Text -- Judges 1:3-36 (NET)

1:3 The men of Judah said to their relatives, the men of Simeon, “Invade our allotted land with us and help us attack the Canaanites. Then we will go with you into your allotted land.” So the men of Simeon went with them. 1:4 The men of Judah attacked, and the Lord handed the Canaanites and Perizzites over to them. They killed ten thousand men at Bezek. 1:5 They met Adoni-Bezek at Bezek and fought him. They defeated the Canaanites and Perizzites. 1:6 When Adoni-Bezek ran away, they chased him and captured him. Then they cut off his thumbs and big toes. 1:7 Adoni-Bezek said, “Seventy kings, with thumbs and big toes cut off, used to lick up food scraps under my table. God has repaid me for what I did to them.” They brought him to Jerusalem, where he died. 1:8 The men of Judah attacked Jerusalem and captured it. They put the sword to it and set the city on fire. 1:9 Later the men of Judah went down to attack the Canaanites living in the hill country, the Negev, and the lowlands. 1:10 The men of Judah attacked the Canaanites living in Hebron. (Hebron used to be called Kiriath Arba.) They killed Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai. 1:11 From there they attacked the people of Debir. (Debir used to be called Kiriath Sepher.) 1:12 Caleb said, “To the man who attacks and captures Kiriath Sepher I will give my daughter Acsah as a wife.” 1:13 When Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother, captured it, Caleb gave him his daughter Acsah as a wife. 1:14 One time Acsah came and charmed her father so she could ask him for some land. When she got down from her donkey, Caleb said to her, “What would you like?” 1:15 She answered, “Please give me a special present. Since you have given me land in the Negev, now give me springs of water.” So Caleb gave her both the upper and lower springs. 1:16 Now the descendants of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up with the people of Judah from the City of Date Palm Trees to Arad in the desert of Judah, located in the Negev. They went and lived with the people of Judah. 1:17 The men of Judah went with their brothers the men of Simeon and defeated the Canaanites living in Zephath. They wiped out Zephath. So people now call the city Hormah. 1:18 The men of Judah captured Gaza, Ashkelon, Ekron, and the territory surrounding each of these cities. 1:19 The Lord was with the men of Judah. They conquered the hill country, but they could not conquer the people living in the coastal plain, because they had chariots with iron-rimmed wheels. 1:20 Caleb received Hebron, just as Moses had promised. He drove out the three Anakites. 1:21 The men of Benjamin, however, did not conquer the Jebusites living in Jerusalem. The Jebusites live with the people of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this very day.

Partial Success

1:22 When the men of Joseph attacked Bethel, the Lord was with them. 1:23 When the men of Joseph spied out Bethel (it used to be called Luz), 1:24 the spies spotted a man leaving the city. They said to him, “If you show us a secret entrance into the city, we will reward you.” 1:25 He showed them a secret entrance into the city, and they put the city to the sword. But they let the man and his extended family leave safely. 1:26 He moved to Hittite country and built a city. He named it Luz, and it has kept that name to this very day. 1:27 The men of Manasseh did not conquer Beth Shan, Taanach, or their surrounding towns. Nor did they conquer the people living in Dor, Ibleam, Megiddo or their surrounding towns. The Canaanites managed to remain in those areas. 1:28 Whenever Israel was strong militarily, they forced the Canaanites to do hard labor, but they never totally conquered them. 1:29 The men of Ephraim did not conquer the Canaanites living in Gezer. The Canaanites lived among them in Gezer. 1:30 The men of Zebulun did not conquer the people living in Kitron and Nahalol. The Canaanites lived among them and were forced to do hard labor. 1:31 The men of Asher did not conquer the people living in Acco or Sidon, nor did they conquer Ahlab, Aczib, Helbah, Aphek, or Rehob. 1:32 The people of Asher live among the Canaanites residing in the land because they did not conquer them. 1:33 The men of Naphtali did not conquer the people living in Beth Shemesh or Beth Anath. They live among the Canaanites residing in the land. The Canaanites living in Beth Shemesh and Beth Anath were forced to do hard labor for them. 1:34 The Amorites forced the people of Dan to live in the hill country. They did not allow them to live in the coastal plain. 1:35 The Amorites managed to remain in Har Heres, Aijalon, and Shaalbim. Whenever the tribe of Joseph was strong militarily, the Amorites were forced to do hard labor. 1:36 The border of Amorite territory ran from the Scorpion Ascent to Sela and on up.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Jdg 1:3

As nearest to him both by relation, being his brother by both parents, and by habitation.

Wesley: Jdg 1:3

Specially so called, because they are distinguished from the Perizzites, Jdg 1:4.

Wesley: Jdg 1:4

Not in the city, for that was not yet taken, Jdg 1:5, but in the territory of it.

Wesley: Jdg 1:5

bezek - The lord or king of Bezek; as his name signifies.

Wesley: Jdg 1:5

Whither he fled when he lost the field.

Wesley: Jdg 1:5

That is, against the city wherein he had encamped himself, and the rest of his army.

Wesley: Jdg 1:6

And this they did, either by the direction of God, or upon notice of his former tyranny and cruelty.

Wesley: Jdg 1:7

Which is not strange in those times and places. For it is well known, that anciently each ruler of a city, or great town, was called a king, and had kingly power in that place; and many such kings we meet with in Canaan: and it is probable, that some years before, kings were more numerous there, 'till the greater devoured many of the less.

Wesley: Jdg 1:7

An act of barbarous inhumanity thus to insult over the miserable, joined with abominable luxury.

Wesley: Jdg 1:8

Yet some of the inhabitants retired into the castle, and held out there 'till David's time.

Wesley: Jdg 1:10

Under the conduct of Caleb, as is recorded, Jos 15:14, &c., for that relation, and this, are doubtless one and the same expedition, and it is mentioned there by anticipation.

Wesley: Jdg 1:16

in - law - That is, of Jethro, so called from the people whom he descended, Num 24:21-22. And, whatsoever he did, it is evident, that his posterity came into Canaan with the Israelites, and were there seated with them, see Jdg 4:11, Jdg 4:17, Jdg 5:24; 1Sa 15:6; 1Ch. 2:1-55.

Wesley: Jdg 1:16

trees - That is, from Jericho, so called, Deu 34:3, not the city which was destroyed, but the territory belonging to it, where it seems they were seated, in a most pleasant, and fruitful, and safe place, according to the promise made by Moses to their father, Num 10:29-32, and whence they might remove, either to avoid the neighboring Canaanites; or out of love to the children of Judah.

Wesley: Jdg 1:16

In the southern part of the land of Canaan, where Arad was, Num 21:1.

Wesley: Jdg 1:16

That is some of them, for others of them dwelt in a contrary quarter, in the most northern part of the land.

Wesley: Jdg 1:16

Heb. that people, namely, those children of Judah that lived there.

Wesley: Jdg 1:17

According to his promise, Jdg 1:3, and the laws of justice and gratitude.

Wesley: Jdg 1:17

Either, The same place so called, Num 21:3, and so what was there vowed, is here executed: or, Some other place called by the same name upon the like occasion, which was frequent among the Hebrews. This seems more probable.

Wesley: Jdg 1:18

It is only said, they took the cities, and probably contented themselves with making them tributary; but it is not said that they slew the people, as they ought to have done; and as it is said of the other cities here. And the people being thus spared, did by God's just judgment recover their strength, and expel the Jews out of their cities. It is farther observable, that Ekron here taken, was one of Dan's cities, Jos 19:43, and it was taken here by Judah and Simeon, partly out of love for their brother Dan, and partly to secure their new conquests, and other adjoining territories, from such potent neighbours.

Wesley: Jdg 1:19

Because of their unbelief, whereby they distrusted God's power to destroy those who had chariots of iron, and so gave way to their own fear and sloth, whereby God was provoked to withdraw his helping hand.

Wesley: Jdg 1:22

That is, the tribe of Ephraim.

Wesley: Jdg 1:24

On which side it is weakest, that we might best invade and take it.

Wesley: Jdg 1:25

Together with his estate, as the following verse manifests.

Wesley: Jdg 1:26

Where the Hittites seated themselves after they were driven out of Canaan, which seems to be northward from Canaan, and near upon it.

Wesley: Jdg 1:27

That is, that half of this tribe which dwelt in Canaan.

Wesley: Jdg 1:29

Which they possessed 'till Solomon's time, 1Ki 9:16.

Wesley: Jdg 1:34

That is, into the plain country; which was the occasion of that expedition for the getting new quarters, of which we read Jos 19:47-48 and Jdg. 18:1-31.

Wesley: Jdg 1:35

That is, of the Ephraimites, who helped their brethren the Danites against the Amorites.

Wesley: Jdg 1:36

Which was in the southern part of Canaan, Jos 15:2-3, from whence it went up towards the north. This is added to shew the great power and large extent of this people.

JFB: Jdg 1:3

Being conterminous tribes (Jos 19:1-2), they had a common interest, and were naturally associated in this enterprise.

JFB: Jdg 1:5-6

This place lay within the domain of Judah, about twelve miles south of Jerusalem.

JFB: Jdg 1:5-6

That is, "lord of Bezek"--he was "found," that is, surprised and routed in a pitched battle, whence he fled; but being taken prisoner, he was treated with a severity unusual among the Israelites, for they "cut off his thumbs and great toes." Barbarities of various kinds were commonly practised on prisoners of war in ancient times, and the object of this particular mutilation of the hands and feet was to disable them for military service ever after. The infliction of such a horrid cruelty on this Canaanite chief would have been a foul stain on the character of the Israelites if there were not reason for believing it was done by them as an act of retributive justice, and as such it was regarded by Adoni-bezek himself, whose conscience read his atrocious crimes in their punishment.

JFB: Jdg 1:7

So great a number will not appear strange, when it is considered that anciently every ruler of a city or large town was called a king. It is not improbable that in that southern region of Canaan, there might, in earlier times, have been even more till a turbulent chief like Adoni-bezek devoured them in his insatiable ambition.

JFB: Jdg 1:8

The capture of this important city, which ranks among the early incidents in the war of invasion (Jos 15:63), is here noticed to account for its being in the possession of the Judahites; and they brought Adoni-bezek thither [Jdg 1:7], in order, probably, that his fate being rendered so public, might inspire terror far and wide. Similar inroads were made into the other unconquered parts of Judah's inheritance [Jdg 1:9-11]. The story of Caleb's acquisition of Hebron is here repeated (Jos 15:16-19). [See on Jos 15:16.]

JFB: Jdg 1:16

Called "the Kenite," as probably descended from the people of that name (Num 24:21-22). If he might not himself, his posterity did accept the invitation of Moses (Num 10:32) to accompany the Israelites to Canaan. Their first encampment was in the "city of palm trees"--not Jericho, of course, which was utterly destroyed, but the surrounding district, perhaps En-gedi, in early times called Hazezon-tamar (Gen 14:7), from the palm-grove which sheltered it. Thence they removed for some unknown cause, and associating themselves with Judah, joined in an expedition against Arad, in the southern part of Canaan (Num 21:1). On the conquest of that district, some of this pastoral people pitched their tents there, while others migrated to the north (Jdg 4:17).|| 06527||1||13||0||@And Judah went with Simeon his brother==--The course of the narrative is here resumed from Jdg 1:9, and an account given of Judah returning the services of Simeon (Jdg 1:3), by aiding in the prosecution of the war within the neighboring tribes.

