Juízes 11
F.B. Meyer · Citado em PreceptAustin
Juízes 11
Meyer - TURNING TO A REJECTED LEADER Judges 10:17-18; Judges 11:1-11 The life of Jephthah is a great consolation to those whose birth has been irregular. The sin of his parents was not allowed permanently to injure his career. He is also distinctly mentioned in Hebrews 11:1-40 as one of the heroes of faith. See Ezekiel 18:14-17. Driven from his home, Jephthah took to the life of a bandit-chieftain, probably in much the same fashion as David in after-years when he protected, for payment, the cattle of the Hebrew grazers from Ammonite forays. See 1 Samuel 25:15. Jephthah’s wife apparently had died; but his sweet and noble daughter grew up amid that wild horde, and they were all in all to each other. As David influenced a similar band, so did this father and child lift the tone and morale of their followers, until the story of it filled the land and brought the, elders, who years before had sided with Jephthah’s brethren, to entreat him to lead the fight for freedom. What a beautiful suggestion of our Lord! He came to His own and they crucified Him. He comes to us and we at first refuse Him. But His love never faileth. Being reviled, He blesses; being persecuted, He endures; being defamed, He entreats, 1 Corinthians 4:12. Phil Newton - Judges 11:1-11 Confusing Times There is no clean, neat, I-dotting, t-crossing story in this portion of Judges. We're met with confusing, troubling issues. Perhaps this is something of the medicine that we need to cure the vanity of American cultural Christianity. Let me amplify what I mean. It seems that much of the evangelical world lives in a make-believe Christian world. Everyone lives happily ever after, regardless of the setting. To unruffled our neat, packaged ideas of God, the gospel, and the Christian faith will not do. Many will avoid reading or listening to anything that will disrupt their comfortable lives. They say they believe that God is sovereign but refuse to consider what this sovereignty means. They claim to believe in the gospel but know little of the meaning and implications of the gospel, and then recoil when the gospel is applied. We like to think that Bible stories present lovely pictures of happy, satisfied people. But instead, we have the most realistic pictures presented to us. We see man in his sinfulness, weakness, and folly, whose only hope can be found in the God of sovereign grace. Jephthah is just such a story. He had an ignoble beginning, the offspring of infidelity. He was rejected by his brothers (or half-brothers) because of his mother being a harlot. He leaves home and "worthless fellows" join him to form a brigand. Once he is finally accepted, he opens his mouth and makes a most foolish vow, resulting in the death of his daughter, contrary to the laws of God. Though he was given a great victory over his enemies he finds no satisfaction in it because of his own personal tragedy. To top it off, he is unable to reconcile a neighboring tribe and so instigates a slaughter of his kin in Israel. In spite of this, Jephthah finds his way into the "Hall of Faith" in Hebrews 11 (32). In spite of the failures, tragedies, and great errors, God was pleased to use Jephthah to accomplish His purpose in Israel. We see again that He is a God of grace who bestows upon unworthy creatures His kindness. And we see that in spite of God's gracious favor, men can still act in the most reprehensible ways. God is not reduced to a cookie-cutter pattern of action, nor is man who is used by God squeezed into the same mold. I. An unlikely instrument with God It is somewhat easy to pre-judge an individual and what he can accomplish. Certain positions and pedigrees appeal to the flesh as being greater and more useful for service to God. But God is pleased to do what we do not naturally expect! Cf. I Corinthians 1:26-29 Rejected by men, Judges 11:1-2 How else can we explain Jephthah? E.g. Erasmus was the illegitimate son of a priest and a physician's daughter; William Carey had neither education, notoriety nor family connections in England; Spurgeon was raised for several years by his grandparents because his parents were too impoverished to care for him. What the world despises makes no difference to the sovereign Lord. That no man would boast, Judges 11:3-11 Though rejected, Jephthah was being prepared for leadership and as a deliverer for the ones who rejected him. We must recognize this much about him: - He made the most of his dire situation - He showed no bitterness of rancorous spirit when invited to return - He was willing to lay down his life to serve even those who had rejected him - He understood that the source of victory would be the Lord (Judges 11:9) - He willingly spoke of the Lord among his relatives (Judges 11:10-11) Application: Too often we despair of our own usefulness before the Lord because of fame, money, position, power. We put so much value in the impressive things of the world. Consequently, we end up trusting things and missing the blessing of the Lord. In this sense Jephthah is a stunning rebuke to all who complain or make excuses for lack of service or who fail to look to the Lord in sheer, unadulterated dependence. (Sermon) Alan Carr - Judges 11:1-3 AN APPALLING REJECTION A. Judges 11:1 Jephthah’s Character – The first revelation we have concerning Jephthah is that he is “a mighty man of valor”. The phrase “mighty man” means that Jephthah was marked by “great bravery”. The word “valor” refers to “strength, ability and efficiency”. This identified Jephthah as a very courageous and powerful man. He was the kind of man who did what needed to be done in every situation he faced in life. He was the kind of man who refused to back down. He was the kind of man you would like to have at your back in a battle. He was the kind of man others would look to for leadership. He was a strong, able and efficient man. B. Judges 11:1 Jephthah’s Challenge – The next truth we learn about this man is the fact that “he was the son of a harlot”. His father’s named was “Gilead”. Evidently, Gilead was a man who frequented prostitutes. One became pregnant and bore him a son named Jephthah. This was a major strike against Jephthah as it marked him as an illegitimate son of Gilead. (Note: Like everyone in this room, Jephthah had marks in the plus column and marks in the minus column. He had areas of his life that were extraordinary while other areas were problematic. We are all in the same boat. Most of us do not trumpet our abilities, yet we go to great lengths to conceal our problems. This just reminds us that we are human, and as long as we live in this world, we are going to remain less than perfect. No matter how far up the ladder of holiness we climb, we will still be sinners, and we will still desperately need a Savior.) Judges 11:2 And Gilead's wife bore him sons; and when his wife's sons grew up, they drove Jephthah out and said to him, "You shall not have an inheritance in our father's house, for you are the son of another woman." they drove Jephthah out: Ge 12:10 Dt 23:2 Ga 4:30 you are the son of another woman: Pr 2:16 5:3,20 6:24-26 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH THE OUTCAST And Gilead's wife bore him sons; and when his wife's sons grew up, they drove Jephthah out and said to him, "You shall not have an inheritance in our father's house, for you are the son of another woman - Gilead’s wife refers to his lawful wife, not to Jephthah’s mother and yet to Gilead's credit he did acknowledge him, but the same acceptance was not found with his brothers. Note the reason given to explain why Jephthah has no inheritance is explained ("for" - term of explanation) by his birth from another woman or strange woman as in the KJV. What is sad is that Jephthah was not to blame for the untoward circumstances of his birth and yet he is held responsible. Bush says the Hebrew (אשה אחרת ishâh a’hereth) is literally "of another woman" i.e., other than his lawful wife, and probably a foreigner." (cf Ex. 1:8; Dt. 29:26; Jer. 22:26) Bush - You shall not have an inheritance in our father's house. That he was not entitled to share in the inheritance was a matter of course, for even the children of the lawful secondary wife or concubine were not admitted to this privilege, Ge 21:10, and Ge 25:6, much less the issue of such an illicit connection as that in question. But Jephthah’s brethren were probably actuated by some secret motive of jealousy or envy, which they would fain conceal by the plea of illegitimacy and outlawry here advanced; for it does not appear that his expulsion from his father’s house was necessary simply on this account. At any rate, he evidently regarded it as a gross outrage upon his rights, Jdg 11:7, and one which the elders and magistrates of the city connived at and abetted. The pretense of legal right is often a mere cover to the foulest wrongs and injuries (ED: GREAT POINT WHICH IS MANIFEST AT ALL LEVELS OF OUR MODERN JUDICIAL SYSTEM!). (Judges 11 Commentary) They drove Jephthah out (garas; Lxx - ekbállō) and said to him: Garas is used in Ge 21:10 where Sarah gave the same reason declaring "to Abraham, “Drive out this maid, and her son, for the son (ISHMAEL) of this maid shall not be an heir with my son Isaac.” In both cases the sins of the father's had significant consequences to their sons. Fathers… listen up. Take heed and be instructed by these OT examples given that we might not crave evil things as they craved! (1Cor 10:6+). HCSB - Driven from his home, Jephthah lived the life of a bandit in the land of Tob, where he was joined by lawless men. This is the same phrase used to describe Abimelech's mercenaries in Judges 9:4+. Jephthah was a man without a home, a family, or a future. Rich Cathers - God uses outcasts - It seems that God has this habit of using people that have been rejected by others. Joseph was rejected by his brothers. David was rejected by his boss, Saul. Jeremiah and many of the other prophets were often rejected because of their message. Jesus was rejected by His people, the Jews. Paul wrote, (1 Cor 1:26-27 KJV) For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: {27} But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty (Sermon Notes) IVP Background Commentary - It should be noted that it was not any family shame or humiliation that resulted in Jephthah’s being driven out. With the existence of temple prostitutes and polygamy it would be fairly common for children of different mothers to be in the same household. Here the text makes it clear that it was the inheritance that motivated the expulsion. Whether Jephthah, as the firstborn, had rights to a double portion, or whether they were dividing equally (see comment on primogeniture at 9:2), elimination of one party would increase the shares of the others. (See context The IVP Bible Background Commentary) A R Fausset - And Gilead’s wife bare him sons: and his wife’s sons grew up, and they thrust out Jephthah, and said unto him, Thou shalt not inherit in our father’s house [just as Ishmael the son of the concubine, and the sons of Keturah, were sent away by Abraham, not to inherit with Isaac the son of the wife (Ge 21:10, 25:5, 6). Though not entitled to share his father’s inheritance, he was entitled to sustenance: therefore Jephthah upbraids them (Jdg 11:7)]; for thou (art) the son of a strange woman. (Judges 11 Commentary) Drove out (01644)(garas) is a verb that means to cast out, drive out. Garash depicts God driving Adam and Eve from Eden (Ge 3:24), God driving Cain from His presence (Ge 4:14), Jonah expelled from God's sight (Jonah 2:4), Pharaoh driving out the Israelites (Ex 6:1; 12:39), Pharaoh driving Moses and Aaron from his presence (Ex. 10:11), repeatedly used of God driving out Israel's enemies (Ex 23:28-31, 33:2, 34:11, Dt 33:27, Jos. 24:12, Ps. 78:55, Ps. 80:8 contrast result because of Israel's disobedience - Jdg 2:3-note, Hos. 9:15) . It is used in the general sense of banishing outcasts from society (Job 30:5). In its figurative usage, it indicates divorcing