And whose lips are they which pronounce this blessing? Indeed, it is Deborah the prophetess who sings this song; it is Deborah, by whom God spake, who gives utterance to this strain. It is clear that, revolting as her action appears at first view, there must be a way of looking at it in which it deserves all our sympathy and applause.
I. First, we would observe that human actions are, in God’s holy Word, spoken of as good and righteous, although at the same time it is certain that the best deeds of the best men are alloyed with evil. It would not, therefore, be out of harmony with the tenor of the inspired volume, that Jael should be called blessed for her deed, that her deed should meet with commendation from the prophetess, without it being thereby implied that she was quite undeserving blame. If her act contained some elements of good, amidst much of evil, it might, if the good preponderated, be esteemed and proclaimed as blessed. To this general observation we would add another, namely, that under the Jewish dispensation there was a lower standard of religious perfection than under the Christian. Hence it is that you find the most renowned characters of the Old Testament polluted with sins from which men of ordinary morality among ourselves would recoil. So that Jael’s deed is to be judged, not by itself in the abstract, still less by the light of the gospel, but in reference to the code under which she lived, in reference to the knowledge of the Divine will then published among men; and so judged, it is not requisite that it should have been free from all blame in order to obtain praise.
II. But what were the elements of good in this famous act of the Kenite woman? Now we must here remind you of the real character of the Israelitish warfare. It is of course true that always the sword is God’s weapon, as much as the famine or the pestilence. War is the scourge wherewith the Eternal lashes the nations when they wax proud against Him. But the difference between the case of the Israelites and every other conquering race is this, that the Israelites knew their mission, and went forth to execute it at God’s bidding. And now, again, let us apply these principles to the case of Jael. The people of the Lord were in arms against the enemies of the Lord. We do not know whether Jael was a daughter of Israel; if not, her faith, as we shall see, is more remarkable. She had heard of the violence of the Canaanite for twenty years; she had heard that Deborah, in whom dwelt the spirit of prophecy, had aroused the men of Israel against Sisera. To her mind it was not a mere struggle of hostile nations for liberty and power. To her it was the battle of the Lord of hosts against the heathen who refused to worship Him; it was as the mustering of the armies of heaven against the armies of hell. We are aware that it is still open to you to object, that even if the killing Sisera can be justified, the craft which beguiled him must be reprehensible. In answer to this, we remind you of the observations wherewith we started, namely, that we need not prove Jael’s act to be free from all defect, we are only concerned to show that it had in it many elements of good; and now we set it forth as an act evidencing strong faith in the God of Israel (faith still more marvellous if the Kenite’s wife was not a daughter of Israel), as prompted by love for Him, and zeal for His cause. Such love and such zeal, even when evinced by an action not perfectly faultless, might well earn praise. But we go further. It may be doubted how far the treachery of the act, as it appears, was sinful. Is it wrong to use craft against Satan? May we resist the devil only by open force? May we not use prudence and tact and wiliness in avoiding temptation or in abating its force?
III. The whole history of the Israelites is typical of the history of the redemption of mankind by Jesus Christ. The delivery of the Jews from their enemies, often as it occurs, is symbolical of the greater deliverance of all people from the thraldom of Satan. And whilst the general history is thus broadly significant, the distinct parts of that history lead us almost irresistibly to the remembrance of particular features in the history of Christ’s salvation. (Bp. Woodford.)
The blessing of Jael by Deborah
I. The difficulty is not to be surmounted by denying the inspiration of Deborah’s utterance. If this were so--if it might be maintained that Deborah is wrong when she pronounces Jael blessed--how are we to know that she is right in her other statements? Upon what principle are we to draw the exact line of demarcation?
II. In what sense are we to understand Deborah’s language, and how are we to reconcile it with what would seem, at first sight, to be the true character of Jael’s action?
1. Sisera’s life was, in Deborah’s judgment, rightly forfeited. He was the Lord’s enemy. He represented, in Deborah’s eye--
(1) An impure and cruel system of idolatry, which had been sentenced to extermination by God;
(2) a long career of plunder and murder, which had brought untold miseries upon the poor peasants of Naphtali and Zebulun.