JFB: Jdg 1:16

Or Zephathah (2Ch 14:10), a valley lying in the southern portion of Canaan.

JFB: Jdg 1:16

Destroyed in fulfilment of an early vow of the Israelites (see on Num 21:2). The confederate tribes, pursuing their incursions in that quarter, came successively to Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, which they took. But the Philistines seem soon to have regained possession of these cities.

JFB: Jdg 1:19

The war was of the Lord, whose omnipotent aid would have ensured their success in every encounter, whether on the mountains or the plains, with foot soldiers or cavalry. It was distrust, the want of a simple and firm reliance on the promise of God, that made them afraid of the iron chariots (see on Jos 11:4-9).

JFB: Jdg 1:21

Judah had expelled the people from their part of Jerusalem (Jdg 1:8). The border of the two tribes ran through the city--Israelites and natives must have been closely intermingled.

JFB: Jdg 1:22-23

The tribe of Ephraim, as distinguished from Manasseh (Jdg 1:27).

JFB: Jdg 1:24

That is, the avenues to the city, and the weakest part of the walls.

JFB: Jdg 1:24

The Israelites might employ these means of getting possession of a place which was divinely appropriated to them: they might promise life and rewards to this man, though he and all the Canaanites were doomed to destruction (Jos 2:12-14); but we may assume the promise was suspended on his embracing the true religion, or quitting the country, as he did. If they had seen him to be firmly opposed to either of these alternatives, they would not have constrained him by promises any more than by threats to betray his countrymen. But if they found him disposed to be serviceable, and to aid the invaders in executing the will of God, they might promise to spare him.

JFB: Jdg 1:26

(See on Gen 12:7; Gen 28:18).|| 06537||1||10||0||The same course of subjugation was carried on in the other tribes to a partial extent, and with varying success. Many of the natives, no doubt, during the progress of this exterminating war, saved themselves by flight and became, it is thought, the first colonists in Greece, Italy, and other countries. But a large portion made a stout resistance and retained possession of their old abodes in Canaan. In other cases, when the natives were vanquished, avarice led the Israelites to spare the idolaters, contrary to the express command of God; and their disobedience to His orders in this matter involved them in many troubles which this book describes.

Clarke: Jdg 1:3

Come up with me into my lot - It appears that the portions of Judah and Simeon had not been cleared of the Canaanites, or that these were the parts which were now particularly invaded.

Clarke: Jdg 1:5

And they found Adoni-bezek - The word מצא matsa , "he found,"is used to express a hostile encounter between two parties; to attack, surprise, etc. This is probably its meaning here. Adoni-bezek is literally the lord of Bezek. It is very probable that the different Canaanitish tribes were governed by a sort of chieftains, similar to those among the clans of the ancient Scottish Highlanders. Bezek is said by some to have been in the tribe of Judah. Eusebius and St. Jerome mention two villages of this name, not in the tribe of Judah, but about seventeen miles from Shechem.

Clarke: Jdg 1:6

Cut off his thumbs - That he might never be able to draw his bow or handle his sword, and great toes, that he might never be able to pursue or escape from an adversary.

Clarke: Jdg 1:7

Threescore and ten kinds - Chieftains, heads of tribes, or military officers. For the word king cannot be taken here in its proper and usual sense

Clarke: Jdg 1:7

Having their thumbs and their great toes cut off - That this was an ancient mode of treating enemies we learn from Aelian, who tells us, Var. Hist. l. ii., c. 9, that "the Athenians, at the instigation of Cleon, son of Cleaenetus, made a decree that all the inhabitants of the island of Aegina should have the thumb cut off from the right hand, so that they might ever after be disabled from holding a spear, yet might handle an oar."This is considered by Aelian an act of great cruelty; and he wishes to Minerva, the guardian of the city, to Jupiter Eleutherius, and all the gods of Greece, that the Athenians had never done such things. It was a custom among those Romans who did not like a military life, to cut off their own thumbs, that they might not be capable of serving in the army. Sometimes the parents cut off the thumbs of their children, that they might not be called into the army. According to Suetonius, in Vit. August., c. 24, a Roman knight, who had cut off the thumbs of his two sons to prevent them from being called to a military life was, by the order of Augustus, publicly sold, both he and his property. These are the words of Suetonius: Equitem Romanum, quod duobus filis adolescentibus, causa detractandi sacramenti, pollices amputasset, ipsum bonaque subjecit hastae . Calmet remarks that the Italian language has preserved a term, poltrone, which signifies one whose thumb is cut off, to designate a soldier destitute of courage and valor. We use poltroon to signify a dastardly fellow, without considering the import of the original. There have been found frequent instances of persons maiming themselves, that they might be incapacitated for military duty. I have heard an instance in which a knavish soldier discharged his gun through his hand, that he might be discharged from his regiment. The cutting off of the thumbs was probably designed for a double purpose

1.    To incapacitate them for war; and

2.    To brand them as cowards

Clarke: Jdg 1:7

Gathered their meat under my table - I think this was a proverbial mode of expression, to signify reduction to the meanest servitude; for it is not at all likely that seventy kings, many of whom must have been contemporaries, were placed under the table of the king of Bezek, and there fed; as in the houses of poor persons the dogs are fed with crumbs and offal, under the table of their owners

Clarke: Jdg 1:7

So God hath requited me - The king of Bezek seems to have had the knowledge of the true God, and a proper notion of a Divine providence. He now feels himself reduced to that state to which he had cruelly reduced others. Those acts in him were acts of tyrannous cruelty; the act towards him was an act of retributive justice

Clarke: Jdg 1:7

And there he died - He continued at Jerusalem in a servile and degraded condition till the day of his death. How long he lived after his disgrace we know not.

Clarke: Jdg 1:8

Had fought against Jerusalem - We read this verse in a parenthesis, because we suppose that it refers to the taking of this city by Joshua; for as he had conquered its armies and slew its king, Jos 10:26, it is probable that he took the city: yet we find that the Jebusites still dwelt in it, Jos 15:63; and that the men of Judah could not drive them out, which probably refers to the strong hold or fortress on Mount Zion, which the Jebusites held till the days of David, who took it, and totally destroyed the Jebusites. See 2Sa 5:6-9, and 1Ch 11:4-8. It is possible that the Jebusites who had been discomfited by Joshua, had again become sufficiently strong to possess themselves of Jerusalem; and that they were now defeated, and the city itself set on fire: but that they still were able to keep possession of their strong fort on Mount Zion, which appears to have been the citadel of Jerusalem.

Clarke: Jdg 1:9

The Canaanites, that dwelt to the mountain - The territories of the tribe of Judah lay in the most southern part of the promised land, which was very mountainous, though towards the west it had many fine plains. In some of these the Canaanites had dwelt; and the expedition marked here was for the purpose of finally expelling them. But probably this is a recapitulation of what is related Jos 10:36; Jos 11:21; Jos 15:13.

Clarke: Jdg 1:12-15

And Caleb, etc. - See this whole account, which is placed here by way of recapitulation, in Jos 15:13-19 (note), and the explanatory notes there.

Clarke: Jdg 1:16

The children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law - For an account of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, see Exodus 18:1-27 (note); Num 10:29 (note), etc

Clarke: Jdg 1:16

The city of palm trees - This seems to have been some place near Jericho, which city is expressly called the city of palm trees, Deu 34:3; and though destroyed by Joshua, it might have some suburbs remaining where these harmless people had taken up their residence. The Kenites, the descendants of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, were always attached to the Israelites: they remained with them, says Calmet, during their wanderings in the wilderness, and accompanied them to the promised land. They received there a lot with the tribe of Judah, and remained in the city of palm trees during the life of Joshua; but after his death, not contented with their portion, or molested by the original inhabitants, they united with the tribe of Judah, and went with them to attack Arad. After the conquest of that country, the Kenites established themselves there, and remained in it till the days of Saul, mingled with the Amalekites. When this king received a commandment from God to destroy the Amalekites, he sent a message to the Kenites to depart from among them, as God would not destroy them with the Amalekites. From them came Hemath, who was the father of the house of Rechab, 1Ch 2:55, and the Rechabites, of whom we have a remarkable account Jer 35:1, etc.

Clarke: Jdg 1:17

The city was called Hormah - This appears to be the same transaction mentioned Num 21:1 (note), etc., where see the notes.

Clarke: Jdg 1:18

Judah took Gaza - and Askelon - and Ekron - There is a most remarkable variation here in the Septuagint; I shall set down the verse: Και ουκ εκληρονομησεν Ιουδας την Γαζαν, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· ουδε την Ασκαλωνα, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· και την Ακκαρων, ουδε τα ὁρια αυτης· την Αζωτον, ουδε τα περισπορια αυτης· και ην Κυριος μετα Ιουδα. "But Judah Did Not possess Gaza, Nor the coast thereof; neither Askelon, nor the coasts thereof, neither Ekron, nor the coasts thereof; neither Azotus, nor its adjacent places: and the Lord was with Judah."This is the reading of the Vatican and other copies of the Septuagint: but the Alexandrian MS., and the text of the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, agree more nearly with the Hebrew text. St. Augustine and Procopius read the same as, the Vatican MS.; and Josephus expressly says that the Israelites took only Askelon and Azotus, but did not take Gaza nor Ekron; and the whole history shows that these cities were not in the possession of the Israelites, but of the Philistines; and if the Israelites did take them at this time, as the Hebrew text states, they certainly lost them in a very short time after.

Clarke: Jdg 1:19

And the Lord was with Judah, and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron - Strange! were the iron chariots too strong for Omnipotence? The whole of this verse is improperly rendered. The first clause, The Lord was with Judah should terminate the 18th verse, and this gives the reason for the success of this tribe: The Lord was with Judah, and therefore he slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, etc., etc. Here then is a complete period: the remaining part of the verse either refers to a different time, or to the rebellion of Judah against the Lord, which caused him to withdraw his support. Therefore the Lord was with Judah, and these were the effects of his protection; but afterwards, when the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim, etc., God was no longer with them, and their enemies were left to be pricks in their eyes, and thorns in their side, as God himself had said. This is the turn given to the verse by Jonathan ben Uzziel, the Chaldee paraphrast: "And the Word of Jehovah was in the support of the house of Judah, and they extirpated the inhabitants of the mountains; but afterwards, When They Sinned, they were not able to extirpate the inhabitants of the plain country, because they had chariots of iron."They were now left to their own strength, and their adversaries prevailed against them. From a work called the Dhunoor Veda, it appears that the ancient Hindoos had war chariots similar to those of the Canaanites. They are described as having many wheels, and to have contained a number of rooms. - Ward’ s Customs.

Clarke: Jdg 1:20

They gave Hebron unto Caleb - See this whole transaction explained Jos 14:12 (note), etc.

