Judges 2:16

Jdg 2:16 Nevertheless the LORD raised up judges, which delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them.

Ver. 16. Nevertheless the Lord.] Here we have an epitome of the whole book, showing the circle that God goeth in with his. See Psa 30:5; Psa 30:7, &c., {See Trapp on "Psa 30:5"} {See Trapp on "Psa 30:7"}

Raised up judges.] Ordinary men, but extraordinarily qualified. God gifteth those whom he sendeth.

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_2:16-23

The Lord raised up Judges.

The judges, their choice, function, and administration

I. These men, in some of whom the miraculous operations of the Holy Spirit were singularly manifested, were not chosen, like the suffetes of Carthage, with regal powers for a year; nor like the archons of Athens, with divided and carefully defined responsibilities; nor like the dictators of Rome, chosen to exercise uncontrolled power during extraordinary emergencies. They were not chosen by the people at all. They were sent forth by the Divine King of Israel--impelled by an inward inspiration, which was in several instances confirmed by outward miraculous signs to act in His great name. They were raised up as the exigencies of the times required; and their presence and their absence were alike calculated to keep alive in the nation a sense of dependence upon its invisible King.

II. The functions which the judges were called upon to discharge may be partly understood by referring to the position in which Moses and Joshua stood in relation to the twelve tribes. The judges were Gods vicegerents. The parallel between the office of the judges and that of Moses or Joshua was not, however, complete. In so far as they were specially raised up to be Gods vicegerents in Israel, it holds good; yet it was a separate and distinct form of government, and is recognised as such by St. Paul. Moses and Joshua was called, each of them, to introduce a new order of things. But during the period of the judges, nothing, in respect of Gods covenant, was put upon a new footing. The history of the people is a succession of various fortunes, afflictions, and deliverances, alternating according to their public sin or their repentance: but no change occurred, permanently or deeply affecting their public condition. As often as the sins of the people brought down Gods chastisements, and chastisement produced repentance, judges were raised up to repel the invader, and to restore peace and tranquillity. Hence they are frequently called, in the sacred history, deliverers and saviours. The judges were the chief magistrates of the Hebrew commonwealth. As such, they had to deal with religious, no less than with civil, affairs; for the sharp line of separation between these which modern ingenuity has invented did not then exist. It became the duty of the judges to stir up the people to return to the Lord; and hence they needed to be themselves men of faith.

III. With regard to the effect of their administration upon the nation of the Jews, I think the period of the judges was, upon the whole, a period of national advancement. For, in the first place, the rule of the judges secured long periods of public tranquillity. Gloomy and fearful as are some of the details furnished in the Book of Judges, the Hebrew nation was nevertheless in a better state during that period, morally, politically, and spiritually, than it became afterwards during the reigns of the later kings. Not only the intervals of repose, but also the periods of warfare, must be taken into account in estimating the benefits of their rule. In general, they exerted themselves to prevent idolatry, dissuading the people from their besetting sin; but there were times when the people would not hearken unto their judges; and further, when the judge was dead, they took advantage of the interregnum which sometimes occurred, and returned, and corrupted themselves more than their fathers. These apostasies were followed by chastisements. The Lord forsook them; He permitted their enemies to oppress and torment them; the east wind from the wilderness dried up the fountain of their strength, until, at the point to die, they bethought themselves of His holy name. Miserable and forsaken, their name might have been blotted out for ever but for the saviours--figures of a greater Saviour--whom their God raised up to deliver them. Nor was success denied to these men in that which they undertook. The kings of Mesopotamia, of Moab, and of Canaan, the fierce mountaineers of Ammon: the innumerable hordes of the Bedouin; the lordly and persistent Philistines, were in turn humbled and subdued by these men who, through faith, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the ninnies of the aliens. (L. H. Wiseman, M. A.)

.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jdg 2:16-17. Nevertheless the Lord raised up — By inward inspiration and excitement of their hearts, and by outward designation, testified by some extraordinary action. Judges — Supreme magistrates, whose office it was, under God, and by his particular direction, to govern the commonwealth of Israel by God’s laws, and to protect and save them from their enemies, to preserve and purge religion, and to maintain the liberties of the people against all oppressors. Yet they would not hearken to their judges — Who admonished them of their sin and folly, and of the danger and misery which would certainly befall them.

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

CRITICAL NOTES.—

Jdg_2:18. For it repented the Lord because of their groanings.] “Because the Lord had compassion upon their sighing.” [Keil.] “ ‘The Lord was moved with compassion,’ or ‘was grieved,’ ‘because of their groanings,’ as Jdg_21:15. So, too, Psa_106:45. The sense of repenting which the word (נחם) bears, Jon_3:9, and elsewhere, is secondary” [Speaker’s Com.]

Jdg_2:19. And it came to pass.] “But it came,” &c., the vau being taken adversatively. They ceased not.] Cf. Marg., “they let nothing fall of their doings,” i.e., of their wicked doings. LXX., “They abandoned not their devices.”

Jdg_2:20. And the anger of the Lord.] This resumes the statement from Jdg_2:14, the intervening passage being a general description of details presently to be mentioned in the main narrative.

Jdg_2:21. I also will not henceforth, &c.] Lit., “I also will not continue to drive out a man from before them.” This cessation of Jehovah’s working is placed over against the want of cessation from evil doings spoken of in Jdg_2:19.

Jdg_2:23. Therefore the Lord left.] That is to say, “Therefore the Lord had left,”&c. He had foreseen this backsliding of Israel (Deu_31:16-18), and had suffered the Canaanites to rally from the apparently overwhelming defeats of Joshua, in order that they might remain to prove Israel. Thus, as Prof. Steenstra remarks, “the ‘not speedily’ of Joshua’s time had by Israel’s faithless apostasy been changed into ‘never.’ ” The impression left by this verse in the A.V. as to not “driving them out hastily,” is certainly not in harmony with the emphatic statement in Jdg_2:21, that Jehovah would not go on, or add, “to drive out a man” in the future.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Jdg_2:16-23

THE CONFLICT OF GOD’S MERCY WITH MAN’S SIN

The Book of Judges, of which these verses give a summary, is a “book of the wars of the Lord.” We see here God contending with sin in the hearts of His people. He who reads the Books of Joshua and Judges merely as accounts of battles between the Israelites and their enemies, will overlook by far the larger half of the conflicts set down in the narratives. As was observed in treating of the siege of Jericho, God’s great battle there was with sin and unbelief in the hearts of the Israelites. Such, too, was the strife at Ai, at Beth-horon, and in the subsequent conflicts. Such, even more manifestly, is the great underlying purpose of all the struggles between man and man recorded in the history before us. In every battle, whether won by Israel or lost, the God of love is seen contending with the unbelief and idolatry of the people whom He had redeemed from the bondage of Egypt. The Divine word, through Hosea, might stand, indeed, for the text of this whole book: “I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms; but they knew not that I healed them.”

I. Great sin followed by still more abundant mercy. “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”

1. God’s mercy was in excess of His promises. The “thorns in their sides” had been repeatedly foretold to these Israelites. The punishments that would follow unfaithfulness had been reiterated again and again. These great deliverances under the judges had not been so foretold. While God’s judgments are ever equal to His threatenings, His mercies are often largely in excess of His promises. The evils which would follow disobedience were foretold in much detail, and they came, even “as the Lord had said” (Jdg_2:15); little, if anything, was said about the deliverances, but they came no less than the judgments. The wicked have every reason to believe that the threatened woes of the last day will also be even “as the Lord hath said;” the truly penitent will find in the way to heaven, and still more when there, that the half has not been told them of God’s wondrous goodness.

2. The mercy was through one man, because of the unfitness of the multitude. Each judge was made the great instrument of deliverance. This was emphatically the case in the instances of Ehud and Shamgar, Gideon and Samson. It seemed as if the Lord purposely took away all opportunities from the people to glory in their own might. They were too wicked for success, and even in their deepest penitence fit only for mercy. Hence God gave them deliverance through the personal prowess of a few men. The multitude was not fit to win favours; it was hardly prepared to receive them. The measure of a Church’s spiritual success is probably often according to its ability to bear success. The manner in which success comes may also furnish some indication as to our preparedness, in the sight of God, to receive the blessings of prosperity.

