Juízes 8
John Phillips · Citado em PreceptAustin
Juízes 8
Phillips quips "Some people (EPHRAIMITES) simply cannot stand not being involved in other people's victories; rather than rejoice with those who rejoice, they become embittered (See Holman Old Testament Commentary) Contrast Gideon, who placates the wrath of this tribe (Jdg 8:2-3), with Jephthah, who brings humiliation and defeat to it (Jdg 12:1-6+). Daniel Block - Something seems to have happened to the character of the hero. In chaps. 6-7 we have witnessed his transformation from a fearful private citizen to a fearless agent of God, willing to take on the enemy against all odds, not to mention a sensitive diplomat. But the portrait of the man the author paints in this chapter creates a radically different impression in the reader's mind. If Judges 8:1-32 had been handed down without the literary context in which it is embedded, modern readers would reject Gideon as a tyrant, arbitrary in his treatment of the enemy and ruthless in his handling of his own countrymen. Instead of 'hacking' and 'contending' with the enemy, Gideon/Jerubbaal 'contends' and 'hacks' his own people." (Borrow his top rated commentary Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary) Contend (plead case) (07378)(riyb) means to strive, plead, contend, conduct a lawsuit, make a charge. The range of meanings of the verb rîv, "to conduct a lawsuit," "to dispute," "to strive," "to contend," denote some kind of argument or conflict between people, such as between herdsmen over wells (Ge. 26:20f) or a quarrel that leads to a physical fight (Ex 21:18). Jacob contends with Labin Ge 31:36. Israel quarreled (riyb) with Moses (Ex 17:2, contended Nu 20:3). Israel contended with the Lord (Nu 20:13)! Men of Ephraim contended vigorously with Gideon (Jdg 8:1). Those who contend with the LORD will be shattered (1Sa 2:10). "Plead for the widow" (Isa 1:17) The word means to contend or to strive for some reason in a non-legal setting as well. Riyb is found in both biblical and modern Hebrew. Riyb means to conduct a lawsuit or legal case and all that this involves. And so we see the Lord conduct His case against the leaders of Israel (Isa 3:13). He relents in His case from accusing humankind, knowing how weak they are (Isa. 57:16). David pleaded with the Lord to give him vindication in his case (1Sa 24:15) as did Israel when God contended for them (Mic. 7:9+). Riyb in Judges - Jdg. 6:31; Jdg. 6:32; Jdg. 8:1; Jdg. 11:25; Jdg. 21:22; Vigorously (02394)(chozqah from chazaq = to be firm or strong) means strength, force, violence and always with the preposition "be" (Heb) meaning with or by. Baker - It can be used to modify oppression (Jdg. 4:3); rebuke (Jdg. 8:1); capture (1 Sam. 2:16); ruling (Ezek. 34:4); crying to God (Jon. 3:8). Only the last of these references has a positive connotation. All the others connote a harsh, cruel, and self-serving connotation of the use of one's strength and power. (The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament ) Gilbrant - This infinitive form of the verb chāzaq is used in much the same way as other derivatives of this verb. In Isa. 8:11, it is used in construct with the noun "hand" to yield "the strength of his hand." The noun is preceded by the preposition ke, meaning "according to the strength of his hand." Manuscripts, differ, however, containing the preposition be which translates "in the strength of his hand" or "by the strength of his hand." Neither preposition, however, presents an appreciable difference in this context, which basically underscores the importance of the hand of the Lord in prophetic communication.The same term is used of Rehoboam's rule (2 Chr. 12:1) and that of Uzziah (2 Chr. 12:16). Both these instances use this word to denote the negative attitude of these two kings after they had achieved a position of strength. A further instance of this noun occurs in Deut. 11:2, which again refers to a gradual and eventual accumulation of strength. (Complete Biblical Library) Chozqah - earnestly(1), force(2), severely(1), vigorously(1). Jdg. 4:3; Jdg. 8:1; 1 Sam. 2:16; Ezek. 34:4; Jon. 3:8 The Strengths and Weaknesses of an Inconsistent Life, Judges 8:1-35 Introduction: many people live inconsistent lives. And inconsistency causes all kinds of problems, problems both for the inconsistent person and for those who observe his inconsistency. All kinds of guilt and problems arise for the person who lives an up and down, contradictory life. If a person is up one day and down the next day, achieving one week and failing the next week, feeling pleased one moment and displeased the next moment—the person faces a miserable life and causes misery for others. The sense of failure and guilt, of coming short, is always within the heart of an inconsistent person. And tragically, while the inconsistent person is living in failure or sin and evil, he is influencing others to fail or commit sin and evil. Inconsistency—a life of strengths and weaknesses—was one of the major traits of Gideon. A picture of his fluctuating life, of both his strengths and weaknesses, is painted in the present passage of Scripture. This passage stands as a warning to us against living an inconsistent life. - Preacher's Outline and Sermon Bible - Commentary 1. Gideon was a man who sought peace—to avoid controversy—among God's people (Judges 8:1-3). 2. Gideon was a man who warned scoffers and unbelievers (Judges 8:4-9). 3. Gideon was a man who endured, persevered until he conquered the enemy (Judges 8:10-12). 