastly, Ehud by this means made his escape to Sierath, a thick wood; so some, v. 26. It is not said anywhere in this story what was the place in which Eglon lived now; but, there being no mention of Ehud passing and repassing Jordan, I am inclined to think that Eglon had left his own country of Moab, on the other side Jordan, and made his principal residence at this time in the city of palm-trees, within the land of Canaan, a richer country than his own, and that there he was slain, and then the quarries by Gilgal were not far off him. There where he had settled himself, and thought he had sufficiently fortified himself to lord it over the people of God, there he was cut off, and proved to be fed for the slaughter like a lamb in a large place.

(2.) Ehud, having slain the king of Moab, gave a total rout to the forces of the Moabites that were among them, and so effectually shook off the yoke of their oppression. [1.] He raised an army immediately in Mount Ephraim, at some distance from the headquarters of the Moabites, and headed them himself, v. 27. The trumpet he blew was indeed a jubilee-trumpet, proclaiming liberty, and a joyful sound it was to the oppressed Israelites, who for a long time had heard no other trumpets than those of their enemies. [2.] Like a pious man, and as one that did all this in faith, he took encouragement himself, and gave encouragement to his soldiers, from the power of God engaged for them (v. 28): "Follow me, for the Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands; we are sure to have God with us, and therefore may go on boldly, and shall go on triumphantly." [3.] Like a politic general, he first secured the fords of Jordan, set strong guards upon all those passes, to cut off the communications between the Moabites that were in the land of Israel (for upon them only his design was) and their own country on the other side Jordan, that if, upon the alarm given them, they resolved to fly, they might not escape thither, and, if they resolved to fight, they might not have assistance thence. Thus he shut them up in that land as their prison in which they were pleasing themselves as their palace and paradise. [4.] He then fell upon them, and put them all to the sword, 10,000 of them, which it seems was the number appointed to keep Israel in subjection (v. 29): There escaped not a man of them. And they were the best and choicest of all the king of Moab's forces, all lusty men, men of bulk and stature, and not only able-bodied, but high spirited too, and men of valour, v. 29. But neither their strength nor their courage stood them in any stead when the set time had come for God to deliver them into the hand of Israel. [5.] The consequence of this victory was that the power of the Moabites was wholly broken in the land of Israel. The country was cleared of these oppressors, and the land had rest eighty years, v. 30. We may hope that there was likewise a reformation among them, and a check give to idolatry, by the influence of Ehud which continued a good part of this time. It was a great while for the land to rest, fourscore years; yet what is that to the saints' everlasting rest in the heavenly Canaan?

Shamgar Slays Six Hundred Philistines. (b. c. 1316.)

31 And after him was Shamgar the son of Anath, which slew of the Philistines six hundred men with an ox goad: and he also delivered Israel.

When it is said the land had rest eighty years, some think it meant chiefly of that part of the land which lay eastward on the banks of Jordan, which had been oppressed by the Moabites; but it seems, by this passage here, that the other side of the country which lay south-west was in that time infested by the Philistines, against whom Shamgar made head. 1. It seems Israel needed deliverance, for he delivered Israel; how great the distress was Deborah afterwards related in her song (ch. v. 6), that in the days of Shamgar the highways were unoccupied, &c.; that part of the country which lay next to the Philistines was so infested with plunderers that people could not travel the roads in safety, but were in danger of being set upon and robbed, nor durst they dwell in the unguarded villages, but were forced to take shelter in the fortified cities. 2. God raised him up to deliver them, as it should seem, while Ehud was yet living, but superannuated. So inconsiderable were the enemies for number that it seems the killing of 600 of them amounted to a deliverance of Israel, and so many he slew with an ox-goad, or, as some read it, a plough-share. It is probable that he was himself following the plough when the Philistines made an inroad upon the country to ravage it, and God put it into his heart to oppose them; the impulse being sudden and strong, and having neither sword nor spear to do execution with, he took the instrument that was next at hand, some of the tools of his plough, and with that killed so many hundred men and came off unhurt. See here, (1.) That God can make those eminently serviceable to his glory and his church's good whose extraction, education, and employment, are very mean and obscure. He that has the residue of the Spirit could, when he pleased, make ploughmen judges and generals, and fishermen apostles. (2.) It is no matter how weak the weapon is if God direct and strengthen the arm. An ox-goad, when God pleases, shall do more than Goliath's sword. And sometimes he chooses to work by such unlikely means, that the excellency of the power may appear to be of God.