II. Rejected mercy followed by reckless sin (Jdg_2:17; Jdg_2:19). The Lord raised up judges, and delivered the people out of their great distress; the people prayed for deliverance, and gladly accepted it when it came; then, when their distress was removed, they rejected the Lord who had showed mercy upon them, and thus rejected all the high meanings with which the mercy was laden. It is not to be wondered at that we read, after that, “They returned, and corrupted themselves more than their fathers, in following other gods to serve them, and to bow down unto them; they ceased not from their evil doings, nor from their stubborn way.” To ignore great kindness and mercy is one of the most sure and terrible ways of hardening the heart in wickedness. Take the case of Judas. How tenderly our Lord’s kindness must have pleaded with that man in the upper room! Think of the Saviour washing the feet of the man who was already committed to the sale of his Master! After the washing of the feet, Christ let Judas see that He fully knew the dark purposes of his wicked heart, and yet had washed his feet, notwithstanding. Think of the kind sad tones of the voice that said, “One of you shall betray Me!” Think of the inquiry of the twelve, “Is it I?” and of the miserable creature who, not to betray himself by being unlike the rest, was forced in his turn to ask that question also! Think of the words to John, and of the gift of the sop which followed them! Why did not Judas drop the sop, and burst into tears, and openly acknowledge what His Lord, and through Him the eleven, so evidently knew? How hard the heart of Judas must have been after he had taken that sop, and managed to swallow it without crying! The tears must have all petrified within the man—a heart full of tears, turned into the severe hardness of diamonds, but having none of their purity. The tenderness of Christ’s deeds and words was not only making evident Christ’s former saying—“One of you is a devil;” for Judas to reject such love was to diabolise himself more than ever. Think of the opportunity for spontaneous confession which the Lord gave to the man in the words, uttered probably with infinite tenderness: “What thou doest, do quickly!” Why did not Judas answer back: “Lord, I cannot do it at all; much less can I do it quickly, against love like Thine?” But the man had no spontaneity in him. Poor Peter would have broken down half a dozen times through that supper; but Judas had no good impulses. So, “he then having received the sop went immediately out.” And he went out fully prepared to do his dreadful work. After being able to resist all the tenderness of the Saviour at the supper, it was easy work to go for the band of men and officers, and comparatively easy even to betray Christ with his kiss. The act of spurning the Lord’s tender mercy had turned his poor heart to very stone. Take the case of a young man, rejecting a good mother’s love and tears. Suppose a wicked son bent on doing some wicked deed. Think of a Christian and ever-gentle mother pleading with him on her knees, her eyes streaming with tears, not to do the evil thing in his heart. Imagine such a son striking that mother a brutal blow to the earth, and then fleeing from her presence while she was yet insensible. Who does not see how so wicked an act, against such love, would harden the heart almost beyond redemption. The man would be capable of anything after that. So it ever is with any who resist, and overcome, and put away from them tender pleadings of the love of Christ in their own consciences. So it was with these Israelites when they resisted the pleading of God’s great mercy with them in their distress, and turned again to sin. Isaiah saw the glory of Jehovah as He sat upon the throne high and lifted up, and the prophet cried, “I am a man of unclean lips!” To others of the Jews, God had showed the glory of much mercy and gentleness and love. But the Jews resisted that mercy. Therefore Isaiah said of Jehovah in His splendour of goodness, “He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw His glory, and spake of Him.” The resisted light of God ever turns to darkness. The heart that turns from His glory, must needs rush very deeply into sin, to forget itself. The glory makes a man feel with Peter: “Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man;” it makes him who sees it cry with Isaiah, “Woe is me! for I am a man of unclean lips:” or it drives him who beholds it more recklessly into wickedness than ever. Thus was it with the Israelites. When they turned again to sin after God’s very marvellous and gracious deliverances, there was nothing for it but that they should give themselves up to idolatry without restraint. To sin against great light and tender love, is to sin with utter recklessness.

III. Reckless sin followed by still severer chastisements (Jdg_2:20-21). “The anger of the Lord was hot against Israel.” He said, “I also will not henceforth drive out any from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died.” On one occasion, we see how, for a time, the Lord absolutely refused to hear their prayer. He answered them in their distress: “Wherefore I will deliver you no more. Go and cry unto the gods which ye have chosen; let them deliver you in the time of your tribulation” (Jdg_10:9-14).

1. God’s punishment of sin is too just to be given up without repentance. It is not grounded on the anger of impulse, but on the calm anger which has its foundation in a sense of wrong—wrong to Himself, wrong to men generally, and wrong to the souls of the evildoers. Man’s anger is a fire, burning with impulsive and selfish passion; God’s anger is a consuming fire, unless it be met by repentance, for it is kindled by eternal principles of righteousness and benevolence

2. God punishes sin too deliberately to forego His chastisements without reason. He does not begin to build His towers without counting the cost. The steady and increasing pressure upon Pharaoh can only end in Pharaoh’s destruction unless he repents. Israel itself must presently be carried even to Babylon, if Israel will persist in idolatry.

3. God’s punishments are too full of love to be given up lightly. Not only is the anger calm, but the love is very deep. The anger of God against sin has no hatred of the guilty—

“He hates the sin with all His heart,

And yet the sinner loves.”

“Having loved His own which are in the world, He loves them unto the end.” Hence we are prepared to see, as indicated in these closing verses,

IV. Chastisement, in its severest form, still made the vehicle of God’s merciful purposes (Jdg_2:22-23). God would “prove Israel” to see whether or not they would keep His way. The spirit of this patient purpose runs all through the book. It was not a sudden purpose, formed only when the Israelites began to depart from God. God had cherished that purpose even in the time of Joshua, and forborne to deliver the Canaanites entirely into Joshua’s hand. Notwithstanding this dark history under the several judges, the Divine purpose did not fall to the ground. Through steady and stern chastisements, the Israelites gradually grew into the feeling that the way of sin was a way of sorrow. God made Bye Path Meadow rougher than the King’s highway. There were times when Giant Despair fastened the people in his terrible stronghold. They were often glad to return again by the way in which they had departed. The result was that during Samuel’s time the nation was found, probably, nearer God than at any period between the death of “the elders who outlived Joshua,” and that of Samson in the house of Dagon, at Gaza. Mr. L. H. Wiseman has well expressed the real progress of the nation in the following remarks: “I am inclined to think that the period of the judges was, upon the whole, a period of national advancement. The prevailing idea is, no doubt, opposed to this view. It contemplates the period of the judges as an unbroken series of idolatries and crimes and miseries, relieved only by the occasional appearance of a Barak or a Gideon, like a momentary gleam of sunshine on a dark tempestuous day. But a deeper study of the times tends to modify and correct this idea. The rule of the judges secured long periods of tranquillity. Of history in general, it may be justly said that it brings into bold relief a nation’s wars and discontents, while epochs of peace and prosperity are either thrown into the background, or left unnoticed. The exceptions, rather than the rule, are recorded; just as a voyager, narrating the story of his crossing the ocean, dwells chiefly on a storm or two which befell him, and passes lightly over many a week of smooth and pleasant sailing.… It is thus with the Book of Judges. The period of which it treats was not a period of incessant warfare; but it was marked by long and frequent intervals of repose. War and disgrace were, after all, the exception; peace and tranquillity were the rule. Thus, after the victory achieved by the first judge, Othniel, ‘the land had rest forty years;’ after Ehud’s victory, ‘the land had rest fourscore years;’ a little later, ‘the country was in quietness forty years in the days of Gideon;’ the twenty-three years of Tola, the twenty-two years of Jair, the twenty-five years following the death of Jephtha, all passed without any recorded national struggle; and the forty years of Eli’s official life were free from war till its melancholy close. And although the people’s lapses into idolatry were frequent, they were so far checked and restrained, that of 450 years, according to the computation of a learned writer (Graves on the Pentateuch), there were not less than 377 years during which the worship of God was generally maintained. Gloomy and fearful as are some of the details furnished in the Book of Judges, the Hebrew nation was nevertheless in a better state during that period, morally, politically, and spiritually, than it became afterwards during the reigns of the later kings. For these long intervals of tranquillity and of rest from the enemy—during which many a family, no doubt, followed the Lord in quietness and faith, according to that lovely picture of domestic piety given us in the Book of Ruth—the Church of those days was indebted, under God, to the judges, who, through faith, ‘wrought righteousness, and obtained promises.’ … On the whole, during this period, the Hebrew nation increased in importance and strength. After Joshua’s death there had been a rapid decline; but if we take as the commencement of the period the state of things in the time of Othniel, the first judge, and compare it with the state of things in the time of Samuel, who was the last, the advancement is too manifest to be disputed. The Jewish state went on from that time increasing in glory till it reached its culminating point a century later in the reign of Solomon: after which commenced its long and unretrieved decline. In the period of the judges, notwithstanding the defections from God, the rebellions, the outrages, the confusion, the bloody civil strifes which the historian records, so that at the close of the book we seem to behold, as a learned writer (Bishop Wordsworth) observes, ‘An overclouded sunset, almost a dark eclipse, of the glory of Israel,’ yet idolatry was neither so frequent, so open, so obstinately continued, nor so shamelessly immoral, as it became in the later period of the monarchy. The rulers of the people, instead of being hereditary tyrants, and sensualists who taught their people to sin, were special messengers of God, men of faith and power, capable of checking public disorder, and of restoring religion and faith. Notwithstanding frightful interruptions, like the deep rents and yawning chasms which meet the traveller ascending their own Lebanon, the general tendency and direction of the period of the judges was not downward, but upward toward the heights beyond.” So far as progression under the judges is concerned, little exception can be taken to this careful and eloquent estimate, which well accords with the view taken by Dr. Kitto. As to the subsequent decay under the later kings, perhaps the verdict is somewhat too emphatic. Notwithstanding the guilt of Jeroboam, Ahab, Manasseh, and other monarchs, and the dire results of their apostasy among the people, it should not be forgotten that even in Ahab’s days there were seven thousand who had not “bowed the knee to Baal,” and probably many more who bowed reluctantly. There seems even some ground for Dean Stanley’s remark, lying wholly in another direction: “The age of the psalmists and prophets was an immense advance upon the age of the judges.” Of the progress of the people from Othniel to Samuel, however, there can be little doubt. God’s chastisements were not in vain. The purpose of the Lord was full of mercy, and the mercy did not fail. In the language of one of the last of the judges, “Out of the eater came forth meat.” The Lord’s chastisements are no less full of merciful purpose in these latter days.

