Judges 17:6

Jdg 17:6 In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.

Ver. 6. In those days there was no king in Israel,] i.e., No ordinary supreme magistrate: hence this idolatry and the following outrages. Of the two, tyranny or ochlocraty, that rule of rascality, is better than anarchy. It is noted as a just wonder, that "the grasshoppers have no king, yet go they forth in bands": {Pro 30:27} for the body of the commonwealth which lacked a chief ruler, is like the body of Polyphemus, without an eye. Ulysses, asking what kind of kingdom the Cyclopes had, was answered by Silenus, Nομαδες, ακουει ουδεις ουδενος, they wander at pleasure, and do what they want without control. The inhabitants of Brazil are said to be sine fide, sine rege, sine lege, without religion, law, or government, and must therefore needs be miserable. Look what a ship is without a steersman, a flock without a shepherd, a house without the father of the family, or a school without a schoolmaster; such is a state without a supreme government. This when none would take upon them, the prophet showeth that confusion followed, {Isa 3:6} and men became as fishes, devouring one another.

But every man did that which was right in his own eyes.] So they did in the interregnums at Rome, and do still in Turkey, to the great disturbance of the public welfare. Stobaeus {a} telleth us, that by the Persian law, there was at the death of their king a five days’ lawless liberty proclaimed, to the end that, by the want of good government for such a time, people might be made to know the worth of it, and so might prize it the better ever after.

{a} Orat., xlii.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jdg 17:6. There was no king in Israel — No judge to govern and control them; the word king being used largely for a supreme magistrate. God raised up judges to rule and deliver the people when he saw fit; and at other times for their sins he suffered them to be without them, and such a time this was; and therefore they ran into that idolatry from which the judges usually kept them; as appears by that solemn and oft-repeated declaration in this book, that after the death of such or such a judge, the people forsook the Lord, and turned to idols. His own eyes — That is, not what pleased God, but what best suited his own fancy.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For where there is no Magistrate fearing God, there can be no true religion or order.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

every man did that which was right in his own eyes--From want of a settled government, there was no one to call him to account. No punishment followed any crime.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 6. There was no king in Israel] The word מלך melech, which generally means king, is sometimes taken for a supreme governor, judge, magistrate, or ruler of any kind; (see Ge 36:31, and De 33:5); and it is likely it should be so understood here.

Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.] He was his own governor, and what he did he said was right; and, by his cunning and strength, defended his conduct. When a man's own will, passions, and caprice, are to be made the rule of law, society is in a most perilous and ruinous state. Civil government is of God; and without it the earth must soon be desolated. There was a time when there was no king in England; and that was, in general, a time of scandal to religion, and oppression to men.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(6) In those days there was no king.—This shows that these narratives were written, or more probably edited, in the days of the monarchy. (See Jdg_18:1; Jdg_19:1; Jdg_21:25.)

Did that which was right in his own eyes.—The notice is added to show why there was no authoritative interference of prince or ruler to prevent idolatrous or lawless proceedings. (Deu_12:8 : “Ye shall not do after all the things which we do here this day, every man what is right in his own eyes.”)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In those days there was no king in Israel,.... That is, no supreme magistrate, judge, or ruler, Joshua being dead and Caleb also, and the elders contemporary with them; for what the Samaritan Chronicle says (l) is without foundation, that Joshua a little before his death cast a lot in the presence of the congregation, to know who should govern after him, and the lot came to one Abel, of the tribe of Judah:

but every man did that which was right in his own eyes; which accounts for the idolatry of Micah, there being no supreme magistrate to take cognizance of his sin, and restrain him from it, or punish him for it according to the law of God.