one’s wife (Lev. 21:7). It describes the sea or a river as driven and tossed (Isa. 57:20; Amos 8:8). The word is also used of a divorced woman in Lev. 21:7, a woman that is “put away from her husband.” Garas in Judges - Jdg. 2:3; Jdg. 6:9; Jdg. 9:41; Jdg. 11:2; Jdg. 11:7; Gary Inrig introduces Jephthah - Rejected by Men, Accepted by God The name of G. Campbell Morgan isn’t well known today, but for many years he was renowned throughout the English-speaking world as the “prince of Bible expositors.” His ministry took him around the world, but his impact was especially felt in Great Britain in the first half of the twentieth century. To help ease the financial pressures in his family, Morgan found it necessary to work as a school teacher. But his heart was in the ministry of God’s Word, and he took every opportunity that came his way. Finally, he decided to seek credentialing for the Methodist ministry. Because of his lack of formal training, part of the process was a “trial sermon,” to be preached before examiners. Morgan found himself among 150 candidates applying that year, and, on the appointed day, his examination took place in a church in Birmingham, England. He was met by a rather austere examiner who, on meeting him, said rather sharply, “Now I am ready for you!” Already intimidated, the young man walked into a thousand-seat auditorium to find only seventy-five people present. In that context, what little self-confidence he had utterly vanished, and he did very poorly. Two weeks later, when he received word of the results, Morgan was among the 105 who were rejected. Despondent, he sent a one-word telegraph to his father: “Rejected.” He then poured out his soul in his diary: “Very dark everything seems. Still, he knoweth best.” But very quickly a reply came back: “Rejected on earth. Accepted in heaven. Dad.” That word of encouragement was enough to keep him going. He became an itinerant evangelist, was later ordained as a Congregationalist, and was one of the most sought-after speakers of his day as well as a writer whose books many still read.20 Rejection is a bitter pill to swallow, and it can scar us for life. But the things that often cause people to reject us do not necessarily disqualify us before God. All too often we live with a sense that unless we possess certain very specific skills or personality traits or qualifications, we fall short. Or perhaps we measure ourselves by our family background, our social standing, or a blemish-free past. The result can be discouraging. We convince ourselves that, at best, we will be allowed to watch and cheer as the real spiritual first-string accomplishes God’s truly significant work. Without the proper credentials, we are not the kind of people the Lord can or will use. As we have already seen, that is not the pattern we find in God’s Word. God is not a God of stereotypes, and, if we need any confirmation of that, we have it in abundance in the study of another judge, a unique man named Jephthah. He was a man in whom we find great conflicts and contrasts. There are some ugly blotches in his life, but there are also some glorious victories. To understand Jephthah, it is essential for us to understand the times in which he lived and served God. That background is given in Judges 10:6–18.... Jephthah’s emergence is unlike that of any other judge. Earlier judges have been raised up by God, often in rather dramatic fashion. But there is no such intervention that puts Jephthah on stage, as it were. Instead we are shown the deliberations and maneuverings of people. That is not to suggest that God is not at work behind the “seen.” He clearly is, but Jephthah’s emergence is described as “ground-level.” When the Ammonites once again moved in force into Israelite territory east of the Jordan (the region of Gilead, part of modern-day Jordan), they aroused a counter-response by the eastern Israelite tribes, who mustered against them at Mizpah. It is hard to imagine that they became aware of the problem only at that point, but it quickly became evident that they lacked one vital ingredient—a leader of enough skill and charisma that he could lead the Israelite forces against the enemy. This was no small problem—survival depended upon it! The question “Who will lead us?” was a cry of desperation, not one of curiosity. It was a situation that should have driven them to their knees in heartfelt prayer to the Lord that He would either reveal or raise up such a deliverer, as He had in the past. There is no such prayer. Instead there is a declaration that combines appeal and bribery: “Whoever will launch the attack against the Ammonites will be the head of all those living in Gilead.” To accept any person who would simply claim leadership or automatically to make a military leader a nation’s political head without knowing in advance whom that person might be would not be considered a wise strategy. But desperate times call forth desperate measures, and the Israelites were desperate. Not, mind you, desperate enough to humble themselves before their God! It is at this point that we are introduced to Jephthah by way of a flashback. He is one of the most unusual men in the Old Testament: a man with a tragic past, a checkered career, and a strong personality, a man possessed with more than his share of faults. Nothing about Jephthah came in pale colors. His gifts and weaknesses were painted in bold colors, and his inner conflicts ran deep. Yet he was a man God used to accomplish something of His purpose for His people. The Lord does not produce Christians the way General Motors produces cars, a few basic models rolling off an assembly line with a variety of available options. He is infinitely creative. We search Scripture in vain for an established pattern into which we must fit before He would deign to use us. As I write this, I am on my way home from a pastor’s meeting, intrigued once again by how very different the various men were— differences in personality, appearance, age, ethnicity, background, and skill set—yet we do very similar things. God can use each one of us. Yet many Christians suffer from a severe inferiority complex because they do not “fit the mold,” whatever they conceive it to be. Sometimes the fault is ours because we put restrictions on God; sometimes it is others’, who are quite sure they have the Lord figured out. Thank God, there is no such mold. Some time ago a friend wrote a letter describing what he was witnessing as a missionary in Ethiopia. Among other things, he wrote: The key to the exciting growth of the church in Ethiopia is the Holy Spirit. His human agents in all of this are the Ethiopian evangelists. Nine of them share the work here . . . Each man is supported by his home church which provides him with about $20 a month. All of them have families, and, as you can well imagine, find it very difficult to make ends meet on such meager allowances. As for the men themselves, there is little, humanly speaking, to commend them as missionaries. Without exception, they would be rejected by North American mission societies. Their average education is grade four. Some of them have no formal Bible training. Take Indreas, for example. With his wife—a former barmaid—and four children—one of whom is a hunch back—he preaches and teaches at a remote point two full days journey from Bonga. Last time I went to his church, I attended the baptism of 88 believers! Or take Arshe, a young man of about 25. He has six fingers on his hand. He is well educated by local standards, having completed grade six as well as some Bible training. His wife has T.B. His church, too, is growing, with 24 baptized one month, while many more believed. Jephthah was an Old Testament man like that—a leader of the society of the unacceptable. Yet God, in His sovereign wisdom, chose to use and work through Him. The passage before us depicts him in five distinct stages of his development. (Borrow Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay) Alan Carr - Judges 11:1-3 AN APPALLING REJECTION Judges 11:2 Jephthah’s Conflict – Jephthah’s father also had children with his wife. When these legitimate children reached maturity, they all turned on Jephthah and forced him out of the family home. Apparently, their father is dead and they refused to share their inheritance with Jephthah. Most likely they were motivated by greed. With Jephthah out of the way, there was more money to go around. Besides, Jephthah’s presence in the family was a constant reminder of their father’s infidelity. They had probably hated Jephthah all their lives. They may have even envied him since he was a strong, able and efficient man. He was probably everything they were not and they turned on him. They hated him because he represented everything they could never be. (Note: Jephthah paid a price for the sins of his father. His father was a philanderer who brought an illegitimate child into the world. That child lived with the stigma of his father’s sins his whole life. His life was scarred by the actions of his father and his half-brothers, but he did not stoop to the same level of evil he saw in them. Jephthah broke the cycle of sin in his family and became a better man than the others in his family. We need to stop here and learn a valuable lesson. Exodus 34:7 says, “Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.” This does not mean that God will punish you for what your parents did. It does mean that what your parents did will often bear fruit in your life. Children often develop attitudes that are similar to their parents. They develop ways of living that are like their parents. They have prejudices, likes and dislikes that were built into them by their parents. The fact is, a lot of what we do is generational. We may not like it, but we carry the influence of our family with us all the days we live. If your mother was hateful, there is a good chance that you might have the tendency too. If your father was a drunk, you could be prone to problems in that area. If you grew up hearing criticism and negativity, you have a good chance of becoming a negative of person too. If you grew up in an abusive home, you might have that kind of mindset as well. However, someone has to break the cycle! Just because your parents did certain things to you or around you it does not mean that those things have to be a part of your life today. You have the opportunity to change. There is power, grace and help in the Person of the Holy Spirit and in the Word of God. As we yield to God and allow Him to work in our lives, we can rest assured that He will work to change us into His image. That is His goal, Rom. 8:28-29; Eph. 1:4; 4:13-15. I don’t know if that speaks to any of your hearts today, but let’s break the cycle of sin in our families and set our children free. There is help, hope and power in the Word and will of God.) (Note: Others have suffered this kind of familial rejection. David experienced it. When Samuel came to Jesse’s house to anoint one of his sons as king of Israel, they did not even think enough of David to call him to appear before the prophet. Jesus Christ experienced it. His half-brothers mocked His claims to be the Messiah. They doubts His identity and none of them believed on Him until after His death and resurrection, John 7:2-5. At one point all His family and friends thought He was crazy, Mark 3:21. Your earthly family may turn against you, but if you are saved, you are a member of a new family. Your Heavenly Father will never turn you away! Your true brothers and sisters will never fail to love you, forgive you and stand by you. That is the nature of our new family! Like the song writer said. “I’m so glad that I’m a part of the family of God!”) (Judges 11 - The Reject Who Became a Ruler) Judges 11:3 So Jephthah fled from his brothers and lived in the land of Tob; and worthless fellows gathered themselves about Jephthah, and they went out with him. Jephthah fled from his brothers: Heb. from the face of worthless fellows gathered themselves about Jephthah: Jdg 9:4 1Sa 