OUTLINES AND COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

A NATION’S GREAT AND GOOD MEN.—Jdg_2:16

I. The relation of a nation’s great men to God.

1. The Lord raises them up. They are of His providing. After all allowances for evolution and natural development, He is at the back of both.

2. The Lord chooses the time for raising them up. He raises them up when they are wanted. Carlyle says: “Show our critics a great man, a Luther for example, they begin to what they call ‘account’ for him; not to worship him, but to take the dimensions of him, and bring him out to be a little kind of man. He was the ‘creature of the time,’ they say; the time called him forth, the time did everything, he nothing—but what we the little critic could have done too? This seems to me but melancholy work. The time call forth? Alas, we have known the times call loudly enough for their great man; but not find him when they called! He was not there; Providence had not sent him; the time, calling its loudest, had to go down to confusion and wreck because he would not come when called.” All this is true enough. Still, when Providence does not answer the call of a critical time, it is because there is something in the men of the time which forbids this answer. When the man for the time does not come, it is not because God is short of men, but because the men of the time have got where “confusion and wreck” are better for that time, or after times, than any amount of prosperity.

II. The relation of great and good men to a nation’s social and religious condition.

1. True, leaders are not always given because of a nation’s merit, but often in spite of its unworthiness. The great sin of Israel made these judges necessary, yet the judges were not given till distress had wrought penitence. When the people were penitent, then God sent them a helper. Periods of national calamity on account of sin, like those which we find in this book, account for the spirit of much of Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple; still more is their influence to be marked in the profound sense of national humiliation pervading the prayer of holy Daniel (Dan_9:3-20).

2. Such leaders are not raised up by God after the thought and manner of men. They may be lefthanded, like Ehud. They may be women like Deborah. They may be of such a class as Gideon, who cried, “O my Lord, where with shall I save Israel? behold my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.” The Lord never needs to prop up His greatness with any of the so-called greatness of men. Shamgar, the man of the ox goad, or Jephtha, “the son of a strange woman;” either can do the Lord’s work so long as the Lord is with them. “The Lord seeth not as man seeth.”

3. Some leaders are raised up, even from their birth, to give deliverance to their nation. They are the subjects of God’s forethought, and training, and careful provision. Such was Samuel. He whom the Lord would raise to conspicuous greatness and usefulness is generally nurtured amid the influences of pure religion. We do not hear much of the mothers of the judges, in general; nor was the influence of the ordinary judges very abiding (Jdg_2:19): Samuel whose influence was to last through all the nation’s history was the child of a mother who both knew how to pray, and how to give her much-loved child to her more-loved God. A nation’s real leaders must needs be scarce when there are no real mothers.

III. The relation of men whom God raises up to a nation’s deliverances.

1. All victory is of the Lord; leaders are but the instruments through whom He works. (a) None of the deliverances are wrought to any considerable extent by the people. In this Book, it is the man by whom God works, not the multitude. (b) No leader is too weak so long as God strengthens him. Ehud, the left-handed man triumphs when God is with him; yet even mighty Samson fails when the Lord has “departed from him.” Shamgar’s ox goad, or the jaw bone of an ass, or the ardour of the woman Deborah; nothing is too rude, no one is too weak and unskilled, if the Lord does but bless the instrument. (c) All these features of victory were meant to teach Israel that “the battle is the Lord’s.” “Without Me ye can do nothing;” that is one side of the Book of Judges: “I can do all things through Him which strengtheneth me”; that is the other side.

2. The Lord works most enduringly with those leaders who walk most with the Lord. Set the work of the sensual and mighty Samson over against that of the pure and unselfish Gideon, whose humility led him to claim the lowest place in the poor house of his father, and see whose life brings most of blessing to his nation. Even the rude strength of Jephtha—a man of ready resources, quick movements, and a born commander, but tainted with the spirit of the surrounding idolatry—compares feebly indeed with the enduring mercy that comes to Israel though the calm gentle strength of holy Samuel. Israel’s great song in this Book is the outcome of the ardent piety of a woman, and the best perpetuated mercies of the nation spring from the labours of Gideon and Samuel who walk very near to God. Even here, Gideon’s influence becomes sorely weakened by the Ephod, which became a snare to his nation, his household, and himself (Jdg_8:27). Great leaders are a great gift of God, but when greatness and true piety go together, the Lord’s favour is rich indeed.

THE INFLUENCES OF GOOD LIVES.—Jdg_2:16

“What an umpire Nature is; what a greatness, composure of depth and tolerance there is in her. You take wheat to cast into the earth’s bosom: your wheat may be mixed with chaff, chopped straw, barn-sweepings, dust and all imaginable rubbish; no matter: you cast it into the kind just earth; she grows the wheat,—the whole rubbish she silently absorbs, shrouds it in, says nothing of the rubbish. The yellow wheat is growing there; the good earth is silent about all the rest,—has silently turned all the rest to some benefit too, and makes no complaint about it.” [Carlyle.]

This is so, and not so in the sowings that come of our human lives. The good seed of a good life grows. God suffers not that to lack a harvest. But the bad seed of our lives grows also. Our moral and spiritual rubbish is full of life-germs, and the soil around us is still more favourable to get a heavy crop out of them. “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap;” alas! others around him will reap a good deal of it also.

A good life is light from heaven; it is a revelation of God; it is God’s image, wherein man was originally made, set up before surrounding lives. The holier of these judges not only showed the people what a human life should be; every approach to holiness which they made in their work was in that measure a revelation of the Divine character to their fellows. Every true worker now, in proportion as his work is true indeed, reveals his Father which is in heaven before the eyes of his fellows. In this sense, there is much beauty in the lines of Goethe, as translated by Carlyle:—

“In Being’s floods, in Action’s storm,

I walk and work, above, beneath,

Work and weave in endless motion

Birth and Death,

An infinite ocean;

A seizing and giving

The fire of living:

’Tis thus at the roaring loom of time I ply,

And weave for God the garment thou seest HIM by.”