4. Gideon was a man who executed justice (Judges 8:13-21). 5. Gideon was a man who acknowledged the Lord and His right to rule over His people (Judges 8:22-23). 6. Gideon was a man who had an inconsistent testimony and witness (Judges 8:24-32). 7. Gideon was a man who had a tragic, inconsistent legacy: his rule was soon followed by apostasy and rebellion against God (Judges 8:33-35). (Source: Judges, Ruth - The Preacher's Outline & Sermon Bible) Gary Inrig on Ephraim's complaint and the practical application - Their complaint was petty and self-serving, motivated almost entirely by personal jealousy and injured pride. Gideon had won an astonishing victory, one from which Ephraim would greatly profit. But there was no joy at what God had done through Gideon, no enthusiasm for the wonderful victory God had given His people, no gladness and thanksgiving before God, no spontaneous hymns of praise to their good and gracious God. There was only bitterness of heart and petty jealousy. There may also have been greed, with Ephraim wanting to make their claim on the war booty. To put it bluntly, Ephraim was totally selfish. They put a priority on their own perceived problems, and they wanted Gideon to stop the battle until their little need was met. I wish this were a strange and unique response. It isn’t. It is sadly true that in a time of victory the greatest danger often comes from within the circle of God’s professing people. They don’t see what God is doing; all they can see is their own cause or convenience, and they view everything from how it impacts their own interests. Gideon had every right to be absolutely furious with those people. After all, it is easy to sit back and criticize after the battle has been fought, to be brave when the victory is won, to be a spectator who points out all the mistakes of others. There is nothing Satan loves more than to see Christians fighting with one another. In the book of Acts, after Satan had completely failed with various attacks on the church from the outside, what did he do? He tried to destroy the unity of believers over the actions of Ananias and Sapphira. When that did not work, he stirred up a fuss over the language tensions between Greek-speaking and Hebrew-speaking Christians and the way widows were being looked after. If we are fighting with each other, we are not pursuing the enemy. Satan can cause us to be so confused that we believe fellow believers are our enemies. This is not a tired tactic from the past. Satan uses it time and again. When people are trusting Christ, young Christians are being discipled, and established believers are growing and maturing, Satan will bend every effort to sow disunity. He does not care why we are divided, he just cares that we are. It may be division because of pride or hurt feelings or over our differences economically, socially, or educationally. It could be over personalities or differences in minor doctrines. But Satan loves to see us divided. (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay - borrow for an hour) Warren Wiersbe provides an interesting analysis of Judges 8: It takes all kinds to make a nation (or a church), and a leader must know how to handle each one, especially after a great victory. The critical (Jdg 8:1-3) They were angry with Gideon because they were left out and did not share in the glory. Gideon tactfully gave them the “soft answer” that healed the wounds and prevented division (Pr 15:1; Ep 4:1, 2, 3-note, Ep 4:29-note). Better to do that than to start another war. The cynical (Jdg 8:4-9) They said, “You have not yet won the battle, so why should we help you?” The men of Succoth had no faith in God or appreciation for Gideon and his men, and their lack of love cost them dearly. The cowardly (Jdg 8:10-21) Executing two famous kings would be a great way to start a military career, but the lad was too immature to carry it out. We wonder if Gideon remembered his own fears and God’s patience with him. The compromising (Jdg 8:22-35) Unlike Abraham, Gideon became covetous and asked for a generous share of the loot (Ge14:18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24). This led to idolatry and apostasy because the heart of man is ever ready to indulge in sin. (See note or borrow With the Word for one hour ) THE TOUCHY TRIBE John H. Paterson "Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? I have heard him, and observed him: I am like a green fir tree. From me is thy fruit found." Hosea 14:8 THE history of the Children of Israel forms one of the principal themes of the Old Testament. It is the theme of God's dealings with a chosen group of men and women, through whom He wished to make Himself known to the rest of mankind. That being the case, have you ever wondered why the Bible dwells at such length upon the fact that, although there was only one people of Israel, there were twelve tribes? About some of these tribes -- Judah, for example -- we know a great deal, but of others very little. For all twelve of them we have a most detailed listing of their borders, their territory and their cities. We also know -- though what to make of it would be hard to say! -- that two and a half tribes decided not to enter the land of promise, but to settle east of the River Jordan. Nothing in their subsequent history shows them to have suffered by this decision, in which case we are left to wonder about their choice. That the tribes were different from one another early emerges from the story. The point is made by Jacob's thumbnail sketches