22:2 27:2 30:22-24 Job 30:1-10 Ac 17:5 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: 1 Samuel 22:1-2 So David departed from there and escaped to the cave of Adullam; and when his brothers and all his father’s household heard of it, they went down there to him. 2 Everyone who was in distress, and everyone who was in debt, and everyone who was discontented gathered to him; and he became captain over them. Now there were about four hundred men with him. JEPHTHAH FLEES TO "LAND OF GOOD" AND GATHERS A "GANG" So Jephthah fled from his brothers and lived in the land of Tob (see map for probable location); and worthless (req) fellows gathered themselves about Jephthah, and they went out with him - Tob (see map Tob = "land of good") - The fact that he fled (Lxx has apodidrasko = run away, escape, especially by stealth) suggests that they did not just casually tell him to go but were more aggressive. Tob is probably in region of modern day Syria and is to the north and east of Gilead (on east side of Jordan River). There is a slight word play for Tob is from a root meaning to be pleasing which the antithesis of what he was in the eyes of his brothers! Worthless is a Hebrew word which means to make empty, in context describing men who idle and looking for something to do (cf unemployed). The fact that they gathered about him show that he was honing his skills as a leader. It is also notable that the Septuagint translates gathered with sullego which means to gather by plucking or picking suggesting he handpicked the men and here is in the imperfect tense picturing this as a process. Clearly his reputation was growing in Tob and attracted these men. Thus even in this exiled state we see his leadership qualities rise to the top. Jephthah did not let circumstances restrict or limit who he was, and in fact his circumstances actually allowed him to develop into the leader he would later be. God clearly was at work in the providential circumstances of making sure he was kicked out of his family. They went out with him is a key phrase raising the question went out where? I think the NRSV translation is "spot on" as it says "went raiding with him." (Jdg 11:3NRSV) Several other translations also favor this idea - AMP = "went on raids with him." TLB = "living off the land as bandits." MLB = "joined him in banditry." NJB = "used to go raiding with him." NAB = "went out with him on raids." NKJV = "went out raiding with him." Bush adds that went out with him "is a phrase frequently applied to warlike and plundering inroads upon an enemy’s territory." This paraphrase would makes sense in the overall context, for if indeed he was the leader of a band of raiders (some say he like an ancient "robin hood"), it would have allowed him to hone his skills as a valiant warrior (Jdg 11:1) and would also give him a reputation as a man of war. And the fact that the land of Tob was likely not that far from Gilead, soon led to his reputation spreading eastward to his Israelite relatives. Arthur Cundall - Eventually he was thrust out by his stepbrothers, an event which determined his whole future, for he became a brigand-chief over a group of outcasts and social misfits. There is some correspondence with the factors that shaped the career of David who, driven into the wilderness by Saul’s jealousy, gathered to himself those who were in distress or debt, or who were discontented (1 Sam. 22:2), and welded them into a formidable force. At a later stage, still pursued by Saul and unsure of the loyalty of his own countrymen, David went over to the Philistines as a mercenary captain, learning the arts of warfare which were to serve him in good stead in the course of his long reign. So Jephthah the despised, through dire misfortune, was prepared for the task of saving the very people who had thrust him out. Tob has been tentatively identified with the modern el-Taiyibeh, about 15 miles east-north-east of Ramoth-gilead, in the desolate area which lay just outside the eastern boundary of Israel and the northern frontier of Ammon. (Borrow Judges & Ruth: Tyndale Old Testament Commentary) George Bush - Were gathered vain men to Jephthah, and went out with him. Heb. ריקים אנשים rëkim anâshim, empty men; that is, idle, worthless, profligate men, a lawless rabble. The original רקים is a term of great reproach, being the same with ‘Raca,’ in the New Testament. The meaning evidently is, that Jephthah, being without any inheritance or family connexions to afford him a subsistence, and being expelled from his native place, became an adventurer, and his character having brought around him a number of brave but idle men, perhaps similarly circumstanced, he made predatory incursions into the neighboring countries. This is what is meant by ‘going out with him,’ a phrase frequently applied to warlike and plundering inroads upon an enemy’s territory. Probably they went out particularly into the land of the Ammonites, to retaliate the incursions which the latter made into Israel; and Jephthah’s success or skill in these free-booting expeditions acquired him so much reputation, that the people would naturally be led to look to him when they wanted a military leader. The mode of life here indicated, is precisely that which was followed by David, when his reputation brought around him men of similar character to these followers of Jephthah. This kind of military robbery is far from being considered dishonorable in the East. On the contrary, the fame thus acquired is thought as fair as any that can be obtained through any class of military operations. An Arab or Tartar desires no higher or brighter distinction than that of a successful military robber; and to make that fame unsullied, it is only necessary that his expedition should not be against his own nation or tribe. (Judges 11 Commentary) NIV Study Bible on the land of Tob. The Hebrew name sounds exactly like "the good land," a common way of referring to the promised land in Deuteronomy. The narrator appears to call attention to the irony of this outcast from Israel finding a refuge in "a land of good (things)." The men of Tob were later allied with the Ammonites against David (2Sa 10:6-8). adventurers. (See context NIV Study Bible, Fully Revised Edition) Gary Inrig on Jephthah: He became a kind of Hebrew Robin Hood, a leader of a military band who functioned as an unofficial police force. He skillfully brought together this refugee band, and, for a price, they protected the Hebrews and attacked the enemy. This provides another interesting parallel to the life of David because he did exactly the same thing in the period while he was hiding from King Saul....Alone except for God. The grace of God was at work in this man’s life, rescuing him from an apparently hopeless future. God does not submit to human prejudices, and He is not limited by the social, parental, and environmental factors that men consider determinative. A Christian knows that God is the great Determiner, and in that knowledge there is freedom. I am not a prisoner of my past, no matter how desperate that past was. God delights in using the unusable and in making the ugly beautiful.
Juízes 11
Meyer - A WARNING FROM HISTORY Judges 11:12-28 Jephthah acted with great prudence. Before rushing into war, he endeavored to argue the matter at issue in peaceful and courteous terms. In answer to the contention that Ammon was only trying to regain its own territories, he insisted that, when Israel came on the scene, they wrested the land, not from Ammon, but from the Amorites. Besides, the occupation of 300 years, which had never before been challenged, surely disproved the claim of the Ammonite king. When a nation has right and justice on its side and is fighting against aggression, especially when the choice between two ideals is in the scale, there is every reason why it should appeal to the Lord, the Judge, to vindicate its cause. It was a question whether the worship of Jehovah or of Chemosh should dominate the country; on that issue there could be no vacillation nor hesitancy. It is interesting to notice how accurately Jephthah had studied the sacred annals of his people and how reverently he alludes to God. There is more religion in the hearts of men like Jephthah than certain Pharisees and priests give them credit for! Judges 11:12 F B Meyer Our Daily Homily And Jephthah sent messengers unto the king of the children of Ammon. Jephthah’s procedure was admirable in his quiet expostulation, before resorting to force in the defence of home and country against the aggression of Amalek. It was quite clear that Ammon had no right to the lands of which Israel, at God’s command, had dispossessed the Amorites. “Thou doest me wrong to war against me.” But before repelling the invasion, Jephthah did his best to show the unreasonableness of Ammon’s pretext. Thus our Lord expostulated with the servant that smote Him. “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou Me?” It is in this way that we are to act still. “If thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.” In the Masters judgment, the wrong-doer injured himself much more than any one else; and therefore earnest words of expostulation were desirable to stay him from his own destruction. How admirable it would be if we would act in such a spirit of meek conciliation! Then our cause might fairly be submitted to the Judge of all (Judges 11:27); and we should be strong in after-times to stand for the sacred rights of others. There is no need to bribe God’s help, as Jephthah did, by his rash promise. He will give gladly and freely out of his own heart of love the help and deliverance we need, if only our cause is rightly ordered before Him. “Who delivered, … and doth deliver; … He will yet deliver” (2 Corinthians 1:10). When we are right with our fellow-men, we can confidently count on God’s almighty helpfulness. Judges 11:13 And the king of the sons of Ammon said to the messengers of Jephthah, "Because Israel took away my land when they came up from Egypt, from the Arnon as far as the Jabbok and the Jordan; therefore, return them peaceably now." Because Israel took away my land: Nu 21:24-26 Pr 19:5,9 Jabbok: Ge 32:22 Dt 2:37, 3:16 Judges 11 Resources Arnon River on South separates Reuben from Moab Jabbok River on North separates Gad from Manasseh KING OF AMMON'S COUNTER And the king of the sons of Ammon said to the messengers of Jephthah, "Because Israel took away my land when they came up from Egypt, from the Arnon as far as the Jabbok and the Jordan; therefore, return them peaceably now - The territory the king of the Ammonites claims belongs to his people is the land of Reuben (bordered on South by the Arnon River) and Gad (bordered on the north by the Jabbok River) (See the map above for orientation). The King of Ammon is saying this land originally was their land, Israel took it from them unjustly and thus they had the right to act to recoup what was theirs. Yahweh states the territory He Himself had given to Israel declaring "To the Reubenites and to the Gadites I gave from Gilead even as far as the valley of Arnon, the middle of the valley as a border and as far as the river Jabbok, the border of the sons of Ammon." (Dt 3:16+) Pulpit Commentary - It appears from Joshua 13:25 that part of the land of the tribe of Gad, that, namely, "on the western side of the upper Jabbok," had once belonged to the Ammonites, but had been conquered by the Amorites, from whom Israel took it, together with that which had formerly belonged to the Moabites. George Bush - Because Israel took away, &c. One who seeks a pretext for a quarrel will never be at a loss to find one; yet it speaks much in favor of the general peaceableness and inoffensiveness of Israel towards their neighbors, that their enemies, when intent upon hostilities against them, are obliged to look three hundred years back for a specious occasion. If the Ammonites had been conscious of a valid claim, their demand should have been published before invading Israel. But we have no intimation of this, and the claim now