Lange Commentary - Judges 9:22

Lange Commentary - Judges 9:22 - 9:30

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - Judges 9:22 - 9:30

(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Discord between Abimelech and Shechem. The intrigue of Gaal.

Jdg_9:22-30.

²²When [And] Abimelech had [omit: had] reigned [held sway] three years over ²³Israel, [.] Then [And] God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men [lords] of Shechem; and the men [lords] of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: ²⁴That the cruelty [violence] done to the three-score and ten sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother which slew them, and upon the men [lords] of Shechem which aided him [strengthened his hands] in [for] the killing of his brethren. ²⁵And the men [lords] of Shechem set liers in wait [ambuscades] for him in the top of the mountains, and they robbed all that came along that way by them: and it was told Abimelech. ²⁶And Gaal the son of Ebed came with his brethren [on an expedition], and went over to [passed over into] Shechem: and the men [lords] of Shechem put their confidence in him. ²⁷And they went out into the fields, and gathered their vineyards [held vintage], and trode the grapes, and made merry [prepared harvest-feasts], and went into the house of their god, and did eat and drink, and cursed Abimelech. ²⁸And Gaal the son of Ebed said, Who is Abimelech, and who is Shechem, that we should serve him? is not he the [a] son of Jerubbaal? and [is not] Zebul his officer? serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem: for why should we serve him? ²⁹And would to God this people were under my hand! then would I remove Abimelech. ³⁰And he said to Abimelech, Increase thine army, and come out. And when [omit: when] Zebul the ruler [prefect] of the city heard the words of Gaal the son of Ebed, [and] his anger was kindled.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

[¹ Jdg_9:25.— ìåֹ . Keil: ‘Dat. incommodi; to his disadvantage.” Cf. the Commentary.—Tr.]

[² Jdg_9:28.—De Wette: “Why should we serve him, we?” The position of àֲðָçְðåּ at the end of the sentence, marks the speaker’s indignation at the thought of Shechem’s serving a son of Jerubbaal.—Tr.]

[³ Jdg_9:29.—The pronunciation øַáֶּä (with seghol) is perhaps designed to give to the imperative piel form the strengthening effect of the ending Îָä found with the other imperative ( åָöֵàָä ), but of which ìäØ verbs do not admit. Cf. Ewald, Gram. p. 511, note.—Tr.]

EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL

Jdg_9:22. And Abimelech held sway. The narrator says not, “he reigned” ( îָìַêְ ), nor “he ruled” ( îָùַׁì ), but åַéָּùַׂø : Abimelech was nothing but a ùַׂø . He is not acknowledged either as a rightful king, or as a military chieftain of Israel: he is only a usurper, whom his adherents have clothed with arrogated power. And though his authority is said to have been “over Israel,” this does not mean that it extended over the whole nation. The history shows that his authority did not extend beyond the narrow circle of the mountains of Ephraim. Deference and consideration were doubtless paid him in more extended regions, for these no fait accompli, whether it be good or evil, ever fails to command.

Jdg_9:23. And God sent an evil spirit. Friendship among the wicked is only a league of vice against others. In itself it cannot stand. Wickedness, says Hesiod, prepares its own punishment. Abimelech, it seems, ruled three years in peace. Plutarch, in his noble treatise on the purposes of the Deity in so often delaying the retribution due to crime, finds the ground of it in the wisdom of Providence, which knows the opportune moment for punishment. Here, as in other passages where he speaks of unholy men, our narrator names the recompensing deity Elohim, not Jehovah. Elohim sends the evil spirit of discord among them; for the undeviating law by which sin punishes itself, is grounded in the very nature of the Deity. It would be the destruction of the justice and truth of the divine government, if worthlessness escaped its recompense. The moral universe is so constituted as to ensure evil fruits to evil deeds. The experience which here presents itself is one of the most common in the history of states and individuals. It is the type of all unnatural conspiracies against right, and of their issue. It is moreover demonstrative of the perfect clearness with which the divine government of the world is apprehended in the Book of Judges, that the falling out of vice with itself, and the stopping up by wickedness of the natural sources of its own advantage, are represented as the action of an evil spirit sent by Elohim. Shechem now seeks to deal with Abimelech, as heretofore it helped him to deal with the sons of Gideon. Treason began, and treason ends, the catastrophe.