of his twelve sons in Genesis 49. The successive censuses of the people (e.g. Numbers 2 and 26) show that some tribes became much more numerous than others as time went by, and we can read of the rivalries and conflicts between them which help to explain some of these differences (e.g. Judges 20:35). We know of the special priestly role to which the tribe of Levi was called. And we know that the birthright due to Jacob's oldest son, Reuben ("unstable as water, thou shalt not excel", Genesis 49:4), was forfeited and transferred to Joseph (1 Chronicles 5:1-2). What all this suggests is that, if we can but trace them, we have here twelve histories rather than just one. To pick out these histories in some cases may well prove difficult, for we know so little of the tribe concerned. But it is my guess that, if we could do so, we should be led to the conclusion that the twelve tribes were intended by God to portray through their experiences different aspects of His work and character in human lives. Together, the twelve would then make up a united testimony that "blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord" (Psalm 33:12). Some of the tribes never really began to fulfil this role; their testimony never "got off the ground". In one or two cases we can see, I believe, what the lesson was supposed to be, and we can also see where the tribe failed. If any reader can do this for all twelve tribes, then I hope that the editor will afford him or her space in these pages for an appropriate series of articles! For myself, I am taking the easy course of dealing here with only one tribe, the one which seems to me most clearly to exemplify the ideas I have so far suggested. That is the tribe of Ephraim. The History of Ephraim Let me start by recalling to you some incidents from the tribe's history in the land of promise, incidents which seem to fit a pattern. In the first place, we find the tribe complaining to Joshua (who was, of course, an Ephraimite himself), that he had not allocated them a large enough territory for a tribe of their size and importance (Joshua 17:14-18). But Joshua knew how to handle his relatives. He said to them, in effect, "Certainly: take all the space you want! All you have to do is to drive out the people in your way!" [110/111] But the natives had chariots of iron, and Ephraim complained that this made the task too difficult; in fact, they never did drive out those inhabitants. The implication was that it was up to Joshua to send along someone to help them: they were a great tribe, but not that great! "The children of Ephraim, being armed, and carrying bows, turned back in the day of battle" (Psalm 78:9). Then there are two incidents in Judges, both of which reveal a common character trait. When Gideon had defeated the Midianites, he sent word to the tribe of Ephraim to block the fords of Jordan and cut off the enemy's retreat. This they did, apparently very effectively; it was a manoeuvre of which any general might be proud (Judges 7:24-25), but notice the reaction of Ephraim: "Why hast thou served us thus, that thou calledst us not, when thou wentest out to fight with the Midianites? And they did chide him sharply" (Judges 8:1). To be used just to block a retreat, rather than to be first-choice troops to fight the battle, was not good enough for Ephraim, the super-tribe! Almost unbelievably, they did the same thing again, a few years later. This time, the Israelite leader was Jephthah, but the treatment he received was even worse than that meted out to Gideon: "Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? We will burn thy house upon thee with fire" (Judges 12:1). But Jephthah did not take this lying down; he pointed out that before the event, when actual danger threatened, they had been deaf and blind to his need for help. It was only after he had won the victory that they came accusing him of acting without reference to them. We get the impression that, as a tribe, Ephraim was touchy in the extreme: status-conscious is a modern word which we might use. Nobody was supposed to do anything without giving Ephraim first refusal! In this respect, if there was one tribe more than another which worried proud Ephraim, it was Judah. The birthright of Reuben, as we are told in 1 Chronicles 5:1-2, might have been transferred to Joseph, Ephraim's father, but "Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler" -- the royal house. On this basis, any priority, any preeminence among the tribes of Israel that Ephraim might claim had to be shared with Judah. This so worried Ephraim that the prophet Isaiah, in that wonderful eleventh chapter which begins, "there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse" (a man of Judah!), can foresee no greater bliss, in that great and coming day, than that "the envy also of Ephraim shall depart ... Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim" (Isaiah 11:13). The Role of Ephraim Now all of these characteristics are, you may feel, simply indicative of human weakness: we all know "me-too" people like Ephraim and, indeed, there is a bit of Ephraim in all of us. However, if we bear in mind God's often-declared purpose that His people should represent Him and, by their quality, should testify to His power and greatness, then we are entitled to enquire a little further into this matter and ask: what was it that this tribe, in particular, might have been expected to exhibit in its character, and how does its actual conduct contrast with this intention? Well, Ephraim, far from being the super-tribe it evidently considered itself to be, was the tribe that had no right to be there at all. Ephraim was not one of the twelve sons of Jacob, but one of Jacob's grandsons. Ephraim and Manasseh were just there to make up the numbers! Levi, as the priestly tribe, was not to be counted as one of the twelve, and Joseph was to be counted twice, because his descendants had become so numerous (Joshua 17:17). But this was only the last in a long series of events that brought Ephraim to a position of power -- a sequence of divine choices which no human logic could justify. Consider: Ephraim was where he was because Jacob had blessed him ahead of his elder brother, Manasseh (Genesis 48:10-20). Ephraim's father Joseph was where he was, the ruler of Egypt and holder of the family birthright, because he had been blessed ahead of all his brothers: God had made him "to be fruitful in the land of my affliction" (Genesis 41:52), which was how and why Ephraim (-- fruitful) had received his name. [111/112] But then we go on: Jacob was where he was because he had been preferred, in his turn, to his elder brother Esau (Genesis 25:23), and that quite independently of his own strenuous efforts at self-advancement. And Jacob's father, Isaac, was where he was because he, in turn, had been preferred to his elder brother, Ishmael (Genesis 17:18-19). What an extraordinary series of events! Four times over, at least, God allowed the natural sequence to be overturned and, at the end of the sequence, there was Ephraim, the product of God's successive interventions. Perhaps we can visualise a modern parallel of someone who joined a firm as an office-boy and then, without ever going near the office in question, was promoted to departmental head, to managing director and, a few days later, to chairman of the board! Now when we are thinking of God and His actions towards men and women we have a name for this kind of unmerited preferment that Ephraim received. We call it Sovereign Grace. Of the twelve tribes of Israel, Ephraim was the one which, more than all the others, ought to have been aware of God's amazing grace, and lived in the light of it -- of a four-times-over promotion, at the end of which the tribe enjoyed a status that, by nature, it could never for a moment claim. Here, then, was a tribe whose true destiny was, surely, to be a prime exemplar of God's grace at work in human lives. If anybody could appreciate the meaning and extent of that grace it should have been Ephraim. But, as we have seen, the reverse was the case: touchy, status-conscious, this tribe saw an entitlement where it should have seen the gift of God's grace. Grace is, I think, the hardest of God's gifts for men and women to appreciate. Indeed, in the whole of the Scriptures, how many men -- and, especially, women -- can you think of who accepted it, humbly and immediately? Ruth and Mary the mother of Jesus would certainly head my list; after them perhaps Hannah; perhaps David in 2 Samuel 7. But the list cannot be much longer than that: for all the others, let alone for ourselves, the acceptance of grace caused, and causes, awful problems! Think of Joseph, Ephraim's father, who when he was young, sounded exactly as his son was later to sound: "Behold, I have dreamed a dream ... the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me" (Genesis 37:9). What a long and weary way Joseph had to go, through hatred, injustice and neglect, before he came to accept that "God meant it unto good" (Genesis 50:20)! Think, too, of Jacob, Ephraim's grandfather who, before he learned the meaning of grace, had cheated and been cheated halfway across the Middle East. What travels and trials before the startling realisation came: "God hath dealt graciously with me and ... I have enough" (Genesis 33:11)! It is a lesson which most of us will finally learn only in the glory of another Day -- to be recipients of the grace of God and to recognise that we have nothing to do but to accept it. And the most difficult "status" of all to maintain is that of the recipient who says, "I have done nothing. I deserve nothing. I am where I am because of God's grace and nothing else." Ephraim and Israel Let me, if I may, add another dimension to this story of grace unappreciated. One has only to spend a few minutes with a concordance to realise that the name Ephraim is not used in the Bible for this one tribe alone. It is also frequently used to cover all those ten tribes which broke away from the rule of Judah's royal house and formed the northern kingdom of Israel. This is probably true, for example, of the passage I have already quoted in Isaiah 11, and is certainly true of such other references as Isaiah 7:8 and 17. Most of all, however, it is true of the prophecies of Hosea. Now it is evident that this use of the name Ephraim to cover the whole kingdom of the ten tribes is a habit of particular prophets. But I want to suggest that it is also largely confined to passages, or prophetic messages, of a particular kind. If you read the words of Isaiah or Hosea, I think you will find that where the name Ephraim is used in this way, it is nearly always in relation to the love of God for Israel. It is a message to Israel of God's love and grace and their failure to appreciate them; a message of endearment for the undeserving. [112/113] Families and friends commonly have what we call pet names for each other. They are used in private messages of love or friendship, but almost never when, say, a husband and wife are