preferred was evidently trumped up to serve the present occasion, as affording a colorable pretence of justice in the invasion; showing that they who are destitute of conscience and honesty, are often very unwilling to appear so. Jephthah, however, in what follows, stripped their conduct of its specious disguise, and showed conclusively how false and arrogant were their pretensions. (Judges 11 Commentary) Daniel Block - The response of the king of the sons Ammon to Jephthah’s first approach is curt and to the point. By invading the land of Gilead he has reclaimed land the Israelites had taken away from him. The king’s historical sense is both remarkable and skewed. On the one hand, he was aware of Israel’s origins in Egypt and their earlier migration to the land of Canaan. On the other hand, he accused them of injustice against him, inasmuch as they had robbed him of the territory between the Arnon and Jabbok tributaries of the Jordan (modern Wadi Mugîb and Wadi Ez-Zarqa respectively). But this is patently false. The Ammonites had never occupied this land. Even so, the new territorial claims are understandable because the Ammonite heartland consisted of an amorphous region without distinct geographic boundaries between the desert to the east and the hills of Gilead in the west. The present claims arise not only from a desire for more land but also out of a need for fixed and definable borders, such as these rivers would provide. But the Ammonite’s claim is based more on wishful thinking (ED: GREED!) than on historical reality. According to the biblical record the Arnon served as the border between Moab and the Amorites (not the Ammonites), and the Israelites had gained title to the land between this river and the Jabbok by defeating the Amorite king Sihon, who ruled in Heshbon. But the Ammonite king’s reply to Jephthah is a typical political speech, claiming land that his people have never owned but basing his claim on history. (Borrow Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary) A R Fausset - (Judges 11:13) And the king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when they came up out of Egypt, from Arnon [on the south, flowing into the Dead Sea] even unto Jabbok [on the north, flowing into Jordan], and unto Jordan [on the west: the eastern boundary was the wilderness (ver. 22)]; now therefore restore those (lands) [viz., that of Moab, and that of Ammon (ver. 15)] again peaceably. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:14 But Jephthah sent messengers again to the king of the sons of Ammon, again to: Ps 120:7 Ro 12:18 Heb 12:14 1Pe 3:11 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH BEGINS HIS COUNTER WITH A HISTORICAL ACCOUNT But Jephthah sent messengers again to the king of the sons of Ammon - He is still seeking the diplomatic route. While he is a valiant warrior, clearly war is not his default position. Here Jephthah proves himself to be a diligent diplomat giving a detailed discussion of historical facts which defend Israel's right to the land in question (the territory now occupied by Gad and Reuben). Block - Jephthah responded to the king of Ammon’s rebuff with a second delegation of envoys, sent with a specific message dictated by the Gileadite leader (Jdg 11:14–27). This speech is remarkable not only for its length but also the formality and sophistication of Jephthah’s argumentation (Borrow Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary) Gary Inrig - The fourth stage of Jephthah’s career puts him in a very different role. We do not need to pursue all the details either of the argument or of the history Jephthah recounts. But we need to notice that the illegitimate outcast and desert gang leader is now negotiating face to face with an enemy king. A few days have brought him a very long distance! He is not a tentative leader. He had been given a responsibility, and he seized it with both hands. Jephthah was a fighting man, and we might expect him to strike first and to ask questions later. But that was not the route he chose to go. Before he drew up battle lines, Jephthah sent messengers to Ammon, asking the obvious question, “What is the problem? Why are you invading us and fighting against our land?” He accused Ammon of unwarranted aggression, an unjustified invasion. Ammon countered with a claim that Israel had stolen Ammon’s land hundreds of years earlier in the time of Joshua and that he was simply seeking justice, a rightful land claim. Jephthah turned out to be as forceful and strong-minded a negotiator with the king of Ammon as he had been with the tribal leaders of Gilead. He displayed a strong grasp of the historical realities (although he may have stumbled on a detail or two), and he was convinced that the story of Israel was a story of what God had done. His response was direct and to the point: He told the king, “Check your history. We captured the land from Sihon, the king of the Amorites, not the Ammonites” (vv. 15–22). Next, check your theology. The Lord God of Israel gave us this land, and we cannot surrender His gift. Live in the land your god Chemosh has given you” (vv. 23-25). We should note that at this point Jephthah makes two mistakes. The first is that Chemosh was the god of the Moabites, not of the Ammonites, who worshiped Milcom. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, he may have been considering the king as the leader of an alliance. More seriously, he seemed to reduce Yahweh, God alone, into just another god, by his argument that Chemosh had indeed given them their land while Israel’s God had given His people theirs. This was a huge mistake and shows how much paganism had corrupted his thinking. “Finally, check your logic. For three hundred years we have held the land, and you have done nothing to recapture it. It is too late for native land claims now” (vv. 26-27). The significant thing is that Jephthah’s answer was grounded in the truths of history. He did not argue probability or dispute possibility. He stood firmly on fact. That is where a Christian always stands. The early Christians did not set their world aflame by expressing opinions or exchanging experiences but by insisting upon the truth of who Jesus is and what He did. Our calling is the same. We do not go into the world merely telling people of our experience but proclaiming Jesus Christ, telling people who He is, what He has done, and what He requires of us. (Borrow Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay) Judges 11:15 and they said to him, "Thus says Jephthah, 'Israel did not take away the land of Moab, nor the land of the sons of Ammon. Israel did not take away the land of Moab: Nu 21:13-15,27-30 Dt 2:9,19 2Ch 20:10 Ac 24:12,13 Judges 11 Resources ISRAEL WAS NOT A LAND THIEF! And they said to him, "Thus says Jephthah, 'Israel did not take away the land of Moab, nor the land of the sons of Ammon. They of course refers to the emissaries sent by Jephthah to speak his words. Through these messengers Jephthah states the facts correctly concerning the Ammonites' false claim to the disputed land. When Israel first captured the land it belonged to the Amorites NOT the Ammonites. So Israel coming from Egypt to the Promised Land did not steal Ammon's land. The following passages explain why this is the case. He is simply proving that Israel captured this land from the Amorites without violating the territorial rights of either Moab or Ammon. The Arnon River (separating Reuben from Moab in map above) is mentioned repeatedly because in Jdg 11:13 the King of Ammon specifically claims that the land bordered on the south by the Arnon River and on the north by the Jabbok River belonged to Ammon when historically this was actually the possession of the the Kingdom of Sihon, the ruler of the Amorites. His refusal to let Israel pass through (Jdg 11:19,20) resulted in God giving Sihon's land to Israel (Jdg 11:21). In short, the King of Ammon had absolutely no claim to this land which Israel had occupied for 300 years (Jdg 11:26). George Bush - Israel took not away, &c. In order to evince beyond dispute, the falsehood and futility of the enemy’s claims upon these lands, Jephthah goes into a recapitulation of the leading circumstances of Israel’s coming into possession of them. He admits that they had indeed taken the territories in question, but they took them not from the Ammonites or Moabites, whom they were expressly forbidden to molest on their march, but finding them in possession of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they took them from him in just and honorable warfare, in consequence of an unprovoked attack upon them. It might, indeed, be true, that prior to Israel’s arrival in the country, the Amoriteshad taken these lands from the Moabites or Ammonites, Num. 21:26; Josh. 13:25, but this was no concern of theirs, nor were they bound to recognize the previous title of any people whatever. This was his first plea in support of his claims, which extends to v. 22. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And said unto him, Thus saith Jephthah, Israel took not away the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon [the king of Amnion’s claim had an appearance of justice: for one portion of the land occupied by Israel had belonged to Moab and Ammon formerly. But Israel had not wrested it from them, for God had forbidden Israel to attack Ammon, Moab, and Edom (Deut. 2:5, 9, 19; 2 Chron. 20:10). Part of it had been wrested from Moab by Sihon king of the Amorites (Nu 21:26). Part also was wrested by him from Ammon, as is implied by the statement in Josh. 13:25, 26, that Gad received in addition to Gilead “half the land of the children of Ammon unto Aroer that is before Rabbah,” i.e., the land to the east of Gilead, on the western side of the Upper Jabbok, Nahr Amman (Deut. 2:37, 3:16). Israel, in taking Sihon’s territory, took the portions already absorbed by Sihon from Ammon and Moab, but did not take in addition any of the land possessed by the latter in the time of Moses]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:16 'For when they came up from Egypt, and Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh, Israel went through the wilderness: Nu 14:25 Dt 1:40 Jos 5:6 came to Kadesh Ge 14:7 Nu 13:26 Nu 20:1 Dt 1:46 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Numbers 20:14-17+ From Kadesh Moses then sent messengers to the king of Edom: “Thus your brother Israel has said, ‘You know all the hardship that has befallen us; 15 that our fathers went down to Egypt, and we stayed in Egypt a long time, and the Egyptians treated us and our fathers badly. 16 ‘But when we cried out to the LORD, He heard our voice and sent an angel and brought us out from Egypt; now behold, we are at Kadesh, a town on the edge of your territory. 