Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Judges 7:12 - 7:25
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jdg_7:12-25
Jdg_7:13. And as Gideon came, behold, a man told a dream. From the enemy’s dream, Gideon will learn the frame of mind in which they are. For this end he was to go into the encampment, thereby to perfect his own confidence. Jehovah is God of the heathen also. Although they do not believe in Him, they are yet instruments in his hand. It was He who, without their knowing it, raised them up and directed their way. They did not learn to know Him from his works; and yet He shone above them, like the sun concealed by clouds and vapors. The manifest God they fail to see by day; but the Hidden and Unknown they seek in dreams. All heathenism is, to a certain extent, a great dream; and it is in accordance with its nature, that as all nations dream, so all are disposed to find in dreams the indications of a hidden truth. Their interpreters did not know the God of Truth in himself; but He who turns the nations as water-courses, fills their hearts, when He pleases, with visions and interpretations which have their rise in truth. Hence, when in Scripture, God frequently favors heathen with dreams of truth, He does not thereby sanctify every dream; but only uses dreams to influence the men whom He takes under the guidance of his wisdom,—the Philistine king, for instance, Laban the Aramæan, the Egyptian baker and butler,—because they already look on dreams as such as hiding a divine mystery. Dreams appeared the more significant, when great events were manifestly at hand. And in the condition of mental excitement which under such circumstances seizes on men, they are natural and to be expected. Thus elsewhere also we hear of dreams by generals before battle. Leonidas, Plutarch (on Herodotus) tells us, had a dream before the battle of Thermopylæ, which disclosed to him the future destinies of Greece and Thebes. Xerxes had a dream previous to his Greek campaign; and Gustavus Adolphus is said to have dreamed before the battle of Leipzig, that he was wrestling with Tilly (Joh. Scheffer, Memorab. Suet. Gentis, p. 23). It was not unknown to the Midianites that Gideon, though but a contemned foe, lay encamped on the mountain. The peculiar dream must therefore the more impress the soldier who dreamed it.
A round barley-loaf rolled itself. The narrative, notwithstanding its simplicity and brevity, is very vivid and forcible. The animated äִðֵּä recurs three times. The dream itself also portrays the contrast with which it has to do, with uncommon clearness. The barley-loaf is the symbol of wretchedness and poverty, over against the luxury and wealth of Midian. Indigent Bedouins, who have nothing else, at this day still subsist on barley-bread, which they sometimes dip in goat’s fat (Ritter, xiv. 1003). The cake or loaf is here called öְìִéì , a term variously explained. The definition of Gesenius, who derives it from âָּìַì=öָìַì , to roll, seems to be the most likely. The mention of the round form of the loaf was necessary to bring its rolling vividly before the imagination, since all loaves were not round. The Arabs of the desert, according to Niebuhr, take a round lump of dough, and bury it in hot coals, until they think it baked. Then they knock off the ashes, and eat it (Beschreib. Arab. p. 52). Such a wretched loaf is that which the Midianite sees rolling in his dream. It signifies Gideon and Israel, who, by reason of their enemies, were reduced to poverty and distress (Jdg_6:4). It comes rolling “against” the encampment ( áְּîַçֲðֵä ), not “in” it, as the expositors have it; for the dream depicts the coming event.
And it came to the tent, òַã äָàֹäֶì . The tent—with the article. It would be an error to think here, with Bertheau, who follows Josephus, of the tent of the king; for there were several kings. The tent of the dream stands collectively for all the tents of the encampment; for the very idea of the dream is that the rolling loaf comes into collision with the tents in general. One tent after another is struck by it, falls, and is turned upside down. åְðָôִì äָàֹäֶì , and “the tent,” all the tents, one after another, lay overturned. By this venaphal, the narrator recapitulates, as it were, the falling of the several tents, which in the vivid dream vision, in which all notions of time and space are forgotten, appeared like the downfall of a single tent.