Clarke: Jdg 1:21

The Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin - Jerusalem was situated partly in the tribe of Judah, and partly in the tribe of Benjamin, the northern part belonging to the latter tribe, the southern to the former. The Jebusites had their strongest position in the part that belonged to Benjamin, and from this place they were not wholly expelled till the days of David. See the notes on Jdg 1:8. What is said here of Benjamin is said of Judah, Jos 15:63. There must be an interchange of the names in one or other of these places

Clarke: Jdg 1:21

Unto this day - As the Jebusites dwelt in Jerusalem till the days of David, by whom they were driven out, and the author of the book of Judges states them to have been in possession of Jerusalem when he wrote; therefore this book was written before the reign of David.

Clarke: Jdg 1:22

The house of Joseph, they also went up against Bethel - That is, the tribe of Ephraim and the half tribe of Manasseh, who dwelt beyond Jordan. Beth-el was not taken by Joshua, though he took Ai, which was nigh to it. Instead of בית יוסף beith Yoseph , "the house of Joseph,"ten of Dr. Kennicott’ s MSS. and six of De Rossi’ s have בני יוסף beney Yoseph , "the children of Joseph;"and this is the reading of both the Septuagint and Arabic, as well as of two copies in the Hexapla of Origen.

Clarke: Jdg 1:23

Beth-el - the name of the city before was Luz - Concerning this city and its names, see the notes on Gen 28:19.

Clarke: Jdg 1:24

Show us - the entrance into the city - Taken in whatever light we choose, the conduct of this man was execrable. He was a traitor to his country, and he was accessary to the destruction of the lives and property of his fellow citizens, which he most sinfully betrayed, in order to save his own. According to the rules and laws of war, the children of Judah might avail themselves of such men and their information; but this does not lessen, on the side of this traitor, the turpitude of the action.

Clarke: Jdg 1:26

The land of the Hittites - Probably some place beyond the land of Canaan, in Arabia, whither this people emigrated when expelled by Joshua. The man himself appears to have been a Hittite, and to perpetuate the name of his city he called the new one which he now founded Luz, this being the ancient name of Beth-el.

Clarke: Jdg 1:27

Beth-shean - Called by the Septuagint Σκυθωνπολις, Scythopolis, or the city of the Scythians. On these towns see the notes, Jos 17:12-13 (note).

Clarke: Jdg 1:29

Neither did Ephraim - See the notes on the parallel passages, Jos 16:5-10 (note).

Clarke: Jdg 1:30

Neither did Zebulun drive out - See on Jos 19:10-15 (note).

Clarke: Jdg 1:31

Neither did Asher - See on Jos 19:24-31 (note)

Clarke: Jdg 1:31

Accho - Supposed to be the city of Ptolemais, near to Mount Carmel.

Clarke: Jdg 1:33

Neither did Naphtali - See the notes on Jos 19:32-39 (note).

Clarke: Jdg 1:34

The Amorites forced the children of Dan, etc. - Just as the ancient Britons were driven into the mountains of Wales by the Romans; and the native Indians driven back into the woods by the British settlers in America.

Clarke: Jdg 1:35

The Amorites would dwell in Mount Heres - They perhaps agreed to dwell in the mountainous country, being unable to maintain themselves on the plain, and yet were so powerful that the Danites could not totally expel them; they were, however, laid under tribute, and thus the house of Joseph had the sovereignty. The Septuagint have sought out a literal meaning for the names of several of these places, and they render the verse thus: "And the Amorites began to dwell in the mount of Tiles, in which there are bears, and in which there are foxes."Thus they translate Heres, Aijalon, and Shaalbim.

Clarke: Jdg 1:36

Akrabbim - Of scorpions; probably so called from the number of those animals in that place

Clarke: Jdg 1:36

From the rock, and upward - The Vulgate understands by סלע sela , a rock, the city Petra, which was the capital of Arabia Petraea

The whole of this chapter appears to be designed as a sort of supplement to those places in the book of Joshua which are referred to in the notes and in the margin; nor is there any thing in it worthy of especial remark. We everywhere see the same fickle character in the Israelites, and the goodness and long-suffering of God towards them. An especial Providence guides their steps, and a fatherly hand chastises them for their transgressions. They are obliged to live in the midst of their enemies, often straitened, but never overcome so as to lose the land which God gave them as their portion. We should learn wisdom from what they have suffered, and confidence in the protection and providence of God from their support, because these things were written for our learning. Few can be persuaded that adversity is a blessing, but without it how little should we learn! He, who in the school of affliction has his mind turned towards God

"Finds tongues in trees, books in the running brooks

Sermons in stones, and good in every thing."

Defender: Jdg 1:7

These "kings" had been rulers over various small "kingdoms" in Canaan, each amounting essentially to a "city-state."

Defender: Jdg 1:7

It was the custom to disable captured leaders in this way, cutting off their thumbs and great toes so that they could neither fight nor run.

Defender: Jdg 1:7

This phrase means they were forced to depend on scraps that fell from the victor's table for their food."

Defender: Jdg 1:20

Caleb, the leader of the forces of Judah, drove the sons of Anak out of Hebron, and either he or his followers later slew them (Jos 15:14; Jdg 1:10)."

Defender: Jdg 1:28

The incompleteness of the destruction of the Canaanites is also noted in Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:33, Jdg 1:35. Yet, Jos 10:40 reports that Joshua had "utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded (Jos 11:14, Jos 11:15). In the early part of his conquests, Joshua evidently swept rapidly through the southern cities, destroying everyone he encountered. Presumably there were many who escaped by hiding in the hills or elsewhere. Furthermore, the conquest of northern and western regions was never completed. So the remnants of the various Canaanite nations either retained or regained enough strength to cause great problems to Israel during the period of the judges."

TSK: Jdg 1:3

Simeon : Gen 29:33; Jos 19:1

I likewise : Jdg 1:17; 2Sa 10:11

TSK: Jdg 1:4

Lord : Exo 23:28, Exo 23:29; Deu 7:2, Deu 9:3; Jos 10:8-10, Jos 11:6-8; 1Sa 14:6, 1Sa 14:10; 1Sa 17:46, 1Sa 17:47; 1Ki 22:6, 1Ki 22:15

Bezek : Eusebius and Jerome mention two villages of this name, near each other, about seventeen miles from Shechem, towards Scythopolis. 1Sa 11:8

TSK: Jdg 1:7

their thumbs : Heb. the thumbs of their hands and of their feet, This was not an unusual act of cruelty in ancient times towards enemies. - Alian informs us, that in after ages ""the Athenians, at the instigation of Cleon, son of Cleoenetus, made a decree that all the inhabitants of the island of Agina should have the thumb cut off from the right hand, so that they might ever after be disabled from holding a spear, yet might handle an oar.""It was a custom among those Romans who did not like a military life, to cut off their thumbs, that they might be incapable of serving in the army; and for the same reason, parents sometimes cut off the thumbs of their children.

gathered : or, gleaned

as I have : Exo 21:23-25; Lev 24:19-21; 1Sa 15:33; Isa 33:1; Mat 7:1, Mat 7:2; Luk 6:37, Luk 6:38; Rom 2:15; Jam 2:13; Rev 13:10, Rev 16:6

TSK: Jdg 1:8

Jdg 1:21; Jos 15:63

TSK: Jdg 1:9

afterward : Jos 10:36, Jos 11:21, Jos 15:13-20

valley : or, low country

TSK: Jdg 1:10

Kirjatharba : Jos 14:15

Sheshai : Jdg 1:20; Num 13:22, Num 13:33; Jos 15:13, Jos 15:14; Psa 33:16, Psa 33:17; Ecc 9:11; Jer 9:23

TSK: Jdg 1:11

Debir : Jos 10:38, Jos 10:39, Jos 15:15

TSK: Jdg 1:12

And Caleb : The whole of this account is found in Jos 15:13-19, and seems to be inserted here by way of recapitulation. Jos 15:16, Jos 15:17; 1Sa 17:25, 1Sa 18:23

to him : In ancient times fathers assumed an absolute right over their children, especially in disposing of them in marriage; and it was customary for a king or great man to promise his daughter in marriage to him who should take a city, etc.

TSK: Jdg 1:13

Jdg 3:9

TSK: Jdg 1:14

And it came : Jos 15:18, Jos 15:19

and she lighted : Watitznach , ""she hastily or suddenly alighted,""as if she had forgotten something, or was about to return.

TSK: Jdg 1:15

a blessing : Gen 33:11; 1Sa 25:18, 1Sa 25:27; 2Co 9:5 *marg. Heb 6:7; 1Pe 3:9

a south land : Which was probably dry, or very ill watered.

give me also springs of water : Let me have some fields with brooks, or wells already digged.

TSK: Jdg 1:16

the Kenite : Jdg 4:11, Jdg 4:17; Num 10:29-32, Num 24:21, Num 24:22; 1Sa 15:6; 1Ch 2:15; Jer 35:2

Moses’ : Exo 3:1, Exo 4:18, Exo 18:1, Exo 18:7, Exo 18:12, Exo 18:14-17, Exo 18:27; Num 10:29

city of palm : Jdg 3:13; Deu 34:3; 2Ch 28:16

which : Num 21:1; Jos 12:14

they went : Num 10:29-32; 1Sa 15:6

TSK: Jdg 1:17

And Judah : Jdg 1:3

Zephath : 2Ch 14:10, Zephathah

Hormah : Num 14:45, Num 21:3; Jos 19:4

TSK: Jdg 1:18

Jos 11:22, Jos 13:3, Jos 15:45-47; 1Sa 6:17

Also Judah : There is the following remarkable variation here in the Septuagint:

Και ουκ εκληρονομησεν Ιουδας την Γαζαν , ουδε τα ορια αυτης; ουδε την Ασκαλωνα , ουδε τα ορια αυτης; και την Ακκαρων , ουδε τα ορια αυτης; την Αζωτον , ουδε τα περισπορια αυτης .

""But Judah did not possess Gaza, nor the coasts thereof; nor Askelon, nor the coasts thereof; nor Ekron, nor the coasts thereof; nor Ashdod, nor the coasts thereof.""Procopius and Augustine read the same; and Josephus (Ant. 1. v. c. 2 sec. 4) says that the Israelites only took Askelon and Ashdod, but not Gaza or Ekron; and from Jdg 3:3, and the whole succeeding history, it appears that these cities were not in the possession of the Israelites, but of the Philistines.