angry with one another, or when a parent is rebuking a child. A friend of mine told me that he always knew when his father was angry with him; ordinarily, he was known as "Glennie", but if his father called out "Glenn", he knew he was in for trouble! I hope that it is neither improper nor irreverent to suggest that "Ephraim" was, in a way, God's pet name for His people. Simply by using it, He was identifying Himself as a God of love and grace, no matter how serious were the charges against Israel. And so we turn to the prophecies of Hosea, and read those remarkable phrases in which the pet name appears: O Ephraim, what shall I do unto thee? I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms. How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? ... Mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together. I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man. The "Ephraim theme" of Hosea is a message of love betrayed. There is a note of incredulity in God's words to His people, as when we say to someone who we thought was our friend, "I don't understand: how could you do this to me?" If it were just a matter of sin, law and punishment, there would be no feeling, no emotion involved. It would be like a traffic warden writing out parking tickets for offenders, dispassionately, without emotion. But this time it is Ephraim that is the culprit: God's special Ephraim. Of course He feels involved: He faces the dilemma of love betrayed: "Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him: I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the Lord" (Jeremiah 31:20). What lesson is there for us in this brief Bible study? This, perhaps: firstly, that it is perilously easy to presume upon grace; to start out feeling grateful for a gift and, in no time at all, to convince ourselves that what at first looked like grace was, in reality, no more than our entitlement. Secondly, that there is a difference in quality between sin as a legal concept and sin as lack of appreciation: that is, between a relationship covered by law and a relationship created by grace. Ephraim was intended in God's purpose to demonstrate how a relationship with Himself can be created by grace alone. Let their failure alert us to the perils of presuming upon that grace. "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich" (2 Corinthians 8:9). Judges 8:2 But he said to them, "What have I done now in comparison with you? Is not the gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer? What: 1Co 13:4-7 Ga 5:14,15 Php 2:2,3 Jas 1:19,20 3:13-18 Abiezer: Jdg 6:11,34 Judges 8 Resources A GENTLE ANSWER TURNS AWAY WRATH The next two verses might be subtitled Gideon the Consummate Diplomat. But he said to them, "What have I done now in comparison with you? : Perhaps Gideon’s immediate feelings to Ephraim being "in his face" weren’t that cordial, but he controlled himself and treated his brothers with kindness and his reply (Pr 15:1, 16:32, cf Pr 25:15) stands in marked contrast to that of Jephthah (Jdg 12:1-6+). Gideon might have questioned the Ephraimites' motives by asking them why they had not taken action on their own during the long seven-year oppression.
Juízes 8
Phillips has an interesting thought on Gideon's "diplomatic two-step" - Given Gideon's responses in the next four cases, one may wonder if his reaction to the Ephraimites was more a matter of political expediency than a passion for truth. Minimizing the role of his army of three hundred soldiers seems tantamount to minimizing God's powerful miracle. Was killing two kings truly a greater feat than routing an army at odds of four hundred fifty to one? Surely not! The Lord had given Gideon the victory, yet Gideon said nothing about God's role in the battle. He dealt with the Ephraimites entirely at a horizontal level. (See Holman Old Testament Commentary - Judges, Ruth) In any event it is sad when brothers declare war on each other after they’ve stood together to defeat the enemy. As the psalmist records “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” (Ps 133:1+) In Poor Richard’s Almanack (1734), Benjamin Franklin wrote: Take this remark from Richard, poor and lame, Whate’er’s begun in anger ends in shame. And King Solomon wrote,“The beginning of strife is like releasing water; therefore stop contention before a quarrel starts” (Pr 17:14NKJV). Gary Inrig - Gideon’s response is both admirable and sad. He could have chosen to put those Ephraimites in their place with a few choice words or to defend himself by a blistering attack on their sinful, selfish attitudes. But he utterly refused to do that. Instead, he shrewdly minimizes his role and maximizes theirs: “What have I accomplished compared to you? Aren’t the gleanings of Ephraim’s grapes better than the full grape harvest of Abiezer? God gave Oreb and Zeeb, the Midianite leaders, into your hands. What was I able to do compared to you?” Do you think that really makes sense? Was it really greater for Ephraim to capture and kill two military commanders than for Gideon to attack 135,000 men with only 300, to bring about a massive slaughter of the enemy and to cause the invaders to flee the land? Of course not. Gideon is obviously trying to keep this smoldering resentment from exploding into full fire, and so his words display a careful and shrewd diplomacy. But we learn two great lessons from Gideon. 