GOD’S UNAPPRECIATED MERCIES.—Jdg_2:17-19

I. Man’s insusceptibility to mercy (Jdg_2:17):—

1. Through blindness to what was good in man. “They would not hearken unto their judges.”

2. Through love of what was evil in things. Their gods represented so much self-indulgence in wickedness.

3. Through ingratitude for all that was gracious in God. They did not care to remember His great goodness. La Rochefoucauld said, “We seldom find people ungrateful as long as we are in a condition to render them services.” Yet these Israelites show us how possible it is to take the Lord’s services and, at the same time, to ignore Him.

II. God’s persistence in mercy (Jdg_2:18). I. In raising up judges. It must have needed much encouragement for the judges to have come out from the multitude: God gave them sufficient encouragement to do even that.

2. In being present with the judges. Some of them were very faulty, but for all that the Lord would not forsake them for His people’s sake.

3. In giving the people actual deliverance from oppression. He who had put them into the hand of their enemies, when affliction had done its work, also took them out again.

4. Because of His great pity. “It repented the Lord because of their groanings.”

III. Man’s rejection of mercy. Even after they had again and again “tasted and handled and felt” the grace of God, sometimes bestowed in answer to their own earnest prayers, they turned again to evil. Well might they be spoken of as men of a “stubborn way.” Yet unto us also God’s mercies are “new every morning.” Are we more grateful than these, whose faults we can so easily perceive?

ISRAEL’S APOSTASY

“Apostacy is followed by ruin; the loss of character by that of courage. Heroes become cowards; conquerors take to flight. Shame and scorn came upon the name of Israel. The nation could no longer protect its cities, nor individuals their homes.

“In distress the people returned to the altars which in presumptuous pride they had left. Old Israel wept when it heard the preaching of repentance; new Israel weeps only when it feels the sword of the enemy.

“

1. Israel must contend with sin, and with enemies.

2. Israel experiences the discipline of judgment and of compassion.

3. That which approves itself is the victory of repentance and the obedience of faith.

“A recent philosopher (Fischer) defines philosophy to be, not so much universal science as self-knowledge. If this be correct, repentance is the true philosophy; for in repentance man learns to know himself in all the various conditions of apostacy and ruin, reflection and return, pride and penitence, heart-quickening and longing after Divine compassion.” [Cassel.]

“God’s judgment on Israel is the non-destruction of the heathen.”

[Lisco.]

“From the fact that the whole history does at the same time, through scattered hints, point to the flourishing period of Israel under the Kings, we learn that these constantly-recurring events do not constitute a fruitless circle, ever returning whence it started, but that through them all God’s providence conducted His people by a road, wonderfully involved, to a glorious goal.” [Gerlach.]

THE LOVE THAT LINGERS IN DIVINE ANGER.—Jdg_2:20-23

I. The anger of the Lord is not without due cause (Jdg_2:20). The covenant with the fathers was transgressed. The voice of the Lord was not hearkened to by the people themselves. God’s words to the fathers is binding on the children. God’s messengers, and mercies, and judgments, are His “voice” to the men to whom they are sent.

II. The Lord’s anger is not without painful results. The nations which had been left, under Joshua, to prove the people, were to be left still. This is but a sentence, as it stands written here, but it presently expands into a history of woe. No word of God’s warning must be neglected, otherwise it may resolve itself into terrible suffering, it may spread to a whole nation, and require a volume for the history of its consequences.

III. The Lord’s anger is not without loving designs. This is true, so far as it applies to His anger in time. He would still “prove Israel,” and still watch to see if they should “keep the way of the Lord.” Love waited to be gracious wherever gracious manifestations would work no harm. He who led His people forth by a right way that He might bring them to a city of habitation, no less determined to keep them in a right way. In the end, our salvation must all be seen to be of Divine goodness.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

The interposition of God in Israel’s behalf by the appointment of Judges. Deliverance and the death of the Deliverer the occasion of renewed apostasy

Jdg_2:16-23

16Nevertheless [And] the Lord [Jehovah] raised up judges, which [and they] delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them. 17And yet they would not [But neither did they] hearken unto their judges, but20 they went a whoring21 after other [false] gods, and bowed themselves unto them: they turned quickly22 out of the way23 which their fathers walked in, obeying24 the commandments of the Lord 18[Jehovah]; but they did not so. And when the Lord [Jehovah] raised them up judges, then the Lord [Jehovah] was with the judge, and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge: (for it repented the Lord [Jehovah] because of their groanings [wailings25] by reason of them that oppressed26 them and 19vexed [persecuted27]28 them.) And [But] it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they returned [turned back], and corrupted themselves29 more than their fathers, in following other [false] gods to serve them, and to bow down unto them; they ceased not from30 their own [omit: own] [evil] doings,31 nor from their stubborn way.32 20And the anger of the Lord [Jehovah] was hot [kindled] against Israel; and he said, Because that this people hath transgressed my covenant33 which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened unto my voice; 21I also will not henceforth [will not go on to] drive out any [a man] from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died: 22that through them I may prove [in order by them to prove34]35 Israel, whether they will keep the way of the Lord [Jehovah] to walk 23therein, as their fathers did keep it, or not. Therefore [And] the Lord [Jehovah] left those [these] nations [at rest36], without driving them out hastily [so that they should not be speedily driven out], neither delivered he them [and delivered them not] into the hand of Joshua.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

[1 Jdg_2:17.—Dr. Cassel has denn, “for.” “But” is better. On כִּי after a negative, cf. Ges. Gr. p. 272, at top.—Tr.]

[2 Jdg_2:17.—That is, as often as a Judge had succeeded in bringing them back to the way of their fathers, they quickly left it again. So Bachmann.—Tr.]

[3 Jdg_2:17.—לִשְׁמֹע: “in that they obeyed.” On this less regular, but by no means rare (cf. Jdg_2:19, Psa_78:18; 1Sa_20:20; etc.) use of the infin. with לְ, cf. Ew. 280 d.—Tr.]

[4 Jdg_2:18.—דָּחַק, only here and in Joe_2:8. If the clause were rendered: “before those that crowded (לָחַץ, cf. on Jdg_1:34) and pressed upon them,” its metaphorical character would be preserved as nearly as possible.—Tr.]

[5 Jdg_2:19.—The E. V. is correct as to sense; but the Hebrew phrase, filled out, would be, “they corrupted their way,” cf. Gen_6:12.—Tr.]

[6 Jdg_2:19.—לֹא הִפִּילוּ מִן: lit. “they caused not (sc. their conduct, course of action) to fall away from their (evil) deeds.”—Tr.]

[7 Jdg_2:12.—לְמַעַן נַסּוֹת. Grammatically this infin. of design may be connected either with לא֗ אוֹסיף, Jdg_2:21, וַיּא֗מֵר, Jdg_2:20, or עָזַב The first construction (adopted by E. V.) is inadmissible, because, 1. It supposes that Jehovah himself continues to speak in Jdg_2:22, in which case we should expect אֶת־דַּרְכִּי, first per., rather than אֶת־דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָֹה. 2. It supposes that the purpose to prove Israel is now first formed, whereas it is clear from Jdg_3:1; Jdg_3:4, that it was already operative in the time of Joshua. This objection is also fatal to the construction with וַיֹּאמֶר, adopted by Keil. (That Dr. Cassel adopts one of these two appears from the fact that he reads: “whether they will (instead of would, see farther on) keep the way of Jehovah,” but which of the two is not clear.) It remains, therefore, to connect with צָוַב, against which there is no objection, either grammatical or logical. “For in such loosely added infinitives of design, in which the subject is not definitely determined, the person of the infin. goes back to the preceding principal word only when no other relation is more obvious, see Ew. 337 b (cf. Exo_9:16). But that here, as in the perfectly analogous parallel passage, Jdg_3:4, the design expressed by the infin. is not Joshua’s nor that of the nations, but Jehovah’s, is self-evident, and is besides expressly declared in Jdg_2:23 and Jdg_3:1. So rightly LXX. It. Pesh. Ar. Aug. (ques. 17), Ser. Stud. and many others” (Bachmann). The connection from Jdg_2:21 onward is therefore as follows: In Jdg_2:21 Jehovah is represented (cf. foot-note 3 on p. 62) as saying, “I will not go on to drive out the nations which Joshua left when he died.” To this the author of the Book himself adds the purpose for which they were left, namely, to prove Israel, whether they would (not, will) keep the way (אֶת־דֶּרֶךְ) of Jehovah to walk therein (כָּם, plur. “in them,” constr. ad sensum, the way of Jehovah consisting of the מִצוֹת יְהוָֹה, Deu_8:2.—Keil), as their fathers kept it, or not. “And so,” he continues, i.e. in consequence of this purpose, “Jehovah (not merely Joshua) left these nations (חָאֵלֶה, these, pointing forward to Jdg_3:1 ff., where they are enumerated,) at rest, in order that they should not speedily (for that would have been inconsistent with the design of proving Israel by them, but yet ultimately) be driven out, and did not give them into the hand of Joshua.” But the “not speedily” of Joshua’s time had by Israel’s faithless apostasy been changed into “never.”—Tr.]

EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL

The first two chapters indicate, by way of introduction, the laws of historical cause and effect whose operation explains the occurrences about to be related in the succeeding pages. They are designed to give information concerning that most important of all subjects in Israel,—the relation of the will of God to his chosen people. Since prosperity and calamity were both referred to God, it was necessary to explain the moral grounds of the same in the favor or wrath of God. It was most important, in view of the peculiar histories which were to be narrated, that the doubts which might be raised against the doctrine of God’s all-powerful and world-controlling direction, should be obviated. The connection between the national fortunes, as about to be related, and the declarations of the Mosaic law, was to be pointed out. The reader was to be informed why the purposes of God concerning the glory of Israel in Canaan, as unfolded to Moses, had been so imperfectly fulfilled. In Judges 1 a historical survey of the conquests of the tribes had been given, in order in connection therewith, to state how little heed had been given to the behest of the law to expel the nations. In that disobedience the germ of all subsequent misfortunes was contained. For by mingling with the heathen nations, the chosen people fell into sin. With Israel to fall from God was actually to fall back into bondage. In their distress and anguish, God (Jdg_2:15; Jdg_2:18) mercifully heard their crying, as he had heard it in Egypt (Exo_2:24; Exo_6:5). Now, as then, He raised them up heroes, who through his might smote the enemy, and delivered the people from both internal and external bondage (Jdg_2:16). This, however, did not remove the evil in its germ. Since the judgeship was not hereditary, the death of each individual Judge brought back the same state of things which followed the departure of Joshua and his contemporaries. The nation continually fell back into its old sin (Jdg_2:18-19). The history of events under the Judges, is the history of ever recurring exhibitions of divine compassion and human weakness. Hence, the great question in Israel must be one inquiring into the cause of these relations. If, the people might say, present relations owed their existence to the temptations occasioned by the remaining Canaanites, he on whom the first blame for not expelling them must fall, would be none other than Joshua! Why did not that hero of God drive them all out of the land? Why did he not secure the whole land, in all its extended boundaries, for a possession to Israel? If only sea and desert had bounded their territories, Israel would have had no temptation to meddle with the superstitions of neighbors. Left to themselves, they would have thought of nothing else than to serve their God. To this Jdg_2:21 ff. reply: God is certainly the Helper and Guide of Israel, its Libera and Conqueror; but not to serve the sinfulness and sloth of Israel. The Spirit of God is with Israel, when the freewill of Israel chooses obedience to God. But the freedom of this choice demonstrates itself only under temptation. Abraham became Father of the Faithful because, though tempted (Gen_22:1), he nevertheless stood firm. Fidelity and faith approve themselves only in resistance to seductive influences. God in his omnipotence might no doubt remove every temptation from the path of believers; but He would not thereby bestow a boon on man. The opportunity for sinning would indeed be rendered difficult; but the evidence of victorious conflict with sin would be made impossible. Had God suffered Joshua to remove out of the way all nations who might tempt Israel, the people's inward sinful inclinations would have been no less, it would have cherished no greater love for God its benefactor, it would have forgotten that He was its liberator (Jdg_2:10); and the faith, the fidelity, the enthusiasm, which come to light amid the assaults of temptation, would have had no opportunity to win the approval of God or to secure the impartation of his strength. Unfaithfulness, to be sure, must suffer for its sins; but faithfulness is the mother of heroes. The Book of Judges tells of the trials by which God suffered Israel to be tried through the Canaanites, of the punishments which they endured whenever they failed to stand the tests,—but also of the heroes whom God raised up because they preserved some faith in Him. The closing verses do not therefore contradict the opening of the chapter. The pious elders weep when from the words of the “messenger from Gilgal” they perceive the temptation. The unfaithful younger generation must suffer the penalty because they yielded to the seduction. Joshua would doubtless have expelled all the nations; but God did not permit it. He died; but in his place God raised up other heroes, who liberated Israel when, in distress, it breathed penitential sighs. Such, in outline, are the author’s thoughts as to the causes which underlie his history. He uses them to introduce his narrative, and in the various catastrophes of the history constantly refers to them.

Jdg_2:16-19. And Jehovah raised them up Judges, שֹׁכִּטים, Shophetim. This word occurs here for the first time in the special sense which it has in this period of Israelitish history, and which it does not appear to have had previously. שָׁפַט is to judge, to decide and to proceed according to the decision, in disputes between fellow-country-men and citizens. Originally, Moses, deeming it his duty to exercise all judicial functions himself, was the only judge in Israel (Exo_18:16). But when this proved impracticable, he committed the lesser causes to trustworthy men from among the people, just as at the outset the Spartan ephors had authority only in unimportant matters. These he charged (Exo_18:21; Deu_1:16) to “judge righteously between every man and his brother.” For the future, he enjoins the appointment of judges in every city (Deu_16:18). Their jurisdiction extends to cases of life and death, to matters of idolatry as all other causes (Deu_17:1-12; Deu_25:2); and although the words are “thou shalt make thee judges,” the judges are nevertheless clothed with such authority as renders their decisions completely and finally valid. Whoever resists them, must die (Deu_17:12). The emblem of this authority, in Israel as elsewhere, was the staff or rod, as we see it carried by Moses. The root שָׁפַט is therefore to be connected with שֵׁבֶמ, staff, σκῆπτρον, scipio. שֹׁפֵט is a staff-man, a judge. In the Homeric poems, when the elders are to sit in judgment, the heralds reach them their staves (Il. xviii. 506); “but now (says Achilles, Il. i. 237), the judges carry in their hands the staff.”37 Judicial authority is the chief attribute of the royal dignity. Hence, God, the highest king, is also “the Judge of all the earth” (Gen_18:25). He judges concerning right and wrong, and makes his awards accordingly. When law and sin had ceased to be distinguished in Israel, compassion induced Him to appoint judges again. If these are gifted with heroic qualities, to vanquish the oppressors of Israel, it is nevertheless not this heroism that forms their principal characteristic. That consists in “judging.” They restore, as was foreseen, Deu_17:7; Deu_17:12, the authority of law. They enforce the penalties of law against the sin of disobedience towards God. It is the spirit of this law living in them, that makes them strong. The normal condition of Israel is not one of victory simply; it is a condition in which חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט law and right,38 are kept. For this reason, God raises up Shophetim, judges, not princes (nesiim, sarim). The title sets forth both their work and the occasion of their appointment. Israel is free and powerful when its law is observed throughout the land.39 Henceforth, (as appears from Deu_17:14,) except shophetim, only kings, melakim, can rule in Israel. The difference between them lies chiefly in the hereditariness of the royal office—a difference, it is true, of great significance in Israel, and closely related to the national destiny. The Judge has only a personal commission. His work is to re-inspire Israel with divine enthusiasm, and thus to make it victorious. He restores things to the condition in which they were on the death of Joshua. No successor were necessary, if without a judge, the nation itself maintained the law, and resisted temptation. Israel has enough in its divinely-given law. Rallying about this and the priesthood, it could be free; for God is its King. But it is weak. The Judge is scarcely dead, before the authority of law is shaken. Unity is lost, and the enemy takes advantage of the masterless disorder. Therefore, Judges, raised up by God, and girded with fresh strength, succeed each other,—vigorous rulers, full of personal energy, but called to exercise judgment only in the Spirit of God. It has been customary, in speaking of the Punic suffetes, to compare them with the Israelitish shophetim. And it is really more correct to regard the suffetes as consules than as kings. Among the Phœnicians also the idea of king included that of hereditariness.40 The suffetes were an elected magistracy, whose name, like that of the Judges, was doubtless derived from the fact that they also constituted the highest judicial authority. They sat in judgment (ad jus dicendum) when the designs of Aristo came to light (Livy, xxxiv. 61). It is, in general, by no means uncommon for the magistracy of a city (summus magistratus), as in the Spanish Gades (Livy, xxviii. 37), to be styled Judges, i.e. suffetes. As late as the Middle Ages, the title of Spanish magistrates was judices. The highest officer of Sardinia was termed judex.41 The Israelitish Judges differ from the suffetes, not so much by the nature of their official activity, as by the source, purpose, and extent of their power. In Israel also common shophetim existed everywhere; but the persons whom God selected as deliverers were in a peculiar sense men of divine law and order. They were not regular but extraordinary authorities. Hence, they were not, like the suffetes, chosen by the people. God himself appointed them. The spirit of the national faith placed them at the head of the people.