Gaza : Jdg 3:3, Jdg 16:1, Jdg 16:2, Jdg 16:21; Exo 23:31

TSK: Jdg 1:19

the Lord : Jdg 1:2, Jdg 6:12, Jdg 6:13; Gen 39:2, Gen 39:21; Jos 1:5, Jos 1:9, Jos 14:12; 2Sa 5:10; 2Ki 18:7; Psa 46:7, Psa 46:11, Psa 60:12; Ecc 9:11; Isa 7:14, Isa 8:10, Isa 41:10, Isa 41:14, Isa 41:15; Mat 1:23; Rom 8:31

he drave : etc. or he possessed the mountain

but could : Not because the iron chariots were too strong for Omnipotence, or because he refused to help them; but because their courage and faith failed when they saw them. Jdg 1:27-32; Jos 7:12; Mat 14:30, Mat 14:31, Mat 17:19, Mat 17:20; Phi 4:13

chariots : Exod. 14:7-31; Jos 11:1-9, Jos 17:16-18; Psa 46:9

TSK: Jdg 1:20

they gave : Num 14:24; Deu 1:36; Jos 14:9-14, Jos 15:13, Jos 15:14, Jos 21:11, Jos 21:12

the three sons : Jdg 1:10; Num 13:22

TSK: Jdg 1:21

Jdg 19:10-12; Jos 15:63, 18:11-28; 2Sa 5:6-9

TSK: Jdg 1:22

the house : Num 1:10, Num 1:32; Jos 14:4, Jos 16:1-4; 1Ch 7:29; Rev 7:8

the Lord : Jdg 1:19; Gen 49:24; 2Ki 18:7

TSK: Jdg 1:23

sent : Jdg 18:2; Jos 2:1, Jos 7:2

Luz : Gen 28:19, Gen 35:6, Gen 48:3

TSK: Jdg 1:24

we will : Jos 2:12-14; 1Sa 30:15

TSK: Jdg 1:25

they smote : Jos 6:22-25

TSK: Jdg 1:26

the land : 2Ki 7:6; 2Ch 1:17

TSK: Jdg 1:27

Manasseh : Jos 17:11-13

Taanach : Jdg 5:19; Jos 21:25

the Canaanites : Exo 23:32; Deu 7:2; 1Sa 15:9; Psa 106:34, Psa 106:35; Jer 48:10

TSK: Jdg 1:29

Jos 16:10; 1Ki 9:16

TSK: Jdg 1:30

Kitron : The Talmudists say Kitron is ""tzippor,""that is, Sepphoris, or Diocesarea, a celebrated city of Galilee, now the village Safoury, situated in the plain of Esdraelon, twenty miles (north-west) from Tiberias, according to Benjamin of Tudela.

Nahalol : Jos 19:15

TSK: Jdg 1:31

Asher : Jos 19:24-30

Accho : Accho, the Ptolemais of the Greeks and Romans, and called Saint John of Acre by the Crusaders, is situated on the Mediterranean, in a fine plain, at the north angle of a bay to which it gives name, and which extends in a semicircle of three leagues as far as Carmel, and nine leagues from Tyre.

Zidon : Another celebrated city of Phoenicia, now Saide, situated in a fine country on the Mediterranean, 400 stadia from Berytus, and 200 (north) from Tyre, according to Strabo, one day’ s journey from Paneas, according to Josephus, and sixty-six miles from Damascus, according to Abulfeda.

Achzib : Or, Ecdippa, now Zib, nine miles north, from Accho.

TSK: Jdg 1:32

Psa 106:34, Psa 106:35

TSK: Jdg 1:33

Naphtali : Jos 19:32-38

he dwelt : Jdg 1:32

became : Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:35; Psa 18:24

TSK: Jdg 1:34

Jdg 18:1; Jos 19:47

TSK: Jdg 1:35

Aijalon : Jdg 12:12; Jos 10:12

Shaalbim : Jos 19:42; 1Ki 4:9

prevailed : Heb. was heavy

TSK: Jdg 1:36

from the going : or, Maaleh-akrabbim, Num 34:4; Jos 15:2

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Jdg 1:4

The Canaanites and the Perizzites - See Gen 12:6, note; Gen 13:7, note. Bezek may be the name of a district. It has not yet been identified.

Barnes: Jdg 1:7

Threescore and ten kings - We may infer from this number of conquered kings, that the intestine wars of the Canaanites were among the causes which, under God’ s Providence, weakened their resistance to the Israelites. Adoni-Bezek’ s cruelty to the subject kings was the cause of his receiving (compare the marginal references) this chastisement. The loss of the thumb would make a man unfit to handle a sword or a bow; the loss of his big toe would impede his speed.

Barnes: Jdg 1:8

Render "and the children of Judah fought against Jerusalem, and took it, and smote it,"etc. With regard to the capture of Jerusalem there is some obscurity. It is here said to have been taken, smitten with the edge of the sword, and burned, by the children of Judah. In Jos 12:8, Jos 12:10 the Jebusite and the king of Jerusalem are enumerated among Joshua’ s conquests, but without any distinct mention of the capture of the city; and in the marginal reference we read that the Jebusites were not expelled from Jerusalem, but dwelt with the children of Judah (compare Jdg 1:21). Further, we learn from Jdg 19:10-12 that Jerusalem was wholly a Jebusite city in the lifetime of Phinehas Jdg 20:28, and so it continued until the reign of David 2Sa 5:6-9. The conclusion is that Jerusalem was only taken once, namely, at the time here described, and that this was in the lifetime of Joshua; but that the children of Judah did not occupy it in sufficient force to prevent the return of the Jebusites, who gradually recovered complete possession.

Set the city on fire - A phrase found only at Jdg 20:48; 2Ki 8:12, and Psa 74:7.

Barnes: Jdg 1:16

The children of the Kenite - See Num 24:21 note.

The city of palm trees - Jericho (see the marginal reference). The rabbinical story is that Jericho, with 500 cubits square of land, was given to Hobab. The use of the phrase "city of palm trees"for "Jericho,"is perhaps an indication of the influence of Joshua’ s curse Jos 6:26. Tbe very name of Jericho was blotted out. There are no palm trees at Jericho now, but Josephus mentions them repeatedly, as well as the balsam trees.

Barnes: Jdg 1:17

Hormah - See Num 21:1 note. The destruction then vowed was now accomplished. This is another decisive indication that the events here related belong to Joshua’ s lifetime. This would be about six years after the vow.

Barnes: Jdg 1:18

It is remarkable that Ashdod is not here mentioned, as it is in Jos 15:46-47, in conjunction with Gaza and Ekron; but that Askelon, which is not in the list of the cities of Judah at all, is named in its stead. (See Jos 13:3 note.) It is a curious fact that when Rameses III took Askelon it was occupied, not by Philistines, but apparently by Hebrews. Rameses began to reign in 1269 B.C., and reigned 25 years. At any time between 1269 and 1244 B.C. such occupation of Askelon by Hebrews agrees with the Book of Judges.

Barnes: Jdg 1:21

This verse is nearly identical with Jos 15:63, except in the substitution of Benjamin for Judah. Probably the original reading Judah was altered in later times to Benjamin, because Jebus was within the border of Benjamin, and neither had the Benjamites expelled the Jebusites.

Barnes: Jdg 1:22

Bethel was within the borders of Benjamin, but was captured, as we here learn, by the house of Joseph, who probably retained it.

Barnes: Jdg 1:26

The site of this new Luz is not known, but "the land of the Hittites"was apparently in the north of Palestine, on the borders of Syria (Gen 10:15 note).

Barnes: Jdg 1:31

Compare the marginal reference. Accho, afterward called Ptolemais, now Akka or St. Jean d’ Acre, is named here for the first time.

Barnes: Jdg 1:32

It is an evidence of the power of the Canaanite in this portion of the land that it is not said (compare Jdg 1:30) that the Canaanites dwelt among the Asherites, but that the Asherites (and Jdg 1:33, Naphtali) "dwelt among the Canaanites;"nor are the Canaanites in Accho, Zidon, and the other Asherite cities, said to have become tributaries.

Barnes: Jdg 1:34

The Amorites are usually found in the mountain Num 13:29; Jos 10:6. Here they dwell in the valley, of which the monuments of Rameses III show them to have been in possession when that monarch invaded Syria. It was their great strength in this district, and their forcible detention of the territory of Dan, which led to the expedition of the Danites Judg. 18. The house of Joseph lent their powerful aid in subduing them, probably in the times of the Judges.

Barnes: Jdg 1:36

The going up to Akrabbim - See the margin and references; properly "the ascent of scorpions,"with which the whole region abounds.

The rock - Petra, the capital of Idumea, so called from the mass of precipitous rock which encloses the town, and out of which many of its buildings are excavated. The original word "Selah"is always used of the rock at Kadesh-Barnea Num 20:8-11, near Petra (compare Oba 1:3). This leads us to look for "the ascent of scorpions,"here coupled with סלע הס has - sela‛ , in the same neighborhood.

Poole: Jdg 1:3

Unto Simeon his brother as nearest to him both by relation, being his brother by both parents, which few of them were; and by habitation, as appears from Jos 19:1,2 .

Against the Canaanites specially so called because they are distinguished from the Perizzites, Jud 1:4 .

Poole: Jdg 1:4

Not in the city, for that was not yet taken, Jud 1:5 , but in the territory of it, or near to it; as in Hor is taken, Num 33:37 ; and in Jericho , Jos 5:13 .

Poole: Jdg 1:5

Adoni-bezek the lord or king of Bezek, as his name signifies,

in Bezek whither he fled, when he had lost the field.

Against him i.e. against the city wherein he had encamped himself, and the rest of his army.

Poole: Jdg 1:6

That he might be disenabled to fight with his hands, or to run away upon his feet. And this they did, either by the secret instinct and direction of God, or upon notice of his former tyranny and cruelty expressed upon others, in this manner, as it follows: either way it was a just requital.

Poole: Jdg 1:7

Threescore and ten kings which is not strange in those times and places; for these might be either, first, kings successively, and so there might be divers of those kings in one place, and so in others; or, secondly, contemporary kings. For it is well known that anciently each ruler of a city, or great town, was called a king, and had kingly power in that place; and many such kings we meet with in Canaan; and it is probable that some years before kings were more numerous there, till the greater devoured many of the less.

Having their thumbs cut off that so their hands might be unable to manage weapons of war.

Gathered their meat under my table an act of barbarous inhumanity thus to insult over the miserable, joined with abominable luxury.

God hath requited me: he acknowledgeth the providence and vindictive justice of God, which also Pharaoh did, and others too, without any true sense of piety.

They brought him they carried him in triumph, as a monument of God’ s righteous vengeance.

To Jerusalem it being the metropolis of the nation.

Poole: Jdg 1:8

To wit, in Joshua’ s time; which though done before, may be here repeated, to show why they brought Adoni-bezek to Jerusalem, because that city was in their hands, having been taken before, as may be gathered from Jos 15:63 . And the taking of this city may be ascribed

to the children of Judah rather than to Joshua, because the city was not taken by Joshua and the whole body of the army in that time when so many kings were destroyed, Jos 10 Jos 12 , (for there is mention made of the destroying of the king of Jerusalem, Jos 10:23 12:10 ; but not a word of the taking of Jerusalem, as there is of the taking of Makkedah, and Libnah, and other cities belonging to the kings there mentioned, Jos 10:28 , &c.,) but by the children of Judah after they had received their lot, when at the desire and with the consent of the Benjamites, in whose lot Jerusalem fell, Jos 18:28 , they assaulted and took it, and thereby, as it seems, acquired the right of copartnership with the Benjamites in the possession of that city. Though some think Jerusalem was twice taken; once in Joshua’ s lifetime; and being afterwards recovered by the Canaanites, was now retaken by the children of Judah.

