Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Judges 1:1 - 1:2
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Introductory Delineation of the Condition of Israel after the Death of Joshua; Sin, and the Judgments entailed by it, rendering the Judgeship necessary.
__________________
FIRST SECTION
The Relations Of Israel Towards The Remaining Canaanites As Forming The Background Of The Ensuing History. Believing And Obedient Israel Enjoys Divine Direction And Favor, Is United Within And Victorious Without; But Faithlessness And Disobedience Lay The Foundations Of Apostasy And Servitude.
__________________
“Who shall first go up against the Canaanite?”
Jdg_1:1-2
[Jdg_1:1.— îִéÎéַòֲìֶäÎìָּðåּ . Dr. Cassel takes ìָðåּ in a partitive sense, and translates, “who of us shall go up.” It is more properly regarded as dat. commodi; for, (1.) The partitive relation, though sometimes indicated by ìְ (apparently, however, only after numerals, cf. Ges. Lex. s. v. ìְ , 4 b), would be more properly expressed by áְּ or îִï ; and (2.) If the writer had intended to connect ìָðåּ with îִé , he would not have placed the verb between them, cf. Isa_48:14; Jdg_21:8. As it stands, the expression is a perfect grammatical parallel with Isa_6:8 : îִéÎéֵìֶêְÎìָðåּ Moreover, ìָðåּ , in the sense of áָּðåּ or îִîֶּðּåּ , adds nothing which is not already implied in the words, îִé éַòֲìֶä áַּúְּçִìָּä , “who shall first go up.” On the other hand, taken in its natural sense, as indirect object after the verb, it expresses the thought that whoever “goes first,” makes a beginning, will do it for the advantage of all. What that advantage was, may be seen from our author’s exposition of the inquiry.—Tr.]
[Jdg_1:1.— àֶì , properly, towards. Dr. Cassel has gegen, which means both “towards” and “against.” The same preposition occurs in Jdg_1:10-11; and though translated “against,” is not to be taken in the sense of òַì . The hostile intent in these passages is not expressed by àֶì , but appears from the context. In this verse, attention to the proper meaning of àֶì , does away with the appearance of tautology which in English the inquiry presents.—Tr.]
[Jdg_1:2.—Dr. Cassel: “Wohlan! Up then!” On this rendering of äִðֵּä , cf. the foot-note on p. 26.—Tr.]
After him, Joshua exercises the authority of government and direction. By his deeds he gains for himself respect among the people, like that which Moses had (Jos_1:5; Jos_1:17; Jos_4:14; Jos_17:4; Jos_18:3); similar wonders arc wrought through him: but he executes only inherited commands; his task demands the energy of obedience. Moses had always been named before Aaron (Moses and Aaron); but when Joshua and the Priest were named together, Eleazar stood first. (Thus, Num_34:17; Jos_14:1; Jos_17:4; Jos_19:51; Jos_21:1). When Moses lived, the priesthood received their commands through him; after his death, Joshua received support and aid through the Priest (Num_27:21). In accordance with this, we must understand what is said, Jos_1:1, namely, that “the Lord spake unto Joshua.” For henceforth “there arose not a prophet like unto Moses.” That which Moses was, could not repeat itself in any other person. Joshua, therefore, was only the reflection of a part of the power of Moses; but as such he had conducted the first historical act of fulfillment demanded by the Mosaic law. The conquest of Canaan was the necessary presupposition of the Mosaic system. Israel, having been liberated, received a national homestead. When Joshua died, the division of the land among the tribes was completed. With the death of Moses the spirit revealed in the law enters upon its course through the history of the world. With the departure of Joshua, the national development of Israel in Canaan commences. The position of Moses was unique, and like that of a father, could not be refilled. When he dies, the heir assumes the house and its management. This heir was not Joshua, but the people itself. Joshua was only a temporary continuator of the Mosaic authority, specially charged with the seizure of the land. He was but the executive arm of Moses for the conquest ( îְùָׁøֵú , “minister,” Jos_1:1). His personality is inseparable from that of Moses. As Elijah’s spirit does not wholly depart from the nation until Elisha’s death, so the personal conduct and guidance of the people by Moses do not entirely cease until the death of Joshua. Joshua’s activity is just as unique as that of his teacher. He is no lawgiver, but neither is he a king or judge, as were others who came after him. He is the servant of Jehovah, inasmuch as he is the minister of Moses. The correspondence between Jdg_1:1 and Jos_1:1, is therefore a very profound one. The death of the men, which these verses respectively record, gave rise to the occurrences that follow.