Jdg_7:14. And his fellow answered. The fact that a true interpretation is given by one comrade to the other, must be specially noted. The first has not asked, but only related; the other is no sooth-sayer, but only a companion. So much the more significant is the frame of mind in which the interpretation originates. For there exists no visible ground for thinking it possible that, notwithstanding their great power, Midian may be delivered into the hands of a man like Gideon. But what does exist, is an evil conscience. Through seven years Midian had plundered and trodden Israel. This is the first time, in all these years, that resistance is attempted. That in spite of distress and numerical weakness, Israel ventures now to begin a war, must of itself excite attention and make an impression. How long had it been, since Israel had unfurled the banners of its God! Proud tyranny is already startled at the prospect of resistance from a few faithful ones. According to Herodotus (Jdg_7:16), Artaban says to Xerxes: “Men are wont to be visited in sleep by images of what they have thought on during the day.” The principle applies in this case to both dreamer and interpreter. Dream and interpretation both reflect the forebodings of an evil conscience, which God is about to judge. The interpreter compares the rolling loaf with the sword of Gideon. (The hithpael of äָôַïְ , here applied to that which symbolized the sword of Gideon (Jdg_7:13), is also used by the sacred writer of the sword which kept the entrance to the garden of Eden. Gen_3:24.) He it is—continues the interpreter—who rises up against the domination of Midian: does he venture on this, and dreamest thou thus,—be sure that his God (hence the article with Elohim, since without the article it also designates their gods) has delivered Midian into his power.
Jdg_7:15. When Gideon heard this. What Gideon hears is not merely the interpretation of a dream which confirms his brightest hopes. The dream is one which his enemies have, and the interpretation is their own. He hears in it an expression of the tone and mood of their minds. He learns that the confidence of the enemy is already broken by the reflection that Israel’s Lord is once more in the field. Astonished and adoring, he and his attendant hear this wonder, as great and real as any other that God has shown him. They feel that God has done this—they see that He is leader and victor—with thanksgiving they bow before Him.
Jdg_7:16-18. And he divided the three hundred men. Encouraged, Gideon hastens to act. He divides his band into three companies, so as to be able to surround the hostile encampment (cf. Jdg_7:21). He bids the two companies who are to take their stations on the other sides, to attend to his signal, and gives them the battle-cry. Now, as to this cry, though Jdg_7:18 gives it, “Of Jehovah and of Gideon,” yet, since Jdg_7:20 has, “Sword of Jehovah and of Gideon,” it is evident that in the former verse the word “sword” is to be supplied. For the two companies who were to wait for the trumpet-blast of Gideon and those with him, could not understand the words of the distant cry, and yet they also shouted, “Sword of Jehovah and of Gideon” (Jdg_7:20). Moreover, the command must have been executed as it was given; and hence the fact that according to Jdg_7:20. Gideon’s own company joined in the longer form, proves that to have been originally given. The cry itself is very expressive. It tells the Midianites that the sword of the God whose people and faith they have oppressed, and of the man whose insignificance they have despised, whose family they have injured, and who through God becomes their conqueror, is about to be swung over their heads.
Jdg_7:19-21. And Gideon came to the border line of the camp about the beginning of the middle watch. From the mention of the middle watch, it has been justly inferred that the night must be considered as divided into three watches. It was still deep in the night when Gideon undertook the surprise. The middle watch was just begun; the sentinels, it is added, with good reason, had just ( àַïְ ) been set—for as the middle watch advanced, the army would begin to stir. Prodigious was the alarm that seized on Midian, when suddenly the trumpets clanged, the pitchers crashed, the thundering battle-cry broke out, the torches blazed. … Accounts are not wanting in the history of other nations, of similar stratagems adopted by bold generals. Tacitus expresses himself on this subject after his own manner (Annal. i. 68, 4): “The clangor of trumpets and the glitter of arms (sonus tubarum, fulgor armorum) easily become destructive to a foe who thinks only of a few, half-armed opponents; the more unexpected the alarm, the greater the loss (cadebant ut rebus secundis avidi, ita adversis incauti).” So the Roman Minucius Rufus terrified the Scordisci, by causing trumpets to be blown from among the mountains round about, the sound of which, echoed by the rocks, spread fear and terror (Frontinus, Stratagematicon, ii. 3). The ancients named such surprises Panic terrors, because Pan put the enemies of Dionysus to flight with his horns (cf Polyænus, Strategem. i. and ii.).