Jdg_2:20, etc.42I will not go on to drive out a man of the nations which Joshua left when he died. The purport of this important sentence, which connects chapters 1 and 3 historically and geographically, is as follows: The whole land, from the wilderness of Edom to Mount Casius and the “road to Hamath,” and from Jordan to the sea, was intended for Israel. But it had not been given to Joshua to clear this whole territory. A group of nations, enumerated Jdg_3:3, had remained in their seats. Nor did the individual tribes, when they took possession of their allotments, make progress against them (cf. Jdg_1:19; Jdg_1:34). Especially does this explain what is said above, Jdg_1:31, of the tribe of Asher. Israel, therefore, was still surrounded by a circle of heathen nations, living within its promised borders, to say nothing of those who with their idolatry were tolerated in the territory actually subjugated (cf. Jdg_1:21; Jdg_1:27; Jdg_1:30). These were the nations by whom temptations and conflicts were prepared for Israel, and against whom, led by divinely-inspired heroes, it rose in warlike and successful resistance With their enumeration, briefly made in Jdg_3:1-5, the author closes his introduction to the narration of subsequent events. The historical and moral background on which these arise, is now clear. Not only the scene and the combatants, but also the causes of conflict and victory have been indicated.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The judgments of God are indescribable—his compassion is indefatigable. Whatever God had promised in the law, must come to pass, be it prosperity or distress. Apostasy is followed by ruin; the loss of character by that of courage. Heroes become cowards; conquerors take to flight. Shame and scorn came upon the name of Israel. The nation could no longer protect its cities, nor individuals their homes. In distress, the people returned to the altars which in presumptuous pride they had left. Old Israel wept when it heard the preaching of repentance; new Israel weeps only when it feels the sword of the enemy. And God's compassion is untiring. He gave them deliverers, choosing them from among Israel’s judges, making them strong for victory and salvation. But in his mercy He chastened them. For Israel must be trained and educated by means of judgment and mercy. The time to save them by a king had not yet come. Judah had formerly led the van; but neither was the education of this tribe completed. Judges arose in Israel; but their office was not hereditary. When the Judge died a condition of national affairs ensued like that which followed the death of Joshua: the old remained faithful, the young apostatized. The Judges for the most part exercised authority in single tribes. The heathen were not expelled from the borders assigned to Israel; Israel must submit to ever-renewed trials; and when it failed to stand, then came the judgment. But in this discipline, compassion constantly manifested itself anew. The word of God continued to manifest its power. It quietly reared up heroes and champions. The contents of these verses form the substance of the whole Book. Israel must contend,—1, with sin, and 2, with enemies; it experiences.—1, the discipline of judgment, and 2, the discipline of compassion; but in contest and in discipline that which approves itself is,—1, the victory of repentance, and 2, the obedience of faith.

Thus the contents of the Book of Judges afford a look into the history of Christian nations. They have found by experience what even in a modern novel the author almost involuntarily puts into the mouth of one of his characters (B. Abeken, Greifensee, i. 43): “Truly, when once the granite rock on which the church is reared has crumbled away, all other foundations crumble after it, and nothing remains but a nation of cowards and voluptuaries.” A glance into the spiritual life shows the same process of chastisement and compassion. The Apostle says (2Co_12:7): “And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan, to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness.” A recent philosopher (Fischer, Gesch. der neueren Philos., i. 11) defines philosophy to be, not so much universal science, as self-knowledge. If this be correct, repentance is the true philosophy; for in repentance man learns to know himself in all the various conditions of apostasy and ruin, reflection and return, pride and penitence, heart-quickening and longing after divine compassion.

Starke: Fathers, by a bad example, make their children worse than themselves; for from old sins, new ones are continually growing, The same: Although God knows and might immediately punish all that is hidden in men, his wisdom employs temptation and other means to bring it to the light, that his justice may be manifest to his creatures. The same: Through tribulation and the cross to the exercise of faith and obedience, prayer and hope. And all this tends to our good; for God tempts no one to evil. The same: Though God permit, He does not approve, the unrighteous oppressor of the unrighteous, but punishes his unrighteousness when his help is invoked. Lisco: God’s judgment on Israel is the non-destruction of the heathen. Gerlach: From the fact that the whole history does at the same time, through scattered hints, point to the flourishing period of Israel under the kings, we learn that these constantly-recurring events do not constitute a fruitless circle, ever returning whence it started, but that through them all, God’s providence conducted his people, by a road wonderfully involved, to a glorious goal.

Footnotes:

[20][Jdg_2:17.—Dr. Cassel has denn, “for.” “But” is better. On כִּי after a negative, cf. Ges. Gr. p. 272, at top.—Tr.]

[21]Jdg_2:17.—כְּי זָנוּ, etc., cf. Deu_31:16.

[22]Jdg_2:17.—סָרוּ מַחֵר, cf. Exo_32:8; Deu_9:12.

[23][Jdg_2:17.—That is, as often as a Judge had succeeded in bringing them back to the way of their fathers, they quickly left it again. So Bachmann.—Tr.]

[24][Jdg_2:17.—לִשְׁמֹע: “in that they obeyed.” On this less regular, but by no means rare (cf. Jdg_2:19, Psa_78:18; 1Sa_20:20; etc.) use of the infin. with לְ, cf. Ew. 280 d.—Tr.]

[25]Jdg_2:18.—נַאֲקָתָם, from נָאַק, cf. Exo_2:24; Exo_6:5.

[26]Jdg_2:18.—לָחַץ, cf. Exo_3:9.

[27]Jdg_2:18.—דָּתַק appears here for the first time. Cf. the Greek διώκω.

[28][Jdg_2:18.—דָּחַק, only here and in Joe_2:8. If the clause were rendered: “before those that crowded (לָחַץ, cf. on Jdg_1:34) and pressed upon them,” its metaphorical character would be preserved as nearly as possible.—Tr.]

[29][Jdg_2:19.—The E. V. is correct as to sense; but the Hebrew phrase, filled out, would be, “they corrupted their way,” cf. Gen_6:12.—Tr.]

[30][Jdg_2:19.—לֹא הִפִּילוּ מִן: lit. “they caused not (sc. their conduct, course of action) to fall away from their (evil) deeds.”—Tr.]

[31]Jdg_2:19.—Cf. Deu_28:20.

[32]Jdg_2:19.—קָשָׁה, with reference to Exo_33:5 etc., where already Israel is called קְשֵׁה־עֹרֶף.

[33]Jdg_2:20.—Cf. Jos_7:11.

[34]Jdg_2:22.—Cf. Exo_16:4; Exo_20:20; Deu_8:2; Deu_8:16; Deu_13:4 (3)).