Jdg_9:24. That the violence .… might come home. The twofold expression of the thought, first by ìָáåֹà , and then by ìָùׂåּí , serves to give it emphasis. The whole history is related so fully, only to show Israel that there is such a thing as retributive justice,—that sin bears its guilt and punishment. Blood comes home to murderers as guilt. Who did ever experience this more terribly than Israel itself, when it slew Him who was more than Gideon and his sons! That which this narrative exhibits as coming on Abimelech and Shechem in the course of three years, the history of the world, has manifestly fulfilled through centuries on those who cried, “His blood be on us and on our children!” Both are punished, Abimelech and Shechem; for both are equally guilty. So likewise both Jerusalem suffered, and the empire by which Pilate was appointed.

Jdg_9:25. And they laid ambuscades for him. What it was that gave immediate occasion for discord, is not communicated. But Shechem found that it had deceived itself, in thinking that Abimelech’s elevation would make itself the virtual ruler. It had fallen into the hands of an iron despot, against whom the cowardly and pleasure-loving Shechemites did not dare openly to rise. They resorted therefore to underhanded stratagems to make him odious. For the robberies committed from places of concealment become perfectly intelligible, and fall moreover into harmonious connection with the expression “ åַéִּáְâְּãåּ , they dealt treacherously” (Jdg_9:23), when they are regarded as carried on by the Shechemites, but in such a manner as to make them appear to be ordered or instigated by Abimelech. Through them he had become a murderer; they would now make him seem to be a robber and highwayman. But Abimelech received intelligence of the deception. Henceforth, the peace between them was broken; and people such as are here portrayed, know very well that now it is time to be on their guard against each other.

Jdg_9:26-28. And Gaal Ben-Ebed came. An adventurer, probably a Shechemite, whose name perhaps already expresses the popular contempt into which the braggart subsequently fell, having come to the city with his followers, the Shechemites thought that in him they had found a party-leader who could protect them against Abimelech. Accordingly, they held their vintage, celebrated their harvest-home with songs of rejoicing ( äìּåּìִéí ), and then observed the customary sacrificial banquet in the temple of their god. The narrative seeks to exhibit the dramatic contrast between the present jubilant enjoyment and the approaching terrible issue, the present boldness and the subsequent cowardice, the passing luxury and the impending death and destruction. Such sacrificial feasts, particularly as connected with the temple of the “Covenant-God,” were also known elsewhere (cf. Dion. Halicarn. vi. 25, on the “covenant-feast” at Ephesus; cf. K. F. Hermann, R. A. der Griechen, ed. Stark. § 66, 4). Among all nations, says Athenæus (lib. v. p. 192), every meal was referred to God, and He was honored with song and praise. But these feasters in the temple at Shechem had no thought of religion. To them applies what Plutarch says, in the introduction to his Symposium: “when barbarity and immorality betake themselves to wine, the banquet comes to a disastrous end.” The fumes of wine make these men rash and thoughtless. That which they had hitherto kept secret, they now divulge. Maledictions against Abimelech make themselves heard. The scene enables us to estimate aright the political wisdom of the Corinthian Tyrant Periander, when he forbade social feasts to his opponents. The speech of the poltroon Gaal is especially remarkable. The episode in which the narrator acquaints us with the divine judgment on Abimelech, affords at the same time a glance into the hidden springs of political life in a city like Shechem.

Let us serve the men of Hamor, the father of Shechem. The apostasy of Israel, after the death of Gideon, in Shechem took the form of a covenant entered into with the remaining heathen. The contrast between heathenism and the religious life of Israel was founded in the existence and the characters of national and local idol gods over against the true God of Israel. The covenant between the heathen and the apostate Israelites in Shechem, found its expression in the election of Abimelech as king, on the ground that on the one hand he was Shechem’s brother, and on the other Gideon’s son. This covenant now breaks up. The wine-heated Gaal pronounces the word: even Abimelech is still too much of Israel. “By what right,” he says, “does Abimelech command our homage? Is he not always still a son of Jerubbaal, the enemy of our god?” The reaction of heathenism must be made complete. Shechem must hold fast to its own ancestors. The families who trace their descent from the heathen Hamor (Genesis 34) i.e. those who desire to banish all Israelitish traditions, must be the masters! The offspring of Hamor, the heathen progenitor, must not serve the descendants of Jacob! When the Tyrant of Sicyon sought to throw off the influence of Argos, he expelled from the city the worship of Adrastus, the primitive Argive hero. That was his way of declaring himself independent.