1. The unity of God’s people is more important than personal pride. So what if he was wronged, mistreated, and criticized? It was more important for God’s people to be one than for Gideon to be vindicated. What a great lesson for us to learn. None of us likes to be wronged or misrepresented the way Gideon was. But how much better is it to take that hurt to the Lord and let Him deal with it than to insist on my rights at the expense of dividing God’s people? 2. We must not take our eyes off the enemy. Quite frankly, Gideon did not have time to fight with Ephraim. He had his eyes on the Midianites. Gideon refused to be deflected from God’s call for his life. That really was Ephraim’s problem. They had a lot of time to discuss their feelings because they had no burden to do God’s work. They had no sense of God’s purpose for them, so naturally they were out of step with Gideon. Often those who find much to criticize in the lives of other people are those who have no sense of urgency about God’s call for their lives. Someone once told of a conversation he had with Dr. Charles Fuller, a man greatly used by God in radio evangelism. During the conversation, a man who had been publicly attacking Dr. Fuller was mentioned. Fuller said, “Yes, God bless him.” Another man said, “You don’t seem too upset, Dr. Fuller.” And Fuller replied, “Why should I let someone else decide how I’m going to act?” What a great attitude for every believer to cultivate! Yet that is not all that must be said. Gideon’s diplomacy was successful, but in the process, he focused entirely on the horizontal. He doesn’t insist on the credit for himself, but neither does he give it to the Lord, where it truly belonged. He doesn’t direct the Ephraimites to God as the source of victory, nor does he make it clear that he had been acting under a divine commission. This is not nitpicking. Disunity will always occur when our perspective is horizontal, not vertical. The major task of a leader is to make sure God is appropriately honored for all that He has done. Gideon’s failure to do that here reflects an issue that will grow far more serious. With that attack met, Gideon crossed the Jordan and continued his pursuit of Midian. Satan had not given up yet. He often tries to draw us into division where there ought to be unity; he also loves to draw us into misplaced priorities, where we subtly substitute our cause for God’s cause and pursue the wrong objectives or do the right thing for the wrong reasons. (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay - borrow for an hour) Judges 8:4 Then Gideon and the 300 men who were with him came to the Jordan and crossed over, weary yet pursuing. weary yet pursuing: 1Sa 14:28,29,31,32 30:10 2Co 4:8,9,16 Ga 6:9 Heb 12:1-4 Judges 8 Resources Gideon Pursues Midianites Zebah and Zalmunna & 15,000 (Source: ESV Global Study Bible) MORE TROUBLE IN THE TRANSJORDAN TERRITORY ESV Study Bible note - Following the Lord’s great victory on the Israelites’ behalf, Gideon pursued a second military engagement. But the narrative here takes on a different tone. Whereas the Lord is prominently mentioned as the one who orchestrates the victory in the preceding chapter (Judges 7), the presence of the Lord is noticeably absent in this chapter. Even though Gideon was finishing off the action against the Midianites, the portrayal of Gideon in Jdg 8:13-21 is far from attractive. (Borrow ESV study Bible for an hour) Lawson G Stone offers an interesting perspective on interpreting Gideon's actions in Judges 8 - "Commentators have a field day excoriating Gideon in Jdg 8:4-21, psychoanalyzing his every move and employing pejorative language ("glib," "rage") with scant textual basis to impugn Gideon's motives (Block, Schneider, Younger). Such eisegesis typically betrays the middle-class western perspective of the interpreters rather than illuminating the Iron Age culture and behavior of Gideon....Too easily modern readers, with our comfortable lives protected by police, ambulance, and civil legal structures, instructed by a whole Bible and 2,000 years of Christian tradition, pass judgment on Gideon. But Gideon's historical and literary world more resembled that of Achilles or Beowulf. Canaan in the midst of Iron Age I remained dark and bloody ground. A civilization of 2,000 years standing, the Bronze Age culture of the eastern Mediterranean had collapsed in flames in a generation, accompanied by invasions, wars, earthquakes, famine, and epidemic. Men like Gideon, called and empowered by Yahweh, provided the only "law" there was.....We may debate whether that context justifies Gideon's actions, but the wise interpreter will not lightly charge Gideon with pursuing merely personal vendettas, or following "self versus the Spirit" as though he had not had devotions that morning. Where the text does not condemn him, neither should we, unless the context provides clear markers.... Interpreters making a facile connection between Gideon "in the Spirit" (7:1-8:3) and Gideon "motivated by self" (8:4-21) perpetrate anachronistic eisegesis. The narrator offers no critique of Gideon in 8:4-21....God does not annihilate the "self" but energizes and animates it. A "sword for Yahweh" need not rule out "a sword for Gideon."