The sons of Israel asked Jehovah. Literally: “And it came to pass ….and the sons of Israel asked,” etc. The first “and” ( å ) introduces the cause, the second the consequence. It is moreover intimated that the consequence is speedy in coming, follows its cause without any interval. The translation might have been: “And it came to pass … that the sons of Israel immediately asked;” or, “Scarcely had Joshua died, when the sons of Israel,” etc. It lies in the nature of the Hebrew copula, that when it introduces a consequence, it also marks it as closely connected with its antecedent in point of time. The Greeks and Romans made similar use of êáὶ and et. Cf. the line of Virgil (Æneid, iii. 9): Vix prima inceperat œstas, et pater Anchises dare fatis vela jubebat. The Hebrew idiom has also passed over into the Greek of the New Testament, cf. Luk_2:21; êáὶ ὅôå ἐðëÞòèçóáí ἡìÝñáé ὀêôὼ .… êáὶ ἐêëÞèç , etc.: “and the child was eight days old, when forthwith it was named Jesus,” where the Gothic version likewise retains the double yah, “and.” This brings out the more definite sense, both in the parallel passage, Jos_1:1, and here. Scarcely had Moses died, if the idea there, when God spake to Joshua. The government of Israel was not for a moment to be interrupted. Scarcely was Joshua dead, when the sons of Israel asked Jehovah. As Joshua succeeded Moses in the chief direction of affairs, so the congregation of the children of Israel succeeded Joshua. The representatives of this congregation, as appears from Jos_24:31 and Jdg_2:7, an the Elders ( æְ÷ֵðִéí ). Jewish tradition, accordingly, makes the spiritual doctrine pass from Moses to Joshua, and from Joshua to the Elders. These Elders are the seventy men chosen by Moses (Num_11:16) to assist him in bearing the burden of the people. The term “Elder,” it is true, is applied to every authority among the people, especially civil. “Elders,” as representatives of the people, are witnesses of the wonders of God in the desert (Exo_17:5). The “Elders” are Judges 7 (Deu_22:16); the civil authorities of each city are “Elders” (Deu_25:7). “Seventy of the Elders,” with Moses and the priests, behold the glory of God (Exo_24:1, seq.). The ùֹׁèְøִéí , shoterim, officers charged with executive and police duties, become “Elders” as soon as they execute the regulations of Moses among the people (Exo_12:21). The seventy Elders who assisted Moses in bearing the burden that pressed upon him must, therefore, be distinguished from the authorities of the several tribes and cities. They represent the whole nation. As such, they unite with Moses, at the close of his career, in commanding the people to keep the law, and after passing the Jordan to erect a memorial of great stones (Deu_27:1-2). During the regency of Joshua, the authorities and representatives of the people, beside the priests and Levites, consist of Elders, heads of tribes, judges, and magistrates (shoterim). Such is the enumeration after the conquest of Ai, and particularly in Jos_23:2, where, in order to give his last instructions to Israel, Joshua calls all the representatives of the people together. Again, in Jos_24:1, it is stated that Joshua “called for the Elders of Israel, and for their heads, judges, and magistrates.” If no distinction were intended here, it had been sufficient to say, “elders and heads;” for judges and magistrates were also “elders.” But he called together the national representatives and those of the several tribes, like two “Houses” or “Chambers.” The tribal representatives and authorities he dismisses; but the “Elders,” who belong to all the tribes in common, remain near him, as they had been near Moses. These, therefore are they who, when Joshua dies, step into his place. As on him, so on them, there had been put of the spirit that was on Moses (Num_11:17). They quickly and zealously undertake the government. They determine to begin at once where Joshua stopped, to make war on the nations who have not yet been conquered, though their lands have been assigned to the several tribes (Jos_23:4). Joshua is scarcely dead, before the Elders inquire of God.