[35][Jdg_2:12.—לְמַעַן נַסּוֹת. Grammatically this infin. of design may be connected either with לא֗ אוֹסיף, Jdg_2:21, וַיּא֗מֵר, Jdg_2:20, or עָזַב The first construction (adopted by E. V.) is inadmissible, because, 1. It supposes that Jehovah himself continues to speak in Jdg_2:22, in which case we should expect אֶת־דַּרְכִּי, first per., rather than אֶת־דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָֹה. 2. It supposes that the purpose to prove Israel is now first formed, whereas it is clear from Jdg_3:1; Jdg_3:4, that it was already operative in the time of Joshua. This objection is also fatal to the construction with וַיֹּאמֶר, adopted by Keil. (That Dr. Cassel adopts one of these two appears from the fact that he reads: “whether they will (instead of would, see farther on) keep the way of Jehovah,” but which of the two is not clear.) It remains, therefore, to connect with צָוַב, against which there is no objection, either grammatical or logical. “For in such loosely added infinitives of design, in which the subject is not definitely determined, the person of the infin. goes back to the preceding principal word only when no other relation is more obvious, see Ew. 337 b (cf. Exo_9:16). But that here, as in the perfectly analogous parallel passage, Jdg_3:4, the design expressed by the infin. is not Joshua’s nor that of the nations, but Jehovah’s, is self-evident, and is besides expressly declared in Jdg_2:23 and Jdg_3:1. So rightly LXX. It. Pesh. Ar. Aug. (ques. 17), Ser. Stud. and many others” (Bachmann). The connection from Jdg_2:21 onward is therefore as follows: In Jdg_2:21 Jehovah is represented (cf. foot-note 3 on p. 62) as saying, “I will not go on to drive out the nations which Joshua left when he died.” To this the author of the Book himself adds the purpose for which they were left, namely, to prove Israel, whether they would (not, will) keep the way (אֶת־דֶּרֶךְ) of Jehovah to walk therein (כָּם, plur. “in them,” constr. ad sensum, the way of Jehovah consisting of the מִצוֹת יְהוָֹה, Deu_8:2.—Keil), as their fathers kept it, or not. “And so,” he continues, i.e. in consequence of this purpose, “Jehovah (not merely Joshua) left these nations (חָאֵלֶה, these, pointing forward to Jdg_3:1 ff., where they are enumerated,) at rest, in order that they should not speedily (for that would have been inconsistent with the design of proving Israel by them, but yet ultimately) be driven out, and did not give them into the hand of Joshua.” But the “not speedily” of Joshua’s time had by Israel’s faithless apostasy been changed into “never.”—Tr.]

[36]Jdg_2:23.—Cf. Num_32:15.

[37]A similarly formed title is that of Batonnier, given by the French to the chief of the barristers, and yet very different from the mediæval bastonerius.

[38][Dr. Cassel’s words are: Gesetz und Recht. For the latter term, as technically used, the English language has no equivalent. It is Right as determined by law.—Tr.]

[39][Dr. Bachmann (with many others) reaches an entirely different definition of the “Judges.” The Judge as such, he contends, acts in an external direction, in behalf of, not on, the people. A Judge, in the special sense of our Book, is first of all a Deliverer, a Savior. He may, or he may not, exercise judicial functions, properly speaking, but he is Judge because he delivers. This view he supports by an extended review of the usus loquendi of the word, and especially by insisting that Jdg_2:16; Jdg_2:18 admits of no other definition. “Why,” he asks, quoting Dr. Cassel, “if a Judge is first of all a restorer of law and right, does not Jdg_2:11-19, which gives such prominence to the fact that the forsaking of the divine law is the cause of all the hostile oppressions endured by Israel, lay similar stress, when it comes to speak of the Shophetim, on the restoration of the authority of law, but, on the contrary, speaks of the deliverance of the people from its oppressors?” To which it were enough to reply, first, that Jdg_2:16 intends only to show how Israel was delivered from the previously mentioned consequences of its lawless condition, not how it was rescued from the lawless condition itself; and, secondly, that Jdg_2:18-19 clearly imply, that while military activity may (and from the nature of the case usually did) occupy a part of the Judge’s career, efforts, more or less successful, to restore the supremacy of the divine law within the nation engage the whole. Hence, the Deliverer was rightly called Shophet, whereas in his military character he would have been more properly called מוֹשִׁיעַ, cf. Jdg_3:9. Dr Bachmann, it is true, explains the title Judge (as derived from the second of the three meanings of שָׁפַט, 1. to Judges 2. to save, namely, by affording justice; 3. to rule) by the fact that the O. T. views the assistance sent by Jehovah to his oppressed people as an act of retributive justice towards both oppressed and oppressor, cf. Gen_15:14; Exo_6:6; Exo_7:4; but in such cases Jehovah, and not the human organ through whom He acts, is the Judge.—Tr.]

[40]Which Movers (Phönizier, ii. 1, 536) has improperly overlooked. As those who exercised governmental functions, properly symbolized by the sceptre, the Greek language could scarcely call them anything else than βασιλεῖς. Some good remarks against Heeren’s view of this matter were made by J. G. Schlosser (Aristoteles’ Politik, i. 195, 196).

[41]It is only necessary to refer to Du Cange, under Judices. Similar relations occur in the early political and judicial history of all nations. Cf. Grimm, Rechtsalterthümer, p. 750, etc.

[42][Dr. Cassel, in striving after brevity, has here left a point of considerable interest in obscurity. Jdg_2:20 reads as follows: “And the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and he said, Because this people hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened to my voice, I also will not,” etc. How is this verse connected with the preceding? Jdg_2:11-19 have given a bird’s-eye view of the whole period of the Judges. They have described it as a period of constantly renewed backsliding, calling down God’s anger on Israel, and not permanently cured even by the efforts of the Judges. Thereupon Jdg_2:20 proceeds as above; and the question arises, to what point of time in the whole period it is to be referred. Dr. Bachmann argues that in Jdg_2:20 the narrative goes back to the “sentence” pronounced at Bochim (see Jdg_2:3). “Jdg_2:20, ” he says, “adds [to the survey in Jdg_2:11-19] that, before God’s anger attained its complete expression in delivering Israel into the hands of strange nations (Jdg_2:14), it had already manifested itself in the determination not to drive those nations out; and with this the narrative returns to the judgment of Bochim.” Accordingly, he interprets the ןיֹּאמֶר, “and he said,” of Jdg_2:20, as introducing an actual divine utterance, namely, the one delivered at Bochim. Without following the whole course of Dr. Bachmann’s argument, it is enough here to say that his conclusion is surely wrong, and that the source of his error lies in the view he takes of the words spoken at Bochim, which are not a “sentence” or “judgment,” but a warning, designed to obviate the necessity for denouncing judgment. The true connection, in my judgment (and as I think Dr. Cassel also conceives it), is as follows: When Joshua ceased from war, there were still many nations left in possession of territory intended for Israel, cf. Jos_13:1 ff. They were left temporarily, and for the good of Israel, cf. Jdg_2:22-23; Jdg_3:1-2. At the same time Israel was warned against the danger that thus arose, and distinctly told that if they entered into close and friendly relations with the people thus left, Jehovah would not drive them out at all, but would leave them to become a scourge to them, Jos_23:12 f. Nevertheless, Israel soon adopted a line of conduct towards them such as rendered it inevitable that the prohibited relations must soon be established, cf. Judges 1. Then came the warning of Bochim. It proved unavailing. Israel entered into the closest connections with the heathen, forsook Jehovah, and served Baal and Ashtaroth, Jdg_3:6; Jdg_2:11 ff. The contingency of Jos_23:12-13 had actually occurred, and its conditional threat passed over into irrevocable determination on the part of Jehovah. The time of the determination falls therefore in the earlier part of the period of the Judges; but as the moment at which it went into force was not signalized by any public announcement, and as each successive apostasy added, so to speak, to its finality, the author of the Book of Judges makes express mention of it (allusion to it there is already in Jdg_2:14 b, 15 a,) only at the close of his survey, where, moreover, it furnished an answer to the question which the review itself could not fail to suggest, Why did God leave these nations to be a constant snare to Israel? why was it, that even the most heroic Judges, men full of faith in God and zeal for Israel, did not exterminate them? The וַיֹּאמֶר of Jdg_2:20, therefore, does not introduce an actual divine utterance. The author derives his knowledge of God’s determination, first, from Jos_23:13, and secondly, from the course of the history; but in order to give impressiveness and force to his statement, he “clothes it in the form of a sentence pronounced by God” (Keil). The ו in וַיִּחַר denotes logical, not temporal, sequence. On the connection of Jdg_2:22 ff. with Jdg_2:21, see note 7 under the text.—Tr.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Hebrew, saved.

Or, magistrates.