17 ‘Please let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or through vineyard; we will not even drink water from a well. We will go along the king’s highway, not turning to the right or left, until we pass through your territory.’” Boundaries of the Promised Land (Source) For - Term of explanation. He explains why he can state that Israel did not steal Ammonite land. Jephthah's explanation demonstrates that he was familiar with Israel's history which would support the premise that he was familiar with the Pentateuch penned by Moses. Where he secured a copy is not stated in this section. When they (Israel) came up from Egypt, and Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh - Jephthah begins his explanation by referring to Israel's stay at Kadesh (see map above at ~7 o'clock)(see on modern map), when they requested permission to travel through Edom (see passages above) and Moab (Jdg 11:17). A R Fausset - But when Israel came up from Egypt, and [rather “then Israel”] walked through the wilderness [the same Hebrew (halak, walked,’ &c.) expression as in Deut. 1:19, 2:14; Josh. 5:6. “The wilderness of wanderings,” or El-Tih, is meant (Deut. 1:19)] unto the Red Sea (the Yam Suf, Israel’s last station before reaching Kedesh, was Ezion Gaber, on the gulf of Akaba, the eastern tongue of the Red Sea (Nu 33:36, 37; 1 Kings 9:26], and came to Kadesh [Kadesh-Barnea. Fürst explains Barnea, “son of wandering,” i.e., Bedouin. The Speaker’s Commentary explains it “country of convulsion” (compare Ps. 29:8); called also Meribah Kadesh. Rithmah (from retem, “a broom,” the chief shrub of the desert), was near, and therefore is the name given instead of Kadesh, in Nu 33:18: here was Israel’s encampment in their first march towards Canaan in the summer of the second year after the exodus. From this encampment (Nu 12:16, 13:20, 25), they sent the spies, waiting forty days for them. Moses and the tabernacle still “abode in Kadesh many days,” whilst the people vainly tried to reverse God’s sentence (Nu 14:8; Deut. 1:34–46). Then Israel compassed Mount Seir, i.e., wandered in the desert of Paran till all that generation died (2:1). The wilderness of Zin is the northern part of the Paran desert, and is also called “the wilderness of (i.e., adjoining) Kadesh” (Nu 10:12, 13:21, 33:30; Ps. 29:8). Thirty-eight years subsequently they reached the same locality, and encamped at Kadesh (Nu 20:1, 22, 33:36, 37), in the fortieth year after leaving Egypt, when just about to enter Canaan. Only a few incidents are recorded of the thirty-eight years of wandering, which comprise the seventeen stages (Nu 33:19–36), between the first time and the second. At Kadesh, the Wady el Ghuweir affords access north-westwards through mountainous Edom: at Hor, their next stage after Edom, they were “in the edge of the land of Edom” (Nu 33:37); and Moses describes Kadesh as a city “in the uttermost of Edom’s border” (Nu 20:16). Here, accordingly, Moses sent to ask a passage “by the king’s highway.” Kadesh, i.e., ‘holy,’ may be the name given from the long stay there of the sanctuary and priests. En-Mishpat, “fountain of judgment,” another of its names (Gen. 14:7), corresponds, inasmuch as judgment and sanctity go together, and emanate from the one and the same Jehovah]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Related Resource: What is the significance of Kadesh Barnea in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Judges 11:17 then Israel sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, "Please let us pass through your land," but the king of Edom would not listen. And they also sent to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh. sent messengers: Nu 20:14-21 Dt 2:4-8,29 to the king of Edom: Dt 2:9 So Israel remained at Kadesh: Nu 20:1,16 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH PRESENTS THE EVIDENCE Then - Marks progression in the narrative. Israel sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, "Please let us pass through your land," but the king of Edom would not listen. And they also sent to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel remained at Kadesh (see map for Kadesh, Edom and Moab) - This continues Jephthah's explanation of how Israel came to possess the land of Sihon the Amorite. The Pentateuch itself does not record Israel's specific petition to Moab. He is building his case like a good defense attorney! George Bush - Then Israel sent messengers, &c. So far were they from offering the least violence to the children of Esau or of Lot, that when refused a passage through their countries, though able, if they had chosen it, to have opened their way by force, they rather underwent the fatigue of a long march to compass their territories, than to set a foot upon them, much less to seize them for their own use. In like manner they sent unto the king of Moab. Of this deputation, however, the history no where else gives us any account. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - Then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land: but the king of Edom would not hearken (thereto). And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab: but he would not (consent): and Israel abode in Kadesh [“many days” (Nu 20:1; Deut. 1:46). In Deut. 1:19, 2:14, the interval between the encampment at Kadesh-Barnea and Israel’s crossing the brook Zered, before entering Canaan, is said to be thirty-eight years. So also in Nu 13:26, Kadesh is mentioned as the place where the spies returned to at the beginning of the thirty-eight years’ wandering. Elsewhere (Nu 33:36), Kadesh is mentioned as the place at which Israel arrived at the end of the thirty-eight years. Therefore Kadesh must have been the point from which they started, and to which they returned, the thirty-eight years intervening. The seventeen stages named in Nu 33:19–36, are the headquarters of the scattered people. The camp with the tabernacle, the priests, and the chiefs, was the nucleus and rallying-point, whilst the congregation was dispersed in various directions during the thirty-eight years. The embassy to the king of Moab is not mentioned in the Pentateuch, as it did not directly affect Israel’s further advance. Otherwise Jephthah shows an accurate knowledge of, and almost exact agreement with, Moses’ inspired history in Numbers and Deuteronomy, and confirms thereby the early date of the Pentateuch, as opposed to modern objections]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Related Resources: What is the significance of Edom in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Who were the Edomites? | GotQuestions.org What is the significance of Moab in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Who was Ruth in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org When did Moab and Ammon eventually worship the Lord (Zephaniah 2:11)? | GotQuestions.org Judges 11:18 'Then they went through the wilderness and around the land of Edom and the land of Moab, and came to the east side of the land of Moab, and they camped beyond the Arnon; but they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the border of Moab. went : Nu 20:22 Nu 21:10-13 Nu 33:37-44 Dt 2:1-8 around: Nu 21:4-9 came: Nu 21:11 camped beyond the Arnon: Nu 21:13 22:36 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Deuteronomy 2:1-5+ (FIRST PROHIBITION TO NOT TOUCH EDOM) “Then we turned and set out for the wilderness by the way to the Red Sea, as the LORD spoke to me, and circled Mount Seir for many days. 2 “And the LORD spoke to me, saying, 3 ‘You have circled this mountain long enough. Now turn north, 4 and command the people, saying, “You will pass through the territory of your brothers the sons of Esau who live in Seir; and they will be afraid of you. So be very careful; 5 do not provoke them, for I will not give you any of their land, even as little as a footstep because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as a possession. Deuteronomy 2:9+ (PROHIBITION TO NOT TOUCH MOAB) “Then the LORD said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab, nor provoke them to war, for I will not give you any of their land as a possession, because I have given Ar to the sons of Lot as a possession.’ Deuteronomy 2:19+ (PROHIBITION TO NOT TOUCH AMMON) ‘When you come opposite the sons of Ammon, do not harass them nor provoke them, for I will not give you any of the land of the sons of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot as a possession.’ JEPHTHAH DESCRIBES DETOUR AFTER DENIAL OF PASSAGE Then - Marks progression in the narrative. They went through the wilderness and around the land of Edom and the land of Moab, and came to the east side of the land of Moab, and they camped beyond the Arnon; but they did not enter the territory of Moab, for the Arnon was the border of Moab - See map for Edom and Moab to see how Israel had to go around on the south and east sides. Neither Edom nor Moab allowed Israel to pass through their land, so the people detoured south of Edom and then east of Moab, stopping at the eastern end of the Arnon River. The Lord specifically commanded Israel not to fight against Edom, Moab, and Ammon because these peoples were all related to Israel and God had given them their own territory (see passages above). A R Fausset - Then they went [Heb., ‘walked’] along through the wilderness [to Mount Hor], and compassed the land of Edom [(Nu 21:4, 10, 11). From Mount Hor they went down the Arabah to the Red Sea: and so on to Obath and Ije-Abarim in the wilderness before Moab. So they went round Edom and Moab, and came on the east of Moab’s boundary], and the land of Moab, and came by the east side of the land of Moab, and pitched on the other side of Arnon [i.e., on the upper course of the Arnon where it flows through the desert], but came not within the border of Moab; for Arnon (was) the [eastern] border of Moab [(Nu 21:13; Dt. 2:1–9, 14, 19, 24). The branch of the Arnon (Seil es Saideh), flowing northwest through the wilderness into the Dead Sea; now Wady el Mojeb, flowing through a rugged ravine]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:19 'And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, the king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, "Please let us pass through your land to our place." Nu 21:21-35 Dt 2:26-34 3:1-17 Jos 13:8-12 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Numbers 21:21-22+ Then Israel sent messengers to Sihon, king of the Amorites, saying, 22 “Let me pass through your land. We will not turn off into field or vineyard; we will not drink water from wells. We will go by the king’s highway until we have passed through your border.” ISRAEL'S ATTEMPT AT DIPLOMACY TO A DESPOT And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, the king of Heshbon, and Israel said to him, "Please let us pass through your land to our place." No prohibition (like that regarding Edom, Moab or Ammon) applied to Sihon and the Amorites. In short his land was what we would call "fair game." A R Fausset - And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, the king of Heshbon; and Israel said unto him, Let us pass, we pray thee, through thy land into my place [from Judges 11:19-22, Jephthah follows almost word for word Nu 20:17, 21:21–27; Deut. 2:26–30, where the words, “over Jordan—the land which the Lord our God giveth us,” answer to “my place” here]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Related Resource: Who was Sihon, king of the Amorites? | GotQuestions.org Who were the Amorites? | GotQuestions.org Judges 11:20 'But Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory; so Sihon gathered all his people and camped in Jahaz, and fought with Israel. Nu 21:23 Dt 2:32, Ne 9:22 Ps 135:10-12 136:17-21, Nu 21:24,25 Dt 2:33,34, Jos 13:15-32 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Numbers 21:23+ But Sihon would not permit Israel to pass through his border. So Sihon gathered all his people and went out against Israel in the wilderness, and came to Jahaz and fought against Israel. Deuteronomy 2:32 “Then Sihon with all his people came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz. DIPLOMACY WITH DESPOT FAILS But Sihon did not trust Israel to pass through his territory; so Sihon gathered all his people and camped in Jahaz, and fought with Israel. When the Amorite king also refused the Israelites passage, there was a battle at Jahaz (means "trodden down!") (map - note Jahaz north of Arnon River). George Bush - Trusted not Israel to pass through his coast. That is, through his dominions; as also, v. 22. The word signifies not only the borders of a country, but the territory included in them. Those who are themselves conscious of a disposition to oppress the weak, and take undue advantages of the simple, will generally give others credit for being actuated by the same spirit, and consequently withhold their confidence in circumstances where they are sensible they could not be confided in themselves. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - But Sihon trusted not Israel [i.e., the promises of Israel, detailed in Nu 21:22; Deut. 2:27, 28; but omitted for brevity by Jephthah, yet hinted at in his word ‘trusted,’ which presupposes promises] to pass through his coast; but [not confining himself to refusing Israel’s request for leave to pass through his land] Sihon gathered all his people together, and pitched in Jahaz [in the plain, now called the Belka, on the extreme south of Sihon’s land, but north of the Arnon. The battle was probably fought on the hill-slope called still Shihan: here is a network of cyclopean walls, from which, Josephus says, the Amorites were dislodged by Israel’s slings and arrows, and fled two miles to the edge of the Arnon gorge], and fought against Israel.(Judges 11 Commentary) JAHAZ [ISBE] - ja'-haz (yahats, Isa 16:4; Jer 48:34, yahatsah, or yahtsah, Nu 21:23; Dt 2:32; Josh 13:18; 21:36, the King James Version "Jahazah"; Jdg 11:20; Jer 48:21; 1Chr 6:78, "Jahzah"): This is the place where in a great battle Israel overwhelmed Sihon king of the Amorites, and then took possession of all his territory (Nu 21:23, etc.). It is named along with Beth-baal-meon and Kedemoth (Josh 13:18), with Kedemoth (Josh 21:37) pointing to a position in the Southeast of the Amorite territory. It was given to Reuben by Moses, and was one of the cities in the portion of that tribe assigned to the Merarite Levites. Mesha (MS, ll. 18 if) says that the king of Israel dwelt in Jahaz when at war with him. Mesha drove him out, and the city passed into the hands of Moab. It is referred to as a city of Moab in Isa 15:4; Jer 48:21,34. Cheyne thinks that either Jahaz or Kedemoth must be represented today by the important ruins of Umm er-Recac, about 2 1/2 hours North of Dibon toward the desert (EB, under the word). No certain identification is possible. W. Ewing Judges 11:21 'And the LORD, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them; so Israel possessed all the land of the Amorites, the inhabitants of that country. THE LORD DEFEATED AND DISPOSSESSED SIHON! And the LORD, the God of Israel, gave Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they defeated them; so Israel possessed (yarash) all the land of the Amorites, the inhabitants of that country - As we repeatedly see in the Scripture, note the juxtaposition of God's sovereignty (LORD...gave) and man's responsibility (Israel...defeated). This principle permeates the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. It is never "Let go, let God," but always "Let God, let's go!" It is the "Paradoxical Principle of 100% Dependent and 100% Responsible" (100/100). So the LORD, the God of Israel gave the Israelites a decisive victory and they took possession of the precise parcel of land then claimed by the king of Ammon which was the land extending "from the Arnon (on the south - see map) as far as the Jabbok (flows east from Jordan 40 miles north of Dead Sea see map on north) and the Jordan" (Jdg 11:13+). Arnon River [EBD] swift, the southern boundary of the territory of Israel beyond Jordan, separating it from the land of Moab (Deut. 3:8, 16). This river (referred to twenty-four times in the Bible) rises in the mountains of Gilead, and after a circuitous course of about 80 miles through a deep ravine it falls into the Dead Sea nearly opposite Engedi. The stream is almost dry in summer. It is now called el-Mujeb. The territory of the Amorites extended from the Arnon to the Jabbok. The LORD....gave - Israel defeated Sihon because God gave them into the hand (power) of Israel. As Solomon wrote "The horse is prepared for the day of battle, but victory belongs to the LORD. (Pr 21:31) This is a proverb, but is also a persistent principle in Scripture as discussed above. God gives the victory over the enemy. And so we see what was true in the OT and is still true in the NT. John writes... For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world–our faith. Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? (1 John 5:4-5+) Comment - Note the pattern, believer overcome because God has overcome! TECHNICAL NOTE - The Septuagint translates gave with the verb paradidomi which conveys the basic meaning of to give over from one's hand to someone or something, especially to give over to the power of another. This same verb is found in Judges in both a positive (gave enemy into hand of Israel - Judges 1:4, 3:10, 3:28, 4:7, 14, 7:2, 7:9, 14, 15, 8:3, 11:32) and a negative context (when Israel did evil God gave them into the hands of their enemy - Judges 2:14, 13:1, 16:24). A R Fausset - And the LORD [JEHOVAH] God of Israel [so ver. 23; Deut. 2:30, 33, “JEHOVAH thy God—our God.” In contrast to what Chemosh gave his worshippers (ver. 24)] delivered Sihon and all his people into the hand of Israel, and they smote them: so Israel possessed all the land of the Amorites, the inhabitants of that country.(Judges 11 Commentary) Possessed (03423) yarash to take possession of, inherit, dispossess, to drive out. The verb yārash is an especially important word in contexts dealing with Israel's conquest of and possession of the land of Canaan. Possession of the land was directly connected to a person's relationship with the Lord; breaking the covenantal relationship led to dispossession. But even in exile, Israelites awaited the day when they would repossess the land (Jer. 30:3). The first meaning, "to take possession of," is most commonly used in connection with possessing land, specifically, the Promised Land. Yahweh first announced "possession" of the land in the context of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 15:7f). Although similar usage continues in Leviticus (Lev 20:24) and Numbers (Nu 13:30; 14:24; 21:24f), yārash in the sense of covenant land possession is a key theme in Deuteronomy. "Go in and possess the land," the Lord commanded (Deut. 1:8, 21, 39; 11:31; 17:14). The phrase, "where you are going to possess it," with reference to the land, recurs in Deuteronomy and Joshua (Deut. 4:5, 14, 26; Josh. 1:11, 15; 12:1; 13:1; 21:43; 23:5). Emphasis on the idea of "possessing" the land continues in Judges (Jdg 11:21-24; 18:9). Yarash in Judges - Jdg. 1:19; Jdg. 1:20; Jdg. 1:21; Jdg. 1:27; Jdg. 1:28; Jdg. 1:29; Jdg. 1:30; Jdg. 1:31; Jdg. 1:32; Jdg. 1:33; Jdg. 2:6; Jdg. 2:21; Jdg. 2:23; Jdg. 3:13; Jdg. 11:21; Jdg. 11:22; Jdg. 11:23; Jdg. 11:24; Jdg. 14:15; Jdg. 18:7; Jdg. 18:9 Judges 11:22 'So they possessed all the territory of the Amorites, from the Arnon as far as the Jabbok, and from the wilderness as far as the Jordan. Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Deuteronomy 2:35-36+ We took only the animals as our booty and the spoil of the cities which we had captured. 36 “From Aroer which is on the edge of the valley of Arnon and from the city which is in the valley, even to Gilead, there was no city that was too high for us; the LORD our God delivered all over to us. ISRAEL DISPOSSESSED THE AMORITES NOT THE AMMONITES! So they possessed (yarash) all the territory of the Amorites, from the Arnon as far as the Jabbok, and from the wilderness as far as the Jordan - Jephthah's accurate historical account directly contradicts the King of Ammon's claim. The very land the latter claimed was stolen is the land Israel secured after God gave them victory over the Amorites. The land that Israel received from the Amorites was from the Arnon on the south (see map) to the Jabbok on the nother (see map). A R Fausset - Jabbok "flows into Jordan midway between the sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, forty-five miles north of the Arnon. Jabbok formed the Amorite border between Rabbah and Gerasa: Israel did not pass this boundary into Ammon eastward: but westward Israel took the Ammonite land already absorbed by Sihon. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:23 'Since now the LORD, the God of Israel, drove out the Amorites from before His people Israel, are you then to possess it? Related Passage: Deuteronomy 2:24+ ‘Arise, set out, and pass through the valley of Arnon. Look! I have given Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land into your hand; begin to take possession and contend with him in battle. THIS LAND IS OUR LAND NOT YOUR LAND Since now the LORD, the God of Israel, drove out (yarash - dispossessed) the Amorites from before His people Israel, are you then to possess (yarash) it - This is essentially a rhetorical reply and almost like a rebuke! Jephthah reiterates it was Yahweh Who orchestrated the dispossession of the Amorites! Thus he shows that the Israelites did not take the land of the Moabites or Ammonites, but that of the Amorites, which they had conquered from Sihon their king; and although the Amorites had taken the lands in question from the Ammonites, yet the title by which Israel held these lands was good, because they took them, not from the Ammonites, but from the Amorites. Bush - Another branch of Jephthah’s argument in proof of Israel’s right to the land. God gave them the country by giving them the victory over him who possessed it. The great Proprietor of the earth, the King of nations, bestowed it upon them by an express and particular conveyance, such as vested in them a title that none could gainsay, Deut. 2:24, ‘I have given into thy hand Sihon and his land.’ Shouldest thou possess it? Heb. תירשנו tirâshennu, shouldest thou inherit him; i. e. the Amorite; the nation, according to Heb. idiom, being taken for the country which it occupied. He appeals to them whether they could suppose that God had given them the land in such an extraordinary manner, merely in order that they should restore it again to the Ammonites or Moabites. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:24 'Do you not possess what Chemosh your god gives you to possess? So whatever the LORD our God has driven out before us, we will possess it. Chemosh: Nu 21:29 1Ki 11:7 Jer 48:7,46 So whatever the LORD our God has driven out before us: Dt 9:4,5 18:12 Jos 3:10 Ps 44:2 78:55 Mic 4:5 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH'S ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM TSK on do you not possess - This is simply an Argumentum ad hominem in which Jephthah argues on this principles recognized by the king of Ammon. As if he had said, "You suppose that the land which you possess was given you by your god Chemosh; and therefore you will not relinquish what you believe you hold by a "divine right". Now we know that Jehovah, our God, has given us the land of the Israelites; and therefore we will not give it up." Do you not possess (yarash) what Chemosh your god gives you to possess (yarash)? So whatever the LORD our God has driven out (yarash - dispossesed) before us, we will possess (yarash) it. Chemosh was the god of Moab, and Milcom (Molech, Moloch) the idolatrous god of Ammon, though Molech may be a title for Chemosh, who was worshiped by both peoples (since they had much in common). NET Note explains that "Jephthah speaks of Chemosh as if he is on a par with the LORD God of Israel. This does not necessarily mean that Jephthah is polytheistic or that he recognizes the LORD as only a local deity. He may simply be assuming the Ammonite king’s perspective for the sake of argument. Other texts, as well as the extra-biblical Mesha inscription, associate Chemosh with Moab, while Milcom is identified as the god of the Ammonites. Why then does Jephthah refer to Chemosh as the Ammonite god? Ammon had likely conquered Moab and the Ammonite king probably regarded himself as heir of all territory formerly held by Moab. Originally Moab had owned the disputed territory (cf. Nu 21:26–29), meaning that Chemosh was regarded as the god of the region (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 203–4). Jephthah argues that Chemosh had long ago (ED: "300 YEARS") relinquished claim to the area (by allowing Sihon to conquer it), while the LORD had long ago established jurisdiction over it (by taking it from Sihon and giving it to Israel). Both sides should abide by the decisions of the gods which had stood firm for three hundred years. Another source writes that the reference to Chemosh as actually giving them their land is rhetorical, intended to appeal to the king of Ammon. It implied, however, that Yahweh was stronger than "Chemosh," since Israel and not Ammon possessed the disputed territory.