The terror which seized on Midian was in truth a terror from God. This the simple narrative sets forth most classically. Jdg_7:16 had already stated that all had trumpets in their hands, and pitchers, with torches, whereby no hand was left free to use the sword. Jdg_7:20 says, still more explicitly, “they had the torches in their left, and the trumpets in their right hands.” They did not use the sword, but only cried, “Sword of Jehovah and of Gideon.” (Not, however, as if Gideon were put on a parallel with God: åּìְâִãְòåֹï is to be taken as supplementing the preceding words—“even that committed to Gideon;” for Gideon was the visible bearer of God’s sword.) Hence, also, Jdg_7:21 says: “They stood (the troops of Gideon) round about the encampment;” i.e., they stand, not otherwise attacking, but simply blowing their trumpets; yet the enemy takes to “running” ( åַéָּøָõ stands contrasted with åַéַּòַîְãåּ ). Just as in Joshua’s time the walls of Jericho fell, while the trumpets of Israel sounded, so here it is—“These blew, those fled.” Terror and disorder ruled the hour in the Midianitish camp. In the darkness and confusion, they no longer knew what they did. Hence, Jdg_7:22 states that “while the three hundred blew the trumpets”—this is intentionally repeated, and shows that they scarcely needed a sword against Midian—the Midianites thought themselves attacked by enemies, and raged among themselves, for “Jehovah had set every man’s sword against his fellow, and against the whole camp,” or as we say, in cases of great confusion, “All against one, one against all.”
Jdg_7:22. And the host fled to Beth-shittah (the House of Acacias), towards Zererah, to the edge of Abel-meholah, near Tabbath. The direction of the flight, and the situation of the places named, can only be inferred from the connection and from a comparison of other passages. The mention of the places must have had a local significance for the reader who was acquainted with their situation. From Judges 8 we learn that the Midianites did not flee in one body, but in several divisions. This is as might be expected, seeing the army was composed of different tribes—Midianites, Amalekites, and “Sons of the East.” This separation in flight is also indicated by the statement of the places to which they fled. First, they are said to have fled “to Beth-shittah, towards Zererah,” by which one line of flight is given. When it is further said that they fled “to the edge of Abel-meholah, near Tabbath,” the intention cannot be to prolong the first line, which is already terminated by the phrase “towards Zererah,” but a second is indicated. This also explains the measures adopted by Gideon. Being unable to follow both himself, he calls on Ephraim to cut off the other line of flight. The enemy’s effort was to gain the fords of the Jordan. That one through which kings Zebah and Zalmunna must have passed (Jdg_8:5), seeing they had the start of the others, is evidently indicated by öְøֵøָúָä , “towards Zererah.” Many codices have öְøֵãָúָä , “toward Zeredah,” daleth being substituted for resh. Kimchi, however, expressly calls attention to the two r’s. But even in the earliest times Zeredah was read instead of Zererah, as appears from 2Ch_4:17, where we find öְøֵãָúָä . From the same passage compared with 1Ki_7:46, it is evident that Zeredah was identified with òָøְúָï , Zorthan. From both it appears to have been situated in the vicinity of the Jordan, not very far from Beth-shean (Beisân); and from Jos_2:15-16, it may be inferred that near it there was a ford through the river. This explains why Midian took this line. They approached the river from the direction of Beth-shittah. Bertheau did well to connect this place with the modern village Shutta, mentioned by Robinson (ii. 356), and situated in the vicinity of Beth-shean. Keil’s objection that it lies north of Gilboa, is of no force under our view of the localities as above indicated. Zorthan (Zarthan) is mentioned in connection with a Succoth on this side the Jordan (1Ki_7:46). To this day the Jordan is passed near some ruins, not far from Beisân, which are supposed to indicate the site of Succoth (Ritter, xv. 446). The other line of fugitives took a more southerly direction, “towards the edge of Abel-meholah.” The name of this place, celebrated as the birth-place of the prophet Elisha, has been preserved in the Onomasticon of Eusebius as Áâåëìáåëáß (ed. Parthey, p. 8). The fact that a ùִׁôַú , edge, or strand, is spoken of, indicates perhaps the presence of a wady. And in fact, coming down from Beisân or Zerîn, the first western tributary of the Jordan met with, is a Wady el-Maleh (cf. Ritter, xviii. 432–448, in several passages). The fugitives are further said to have come to the edge of Abel-meholah “near Tabbath.” There is still a city Tubâs, not far from Wady Maleh, usually considered to be the Thebez of the history of Abimelech (Jdg_9:50), for which, however, there is no compulsory ground.