(Cornerstone Biblical Commentary: Joshua, Judges, Ruth ) Then Gideon and the 300 men who were with him came to the Jordan and crossed over, weary (ayeph) yet pursuing (radaph; dioko in present tense - continually) - CSB = "They were exhausted but still in pursuit." Look at the map above to get your bearings. After settling the "ruffled feathers" of the Ephraimites on the west side of the Jordan, Gideon encountered another confrontation with the Israelites (Gadites) on the east side of the Jordan in the territory of Gad (see map above). Note that there are still 300 men. What does that say? It says two things - (1) God is a promise keeping God for He promised to deliver the enemy using only 300 men (Jdg 7:7) and (2) not one man had died in the route of the 120,000! It is interesting to note that in the first battle against the Midianites where 120,000 died, Gideon's 300 men stood in place around the camp. God had sent such confusion with the lamps and trumpets that they apparently did not need to swing a sword. God won the victory. Now we see Gideon actively pursuing the remaining 15,000 and their 2 kings. Clearly the Lord still was empowering Gideon and his men for there would be no way 300 men could hope to defeat 15,000 men unless the Lord enabled them. NET Note - Literally “And Gideon arrived at the Jordan, crossing over, he and the three hundred men who were with him, exhausted and chasing.” The English past perfect (“had crossed”) is used because this verse flashes back chronologically to an event that preceded the hostile encounter described in Jdg 8:1–3. (Note that Jdg 7:25 assumes Gideon had already crossed the Jordan.) Weary yet pursuing The tiny army was now some 40 miles from the hill of Moreh when they came to Succoth, just north of the Jabbok River (map). Worn out from the long chase, Gideon asked these residents of Gad for some provisions. The men of Succoth must have reasoned that the fleeing Midianites would soon regroup and easily defeat the tiny band of 300 exhausted men. Any assistance given to Gideon would implicate Succoth and bring certain retaliation from the feared nomads. And so fear of man brought a snare to Succoth (and Penuel) for which they paid dearly. Compare the Angel of the Lord cursing Meroz (Jdg 5:23+) because they did not come to the help of the LORD. In a sense Succoth and Penuel are not coming to the "help of the LORD" because Gideon is the LORD's emissary and deliverer to accomplish the LORD's work (Jdg 6:14,16). So even as Saul's persecution of believers was tantamount to persecution of Jesus (Acts 9:4,5), Succoth and Penuel's refusal to help and taunting was an affront to the Most High God of Israel. Having said all this it seems that there is some justification for Gideon's subsequent seemingly harsh punishment of these "traitors" but not every writer agrees with this. THOUGHT- “If you, dear brethren and sisters, will give yourselves wholly to God’s work, although you will never get tired of it, you will often get tired in it. If a man has never tired himself with working for God, I should think he never has done any work that was worth doing.”....“Let us also serve the Lord when every movement is painful, when even to think is wearisome. These men were faint. You know what it is for a soldier to be faint; it is no nonsense, no presence, it is real fainting. Yet to go running on when you are ready to faint, to keep right on when you are ready to drop, this is very trying work; yet let us do it, brethren, by God’s grace. Some people only pray when they feel like praying; but we need most to pray when we feel that we cannot pray. If we were only to preach, – some of us, – when we felt like preaching, we should not often preach.” (Spurgeon) Gary Inrig observes that "Midian had been completely removed as a threat. They had lost more than one hundred thousand warriors. Their fighting capacity had been destroyed. In the light of what follows, it seems that Gideon has begun to pursue a personal vendetta. It is notable that the Lord plays no part in these events, and on the east side of the Jordan a very different Gideon begins to emerge." (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay - borrow for an hour) Comment - I am not sure I agree with Inrig. Midian had lost huge numbers but still had two vital chess pieces (two kings) and therefore theoretically could have regrouped and again become a thorn in Israel's side. Weary (05889)(ayeph for iph = to be exhausted) means faint, physically tired, usually used of people. Esau was famished from working in the fields that he sold his birthright to Jacob for some lentils (Ge. 25:29, 30). Because the people of Israel were faint from travel in the wilderness (Deut. 25:18), the Amalekites were able to attack their rear ranks. Gideon's 300 men were exhausted, but still pursued their Midianite enemies (Judg. 8:4f). When King David fled from Absalom, he and his men became weary and stopped to refresh themselves (2 Sam. 16:14; 17:29). Eliphaz accused Job of refusing to give aid to those who were weary (Job 22:7). In Proverbs 25:25, a weary soul is refreshed by cold water. The adjective also may refer to a weary animal (Isa. 46:1). Figuratively, when the adjective modifies the word "land," it refers to its dry condition. David likened his longing for the Lord to one being thirsty in the desert (Ps. 63:1); "My soul longs for You like a parched land" (Ps. 143:6). A godly man will be like "the shadow of a great rock in a weary land" (Isa. 32:2, NKJV). Prophetically, when the Lord regathers his people in the kingdom, "No one will be weary or stumble among them" (Isa. 5:27, NKJV); also, the Lord will satisfy the weary soul (Jer. 31:25). In the meanwhile, the Lord had promised his people rest for the weary, but they refused it (Isa. 28:12), and those who fight against Israel will be weary (Isa. 29:8). Ayeph - 17v - faint(2), famished(2), parched(2), weary(11). Gen. 25:29; Gen. 25:30; Deut. 