No father ever cared for his children as Moses, under divine direction, cared for his people. Who, then, when he is gone, shall determine what the people are or are not to undertake? The answer to this question is recorded Num_27:21 : After the death of Moses, Joshua is to stand before Eleazar the priest, inquire of him after the judgment of Urim from Jehovah, and according to his answer they shall go out and come in. That Joshua ever did this, the book which bears his name nowhere records. It is characteristic of his exceptional position, as bound by the word and directions of Moses, that the word of God comes directly to him, although he ranks after Eleazar the priest. But this is not the position of the congregation of Israel; and hence the provision made by Moses for Joshua now formally becomes of force. For the first time since Num_27:21, we find here the word ùָׁàַì with áְּ , in the signification “to inquire of Jehovah;” for the ùָׁàì áּàåּøִéí of that passage and the ùָׁàì áּéäåָֹä of this are equivalent expressions. Inquiries put to the Urim and Thummim were answered by none but God. In the sublime organism of the Mosaic law every internal thought, every spiritual truth, presents itself in the form of an external action, a visible symbol. Urim and Thummim (Light and Purity) lie in the breast-plate on the heart of the priest, when he enters into the sanctuary (Exo_28:30). They lie on the heart; but that which is inquired after, receives its solution from the Spirit of God in the heart of the priest. Consequently, although in the locus classicus (Num_27:21), the expression is, “to inquire of the Urim,” here and elsewhere in the Book of Judges it is always, “and they inquired of Jehovah.” The Greeks also used the expression ἑñùôᾶí ôὸí èåüí for “inquiring of the oracle,” cf. Xenoph., Mem., viii. 3). The Urim also were an oracle, and a priest announced the word of God. The God of Israel, however, does not speak in riddles (Num_12:8), but in clear and definite responses. Israel asks:—
Who of us shall first go up against the Canaanite to fight against him? The word “go up” is not to be taken altogether literally. The Hebrew òָìָä , here and frequently answers in signification to the Greek ἐöïñìᾶí , Latin aggredi. It means to advance to the attack, but conceives the defense as made from a higher level. The point and justification of the inquiry lies in the word “first.” The question is not whether aggressive measures shall or shall not be adopted, but which of the tribes shall initiate them. Hitherto, Moses, and after him, Joshua have directed the movements of the people. Under Joshua, moreover, all the tribes united in common warfare. All for one, each for all. The general war is at an end; the land is divided, the tribes have had their territories assigned them. Now each single tribe must engage the enemies still settled within its borders. This was another, very difficult task. It was a test of the strength and moral endurance of the several tribes. The general war of conquest under Joshua did not come into collision with the joy of possession and rest, for these had as yet no existence But after the dispersion of the tribes such a common war, under one leadership, was no longer practicable. It may also have appeared unwise that all the tribes should be engaged in general and simultaneous action within their several territories. Had one tribe been defeated, the others would not have been in a position to assist it. The question there fore concerned the honor and duty of the first attack. As yet no tribe held any definite priority of rank. For the sake of peace and right, it was left with God to determine who should first go up to fight against the inhabitants of the land, to grind them, as the word used expresses it, and thus deprive them of that power for evil which as nations they possessed. The signification “to war” of ìָçַí , is illustrated by the meaning “to eat,” which it also has. The terrible work of war is like the action of the teeth on bread, it tears and grinds its object. Hence the Greek ìÜ÷áéñá , knife, belongs to ìÜ÷ïìáé , to fight, just as the Hebrew îַàֲëֶìֶú , knife, belongs to àָëì , to eat.