Is he not a son of Jerubbaal? and is not Zebul his overseer? Zebul, who in Jdg_9:30 is called the “prefect of the city,” was not of the party who now feasted. He evidently belonged to the Israelites, who, though they had made a covenant with the heathenism of Shechem, were not willing to serve the children of Hamor. He belonged to the upper families of the city; and Gaal in his drunken audacity, discloses the idea that he also must be overthrown, “because Abimelech’s tool.”

Jdg_9:29-30. Verse 29 gives the further speech of Gaal in a very vivid and forcible manner. “O that some one would give this people into my hands! then would I quickly remove Abimelech! That is directed against Zebul. What Gaal means, is, that if he were prefect of the city, as Zebul is, he would make short work with Abimelech.

And he said to Abimelech, Increase thine army, and come out. Gaal does not actually say this to Abimelech, nor does he cause it to be said to him, as many expositors think, for Abimelech hears of it for the first time through Zebul. It is only an animated apostrophe to Abimelech, in which Gaal boastingly challenges Abimelech to prepare himself as if he were present. The inhabitants of Shechem, between their potations, doubtless applauded Gaal, which had the usual effect of emboldening the wine-heated orator. But this drunken jubilation resulted in the ruin of Shechem; for it reached the ears of Zebul. His anger kindled; for his own overthrow, he learned, was to be connected with that of Abimelech.

The narrative, in its admirable simplicity, allows us clearly to trace the advancing progress of that fatal destiny, in which secret treachery and open dissipation, boasting and jealousy, conspire together to precipitate a righteous doom upon the city.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

[Bp. Hall: The prosperity of the wicked is but short and fickle. A stolen crown, though it may look fair, cannot be made of any but brittle stuff. All life is uncertain; but wickedness overruns nature.—The same: It had been pity that the Shechemites should have been plagued by any other hand than Abimelech’s. They raised him unjustly to the throne; they are the first that feel the weight of his sceptre. The foolish bird limes herself with that which grew from her own excretion. Who wonders to see the kind peasant stung with his own snake?—The same: How could Abimelech hope for fidelity of them, whom he had made and found traitors to his father’s blood? No man knows how to be sure of him that is unconscionable. He that hath been unfaithful to one, knows the way to be perfidious, and is only fit for his trust that is worthy to be deceived; whereas faithfulness, beside the present good, lays a ground of further assurance. The friendship that is begun in evil cannot stand: wickedness, both of its own nature and through the curse of God, is ever unsteady.—The same: If the men of Shechem had abandoned their false god with their false king, and out of a serious remorse and desire of satisfaction for their idolatry and blood, had opposed this tyrant, and preferred Jotham to his throne, there might have been both warrant for their quarrel, and hope of success; but now, if Abimelech be a wicked usurper, yet the Shechemites are idolatrous traitors.—The same: When the quarrel is betwixt God and Satan, there is no doubt of the issue; but when one devil fights with another, what certainty is there of the victory?—Tr.]

Footnotes:

[Jdg_9:25.— ìåֹ . Keil: ‘Dat. incommodi; to his disadvantage.” Cf. the Commentary.—Tr.]

[Jdg_9:28.—De Wette: “Why should we serve him, we?” The position of àֲðָçְðåּ at the end of the sentence, marks the speaker’s indignation at the thought of Shechem’s serving a son of Jerubbaal.—Tr.]

[Jdg_9:29.—The pronunciation øַáֶּä (with seghol) is perhaps designed to give to the imperative piel form the strengthening effect of the ending Îָä found with the other imperative ( åָöֵàָä ), but of which ìäØ verbs do not admit. Cf. Ewald, Gram. p. 511, note.—Tr.]

“A something is meant which operates upon the intellectual nature (das Geistige Wesen) of man; therefore, neither a disposition, nor yet a demon.” Hoffmann, Schrift beweis, i. 109.

[The author, by writing Ben (Ebed) instead of translating it as he did in the text, seems to intimate that the whole name, Gaal Ben-Ebed, was perhaps the expression of subsequent contempt. Gaal, from âָּòַì , to abhor, to loathe, means loathing, Gesenius, Lex.; Ben-Ebed, Son of a Slave. Cf. Jdg_9:18, where Jotham speaks of Abimelech as a son of Gideon’s bondwoman.—Tr.]

[Clisthenes. See Herod., v. 67, and Grote, Hist. of Greece, iii. 33, seq.—Tr.]