Poole: Jdg 1:10

Judah went under the conduct of Caleb, as it is recorded, Jos 15:11 , &c.; for that relation, and this here following, are doubtless one and the same expedition and war, as appears by all the circumstances; and it is mentioned either there by anticipation, or here by repetition. Of this and the following verses, see the notes there.

Poole: Jdg 1:16

Children of the Kenite i.e. of Jethro, so called from the people from whom he descended, Num 24:21,22 . And whatsoever he did, it is evident that his posterity came into Canaan with the Israelites, and were there seated with them. See Jud 4:11,17 5:24 1Sa 15:6 1Ch 2:55 .

Out of the city of palm trees i.e. from Jericho, so called Deu 34:3 ; not the city, which was utterly destroyed; but the territory belonging to it, where it seems they were seated as in a most pleasant, and fruitful, and safe place, according to the promise made by Moses to their father, Num 10:31,32 , and whence they might remove, either to avoid the society or molestation of the neighbouring Canaanites; or out of love to the children of Judah, whom they went to; or to avoid temptations to luxury, and exercise themselves in self-denial and contempt of the present evil world, and the lusts thereof; as may be thought from Jer 35:6 , &c.; or for some other cause unknown to us at this distance.

In the south of Arad in the southern part of the land of Canaan, where Arad was, Num 21:1 .

They went i.e. some of them, for others of them dwelt in the contrary quarter, in the most northern part of the land.

Among the people Heb. that people , to wit, those children of Judah that lived there.

Poole: Jdg 1:17

Judah went with Simeon his brother according to his promise, Jud 1:3 , and the laws of justice and gratitude.

Hormah either,

1. The same place so destroyed and called, Num 21:3 , and so what was there vowed is here executed; or,

2. Some other place called by the same name upon the like occasion, which was frequent among the Hebrews. This seems more probable,

1. Because this was but one city, that divers cities, Num 21:2,3 .

2. Because that seems to have been done in Moses’ s time, though interpreters generally think otherwise; of which see my notes there.

Poole: Jdg 1:18

The principal cities of the Philistines.

Quest. How could this be, when among the people left to try Israel, are the five lords of the Philistines, Jud 3:3 .

Answ It is only said that they took the cities, and probably contented themselves with making them tributary; but it is not said that they slew the people, as they ought to have done, and as it is said of the other cities here, Jud 1:5,8,17,25 . And the people being thus spared, did by God’ s just judgement recover their strength, and expel the Jews out of their cities, as we find afterwards. It is further observable, that Ekron here taken was one of Dan’ s cities, Jos 19:43 , and it was attempted and taken here by Judah and Simeon, partly out of love to their brother Dan, and partly to secure their new conquests, and other adjoining territories, from such potent neighbours.

Poole: Jdg 1:19

On account of their unbelief, whereby they doubted and distrusted God’ s power to destroy those who had chariots of iron and so gave way to their own fear and sloth, whereby God was provoked to withdraw his helping hand from them, and so they were really made impotent, as they were unwilling. See Jos 17:16 .

Poole: Jdg 1:20

Above mentioned Jud 1:20

Poole: Jdg 1:22

The house of Joseph i.e. the tribe of Ephraim, as appears from their opposition to the tribe of Manasseh, Jud 1:27 .

Poole: Jdg 1:24

The entrance into the city on which side it is weakest, that we may best invade and take it.

Poole: Jdg 1:25

Together with his estate, as the following verse manifests.

Poole: Jdg 1:26

The land of the Hittites where the Hittites seated themselves after they were driven out of Canaan, which seems to be northward from Canaan, and near unto it. See 1Ki 11:1 2Ch 1:17 .

Poole: Jdg 1:27

Manasseh i.e. that half of this tribe which dwelt in Canaan.

Beth-shean a place near Jordan, Jos 17:11 .

Taanach of which see Jos 12:21 17:11 .

Dor a great city with large territories. See Jos 11:2 12:23 Jos 17:11 .

Megiddo a royal city. See Jos 12:21 17:11 .

Poole: Jdg 1:29

Which they possessed till Solomon’ s time.

Poole: Jdg 1:33

Beth-shemesh a place differing from that Beth-shemesh , Jos 15:10 .

Poole: Jdg 1:34

Into the plain country; which was the occasion of that expedition for the getting of new quarters; of which we read Jos 19 Jud 18 .

Poole: Jdg 1:35

Of the house of Joseph i.e. of the Ephraimites, who helped their brethren the Danites against the Amorites, and that with good success.

Poole: Jdg 1:36

Akrabbim was in the southern part of Canaan, Jos 15:2,3 , from whence it went up towards the north. This is added to show the great power and large extent of this people.

Haydock: Jdg 1:3

Brother. They had the same mother, Lia, and were intermixed in the same country. The two tribes unite both for the public and their own private advantage. The king whom they attacked first, did not dwell in the territory of Juda, as the others did, whom they defeated in this chapter.

Haydock: Jdg 1:4

Pherezite. This name denotes "a countryman," as the former does "a merchant." None of the children of Chanaan were of this appellation, Genesis x. 15. The people of the country assembled therefore at Bezec, where Saul called a rendezvous when he was going to attack Jabes, and which seems to have been near the Jordan, 17 miles from Sichem. (Eusebius; St. Jerome) ---

It signifies "lightning." A place of this name lies to the west of Bethlehem. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:5

Adonibezec, "Lord of Bezec." The cruelty of this tyrant, and the oppression which he probably made some of the Israelites suffer, roused their attention, and they treated him as he had treated others. He had perhaps recourse to such a cruel expedient, to disable his enemies from ever entering the lists against him afterwards, as the Athenians, who cut off the fingers of the inhabitants of Egina, that these islanders might not dispute with them the empire of the sea. (Cicero, Offic. 3.) Some have thus maimed themselves that they might be exempted from going to war, a practice not unusual among the Romans; and the Italian word poltron, signifies one whose fingers are cut off, as it was supposed, out of cowardice. David ordered the hands and the feet of the murderers of Isboseth to be cut off, and this sort of punishment is common in the eastern countries. Eight hundred Greeks who had been treated in this manner by the Persians, presented themselves to Alexander, at Persepolis, to implore his protection. (Curtius &c.)

Haydock: Jdg 1:7

Table, at different times. (Haydock) ---

These were probably princes of some cities of Chanaan, who had been conquered by the tyrant. He obliged them to feed, like dogs, of what he threw down from his splendid table. Thus Sesostris made the kings whom he had overcome, drag his chariot. Sapor forced the Emperor Valerian to serve as a footstool, when he got on horseback. Tamberlane fed Bajazet in a cage, like a wild beast. (Jovius, &c.) (Calmet) ---

Me. So true is that Wisdom (xi. 17,) by what things a man sinneth, by the same also he is tormented. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:8

Jerusalem. This city was divided into two; one part was called Jebus, the other Salem; the one was in the tribe of Juda, the other in the tribe of Benjamin. After it was taken and burnt by the men of Juda, it was quickly rebuilt again by the Jebusites, as we may gather from ver. 21, and continued in their possession till it was taken by king David. (Challoner) ---

Fire. They treated it with such severity, because it seems to have revolted, (Serarius) though the text of Josue (x. 25,) only says that the king was slain. But [in] (Josue xv. 63., and here) ver. 21., it is said, that the children of Juda and of Benjamin dwelt along with the Jebusites.

Haydock: Jdg 1:9

Plains, towards the west, which were very fruitful. They did not expel all the inhabitants from this part, as they had done from the mountains, which lay on the south of the promised land, ver. 19. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:10

Hebron. This expedition against Hebron, &c., is the same as is related [in] Josue xv. 24. It is here repeated, to give the reader at once a short sketch of all the achievements of the tribe of Juda against the Chanaanites. (Challoner) ---

Josue had taken Hebron before; (Josue x. 37,) and Caleb retakes it. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:11

The city of letters. Perhaps so called, from some famous school or library kept there. (Challoner) ---

The explanation, that is, &c., is added by the Vulgate. (Haydock) ---

Madrid, in Arabic, means "the mother of sciences." (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:13

Brother, or near relation, but much younger. See Josue xv. 17. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:16

The Cinite. Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, was called Cinæus, or the Cinite: and his children, who came along with the children of Israel, settled themselves among them in the land of Chanaan, embracing their worship and religion. From these the Rechabites sprang, of whom see Jeremias xxxv. ---

The city of palms. Jericho, so called from the abundance of palm-trees, (Challoner) or rather Engaddi, which is sometimes called Hazazon-Thamar, on that account. It lies nearer to the Dead Sea. Jericho was not rebuilt till the reign of Achab. See Josue vi. 26. ---

Arad was one of the most southern towns of Juda, near the country of the Amalecites. Saul ordered the descendants of Jethro to depart from among them, 1 Kings xv. 6. The Israelites had defeated the king of Arad long before, Nubmers xxi. 1. (Calmet) ---

With him. Hebrew, "the people" of Israel, (Menochius) or of Arad. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:17

Sephaath, near Maresa, where Asa defeated the king of Arabia, 2 Paralipomenon xiv. 9. It was also called Sephata, and afterwards Horma. (Calmet) ---

Septuagint, "they anathematized it, and utterly destroyed it, and they called the city Exolethreusis, "utter ruin." (Haydock) ---

Whether they had engaged themselves by vow to do so, or they treated the city in this manner in thanksgiving for the victory, is uncertain. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:18

Gaza, &c. These were three of the principal cities of the Philistines, famous both in sacred and profane history. They were taken at this time by the Israelites; but as they took no care to put garrisons in them, the Philistines soon recovered them again, (Challoner) or perhaps the villages and territory were only seized by Juda; the cities being too well defended. Josue had not attacked them, Josue xii. 3. Josephus says that only Ascalon and Azotus, in the plain, fell into the hands of the Israelites; and the Roman Septuagint reads with a negation, (Calmet) which is inserted by Grabe in his edition as an interpolation, or as a peculiarity of the Alexandrian manuscripts, "and Juda did (not) possess Gaza with its dependencies, and Ascalon....and Accaron....and Azotus, with its fields around." (Haydock) ---

The situation of Gaza, Ascalon and Accaron in the plain, would seem to secure them from being captured, ver. 19. St. Augustine and Procopius admit the negation. But the original and all the versions reject it, so that the children of Juda must have had possession of these cities at least for a short time. (Calmet) See chap. xv., and xvi., and 1 Kings vi. 17. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:19

Was not able, &c. Through a cowardly fear of their chariots armed with hooks and scythes, and for want of confidence in God. (Challoner) ---

Hebrew does not sy expressly that Juda could not: quia non ad expellendum, &c. He had not the courage or the will. With God's assistance, what had he to fear? Were these Philistines with their chariots, more terrible than the giants in their fortresses? ---

Scythes. Hebrew receb barzel, "chariots of iron." (Calmet) ---

The Roman and Alexandrian Septuagint have "Rechab was opposed to them." (Haydock) ---

The edition of Basil adds, "and they had chariots of iron," as St. Augustine (q. 5,) reads. A double translation is thus given. (Calmet) ---

These chariots were calculated to cut down all that came in contact with them. (Curtius iv.) (Worthington)

Haydock: Jdg 1:20

Enac, mentioned [in] ver. 10. Septuagint add, that "he took the three cities....and destroyed, " &c. See Josue xv. 14. (Haydock)

Haydock: Jdg 1:21

Day, before the reign of David. See Josue xv. 63. The Jebusites occupied the citadel, &c. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:22

Of Joseph, on the west side of the Jordan, attacked Bethel, which it does not appear that Josue molested. (Haydock) ---

Instead of house, some Hebrew manuscripts and the Arabic and Septuagint read, "the sons," which seems to be the better reading. (Kennicott)

Haydock: Jdg 1:23

Besieging. Hebrew, "sent to descry," or they came upon it like spies.