Jdg_7:23-25. Gideon had a definite plan of pursuit. To carry it out, he required more men than the three hundred who had stood with him in the victory. The troops whom he had collected from Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali (Jdg_6:35), though subsequently dismissed, had not yet disbanded. They now returned (Zebulun only is not named), and assisted in the pursuit. But to overtake the Midianites on their fleet camels was not an easy matter. If not intercepted, those of them who were hastening southward, would get as safely over the Jordan as kings Zebah and Zal munna had done near Beisân (at Zorthan). Gideon had foreseen this, and had early sent a message to Ephraim, over whose territory the fugitive host was passing, to “seize the waters as far as Beth-barah and the Jordan.” Ephraim acted promptly, and a part of the Midianites were cut off. The “waters” can only mean some western tributaries of the Jordan; for Gideon’s object is to prevent that body of the enemy which by his pursuit he has thus far kept away from the river, from gaining the lower fords and crossing over. He therefore desires “the waters” to be seized “to Beth-barah.” This name Beth-barah cannot well have originated from Beth-abarah (Ford-house). It does not appear that the letter ò has been dropped out of áֵּéúÎòֲáָøָä . Besides, if Beth-barah meant “Ford-house,” the direction “to Beth-barah” would have been superfluous; for in that case the seizure of the Jordan would have included that of the “waters” and the ford. On the other hand, it was important to provide for the occupation of the “waters,” or the particular stream intended, along its whole length to its source; lest, while it was guarded below, the enemy should cross it above. Beth-barah is therefore, with Eusebius and Jerome (Onomast., p. 104), to be explained as “House of the Spring,” “Well-house” (from áְּàֵø or áֹּø ), by which the narrative becomes clear and intelligible. Therewith, also fall all attempts to identify this Beth-barah with the Beth-abarah of Origen’s reading at Joh_1:28; for that lay beyond the Jordan. Origen was, however, led by a right critical feeling. Instead of a Bethany, the people of his day doubtless spoke of a Beth-abarah in that region; and this, philologically and in fact, was one and the same with Bethany. For this trans-Jordanic Bethany—not to be confounded with that near Jerusalem—is to be derived from Beth-ain, as Beth-abarah from Beth-beer, and like the latter signifies “House of the Spring,”—a point to which I formerly directed attention in my “Bericht über Renan (Berlin, 1864).
The Ephraimites, to their great glory, captured the two Midianite princes Oreb and Zeeb. It was the reward of their prompt obedience. Very suggestive are the names, under which these two princes of the desert had perhaps been especially dreaded—“Wolf” and “Raven.” Among other nations also, these animals, frequenters of desolate places, and eager attendants on battle-fields, have furnished surnames for noted warriors. The Arabs, because the raven follows in the wake of caravans, call him Ebul-Mirkal, Father of the Swift Camel, or Ibn-Bersun, Son of the Sumpter-horse. Noteworthy, at all events, is the conjunction of “Raven and Wolf.” Coupled in the same way, we find them sacred to the Scandinavian Odin. Both ravens and wolves were also consecrated to Apollo. In the early Roman legends the woodpecker (picus) takes the place of the raven as companion of the wolf, and both belong to the God of War (cf. my Schamir, Erf. 1856, p. 103). The Arabs give to both the bird and the quadruped the common name Ibnol-Erdh, Son of the Earth (Hammer, Namen der Araber, p. 48).