(l) Apud Hottinger. Smegma Orient. p. 522.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

In those days ... - This phrase, indicating distinctly that the writer lived after the establishment of the kingly government in Israel, is unique to the author of these last five chapters.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Himself. Serarius thinks this took place before Heli was appointed to succeed Samson. But the opinion of Salien (Menochius) is more probable. For, though he places this history in the 22d year of Othoniel, yet we must remember that he attributes to him all the years of anarchy, so that this liberty was taken by an individual, when none had power or zeal enough to restrain it. How much would Phinees be mortified at this prevarication if he were still alive! (Haydock) --- The title of king may be applied to the judges. But this book was probably written after the appointment of Saul. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

No king, i.e. no judge to govern and control them. The word king being here used largely for a supreme magistrate; as Gen 36:31; Deu 33:5. God raised up judges to rule and deliver the people when he saw fit; and at other times for their sins he suffered them to be without them, and such a time this was; and therefore they ran into that idolatry from which the judges usually kept them, as appears by that solemn and oft-repeated passage in this book, that after the death of such or such a judge the people forsook the Lord, and turned to idols.

That which was right in his own eyes, i.e. not what pleased God, but what best suited his own fancy or lusts.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6. No king — This verse seems here, as everywhere, to explain the irregularities and evils of the age. It here explains how a man in central Palestine could establish such a semblance of idolatry, and profanely make a priest contrary to the requirements of the law. There was no central government to look after such irregularities, and bring the whole nation to uniform methods of worship, or counteract and destroy the growth of various evils.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There was no king. This must have been written in the days of the kings of Israel and Judah, and perhaps with reference to the efforts of such kings as Ass (1Ki_15:13) and Jehoshaphat (1Ki_22:43) to put down idolatry.

No king.

The writer of the Book of Judges more than once attributes the social disorders of Israel to the want of a king. This idea has its bearings on national interests and on private conduct.

I THE NEED OF A KING IN CONNECTION WITH NATIONAL INTERESTS.

1. A centre of authority is essential to the peace arid prosperity of anation. As the first duty of a government is to maintain order, so the need of authority and organisation for the maintenance of order makes the establishment of a government essential to a nation. This is necessary,

(1) to punish violence and crime,

(2) to restrain the unjust encroachment of one man upon the rights of another,

(3) to arbitrate between the conflicting claims of individual men and of great classes of the community,

(4) to promote national objects which are too large for private enterprise, and

(5) to cement the unity of the nation and organise this for defence against foreign invasion.

2. When a nation is not prepared for self-government it is best for it to be ruled by one strong hand. Apart from political requisites, certain moral conditions must be fulfilled before a people can practise self-government. There must be unity of sympathy and self-control. Neither of these conditions was fulfilled by the tribes of Israel in the days of the Judges. Mutual jealousy and antagonism prevailed among them, and violent measures were too common for the minority to submit peaceably to the will of the majority. The spiritual vision of the Divine King which had maintained the unity of the nation in the days of Moses was fading away, and now that sublime and unearthly government was nearly lost, there was no hope for the people but in the establishment of a human monarchy. It is foolish to maintain in words an ideal which is too high for practice. Better confess our degeneracy and shape our conduct according to the means within reach.

II THE NEED OF A KING IN CONNECTION WITH PRIVATE CONDUCT. The soul needs a king. We are born to obey. We need some authority above us to keep us right.

1. It is not safe for every man to do what is right in his own eyes, because

(1) we are swayed by passion and selfish greed, and

(2) in our best moments we are liable to prejudice, and are too shortsighted to see what is best. The anarchy of universal self-seeking without restraint would bring the world to ruin. For the good of all it is necessary that each should not be at liberty simply to please himself.

2. It is not right for every man to do that which is right in his own eyes. We are members one of another, and are morally bound to respect the rights, and needs, and wishes of our neighbours. We are children of the great King, and under a supreme obligation to respect his law. The Church is not a republic; it is a kingdom. The Christian is not free to follow his fancy; he is required to submit to and to obey the mind and will of Christ. Christian liberty is not found in the license of self-will, but in the willingness of obedience and the love which delights to fulfil the will of God and to do to others as we would that they should do to us. A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

No king - No judge to govern and control them. The word king being used largely for a supreme magistrate. God raised up Judges to rule and deliver the people, when he saw fit; and at other times for their sins he suffered them to be without them, and such a time this was; and therefore they ran into that idolatry, from which the Judges usually kept them; as appears by that solemn and oft- repeated passage in this book, that after the death of such or such a judge, the people forsook the Lord, and turned to idols. His own eyes - That is, not what pleased God, but what best suited his own fancy.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.