Jdg_1:2. And Jehovah said, Judah shall go up. Judah takes a prominent position among the sons of Jacob, even in the lifetime of their father The misdemeanors of his elder brethren favor this. It is he who saves Joseph from the pit in which the wrath of the others designed him to perish; and who, by suggesting his sale into Egypt, paves the way for the wonderful destinies which that land has in store for Israel. He is capable of confessing his sins (Gen_38:26). He pledges himself to Jacob for the safe return of Benjamin, and him the patriarch trusts. He, also, in the hour of peril, speaks the decisive word to the yet unrecognized Joseph (Gen_44:18); and, although he bows himself before Joseph, the blessing of Jacob nevertheless says of him (Gen_49:8 ff.): “Thy brethren praise thee; the sceptre shall not depart from Judah.” The tribe of Judah holds the same prominent position. It is the most numerous tribe. At the first census (Numbers 2), its military strength is greater than that of both the tribes of Joseph. In the desert, it leads the first of the four encampments,—that, namely, which faces the east (Num_2:3). It began the decampment and advance (Num_10:14). Among those appointed by Moses to allot the land, the representative of Judah is named first (Num_34:19); and hence when the allotment was actually made under Joshua, the lot of Judah came out first (Jos_15:1).
But the tribe of Judah had yet other merits, by reason of which it took the initiative on the present occasion. When Moses sent twelve men to reconnoitre the land, one man from each tribe, the messengers of Judah and Ephraim alone, full of faith and courage, sought to awaken within the people a spirit pleasing to God. The messenger of Ephraim was Joshua, the son of Nun, the minister of Moses; the representative of Judah was Caleb. Both obtained great credit for their conduct. Joshua became the successor of Moses. When Joshua died, Caleb still lived. The great respect which he enjoyed, as head of the tribe of Judah, and on account of the approbation of Moses, may also be inferred from Jos_14:6.
Up then! I have delivered the land into his hand. “Up then,” the address of encouragement: agite, macte! Judah may boldly attack—victory is certain. Caleb stands at the head of the tribe. He has already been assured of victory by Moses (Num_14:24; Jos_14:9). Josephus (Ant. v. 2, 1) calls the priest who officiates Phinehas. He infers this from Jos_24:33, where the death of Eleazar is recorded. According to Jewish tradition, Phinehas also wrote the conclusion of the Book of Joshua.
Starke: God gives more than we seek from him.—Gerlach: Not even the task which had been imposed on each individual tribe, will they take in hand, without having inquired of the Lord concerning it.
Jdg_1:2 God therefore vouchsafes direction and promise. Judah is to go before. When Israel is believing and obedient, Judah always goes before (Gen_49:10): in the desert, at the head of the host; after the time of the Judges, when David sits upon the throne of Israel; and finally, when the Lion of the tribe of Judah conquers the last enemy, which is death.
Starke: If we also desire to war against our spiritual Canaanites, the first attack must be made, and the war must be conducted, by Christ Jesus, the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Rev_5:5).
Lisco: The words, “I have delivered the land,” are meant prophetically; with God that which is certain in the future is as if it were present.
[Bush (combining Scott and Henry): The precedency was given to Judah because it was the most numerous, powerful, and valiant of all the tribes, and that which the Lord designed should possess the preëminence in all respects, as being the one from which the Messiah was to spring, and for that reason crowned with the“excellency of dignity” above all its fellows. Judah therefore must lead in this perilous enterprise; for God not only appoints service according to the strength and ability He has given, but “would also have the burden of honor and the burden of labor go together.” Those who have the precedency in rank, reputation, or influence, should always be disposed to go before others in every good work, undismayed by danger, difficulty, or obloquy, that they may encourage others by their example.
Wordsworth: The death of Joshua is the date of degeneracy. So in spiritual respects, as long as the true Joshua lives in the soul, there is health. St. Paul says, “I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” The true Joshua lives in the souls of his saints; but if He dies in the soul, that death is theirs; the death of their souls (Origen).
Bachmann: As the Book of Joshua opens with the mention of Moses’ death, so the Book of Judges with that of Joshua. The servants of the Lord die one after the other; but the history of his kingdom goes on uninterruptedly.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[Jdg_1:1.—The author renders: “the sons of Israel asked God;” and by way of explanation adds the following note: “Thus do we intend constantly to render éְäåָֹä , on the ground that it expresses the absolute idea of the true God in Israel. Since àֱìֹäִéí is also used in connection with heathen worship, it corresponds to our ‘Godhead, Deity’ or ‘the Gods.’ ” In this translation the word Jehovah will be inserted.—Tr.]