Haydock: Jdg 1:24

Mercy. The city belonged of right to them, so that they might use this means, as they were not bound to enquire by what motives the man was actuated thus to betray his country. He might be convinced, like Rahab, that God had granted it to the Israelites, and these might justly requite his good dispositions and suffer him to depart in peace. (Bonfrere; Grotius; Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:26

Hetthim. The Hethite lived towards the south of Chanaan. The man probably retired into the stony Arabia, where we find the city of Lusa or Elysa. (Ptolemy v. 16.) ---

He gave it this name in memory of his native city, (Calmet) which was called Luza, or "of nuts." (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:27

Bethsan, &c. See Josue xvii. 11. ---

Began. Hebrew, "would dwell." (Haydock) ---The Israelites sinfully acquiesced, partly through slothfulness and the dislike of war, and partly that they might receive tribute from the Chanaanites. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jdg 1:28

Them. We shall see the punishment of their prevarication during the greatest part of this book. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:31

Accho. Hebrew haco. The Greeks not knowing the derivation of this word, supposed that the city was so called from ake, "a remedy," as they pretend that Hercules was cured in this place. It was also called Ptolemais, after the king of Egypt. The little river Belus, and the famous bed of sand so proper for making glass, were in the neighbourhood. (Pliny, [Natural History?] v. 19.) ---

Ahalab. The situation is unknown, unless it be Aleppo. They say it is the famous city of Berea. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jdg 1:35

He dwelt. That is, the Amorrhite. (Challoner) ---

Hebrew, "But the Amorrhites would dwell in Mount Hares, in Aialon, and in Salebim." Some copies of the Septuagint seem to give the meaning of these proper names, though inaccurately. (Haydock) ---

Solomon had one of his twelve officers at Salebim, in the tribe of Dan, 3 Kings iv. 9.

Haydock: Jdg 1:36

Rock, Petra, the capital of Arabia, which Josephus ([Antiquities?] iii. 2,) assigns to Amalec. The Amorrhites dwelt in many parts of the land of promise, (Calmet) particularly in the higher places about the Dead Sea. (Haydock)

Gill: Jdg 1:3

And Judah said unto Simeon his brother,.... The men of the tribe of Judah said to those of the tribe of Simeon, they being not only brethren by father's and mother's side, which was not the case of all the sons of Jacob, but their possessions and inheritances lay near together; and indeed those of Simeon were within the inheritance of the tribe of Judah, Jos 19:1; so that as they lived in great nearness and familiarity with each other, their interests were closely united together:

come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; conjunctly: the meaning is, that the tribe of Simeon, as many of their warlike men as could, would come and join their forces with those of the tribe of Judah, in order to reduce such cities, in the lot of that tribe, the Canaanites as yet were in the possession of:

and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot: the cities being conquered which were in the lot, of the tribe of Judah, that tribe proposed to bring their united forces into the lot of the tribe of Simeon, and reduce such cities as were in that lot:

so Simeon went with him: the tribe of Simeon agreed to the proposal, and went along with the tribe of Judah against their common enemy.

Gill: Jdg 1:4

And Judah went up,.... Simeon being along with him, from the southern parts of the land, where they dwelt, and went more northward towards Jerusalem, and which therefore is called a going up:

and the Lord delivered the Canaanites and Perizzites into their hands: into the hands of Judah and Simeon: the Canaanites here is not the common name of the seven nations, but the name of one of those nations, distinguished from the rest, as here from the Perizzites, who otherwise were also Canaanites; and both these, at least many of them, dwelt in those parts, and were subdued by the united forces of Judah and Simeon, whereby the Lord's promise was fulfilled, Jdg 1:2,

and they slew of them in Bezek ten thousand men: that is, in and about Bezek, first and last, in the course of this war, as after related. Jerom says ^d there were two villages of this name in his time near one another, seven miles from Neapolis, as you go to Scythopolis; and our countryman Mr. Sandys ^e says, that when they departed from Bethlehem, bending their course from the mountains of Judea lying west from it, near to which, on the side of the opposite hill, they passed a little village called Bezek, as he took it, two miles from Bethsur, see 1Sa 11:8.

Gill: Jdg 1:5

And they found Adonibezek in Bezek,.... Who was king of, the place, and whose name signifies lord of Bezek; not that they took him there, for he is afterwards said to make his escape from thence, but here he was when they came against that city, and into which they rushed upon him, and fell upon him as follows:

and they fought against him; entering the city with their forces:

and they slew the Canaanites and the Perizzites: that were in it, or about it, even to the number of ten thousand, as before related, Jdg 1:4.

Gill: Jdg 1:6

But Adonibezek fled, and they pursued after him, and caught him,.... It is very probable his view was to get to Jebus or Jerusalem, a strong and fortified city and he made his way thither as fast as he could, but was pursued and overtaken by some of the forces of Judah and Simeon; and the rather it may seem he took this course, since when he was taken by them, they brought him thither, as follows:

and cut off his thumbs and his great toes; whereby he was disabled both for fighting and for fleeing. So the Athenians cut off the thumbs of the right hand of the Aeginetae, the inhabitants of the island of Aegina, to disable them from holding a spear, as various writers ^f relate. Whether the Israelites did this, as knowing this king had used others in like manner, and so, according to their law of retaliation, "eye for eye", &c. Exo 21:23, required it; or whether, ignorant of it, were so moved and directed by the providence of God to do this, that the same measure might be measured to him which he had measured to others, is not certain; the latter seems most probable, since the Israelites did not usually inflict such sort of punishments; and besides, according to the command of God, they should have put him to death, as they were to do to all Canaanites.

Gill: Jdg 1:7

And Adonibezek said,.... To the men of Judah, after his thumbs and toes were cut off, his conscience accusing him for what he had done to others, and being obliged to acknowledge he was righteously dealt with:

threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off; that is, by him, or by his orders, whom he had conquered and made captives; according to Josephus ^g, they were seventy two; the number may be accounted for by observing, that in those times, as appears by the preceding book, every city had a king over it; and besides, these seventy kings might not be such who had had the government of so many cities, but many of them such who had reigned successively in the same city, and had fallen into the hands of this cruel and tyrannical king, one after another, and their sons also with them might be so called: and these he says

gathered their meat under my table: were glad to eat of the crumbs and scraps which fell from thence, and might in their turns be put there at times for his sport and pleasure, and there be fed with the offal of his meat, as Bajazet the Turk was served by Tamerlane, who put him into an iron cage, and carried him about in it, and used him as his footstool to mount his horse, and at times fed him like a dog with crumbs from his table ^h:

as I have done, so God hath requited me; whether he had any knowledge of the true God, and of his justice in dealing with him according to his deserts, and had a real sense of his sin, and true repentance for it, is not certain; since the word for God is in the plural number, and sometimes used of Heathen deities, as it may be here by him; however, the righteous judgment of God clearly appears in this instance:

and they brought him to Jerusalem; to that part of Jerusalem which belonged to the tribe of Judah; see Jos 15:8; here they brought him alive, and dying, buried him, as Josephus ⁱ says; which might be their view in carrying him thither, perceiving he was a dying man; or they had him thither to expose him as a trophy of victory, and as an example of divine justice:

and there he died: whether through grief and vexation, or of the wounds he had received, or by the immediate hand of God, or by the hands of the Israelites, is not said; neither are improbable.

Gill: Jdg 1:8

Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it,.... Which accounted for their carrying Adonibezek thither. This they had done in the times of Joshua; for when the king of that place was taken and slain by Joshua, it seems that he and Israel went and fought against the city, and took that in which the tribe of Judah had a principal concern; so Kimchi and Ben Gersom interpret it; but Jarchi and Abarbinel are of opinion, that now from Bezek they went up to Jerusalem, and fought against it, and took it; and so others think, because only the children of Judah are mentioned, and not all Israel, who fought together in Joshua's time; nor is there any mention made of its being taken in his time, and yet it seems plain that it was inhabited in part by the children of Judah, Jos 15:63; some therefore have thought that it was twice taken; that after Joshua had taken it, he and the children of Israel being employed in making conquests in other parts of the land, the Jebusites repossessed it, from whence they were now again in part driven, not wholly; and Josephus says ^k, the lower part was taken, and all the inhabitants killed, but the upper part was hard to be taken, because of the strength of the walls, and the nature of the place:

and smitten it with the edge of the sword; the "inhabitants of it", so far as they got possession of it:

and set the city on fire; some part of it only, for in some part of it dwelt the children of Judah, and in another part the Jebusites.

Gill: Jdg 1:9

And afterwards the children of Judah,.... After the taking of Bezek, and the king of it, having him to Jerusalem, where he died: they

went down; from Jerusalem; which was on high ground:

to fight against the Canaanites that dwelt in the mountain, and in the south, and in the valley; into which several parts the lot of the tribe of Judah was divided; in each of which they had cities, and some, as it seems, yet unsubdued, and in the hands of the Canaanites; of these several parts, and the cities in them, see Jos 15:21.

Gill: Jdg 1:10

And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron,.... Hebron was first taken by Joshua, and the inhabitants of it put to the sword, Jos 10:36; but while Joshua was employed in making other conquests, the Canaanites found ways and means of getting into the possession of it again; wherefore, when a grant of it was made to Caleb, he, with the assistance of the tribe of Judah, of which he was prince, regained it, Jos 15:12; wherefore what is recorded here is only a repetition of what was then done; unless it can be thought that this fact was there inserted by anticipation, or that there were two expeditions of the children of Judah against this place:

now the name of Hebron, before was Kirjatharba: see Jos 14:15; in the first of which Caleb, with the assistance of this tribe, drove out the three giants only, who afterwards got possession again, and in this put them to death, as follows:

and they slew Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai; see Num 13:22; but what follows concerning their going from hence to Debir, and the offer of Caleb to give his daughter in marriage to whomsoever should take it, does not seem so well to agree with times after the death of Joshua; since it is highly probable that Caleb, who was contemporary with him and Eleazar, was now dead, and at least cannot well be thought to have a young daughter at this time undisposed of in marriage; wherefore these facts are only repeated upon observing Judah's having taken Jerusalem, to show what exploits were performed by men of that tribe; wherefore for what is after said, Jdg 1:11, as is said in Jos 15:15, where the same things are related in express words as here, containing the request of Caleb's daughter: such an one, as made to Domitian, is related by Martial ^l.