The fame of the deed perpetuated itself in local designations, and the Raven’s Rock and Wolf’s Wine-press commemorate the disgrace of Midian. The Odyssea likewise speaks of a Raven’s rock in Ithaca (xiii. 408), which name the scholiast derives from a fallen hunter (cf. Bochart, Hierozoicon, ii. 203); and the use of the German Rabenstein, is undeniably analogous. In the other name, the term jekeb ( éֶ÷ֶá , wine-press) is borrowed from the hollow form of the object; hence, the name is here equivalent to Wolf’s-hole. Similar historical allusions are supposed by the German Muse to lie concealed in Worms (from Wurme, slain by Siegfried) and in Drachenfels (cf. Grimm, D. Heldens., pp. 155, 316).
In Haurân, Wetzstein heard the name el-Gurâb, the Raven, applied to a spent volcano (p. 16); and Castle Kerek, at the south end of the Dead Sea, was called Hisnal-gorab, Raven’s-castle (Ritter, xiv.1042).
The important remark in Jdg_7:25, that the heads of the two princes were brought to Gideon “from beyond the Jordan,” induces the hope that the name and location of the “Raven’s-rock” may yet be traced. The “waters” which Ephraim occupied, must have been those now known as Wady el-Faria. Below this wady, there is to this day a much used ford (Ritter, xv. 449); while over against it, on the eastern bank of the Jordan, there is the steep height of Jebel Ajlûn, overlooking the Ghor, and commanding the confluent valleys (Ritter, xv. 369). On this height there are the ruins of a castle, of which Ibrahim Pasha still availed himself to hold the robber hordes in check, and which (according to the reports of various travellers on this yet but imperfectly known locality) bore the name of Kalaat-er Rabbad, or Rabua. The Ephraimites, charged with the occupation of the Jordan, had crossed over and seized on this important point in order fully to command the Jordan valley. Here they captured the princes “Raven and Wolf.” The “Raven’s-rock” was still known by this name in the time of Isaiah (see Isa_10:26); and in the corrupted designation Rabua, a similarity of sound with Oreb or Gorab may be traced. The exploit was swift and fortunate. Gideon in his pursuit was still on this side of the Jordan; while he was making a halt before crossing over, the Ephraimites were already returning in triumph from the opposite shore, bringing with them the heads of the slain princes. All other explanations, as found among others in Bertheau and Keil also, fail to harmonize satisfactorily with the connection. The narrator designedly adds the words “from beyond Jordan,” that the reader may know that Ephraim had gained the great triumph, before Gideon could so much as cross the river. This passing remark helps to prepare the reader for the opening narrative of Judges 8. It foreshadows the pride and selfishness of Ephraim. Finally, that Ephraim was beyond the Jordan, and there captured the hostile chieftains, is evident even from the words (Jdg_7:25), “they pursued Midian;” for as they held the Jordan and “the waters,” they could only pursue those who had passed the river.