[Jdg_1:1.— îִéÎéַòֲìֶäÎìָּðåּ . Dr. Cassel takes ìָðåּ in a partitive sense, and translates, “who of us shall go up.” It is more properly regarded as dat. commodi; for, (1.) The partitive relation, though sometimes indicated by ìְ (apparently, however, only after numerals, cf. Ges. Lex. s. v. ìְ , 4 b), would be more properly expressed by áְּ or îִï ; and (2.) If the writer had intended to connect ìָðåּ with îִé , he would not have placed the verb between them, cf. Isa_48:14; Jdg_21:8. As it stands, the expression is a perfect grammatical parallel with Isa_6:8 : îִéÎéֵìֶêְÎìָðåּ Moreover, ìָðåּ , in the sense of áָּðåּ or îִîֶּðּåּ , adds nothing which is not already implied in the words, îִé éַòֲìֶä áַּúְּçִìָּä , “who shall first go up.” On the other hand, taken in its natural sense, as indirect object after the verb, it expresses the thought that whoever “goes first,” makes a beginning, will do it for the advantage of all. What that advantage was, may be seen from our author’s exposition of the inquiry.—Tr.]
[Jdg_1:1.— àֶì , properly, towards. Dr. Cassel has gegen, which means both “towards” and “against.” The same preposition occurs in Jdg_1:10-11; and though translated “against,” is not to be taken in the sense of òַì . The hostile intent in these passages is not expressed by àֶì , but appears from the context. In this verse, attention to the proper meaning of àֶì , does away with the appearance of tautology which in English the inquiry presents.—Tr.]
[Jdg_1:2.—Dr. Cassel: “Wohlan! Up then!” On this rendering of äִðֵּä , cf. the foot-note on p. 26.—Tr.]
If in Exo_6:20; Exo_6:26, the order is “Aaron and Moses,” it is only to indicate Aaron as the first-born; hence, Jdg_1:27 of the same chapter, as if by way of correction, says, “these are that Moses and Aaron.” For the same reason Num_3:1 reads: “These are the generations of Aaron and Moses.” As the order is everywhere Moses and Aaron, so it is naturally also “Moses and Eleazar.” This difference in the relations of Moses and Joshua respectively to the Priest, it is important to notice. For it is of itself sufficient to show the untenableness of Bertheau’s assertion (Buch der Richter, p. 9), that Num_27:21 is to be so taken that Joshua is to ask, not before, but for, instead of, Eleazar, whether he shall go out; that is (as he thinks), “in a manner just as valid as if the high-priest had inquired of Jehovah.” To inquire of God by means of the Urim, the Priest alone could do, for he alone had it. Moses and the prophets received revelations immediately; but when the Urim is mentioned, the Priest is the only possible medium. The passages to which Bertheau refers, speak against his assertion. The LXX. are as plain as the Hebrew text. In 1Sa_22:10, it is the Priest who inquires of God for David. Josephus, Ant. iv. 7, 2, is an irrelevant passage, and therefore cannot be cited at all. Moreover, Josephus himself puts Eleazar before Joshua, when he speaks of both (iv. 7, 3). Nor is there any good ground for doubt as to the clearness of the passage in Numbers 27. If we find no mention anywhere of Joshua’s having inquired by Urim, the foundation of this fact is deeply laid in his relations to Moses. He was called only to be the executor of the designs of Moses. His activity expends itself in continuing the work of Moses. It moves entirely within the lines prescribed by Moses, and is impelled by his inviolable authority. Joshua’s deeds are but the historical outgrowth of the spirit of Moses. The Book of Joshua is but the narrative of Joshua’s obedience to the word of Moses. Whatever Joshua ordains, is rendered sacred by an appeal to Moses. Even the division of the land is conducted according to this authority (Joshua 13-15). “Every place have I given you, as I said unto Moses,” is the language used (Jos_1:3). Remember what Moses commanded you, says Joshua to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (Jos_1:13). The fact is brought out with peculiar emphasis in the following passages: “Be strong and very courageous to do according to all the laws which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or the left” (Jos_1:7). “There was not a word of all that Moses commanded which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel” (Jos_8:35). “As the Lord commanded Moses his servant, so did Moses command Joshua, and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the Lord commanded Moses” (Jos_11:15).