2. Deborah’s language about Jael is relative language.
(1) Relative to the conduct of other persons than Jael. The contrast is really between the motive and the absence of motive; between the will to do what is right and the absence of will.
(2) Relative to the time and circumstances in which Jael lived, and to the opportunities at her command; or, rather, to the absence of such opportunities. Jael’s loyalty to Israel, and to the oneray of truth she knew, is admirable; the method she chose for expressing her loyalty, though for her quite a matter of course and custom, is deplorable. For acting fully up to all the light she possessed she deserved the meed of praise awarded her by Deborah.
III. Concluding lessons.
1. Note the equitableness of Deborah’s estimate of Jael. How often do we, in our judgment of others, measure their failures by some standard of which they have never heard, and refuse them credit for excellences which in them are even consummate! Their standard is a very poor and low one, it may be, but if they have had no chance of learning something better, it is the standard by which they will be judged. We do not risk loyalty to higher truth than any of which they know if in judging them we are strong enough to be equitable.
2. This history would be sorely misapplied if we were to gather from it that a good motive justifies any action that is known to be bad. Jael could not have been pronounced “blessed” had she been a Jewess, much less had she been a Christian. The blessings which the ignorant may inherit are forfeited when those who know, or might know, more act as do the ignorant. (Canon Liddon.)
Deborah’s praise of Jael
Weneed not weight ourselves with the suspicion that the prophetess reckoned Jael’s deed the outcome of a Divine thought. No; but we may believe this of Jael, that she is on the side of Israel, her sympathy so far repressed by the league of her people with Jabin, yet prompting her to use every opportunity of serving the Hebrew cause. It is clear that if the Kenite treaty had meant very much, and Jael had felt herself bound by it, her tent would have been an asylum for the fugitive. But she is against the enemies of Israel; her heart is with the people of Jehovah in the battle, and she is watching eagerly for signs of the victory she desires them to win. Unexpected, startling, the sign appears in the fleeing captain of Jabin’s host, alone, looking wildly for shelter. “Turn in, my lord; turn in.” Will he enter? Will he hide himself in a woman’s tent? Then to her will be committed vengeance. It will be an omen that the hour of Sisera’s fate has come. Hospitality itself must yield; she will break even that sacred law to do stern justice on a coward, a tyrant, and an enemy of God. A line of thought like this is entirely in harmony with the Arab character. The moral ideas of the desert are rigorous, and contempt rapidly becomes cruel. A tent woman has few elements of judgment, and, the balance turning, her conclusion was be quick, remorseless. Jael is no blameless heroine; neither is she a demon. Deborah, who understands her, reads clearly the rapid thoughts, the swift decision, the unscrupulous act, and sees, behind all, the purpose of serving Israel. Her praise of Jael is therefore with knowledge; but she herself would not have done the thing she praises. All possible explanations made, it remains a murder, a wild, savage thing for a woman to do; and we may ask whether among the tents of Zaanaim Jael was not looked on from that day as a woman stained and shadowed, one who had been treacherous to a guest. Not here can the moral be found that the end justifies the means, or that we may do evil with good intent; which never was a Bible doctrine, and never can be. On the contrary, we find it written clear that the end does not justify the means. Sisera must live on and do the worst he may rather than any soul should be soiled with treachery or any hand defiled by murder. There are human vermin, human scorpions and vipers. Is Christian society to regard them, to care for them? The answer is that Providence regards them and cares for them. They are human after all--men whom God has made, for whom there are yet hopes, who are no worse than others would be if Divine grace did not guard and deliver. Rightly does Christian society affirm that a human being in peril, in suffering, in any extremity common to men, is to be succoured as a man, without inquiry whether he is good or vile. What, then, of justice, and man’s administration of justice? This, that they demand a sacred calm, elevation above the levels of personal feeling, mortal passion and ignorance. Law is to be of no private, sudden, unconsidered administration. Only in the most solemn and orderly way is the trial of the worst malefactor to be gone about, sentence passed, justice executed. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