[Bp. Hall: Now, when we would look that Gideon should give charge of whetting their swords, and sharping their spears, and fitting their armor, he only gives order for empty pitchers, and lights, and trumpets. The cracking of these pitchers shall break in pieces this Midianitish clay; the kindling of these lights shall extinguish the light of Midian; these trumpets sound no other than a soul-peal to all the host of Midian: there shall need nothing but noise and light to confound this innumerable army. And if the pitchers, and brands, and trumpets of Gideon, did so daunt and dismay the proud troops of Midian and Amalek, who can we think shall be able to stand before the last terror, wherein the trumpet of the archangel shall sound, and the heavens shall pass away with a noise, and the elements shall be on a flame about our ears?—The same: Those two and twenty thousand Israelites that slipped away for fear, when the fearful Midianites fled, can pursue and kill them, and can follow them at the heels, whom they durst not look at in the face. Our flight gives advantage to the feeblest adversary, whereas our resistance foileth the greatest.—Scott: In this world, the wicked are often left under the power of their own delusions and the fury of their mad passions, to avenge the cause of God on each other: a period is approaching, when we may expect that the persecuting foes of Christianity will destroy one another, whilst the host of Israel shall look on, and have nothing to do but to blow the trumpet of the gospel.—Wordsworth: Gideon has only three hundred men, and Christ’s church is called “a little flock,” and their foes are innumerable; but their countless myriads melt away, dispersed by the breath of God.—The same: The princes of Midian represent the spiritual enemies of the Church. Is it by chance that they were called Oreb, the Raven, and Zeeb, the Wolf? The Raven is contrasted with the Dove in the history of the Flood (see Gen_8:7) as an unclean bird (cf. Lev_11:15); and in the N. T. the Wolf is the emblem of those false teachers who tear and devour the flock of Christ.—Theodoret (as quoted by Wordsworth): Gideon overcame Midian with unarmed soldiers, bearing only trumpets, torches, and pitchers. So Christ overcame the world by unarmed apostles, bearing the trumpet of preaching and the torch of miracle—Tr.]
Footnotes:
Josephus also understands it thus: “ ἀíèñþðïéò ἄâñùôïí .” His further interpretation, however, can scarcely be followed.
[Cf. Thomson, The Land and the Book, ii. 166—Tr.]
[Wordsworth: “The tent was an expressive emblem of the Midianites, being nomads; their tent was their all in all. Their wives, their children, their cattle, their goods their vesture, their treasure, were all collected in it and about it.”—Tr.]
Æschylus (persœ, 188, etc.) represents poetically the forebodings and dreams of Atossa concerning the impending disaster of Xerxes; but the moral view, that such dreams were inspired by the evil conscience of the conquest-loving tyrant, and that the insignificant people triumphed through God, is wanting.
[Our author treats åַéִּùְׁúַּçåּ as a plural, and translates: “they worshipped.” The form is undoubtedly singular, cf. Gen_23:7; Gen_24:52; etc., and is so regarded by most grammarians, Ges. Gram. 75 Rem. 18; Green, 176, 1. Fürst, however, both in his Lexicon and in his Hebrew Concordance treats it as plural. In his Lexicon, s. v. ùָׁçָä , he says: “ éִùְׁúַּçֲåֶä ; plural, sometimes éִùְׁúַּçåּ , in pause éִùְׁúָּçåּ , sometimes éִùְׁúַּçְååּ .”—Tr.]
[Dr. Thomson remarks (L. & B. ii. 166): “I have often seen the small oil lamp of the natives carried in a ‘pitcher’ or earthern vessel at night.” But the ìַôִּïִéí of this history can scarcely be “oil lamps,” for which ðֵøåֹú would be more appropriate. A better explanation is suggested by the following note in Smith’s Bible Dict. (Art. Gideon): “It is curious to find ‘lamps and pitchers’ in use for a similar purpose at this very day in the streets of Cairo. The Zabit or Agha of the police carries with him at night, ‘a torch which burns, soon after it is lighted, without a flame, excepting when it is waved through the air, when it suddenly blazes forth; it therefore answers the same purpose as our dark lantern. The burning end is sometimes concealed in a small pot or jar, or covered with something else, when not required to give light (Lane, Mod. Egypt., i. ch. iv.)’ ”—Tr.]
A similar maneuver terrified the inhabitants of Heræum in Achaia, when Diotas besieged them. Polyænus, ii. 36.
A place of this name occurs in Carinthia as early as the eleventh century (Förstemann, ii. 768).