Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - 1 Samuel 5:6 - 5:6
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The visitation of God was not restricted to the demolition of the statue of Dagon, but affected the people of Ashdod as well. “The hand of Jehovah was heavy upon the Ashdodites, and laid them waste.†הֵשֵ××, from שָ×מֵ×, when applied to men, as in Mic 6:13, signifies to make desolate not only by diseases, but also by the withdrawal or diminution of the means of subsistence, the devastation of the fields, and such like. That the latter is included here, is evident from the dedicatory offerings with which the Philistines sought to mitigate the wrath of the God of the Israelites (1Sa 6:4-5, 1Sa 6:11, 1Sa 6:18), although the verse before us simply mentions the diseases with which God visited them.
(Note: At the close of 1Sa 5:3 and 1Sa 5:6 the Septuagint contains some comprehensive additions; viz., at the close of 1Sa 5:3 : Καὶ ἐβαÏÏ…Ìνθη Ï‡ÎµÎ¹Ì€Ï ÎšÏ…ÏιÌου ἐπι τοὺς ἈζωτιÌους καὶ ἐβασαÌνιζεν αὐτους, καὶ ἐπαÌταζεν αὐτους εἰς ταÌÏ‚ ἑÌδÏας αὐτων, τὴν ἈÌζωτον καὶ τὰ ὁÌÏια αὐτῆς; and at the end of 1Sa 5:4 : Καὶ μεÌσον τῆς χωÌÏας αὐτῆς ἀνεφυησαν μυÌες καὶ ἐγεÌνετο συÌγχυσις θαναÌτου μεγαÌλη ἐν τῇ πολει. This last clause we also find in the Vulgate, expressed as follows: Et eballiverunt villae et agri in medio regionis illius, et nati sunt mures, et facta est confusio mortis magnae in civitate. Ewald's decision with regard to these clauses (Gesch. ii. p. 541) is, that they are not wanted at 1Sa 5:3, 1Sa 5:6, but that they are all the more necessary at 1Sa 6:1; whereas at 1Sa 5:3, 1Sa 5:6, they would rather injure the sense. Thenius admits that the clause appended to 1Sa 5:3 is nothing more than a second translation of our sixth verse, which has been interpolated by a copyist of the Greek in the wrong place; whereas that of 1Sa 5:6 contains the original though somewhat corrupt text, according to which the Hebrew text should be emended. But an impartial examination would show very clearly, that all these additions are nothing more than paraphrases founded upon the context. The last part of the addition to 1Sa 5:6 is taken verbatim from 1Sa 5:11, whilst the first part is a conjecture based upon 1Sa 6:4-5. Jerome, if indeed the addition in our text of the Vulgate really originated with him, and was not transferred into his version from the Itala, did not venture to suppress the clause interpolated in the Alexandrian version. This is very evident from the words confusio mortis magnae, which are a literal rendering of συÌγχυσις θαναÌτου μεγαÌλη; whereas in 1Sa 5:11, Jerome has given to מָוֶת מְהוּמַת, which the lxx rendered συÌγχυσις θαναÌτου, the much more accurate rendering pavor mortis. Moreover, neither the Syriac nor Targum Jonath. has this clause; so that long before the time of Jerome, the Hebrew text existed in the form in which the Masoretes have handed it down to us.)
“And He smote them with עֳפָלִי×, i.e., boils:†according to the Rabbins, swellings on the anus, mariscae (see at Deu 28:27). For ×¢×¤×œ×™× the Masoretes have invariably substituted טְחֹרִי×, which is used in 1Sa 6:11, 1Sa 6:17, and was probably regarded as more decorous. Ashdod is a more precise definition of the word them, viz., Ashdod, i.e., the inhabitants of Ashdod and its territory.