Gill: Jdg 1:11

And from thence he went against the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before was Kirjathsepher. See Gill on Jos 15:15.

Gill: Jdg 1:12

And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjathsepher, and taketh it,

to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife. See Gill on Jos 15:16.

Gill: Jdg 1:13

And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife. See Gill on Jos 15:17.

Gill: Jdg 1:14

And it came to pass, when she came to him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted from off her ass;

and Caleb said unto her, What wilt thou? See Gill on Jos 15:18.

Gill: Jdg 1:15

And she said unto him, Give me a blessing: for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water. And Caleb gave her the upper springs and the nether springs. See Gill on Jos 15:19.

Gill: Jdg 1:16

And the children of the Kenite, Moses' father in law,.... The posterity of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses; for though Jethro returned to his own country, after he had paid a visit to Moses in the wilderness, yet Hobab his son, at the persuasion of Moses, travelled with him and Israel through the wilderness, and went with them into Canaan, at least some of his descendants, and settled there, some in one part of the land, and some in another, of whom we read in several places of Scripture; they continued to the days of Jeremiah, and then went by the name of Rechabites, so called from Rechab, a descendant of Jethro: these

went up out of the city of palm trees; from the city of Jericho, as the Targum, so called from the great number of palm trees which grew near it, see Deu 34:3. This is to be understood not of the city itself, that was utterly destroyed by Joshua, and the rebuilding of it was forbidden under a curse, but the country adjacent, the valley in which it stood, which was set with palm trees; here was a grove of palm trees ^m, and the garden of balsam, which grew nowhere else, as Strabo ⁿ says; and who also observes, that here was a royal palace in his time; this belonged to Herod king of Judea in the times of Augustus Caesar, to whose palm tree groves there Horace ^o refers. Here the Kenites first settled when they came first over Jordan with Joshua, being a most pleasant and delightful place, and suitable to such persons who dwelt in tents, as they did, and answered to the promise of Moses to Hobab, Num 10:29; and here it seems they had remained to this time: and now they left it, and came

with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah; which was also a convenient place for the habitation of such persons, who loved a solitary life. Perhaps the Canaanites about Jericho might be troublesome to them, and therefore chose to stay no longer, there; or, having a peculiar affection for the tribe of Judah, they chose to be within their lot; and the rather, as they were a warlike and valiant tribe, they might expect the greater safety and protection among them:

which lieth, in the south of Arad; that is, which wilderness of Judah lay there, of which name there was a country or city, see Num 21:1; and here some of them dwelt to the times of Saul, the Amalekites then having got possession of the southern parts, which they infested and were troublesome to, see 1Sa 15:6,

and they went and dwelt among the people; of the tribe of Judah, near some of the cities which were in the wilderness; of which see Jos 15:63.

Gill: Jdg 1:17

And Judah went with Simeon his brother,.... Having subtitled his Canaanites which were in his own lot, according to his promise, he went with his brother Simeon, or the tribe of Simeon, into their lot to reduce those that were in that:

and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it: where and what this city was is not certain; there was a place of this name in upper Galilee, mentioned in Jewish writings ^p, which cannot be meant here; and we read of the valley of Zephathah, 2Ch 14:10; which might have its name from hence, and if so it was near Mareshah:

and the name of the city was called Hormah; from the destruction made of it, and of the country about it; for now what had been vowed by Israel in the wilderness, when near Arad, was fulfilled, Num 21:1.

Gill: Jdg 1:18

Also Judah took Gaza, with the coast thereof,.... Which by lot fell to that tribe, Jos 15:47; it was not till now subdued:

and Ashkelon with the coast thereof; which, according to our countryman Sandys ^q, was ten miles from Gaza:

and Ekron with the coast thereof; this also is the lot that fell to Judah, but was afterwards given to the tribe of Dan, Jos 15:45; for whom Judah now fought and took it; but in a short time all these places were retaken, and possessed by the Philistines, and were three of their five principalities which they ever after retained, see Jdg 3:3.

Gill: Jdg 1:19

And the Lord was with Judah,.... Encouraging, strengthening, succeeding, and giving the tribe victory over the Canaanites; the Targum is,"the Word of the Lord was for the help of the house of Judah:"

and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountains; the mountainous part of Judea, such as was about Jerusalem, and where Hebron stood, and other cities, see Jos 15:48, &c. which though fortified both by nature and man, yet God being with them, they were easily subdued:

but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley; God forsaking them, because they were afraid of them, for a reason after mentioned, or through slothfulness, and being weary of fighting, or because they fell into some sins, which occasioned the divine displeasure; so the Targum,"after they had sinned, they could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley:"

because they had chariots of iron; but this was no reason why they could not drive them out, if God was with them, who could as easily have delivered these into their hands, as the inhabitants of the mountains; but is the reason why they were afraid to fight with them, and to attempt to drive them out, and which they themselves gave why they did not.

Gill: Jdg 1:20

And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said,.... Which was done in the times of Joshua, both by him and all the people, according to the order of Moses. This is to be understood not of the city which was given to the Levites, but of the fields and parts adjacent, Jos 14:13,

and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak: whose names are given Jdg 1:10; this shows that this refers to the same expedition as in Jos 15:14; and is expressed in the same manner.

Gill: Jdg 1:21

And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem,.... That is, that part of it which belonged to them, for it lay between Judah and Benjamin; and neither of them separately, nor both conjunctly, could drive out the Jebusites from it, particularly the strong hold on the top of Mount Sion, which they held to the times of David. Abarbinel is of opinion, that Jerusalem in those times was not a city enclosed about, but was a large province, part of which belonged to the tribe of Judah, and another to the tribe of Benjamin, and another was possessed by the Jebusites; and so Jarchi says it was a province, the name of which was Jebusi:

but the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Benjamin unto this day; when this book was written, which was done by Samuel, as Kimchi and Ben Gersom; and it is certain from hence it must have been written before the reign of David, who dispossessed the Jebusites, 2Sa 5:6.

Gill: Jdg 1:22

And the house of Joseph, they also went up against Bethel,.... Which lay upon the borders of the sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, Jos 16:1; and though it seems to have been taken when Ai was, Jos 8:17; yet it appears that it was now in the possession of the Canaanites; wherefore the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh being desirous of enlarging their borders after the example of Judah, went against this place in order to take it:

and the Lord was with them; the Word of the Lord, as the Targum, directing, assisting, and succeeding them in their attempt.

Gill: Jdg 1:23

And the house of Joseph sent to descry Bethel,.... To reconnoitre the place, to observe its passes and avenues, which were most accessible, and to examine the walls of it, where they were weakest and least defended:

now the name of the city before was Luz; which signifies a "nut"; perhaps it was so called from large numbers of nut trees which grew near it; the Jews suggest as if it was like a nut, no entrance into it but through a cave or some subterraneous passage, see Gen 28:19.

Gill: Jdg 1:24

And the spies saw a man come forth out of the city,.... Or "the keepers" ^r; those that were sent to watch, and observe, and get what intelligence they could of the city, and the way into it:

and they said unto him, show us, we pray, thee, the entrance into the city; not the gate or gates of it, which no doubt were visible enough, but some private way into it; the Jews, as before observed, think the entrance was by the way of a cave, or some hidden passage, of which Jarchi and Kimchi make mention:

and we will show thee mercy; give him a reward for it, or spare him and his family when the city came into their hands.

Gill: Jdg 1:25

And when he showed them the entrance, into the city,.... Pointing to it with his fingers, as the same writers observe:

they smote the city with the edge of the sword; they gave notice of what intelligence they had got to the body of the army, who came up, entered the city, took it, and put the inhabitants of it to the sword, as they were ordered to do with all the Canaanites:

but they let go the man and all his family; who had returned to it, encouraged by the promise made him, and for the sake of saving of his family; which though not expressed, he might have asked the favour of sparing them, which might be promised, as was in the case of Rahab; provided he would either renounce Heathenism, and embrace the true religion, or depart to another country, the latter of which he chose.

Gill: Jdg 1:26

And the man went into the land of the Hittites,.... With his family; Kimchi says this was not one of the seven nations of Canaan; and it is very clear from this narrative, that the land this man went to was not in the land of Canaan; though it is certain a people of this name formerly dwelt there, Gen 15:20; and the land of Canaan is called the land of the Hittites, Jos 1:4; these either might flee to another country upon Joshua's entry into the land of Canaan, or a colony of them from thence might settle elsewhere, to which this man chose to go, who might be originally of them:

and built a city; his family was numerous, and he a man of wealth, and was allowed to carry all his substance with him:

and called the name of it Luz; in memory of the place he left, and had long lived in. There is a city called Loussa, among the cities which Josephus says ^s were taken by the Jews from the Arabians; and which is very probably the Lysa of Ptolemy ^t, which he places in Arabia Petraea, and might be the same with this Luz; and, if so, this shows the land this man went into was in Edom, which is not unlikely; there is another Luza, which Jerom ^u says fell to the lot of the sons of Joseph, near Sichem, three miles from Neapolis:

which is the name thereof unto this day: the time of the writing of this book; See Gill on Jdg 1:21.

Gill: Jdg 1:27

Neither did Manasseh,.... One of the sons of Joseph before mentioned; and it respects that half tribe of Manasseh, which had its portion on this side Jordan in the land of Canaan: these did not

drive out the inhabitants of Bethshean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: all which were places the half tribe had assigned them in Issachar and Asher; of which See Gill on Jos 17:11. This tribe seems to have been sluggish, and not to have exerted itself at all, or made any attempts to drive out these people:

but the Canaanites would dwell in that land; not only desired it, but were determined on it, and rather chose to submit to a tribute than be expelled, at least would not depart unless they were forced.

Gill: Jdg 1:28

And it came to pass, when Israel was strong,.... All the tribes of Israel were become numerous, and able to drive the Canaanites out of the land everywhere, and particularly were able to assist Manasseh in expelling the Canaanites out of the above places, yet they did not; but all they did was:

that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out; which flowed from covetousness, and a love of ease; they did not care to be at the trouble of expelling them, as they found it turned more to their account and present advantage to make them tributaries; and this was true of the Israelites in general, and of the half tribe of Manasseh in particular; which, as Abarbinel thinks, is here respected.

Gill: Jdg 1:29

Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer,.... Not so much as made them tributaries, but made a covenant with them, it is probable, contrary to the express will of God:

but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them; the Ephraimites agreeing to it, and here they dwelt to the times of Solomon; See Gill on Jos 16:10; where indeed they are said to be under tribute; but that seems to respect some later time, and not when they were first admitted to dwell among them, since no mention is made of it here.

Gill: Jdg 1:30

Neither did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol,.... The first of these seems to be the same with Kattah or Kartah, and the latter with Nahalal, both cities given to the Levites, Jos 19:15; which perhaps was the reason of their sloth in driving them out; though it aggravated their sin not to take care to rid those cities of the Canaanites, which were given to religious persons:

but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tributaries; which is observed so far in their favour, that they exerted themselves to make them tributaries, which was more than was done by some others.