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

which delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them--The judges who governed Israel were strictly God's vicegerents in the government of the people, He being the supreme ruler. Those who were thus elevated retained the dignity as long as they lived; but there was no regular, unbroken succession of judges. Individuals, prompted by the inward, irresistible impulse of God's Spirit when they witnessed the depressed state of their country, were roused to achieve its deliverance. It was usually accompanied by a special call, and the people seeing them endowed with extraordinary courage or strength, accepted them as delegates of Heaven, and submitted to their sway. Frequently they were appointed only for a particular district, and their authority extended no farther than over the people whose interests they were commissioned to protect. They were without pomp, equipage, or emoluments attached to the office. They had no power to make laws; for these were given by God; nor to explain them, for that was the province of the priests--but they were officially upholders of the law, defenders of religion, avengers of all crimes, particularly of idolatry and its attendant vices.

Next: Judges Chapter 3

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 16. The Lord raised up judges] That is, leaders, generals, and governors, raised up by an especial appointment of the Lord, to deliver them from, and avenge them on, their adversaries. See the preface.

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

(16) Nevertheless.—Rather, And.

The Lord raised up judges.—Act_13:20; 1Sa_12:10-11. This is the key-note to the book. (See Jdg_3:10; Jdg_4:4; Jdg_10:2; Jdg_12:7, &c.; 15:20.) The word for Judges is Shophetim. The ordinary verb “to judge,” in Hebrew, is not Shaphât, but dayyân. Evidently their deliverers (comp. Deu_17:8-9; Psa_2:10; Amo_2:3) are of higher rank than the mere tribe-magistrates mentioned in Exo_18:26; Deu_1:16, &c. Artemidorus (Jdg_2:14) says that to judge (Krinein) signified among the ancients “to govern.” Of the judges in this book some—e.g., Tola, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon—are not said to have performed any warlike deeds. They may, however, have been warriors, like Jair, whose exploits are only preserved in tradition. Samuel, though not himself a fighter, yet roused the military courage of his people. They received no salary, imposed no tributes, made no laws, but merely exercised, for the deliverance of Israel, the personal ascendency conferred upon them by “the Spirit of God.” Perhaps they find their nearest analogy in the Greek Aisymnetai (elective princes) or the Roman Dictators. The name is evidently the same as that of the Phœnician Suffetes, who succeeded the kings and were the Doges of Tyre after its siege by Nebuchadnezzar. (Jos. 100 Ap. i. 21.) Livy tells us that the Suffetes of Carthage had a sort of consular power in the senate (Liv. 30:7; 28:57; 33:46; 34:61). So, too, in the Middle Ages, Spanish governors were called “judges,” and this was the title of the chief officer of Sardinia. The judges of Israel, at any rate in their true ideal, were not only military deliverers (Jdg_3:9), but also supporters of divine law and order (Gen_18:25). The abeyance of normally constituted authority during this period is seen in the fact that one of the judges is the son of a “stranger” (Jdg_11:2), another a woman (Jdg_4:4), and not one of them (in this book) of priestly or splendid birth.

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

16. raised up … saved] Phrases of the compiler, cf. Jdg_2:18, Jdg_3:9; Jdg_3:15; Jdg_3:31, Jdg_10:12-13.

judges] not in the sense of magistrates, for there was no law or tribunal in our sense at a period when “every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” The “judges” were champions and leaders, called out to meet a special emergency, who vindicated Israel’s rights in battle, Jdg_3:10. The suffetes (Heb. shôfìtim) of Carthage and the Carthaginian colonies bore the same title, but they held a regular magistracy, entirely different from the extraordinary office characteristic of this age; see. NSI., p. 115 f.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Nevertheless, the Lord raised up judges,.... Who are particularly mentioned by name, and their exploits recorded, in some following chapters, and from whom the book in general has its name: these were men that God raised up in an extraordinary manner, and spirited and qualified for the work he had to do by them; which was to deliver the people of Israel out of the hands of their oppressors, and restore them to their privileges and liberties, and protect them in them, and administer justice to them; which was a wonderful instance of the goodness of God to them, notwithstanding their many provoking sins and transgressions:

which delivered them out of the hands of those that spoiled them; who took away their goods and cattle from them, and carried their persons captive: these were the instruments of recovering both again, just as Abraham brought again Lot and all his goods.

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

Nevertheless - (rather “and”) the Lord raised up judges This is the first introduction of the term judge, which gives its name to the book. (See the introduction to the Book of Judges.)

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

Them, for any long time. Their inconstancy was astonishing. (Haydock) --- These judges raised up by God, or chose by the people under his direction, often rescued Israel from servitude; and during the remainder of their lives, watched to see the laws put in execution, being assisted by the counsels of the senators (Menochius) and magistrates of the nation. (Haydock) --- They were commissioned to rescue the penitent and suffering Israelites. (Worthington)

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).

The Lord raised them up, by inward inspiration and excitation of their minds and hearts, and by outward designation, testified by some heroical and extraordinary action.

Judges; supreme magistrates, whose office it was, under God, and by his particular direction, to govern the commonwealth of Israel by God’s laws, and to protect and save them from their enemies; to preserve and purge religion; to maintain the liberties of the people against all oppressors. See Jdg 3:9,10,15; 4:4; 6:25,26; 8:23.

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

16. The Lord raised up judges — The advent of national deliverers at various periods is like a burst of sunshine now and then during a day of clouds and storms. The great military leaders who, by their courage and abilities came into the ascendency, arose not by chance; they were the especial gift of God. The term judges, which occurs here for the first time, does not signify a mere judicial officer, whose functions are limited to the exposition and application of the law. It is used in a broad sense for a succession of executive officers who, by the inspiration of the Spirit of God, combined with great natural qualities, assumed the supreme control, unified the energies of a loose confederation of States, and aroused them to throw off the yoke of foreign oppression. See Introduction.

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

Raised up judges. Hence the name of this book, which recites the names and exploits of those whom God raised up to deliver them out of the hand of their enemies. The title Judges (Hebrew, shophetim) is, as is well known, identical with the Carthagenian suffetes. Mark the riches of God"s mercy.

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

Raised up - By inward inspiration and excitation of their hearts, and by outward designation testified by some extra- ordinary action. Judges - Supreme magistrates, whose office it was, under God, and by his particular direction, to govern the commonwealth of Israel by God's laws, and to protect and save them from their enemies, to preserve and purge religion, and to maintain the liberties of the people against all oppressors.

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

But the Lord did not rest content with this. He did still more. "He raised up judges who delivered them out of the hand of their plunderers," to excite them to love in return by this manifestation of His love and mercy, and to induce them to repent. But "they did not hearken even to their judges," namely, so as not to fall back again into idolatry, which the judge had endeavoured to suppress. This limitation of the words is supported by the context, viz., by a comparison of Jdg 2:18, Jdg 2:19. - "But (כּי after a negative clause) they went a whoring after other gods (for the application of this expression to the spiritual adultery of idolatrous worship, see Exo 34:15), and turned quickly away (vid., Exo 32:8) from the way which their fathers walked in, to hearken to the commandments of the Lord," i.e., from the way of obedience to the divine commands. "They did not so" (or what was right) sc., as their fathers under Joshua had done (cf. Jdg 2:7).

Keil & Delitzsch — Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–1891) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API. (Old Testament only.)

Then Yahweh raised up judges

Yahweh appointing persons to be judges is spoken of as if he were raising or lifting the persons up. (See: Metaphor)

out of the hand of those

Here "hand" refers to power. AT: "from the power of the enemies" (See: Metonymy)

they would not listen to their judges

"they would not obey their judges"

gave themselves like prostitutes to other gods and worshiped them

The people betraying Yahweh and worshiping other gods is spoken of as if the people were prostitutes. AT: "betrayed him by worshiping false gods" (See: Simile)

They soon turned aside from the way their fathers had lived

The people not acting like their ancestors who worshiped Yahweh is spoken of as if the people turned and went in a different direction than their ancestors. (See: Metaphor)

their fathers

"their ancestors" or "their forefathers"

translationWords

Yahweh

raise

judge, judges

possess

faithful

prostitute

false god

worship

turn

ancestor

life

obey

command

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

Adonoy established judges. Continuously, in successive generations, as enumerated in this book, judge succeeding judge.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.