Juízes 11
Meyer - A SHADOWED VICTORY Judges 11:29-40 All the nations around were accustomed to offer those dearest to them in sacrifice to their cruel national deities. This was pre-eminently the case with the neighboring country of Moab, which the prophet Micah rebuked, Micah 6:6-8. But in all that wild border-country, there was then no prophetic voice to arrest Jephthah, who probably felt that Chemosh should not claim from the king of Ammon more than he would surrender to Jehovah. Out of this arose, not the rash but the deliberate though mistaken vow of Judges 11:31. Before you judge him, ask whether you would be willing for your dearest to become a missionary in a heathen land. Have you ever yielded your all to the Man of Calvary? Do you love Him better than the best? You would not carry out your vow as probably Jephthah did, but are you as absolute in your dedication? The reply of Jephthah's daughter is one of the noblest on record. Compare it with Luke 1:38. Her heart was full of filial love and patriotic passion, as she stood there, timbrel in hand; but the love of God overmastered all else and made her willing to yield all. See 2 Corinthians 5:14. Alan Carr - Judges 11:29-40 BE CAREFUL LITTLE MOUTH WHAT YOU SAY Introduction: Jephthah was the son of a man named Gilead and an unnamed prostitute, v. 1. His birth caused him problems with his half-brothers. After their father died, they refused to share the family inheritance with Jephthah and they forced him out of the family home, v. 2-3. Jephthah became the leader of a band of mercenaries who protected the people of Israel from their enemies. Sometime later, the Ammonites attacked the Israelites, v. 4. This promoted the leaders of Jephthah’s tribe to reach out to him, v. 5-6. Apparently, they were familiar with his prowess as a military leader. They ask Jephthah to come back and lead them to victory. If he will do that, they promise to make him the head of their tribe, v. 7-10. Jephthah answers their call and returns with them to address the Ammonite problem. In Jdg 11:12-28 Jephthah tries a series of diplomatic measures to cool tensions with the Ammonites and avoid all out war. In correspondence with the king of Ammon, Jephthah learns that they are attacking Israel because they want back some of the land that Israel took when it entered Canaan, v. 13. Displaying an amazing grasp of Hebrew history, Jephthah answers the Ammonites with several convincing arguments that prove they are wrong in attacking the people of Israel. · Jdg 11:14-22 – The Israelites did not take the land from the Ammonites. They took it from the Ammorites who originally took it from the Moabites. The Ammonites had no stake in the land at all. · Jdg 11:23-24 – The Lord had given the land to Israel. God was given all the glory and credit for giving them the land. Jephthah tells them to take what their god has given them and be satisfied. · Jdg 11:25-26 – Israel had lived in the land for hundreds of years. The Ammonites had not tried to claim the land during the three hundred years Israel had possessed, why were they attempting to claim it now? · Jdg 11:27 – The Ammonites are reminded that by attacking Israel, they are in fact attacking God! He will judge who is right and He will give the victory to whom He chooses! The Ammonites fail to listen to that arguments put forth by Jephthah because they are ignorant of the Word of God; they do not care about the will of God; and they have no regard for the Person of God or the people of God. They press their attack against Israel. When Jephthah attempted to negotiate with the Ammonites, he was not compromising. He stands firmly upon the Word of God and declares the facts of the situation. What he is doing is trying to prevent them from being annihilated in war. He knows that God will give Israel the victory and he is trying to save lives. Jephthah teaches us the truth that the best response is always a peaceful response. When you are attack, do not attack back. Instead, approach those who attack you with offers of peace. If they receive your overtures and reconcile, you have gained a friend. If they persist in their attacks, the Lord will take care of them in His Own way, and in His Own time, Rom. 12:17-21; Matt. 5:38-48. This brings us to our text verses. In these verses Jephthah has another valuable lesson to teach us. In these verses we witness a man who makes a rash vow that he lives to regret. Jephthah teaches us that we need to take heed to every word that comes out of our mouths, and nowhere is that more than when it comes to the words we speak to the Lord. Little children are sometimes taught a song that has a line that goes: Oh, be careful little mouth, what you say, For the Father up above, Is looking down in love, So be careful little mouth what you say. In these verses, we are going to learn the truth at what we say matters, especially when we say it to the Lord. This passage will teach us that He expects us to keep the vows we make to Him. So, let’s consider the truths that present themselves to us in these verses as I try to preach on the thought Be Careful Little Mouth What You Say. I. Judges 11:29-31 JEPHTHAH’S VOW (Jephthah’s attempts at peace are rebuffed by the Ammonites. The stage is set for war. As Jephthah leads the armies of Gilead to battle, he makes a “vow” to the Lord. A “vow” is not something the Lord requires. To not make a vow is not a sin, but to make a vow and not keep it is a serious thing before the Lord. A “vow’ is “a binding promise that involves a gift or sacrifice.” Vows in the Bible are never made to men, but always to God. I will talk more about what the Bible teaches about making vows to the Lord in a moment. Let’s consider Jephthah’s vow.) Judges 11:29-30a The Context of His Vow – Jephthah made his vow to the Lord and he and his men were headed out to do battle with the Ammonites. Apparently, Jephthah wants to be certain of victory, so he tried to make a contract with the Lord. It’s one of those “if you will do this for me, then I will do something for you.” Have you ever done that? Have you ever tried to bargain with the Lord? I think we all have at times, but I think we all fail to recognize the serious nature of the vows we make to the Lord. Again, I will say more about it in a few minutes, but God expects you to fulfill every vow you make to Him! B. Judges 11:30b-31 The Content of His Vow – In this vow, Jephthah promises to offer up to God “whatsoever” comes out of his house first when he returns home in victory. Just a simple glance at this vow tells us how rash and foolish this vow rally is. This is a truth that Jephthah will learn the hard way when he returns home. That’s the problem with most of the promises we make to the Lord. We don’t take the time to think them through before we make them. Then, when things do not go exactly like we want them to, we will go back on our vows to Him. That is a dangerous state of affairs! C. The Character Of His Vow – Jephthah’s vow was totally unnecessary! In verse 29 we are told that “the Spirit of God was upon Jephthah”. God was going to give Jephthah and his army the victory just because he made the Lord a bunch of promises. Victory was assured anyway just because the Lord wanted to give it! When Jephthah made the vow, even though it was unnecessary, it was also binding. The Lord gave Israel some very specific instructions for the use of vows, Deut. 23:21-25; Lev. 27; Num. 30; Num. 30:2. While vows were absolutely voluntary, once a vow had been made to the Lord; God expected that vow to be paid in full, Eccl. 5:1-6. So, when you make a vow to the Lord, He will hold you to the keeping of that vow. It is far better not to promise the Lord something than to make a promise to Him and to fail to carry out that promise. Have you made any vows that you have failed to pay? Judges 11:30 And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, "If Thou wilt indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand, Ge 28:20 Nu 30:2-16 1Sa 1:11 Ec 5:1,2,4,5 Judges 11 Resources A VOW THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN MADE And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, "If Thou wilt indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand Jephthah was not totally confident of success, so he vowed to give the Lord an offering in exchange for victory. To vowed a vow was a common practice before battle among ancient peoples. Promising a sacrifice in exchange for divine deliverance was not wrong in and of itself. Hannah promised to dedicate her child to the Lord's service in exchange for relief from Peninnah's insults (1Sa 1:11). However, Jephthah's vow was unnecessary under the circumstances. Jephthah did not need to bargain with the Lord prior to this battle, for his cause was just (as he had just eloquently presented in Jdg 11:12-28) and he was energized by the divine Spirit (Jdg 11:29). Human sacrifice was strictly forbidden by the Mosaic law (Lev 18:21; Dt 12:31) so Jephthah (who seems to know the Pentateuch as evidenced by his accurate review of Israel's history) should have known that God's favor could not be gained in this terrible way. Yet Israel's neighbors ironically, including the Ammonites, sacrificed their children and this custom might have influenced Jephthah. There is a (after Jephthah's time of course) notable example of the slaughter of the crown prince at the hands of the king of Moab (2Ki 3:27). In his desperation the king was willing to pay the ultimate price for victory. If he had truly believed in God's ability at this point the test would have said "when" not "if". Like Barak and Gideon before him (Jdg 4:8; 6:17, 36-37), his use of the conditional word "if" prior to the battle testifies to his uncertainty about its outcome. This is a most controversial passage so it is wise to avoid taking any dogmatic stand and being argumentative. The point is that Jephthah made a vow which he himself (for whatever reason) later regretted. His reaction alone therefore tells us that this indeed was a rash vow. See [Pr 20:25, Ec 5:1-3,v4,v5] re "rash vows". Jephthah might sincerely (although wrongly— Lv 18:21; Dt 12:31) suppose ‘that Jehovah would need to be propitiated by some offering as costly as those which bled on the altars of Chemosh and Moloch’. It is interesting that MOLECH (Moloch or Milcom) was the detestable god of the Ammonites, the worship of