25:18; Jdg. 8:4; Jdg. 8:5; 2 Sam. 16:14; 2 Sam. 17:29; Job 22:7; Ps. 63:1; Ps. 143:6; Prov. 25:25; Isa. 5:27; Isa. 28:12; Isa. 29:8; Isa. 32:2; Isa. 46:1; Jer. 31:25 Pursuing (chasing) (07291) radaph means to pursue, chase, persecute. The first use describes Abram's pursuit of Lot's captors (Ge 14:14-15). In Ex 14 God hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he would chase after the Israelites (Ex 14:4, 8, 9, 23, Josh 24:6). God's promise if Israel obeys is that they will "chase your enemies." (Lev 26:7-8, cp similar promise in Josh 23:10), but if they disobeyed they would even "flee when no one is pursuing" them (Lev 26:17, cp three uses in Lev 26:36-37). Radaph describes Saul pursuing David to kill him (1Sa 23:25, 28, 24:14, 26:18, thus David prayed Ps 7:1). In fact many of the uses of radaph in Psalms speak of pursuit by an enemy. Radaph refers to hunting, chasing after animals (1 Sam. 26:20). Figuratively, radaph describes chasing rewards (Isa 1:23) or strong drink (Isa. 5:11). To pursue one’s enemies into to darkness means to utterly wipe them out (Nah. 1:8). Radaph is translated in the Lxx with the verb dioko, which means to pursue or chase after and even to persecute. Radaph in Judges - Jdg. 1:6; Jdg. 3:28; Jdg. 4:16; Jdg. 4:22; Jdg. 7:23; Jdg. 7:25; Jdg. 8:4; Jdg. 8:5; Jdg. 8:12; Jdg. 9:40; Jdg. 20:43; Block observes that "Although the plot takes an unexpected turn, Jdg 8:4–27 parallel the preceding account in several significant respects. Again Gideon and his band of three hundred men play key roles. Again they take the enemy camp by surprise. Again two Midianite leaders are captured and executed. But the differences between this chapter and the preceding are even more striking than the links. The following is a list of some of the similarities: 1. Yahweh is not involved in this phase of the plot at all (except in Gideon's own glib comments). 2. The two captured Midianite leaders have strange names and are called “kings” (mĕlākîm) rather than “commanders” (śārîm). 3. The campaign takes Gideon and his men far afield to Karkor east of the Dead Sea. 4. Gideon runs into serious conflict with his Transjordanian countrymen. 5. Gideon is personally involved in the capture and execution of the enemy kings. 6. Personal blood vengeance replaces national deliverance as a motive for Gideon's action. 7. Gideon, the fearful young man, has become a brutal aggressor. (When the plot resumes, something seems to have happened to the character of the hero.)(Borrow this top rated commentary for one hour Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary) Judges 8:5 And he said to the men of Succoth, "Please give loaves of bread to the people who are following me, for they are weary, and I am pursuing Zebah and Zalmunna, the kings of Midian." Succoth: Ge 33:17 Ps 60:6 loaves: Ge 14:18 Dt 23:4 1Sa 25:18 2Sa 17:28,29 3Jn 1:6-8 Judges 8 Resources James Tissot's painting of Gideon begging bread at Succoth SUPPLICATION TO SUCCOTH WHO FEARED MEN NOT GOD And he said to the men of Succoth: Succoth (means "booths" - see map) was east of the Jordan (called "transjordan") and north of the Jabbok River (map) and had come under Israelite control with the defeat of Sihon, king of Heshbon (Dt 1:4+). Succoth is in the territory of the tribe of Gad (map) (cf Josh 13:24-28+) so these were Gideon's "brethren" not his enemies. Their response (and that of Penuel below) shows how sin had begun to corrupt and destroy the tribal unity, sense of brotherhood and national loyalty, to the point that every man was doing what was right in his own eyes, which of course is the "theme song" of the book of Judges! (Jdg 21:25?+). Constable makes an excellent point regarding the degradation of national unity - "Their lack of cooperation illustrates what both Moses and Joshua feared would happen to the Israelites who lived east of the Jordan River (Nu 32:6-15, 20-27+; Josh. 22:13-20+). The seeds of national disintegration had germinated." Gary Inrig - The people of Succoth should have been delighted by Gideon’s achievements. Even though they had not fallen under the direct control of the enemy, the Midianites had been removed as a threat from the region, and at least the people of Succoth could have delighted to support the band that had brought freedom to their fellow Israelites. Although these were people who claimed to belong to a larger family, they had no loyalty to the larger community of faith at all. They should have been excited about what God had done through Gideon. Instead, there was no thankfulness to God, no trust in God, no mention of God. Even the lowest level of human kindness required that they help Gideon, their fellow Israelite. (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay - borrow for an hour) Please (I beg you = marker of emphasis) give loaves of bread to the people who are following me: In theory as a conquering army leader Gideon could have confiscated food, but chose the "diplomatic route" as he had in Jdg 8:1-3. In the recent past however we saw that the Ammonites and Moabites, relatives of the Jews through Lot, failed to help Israel with food with the result that God declared war on them (Dt 23:3-6+). Hospitality is one of the basic laws of the East, and custom demands that the people meet the needs of strangers as well as relatives. Hospitality was also an important ministry in the early church, for there were no hotels where guests might stay; and in times of persecution, many visitors were fleeing. (Ro12:13+; 1Ti 5:10; Heb 13:2+; 1Pe 4:9+.)