Wherever, therefore, Joshua simply executes the will of God as expressed in the commands of Moses, the necessity for inquiring by Urim does not arise. It is precisely in this execution of the Mosaic commands that God speaks to Joshua, as Jos_4:10 clearly teaches: “until everything was finished that the Lord commanded Joshua to speak, according to all that Moses commanded Joshua.” The direct command of God to Moses operates on Joshua who executes it.
That Joshua is the executor of the commands of Moses, cannot consistently with the spirit of the book which relates his history, be overlooked. When, however, the decision by Urim is alluded to, and it is said, “according to his mouth” ( òַì ôִּéå ), the reference is to the same (priestly) mouth which, Jos_19:50, assigns an inheritance to Joshua, “according to the mouth of Jehovah” ( òַì ôִּé éְäåָֹä ). This method of decision comes into play when Joshua has no instructions from Moses according to which to act. The peculiar position of Joshua, by whom, through the word of Moses, God still always speaks and acts as through Moses (Jos_3:7), and who nevertheless does not like Moses stand before, but after, the priest, becomes everywhere manifest. This position also is unique, and never again recurs. It is therefore at his death, and not till then, that the preponderance of the Priest as the sole possessor of the word of God, becomes fully manifest. The fact, therefore, that we now first hear of an “asking of the Lord,” so far from being obscure, is full of instruction on the historical position of affairs.
[Bertheau: “ åַéְäִé , in conjunction with the words, ‘after the death of Joshua,’ first connects itself with the closing narrative of the Book of Joshua (Jos_24:29-33), and secondly designates the Book of Judges as a link in the chain of books which relate, in unbroken connection, the [sacred] history of the world, from the creation to the exile of the inhabitants of the southern kingdom. The several books which contain this connected historical account are joined together by the connective å .”—Tr.]
Cf. Josephus, Ant. iv. 8, 14, who states on the authority of Jewish tradition that there were in every city seven judges, each with two Levitical assistants, corresponding to the seventy-two of the general senate.
[Bachmann: “The sons of Israel here are not the whole nation, but only the tribes west of the Jordan, who are spoken of in the same way, and in express contradistinction from the tribes east of the Jordan, in Jos_22:12-13; Jos_22:32. According to Jos_13:23. the further conflict with the Canaanites was incumbent on the western, not on the eastern tribes. Hence, also, the following account treats only of the doings and omissions of the western Israel.”—Tr.]
[Cf. on this rendering the note under the text on p. 23.—Tr.]
Cf. Psa_114:2, and the Pesikta and Jalkut on the Book of Judges (Ed. Amsterd.) § 37, p. 2, Judges 8.
The history of Athens contains a similar instance. The council of war before the battle of Marathon was presided over by Callimachus, of the tribe Ajax. A preponderance of voices, exaggerating the danger, already inclined to avoid the Persian army, when Callimachus voted for the course urged by Miltiades, and turned the tide. In consequence of this, the tribe of Ajax was specially honored. Notwithstanding the use of the lot, the last place in the chorus was never assigned to this tribe (Plutarch, Qu. Symp., i. 10; cf. Böckh, Staatshaushalt der Athener, i. 743, note). It is said that Charlemagne, induced by the heroic deeds of Count Gerold, bestowed on the Swabians the right of forming the vanguard in every campaign of the empire.
[Occasionally äִðֵּä may be properly rendered by “Up!” or “Now then!” cf. Psa_134:1, where it is followed by an imperative; but in situations like the present such a rendering is unnecessarily free. The word is designed to excite the attention and put it on the alert for what is coming. Of course, the assurance which here follows it, would animate and incite; but the agite! macte! are in the words to which äִðֵּä calls attention, not in äִðֵּä itself. Tr.]