whom was characterized by the gruesome sacrifice of children (cf. Lv 20:2-5; 1Ki 11:5, 7, 33; 2Ki 23:10, 13; Jer 32:35; 49:1-3; Zep 1:5). George Bush - Jephthah vowed a vow Vows were very common under the Mosaic dispensation. They were even encouraged by God himself, in order that his people might have opportunities of manifesting the love that was in their hearts by offerings that were not enjoined, and services that were not commanded. In cases of difficulty or distress, where it appeared of more than ordinary importance to secure the divine favor and protection, the patriarchs of old had resorted to vows, and bound themselves, in case he should vouchsafe to them the desired blessing, to render unto him according to the benefits he should confer upon them. Thus Jacob, when he had just left his father and family in order to seek in a foreign land a refuge from his brother’s vengeance, vowed, that if the Lord would be with him and restore him to his home in peace, he would take God entirely for his God, and devote to him a tenth of all that he should possess, Gen. 28:20–22. In the time of Moses the whole people resorted to the same measure, in order to obtain success against the Canaanites, Num. 21:2. This, it must be confessed, has a legal appearance, and looks like offering to make a bargain with God; but vows may certainly be made in perfect consistency with the liberal spirit of the Gospel; for it is intimated that under the Gospel, yea even in the so termed millennial age, such a practice should obtain, Is. 19:21, and we know that Paul both made a vow himself, Acts 18:18, and united with others in services to which, by a voluntary engagement, they had bound themselves. It is, however, to be remarked, that a vow, to be acceptable to God, must have respect to things in themselves lawful. It cannot cancel a former obligation, or superinduce one that is repugnant to it. All our obligations to obedience proceed from God. He has a supreme right to give laws to his creatures; but if men, by entering into vows, could free themselves from the obligation of his laws, they might then, whenever they pleased, by their own act defeat his authority. Whatever therefore is in itself forbidden by God, and for that reason unlawful, cannot, by being made the matter of a vow, become justifiable. So that he who has vowed to do what cannot be done without sin, is so far from being obliged to perform his vow, that he is, notwithstanding his vow, obliged not to perform it; the original wrong of making such a vow being greatly aggravated by keeping it. Now in applying these remarks to the case of Jephthah, nothing is clearer than that human sacrifices were ever an abomination to the Lord, and that he had again and again interdicted them, with the strongest expressions of abhorrence and reprobation. Deut. 12:31. Indeed it was one of the grand reasons assigned for driving out the Canaanites, that they were in the habit of offering their sons and daughters to Moloch in the fire, i. e. of making burnt offerings of them, as is reasonably to be inferred. It cannot be doubted, therefore, that if Jephthah really vowed such an offering to the Lord, it was utterly unlawful for him to perform it. His duty would have been to humble himself before God, and deeply repent of having entertained for a moment such a criminal purpose. But the intrinsic character of such a vow, supposing Jephthah made it, is one thing, and its moral quality as issuing from a mind, in such a state as his then was, is another. The vow itself may have been unlawful, and yet in making it he may not have been aware of its real nature. Though his motives may have been devout, and in a measure acceptable to heaven, yet he may have uttered it in great darkness and ignorance. Let the circumstances of his case be considered. Let it be borne in mind that he was born in a loose and degenerate period of the Israelitish nation, and that he was bred up beyond Jordan, far from the tabernacle, and in the near neighborhood of heathen tribes, with whose idolatrous practices he would naturally become familiar. Under these circumstances, in a foreign land, and associated with a band of outlaws and freebooters who lived by rapine and violence is it to be wondered at that he should, previous to his appointment as a leader of Israel, have sunk into a state of semi-paganism from which he had by no means recovered, even at the time of his signal victory over the Ammonites? And in this benighted state, is it not easily conceivable that he might have thought to propitiate Jehovah by such a kind of offering as was sometimes presented by heathen worshippers, especially if we suppose he was further influenced by some confused recollections of Abraham’s intended sacrifice of Isaac by divine command? Would it be unnatural for a man thus imperfectly instructed, on the eve of an important battle, in an excited state of mind, and under the promptings of a blind zeal, to bind himself, on condition of his success, to evince his gratitude by what he conceived a heroical and almost superhuman act of devotion? To us there is nothing violent or forced in the supposition; nothing inconsistent with the general tenor of the narrative; and in forming a correct estimate of his conduct on the occasion, it is exceedingly important, if possible, to ascertain the real state of mind by which it was prompted; for it is only in this, that we can find an adequate clew to the right interpretation of his vow. Before entering, however, upon the more particular explication of this, it may be well to advert for a moment to the different kinds of vows in use among the Jews, and determine, if possible, to what class of them this of Jephthah properly belonged. Of these the most important was the ’herem (חרם), which was accompanied by an execration, and answered to the anathema of the Septuagint and the Greek Testament. The person or thing thus vowed unto the Lord, was said to be ‘devoted’ to him, and could not be redeemed, Lev. 27:28. When it respected persons, or animals of any kind, it implied that they were devoted to destruction; but when it respected things, it implied that they were either to be utterly consumed by fire, or to be irrevocably dedicated to the Lord for religious purposes. In its application to persons it seems to have been uttered by public authority and to have been restricted to heathen, aliens, and enemies of God, as the Amalekites, Canaanites, &c., Judg. 1:17; Num. 21:1–3, nor do we any where read that a father or a master of a family was ever authorised thus to anathematize, execrate, or devote to destruction one of his own household. The utter destruction of Jericho with all that it contained, excepting Rahab, affords a striking example of the ’herem. Its grand feature was, that in no case could its objects, whether persons or things, be properly redeemed from the use, condition, or destiny to which they had been devoted. In this respect it differed from a second and milder kind of vow, usually termed neder (נדר), by which one engaged to perform some particular act of piety, as for instance, to bring an offering to God, or otherwise to dedicate any thing to him. The objects of this kind of vow were various, as clean or unclean beasts, lands, the tithes of lands, houses, and the person of the vower himself; of all which we have a detailed account, Lev. 27. These various objects, with the single exception of clean beasts, might be redeemed at the rate, and on the conditions specified in that chapter. Now it is supposed by many critics that the vow of Jephthah is to be classed under this head. The sacred writer in speaking of it says, וידר נדר vayiddar nëder, and he vowed a neder, not a ’herem, and consequently, they say, it was such a vow as he might have redeemed by paying the prescribed ransom of thirty shekels, which was the fixed estimation for a female, Lev. 27:4. But to this it is replied by Rosenmüller, that the terms nâdar, to vow, and neder, a vow, are generic, comprehending both the redeemable and irredeemable class of vows. In proof of this he cites Num. 21:2, where immediately after the words, ‘And Israel vowed a vow (וידר נדר) unto the Lord,’ &c., it is added, ‘then I will utterly destroy החרמתי ha’haramti, their cities,’ from which it plainly appears that the ’herem may be comprised under the neder, though every neder was not a ’herem. As therefore the words alone do not enable us to determine satisfactorily the nature of the vow, it must be gathered from the circumstances. For ourselves, after an attentive consideration of all the incidents connected with the transaction, we are brought to the conclusion, that as far as Jephthah in making the vow had any statute of the divine law in his mind, it was rather that of the ’herem, than of the simple neder; that his predominant idea was that of the irrevocable devotement to death of the object contemplated in his vow. But after all, it may well be doubted, whether Jephthah had his eye upon any particular precept or provision of the Mosaic code. For the reason before mentioned, we imagine his acquaintance with the law was extremely limited; that the distinction between the different classes of vows was a matter of which he had little or no conception; and that he was prompted at the moment far more by a superstitious impulse, than by a zeal according to knowledge. He knew in the gross that vows were recognised in the religious institutes of his people; that there was such a thing as a person’s being devoted without redemption to God; and that such a vow, when taken, was sacredly binding; and this we conceive was about the sum of his knowledge on the subject. Possessing then this very partial degree of light, and actuated by an intense solicitude as to the result of the engagement, he seems to have rushed precipitately into the assumption of a vow, which proved a fearful snare to his soul. That he became, however, subsequently more enlightened as to the import of the vow, and discovered a mode of dispensation from the literal execution of it, we shall endeavor to show in the sequel. But we are treating, at present, solely of his intention at the time, which, if we mistake not, was just that which the reader would naturally apprehend from the simple letter of the text. This we trust will be still more clearly illustrated in the Notes that follow. (Judges 11 Commentary) Matthew