Gill: Jdg 1:31

Neither did Asher drive out the inhabitants of Accho,.... The same with Ptolemais; see Gill on Act 21:7; so called from the first Ptolemy king of Egypt, who enlarged it; but it has since recovered its ancient name pretty nearly, and is now called Acca or Acra."On its north and east sides (Mr. Maundrell says ^w) it is encompassed with a spacious and fertile plain; on the west it is washed by the Mediterranean sea; and on the south by a large bay, extending from the city as far as Mount Carmel:"

nor the inhabitants of Zidon; a well known city in Phoenicia, belonging to this tribe, see Jos 19:28,

nor of Ahlab, nor of Achzib, nor Helbah, nor Aphik, nor of Rehob; two of these places, Ahlab and Helbah, are not mentioned among the cities of the tribe of Asher, Jos 19:24; unless Helbah is the same with Helkath, Jdg 1:25; of the rest, Achzib; see Gill on Jos 19:29, Aphik, and Rehob; see Gill on Jos 19:30.

Gill: Jdg 1:32

But the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land,.... They were in a worse condition than those before mentioned; for the Canaanites were possessed of their country, especially of the above cities, and were masters of them; and the Asherites only dwelt among them upon sufferance:

for they did not drive them out; either they did not attempt it, or they could not do it, and contented themselves with having leave to dwell among them.

Gill: Jdg 1:33

Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Bethshemesh, nor the inhabitants of Bethanath,.... Of which places See Gill on Jos 19:38,

but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land; in the same disgraceful manner as Asher did, owing to cowardice or sloth:

nevertheless, the inhabitants of Bethshemesh, and of Bethanath, became tributaries unto them; these two cities did at length exert themselves, and got the mastery over the Canaanites, as to make them pay tribute to them; though they ought to have expelled them, and even destroyed them, according to the command of God, but avarice prevailed over them.

Gill: Jdg 1:34

And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountain,.... Into the mountainous part of the tribe of Dan; the most noted mountains in it were Sear and Baalah, which lay on the border of Judah, Jos 15:10; Joppa in this tribe was built on an high rock, and so Gibbethon, as its name seems to import, perhaps was built on a hill or mountain, as were the cities after mentioned:

for they would not suffer them to come down to the valley; which lay between Joppa and Caesarea, the plain of Sharon, in which were Lydda, Jamnia, &c. which belonged to their tribe, and they afterwards enjoyed; See Gill on Jos 19:48.

Gill: Jdg 1:35

But the Amorites would dwell in Mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim,.... And they would not suffer the Danites to dwell in the valley, a fruitful and delightful part of their country, terrifying them with their iron chariots, which in the vale they could make use of to great advantage; so neither would they let them dwell alone in the mountainous part of their tribe, but would dwell with them, particularly in three places mentioned: where Mount Heres was is not certain; it signifies the "sun"; very probably it had its name from the worship of the sun on it, or from the sun standing still near it; for Aijalon, where that miracle was wrought, is next mentioned. Perhaps it might be near to Timnathheres, which was in Mount Ephraim, Jdg 2:9; since Ephraim assisted in making these places tributaries; of the two cities, Aijalon and Shaalbim, see Jos 19:42,

yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributaries; or "the hand of it became heavy" ^x; by which it does not clearly appear whether the hand of Joseph was made heavy, and to hang down, by the Amorites; or whether it was heavy upon them, and so prevailed over them, as our version; but the Septuagint puts it out of doubt, reading the words,"and the hand of the house of Joseph was heavy upon the Amorites;''the Ephraimites being near to the tribe of Dan, and observing how they were pressed by the Amorites, took up arms in their favour, and obliged the Canaanites of the above places to become tributaries to the Danites.

Gill: Jdg 1:36

And the coast of the Amorites was from the going up to Akrabbim,.... Of which See Gill on Num 34:4 and See Gill on Jos 15:3,

from the rock, and upwards; even from the city Petra in Idumea, and beyond that; and there was a country near Idumea, called Acrabatane, from this mountain Akrabbim,"Then Judas fought against the children of Esau in Idumea at Arabattine, because they besieged Gael: and he gave them a great overthrow, and abated their courage, and took their spoils.'' (1 Maccabees 5:3)such was the extent of these people, that their coast reached from the places, mentioned to the mountains where the above cities of Dan were; they were the most powerful people among the Canaanites, and lay on both sides of Jordan, and were very troublesome to Israel, yet were at length destroyed, Amo 2:9.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Jdg 1:3

¹ tn Heb “Judah said to Simeon, his brother.”

² tn Heb “Come up with me into our allotted land and let us attack the Canaanites.”

³ tn Heb “I.” The Hebrew pronoun is singular, agreeing with the collective singular “Judah” earlier in the verse. English style requires a plural pronoun here, however.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:4

¹ tn Heb “Judah went up.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:5

¹ tn Or “found.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:7

¹ tn Elsewhere this verb usually carries the sense of “to gather; to pick up; to glean,” but “lick up” seems best here in light of the peculiar circumstances described by Adoni-Bezek.

² tn The words “food scraps” are not in the Hebrew text, but are implied.

³ tn Heb “Just as I did, so God has repaid me.” Note that the phrase “to them” has been supplied in the translation to clarify what is meant.

⁴ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:9

¹ tn Or “foothills”; Heb “the Shephelah.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:11

¹ tn Heb “they went from there against the inhabitants of Debir.” The LXX reads the verb as “they went up,” which suggests that the Hebrew text translated by the LXX read וַיַּעַל (vayya’al) rather than the MT’s וַיֵּלֶךְ (vayyelekh). It is possible that this is the text to be preferred in v. 11. Cf. Josh 15:15.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:13

¹ tn “Caleb’s younger brother” may refer to Othniel or to Kenaz (in which case Othniel was Caleb’s nephew; so CEV).

² tn Heb “he”; the referent (Caleb) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:14

¹ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Acsah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn Heb “him.” The pronoun could refer to Othniel, in which case one would translate, “she incited him [Othniel] to ask her father for a field.” This is problematic, however, for Acsah, not Othniel, makes the request in v. 15. The LXX has “he [Othniel] urged her to ask her father for a field.” This appears to be an attempt to reconcile the apparent inconsistency and probably does not reflect the original text. If Caleb is understood as the referent of the pronoun, the problem disappears. For a fuller discussion of the issue, see P. G. Mosca, “Who Seduced Whom? A Note on Joshua 15:18 // Judges 1:14,” CBQ 46 (1984): 18-22. The translation takes Caleb to be the referent, specified as “her father.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:15

¹ tn Elsewhere the Hebrew word בְרָכָה (vÿrakhah) is often translated “blessing,” but here it refers to a gift (as in Gen 33:11; 1 Sam 25:27; 30:26; and 2 Kgs 5:15).

² tn Some translations regard the expressions “springs of water” (גֻּלֹּת מָיִם, gullot mayim) and “springs” (גֻּלֹּת) as place names here (cf. NRSV).

NET Notes: Jdg 1:16

¹ tc Part of the Greek ms tradition lacks the words “of Judah.”

² tn Heb “[to] the Desert of Judah in the Negev, Arad.”

³ tn The phrase “of Judah” is supplied here in the translation. Some ancient textual witnesses read, “They went and lived with the Amalekites.” This reading, however, is probably influenced by 1 Sam 15:6 (see also Num 24:20-21).

NET Notes: Jdg 1:17

¹ tn Heb “Judah went with Simeon, his brother.”

² tn Heb “it”; the referent (the city of Zephath) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ sn The name Hormah (חָרְמָה, khormah) sounds like the Hebrew verb translated “wipe out” (חָרַם, kharam).

NET Notes: Jdg 1:18

¹ tn Heb “The men of Judah captured Gaza and its surrounding territory, Ashkelon and its surrounding territory, and Ekron and its surrounding territory.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:19

¹ tn Or “seized possession of”; or “occupied.”

² tc Several textual witnesses support the inclusion of this verb.

³ tn Regarding the translation “chariots with iron-rimmed wheels,” see Y. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, 255, and the article by R. Drews, “The ‘Chariots of Iron’ of Joshua and Judges,” JSOT 45 (1989): 15-23.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:20

¹ tn Heb “they gave to Caleb.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:21

¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

² sn The statement to this very day reflects the perspective of the author, who must have written prior to David’s conquest of the Jebusites (see 2 Sam 5:6-7).

NET Notes: Jdg 1:22

¹ tn Heb “house.” This is a metonymy for the warriors from the tribe.

² tn Heb “went up.”

³ map For location see Map4 G4; Map5 C1; Map6 E3; Map7 D1; Map8 G3.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:24

¹ tn Heb “saw.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:26

¹ tn Heb “the man.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:27

¹ map For location see Map1 D4; Map2 C1; Map4 C2; Map5 F2; Map7 B1.

² tn Heb “The men of Manasseh did not conquer Beth Shan and its surrounding towns, Taanach and its surrounding towns, the people living in Dor and its surrounding towns, the people living in Ibleam and its surrounding towns, or the people living in Megiddo and its surrounding towns.”

³ tn Or “were determined.”

⁴ tn Heb “in this land.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:30

¹ tn Heb “the people living in Kitron and the people living in Nahalol.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:31

¹ map For location see Map1 A1; JP3 F3; JP4 F3.

² tn Heb “The men of Asher did not conquer the people living in Acco, the people living in Sidon, Ahlab, Acco, Helbah, Aphek, or Rehob.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:33

¹ tn Heb “the people living in Beth Shemesh or the people living in Beth Anath.”

² tn The term “Canaanites” is supplied here both for clarity and for stylistic reasons.

NET Notes: Jdg 1:34

¹ tn Heb “come down into.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:35

¹ tn Or “were determined.”

² tn Or “Mount Heres”; the term הַר (har) means “mount” or “mountain” in Hebrew.

³ tn Heb “Whenever the hand of the tribe of Joseph was heavy.”

NET Notes: Jdg 1:36

¹ tn Or “the Ascent of Scorpions” (עַקְרַבִּים [’aqrabbim] means “scorpions” in Hebrew).

² tn Or “Amorite territory started at the Pass of the Scorpions at Sela and then went on up.”

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:3

And Judah said unto Simeon his ^{( c )} brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him.

^{( c )} For the tribe of Simeon had their inheritance within the tribe of Judah, (Jos 19:1).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:6

But Adonibezek fled; and they pursued after him, and caught him, and ^{( d )} cut off his thumbs and his great toes.

^{( d )} This was God's just judgment, as the tyrant himself confesses, that as he had done, so did he receive, (Lev 24:19-20).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:8

Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the ^{( e )} city on fire.

^{( e )} Which was later built again, and possessed by the Jebusites, (2Sa 5:6).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:10

And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron: (now the name of Hebron before [was] Kirjatharba:) and they slew ^{( f )} Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai.

^{( f )} These three were giants, and the children of Anak.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:14

And it came to pass, when she came [to him], that she moved him to ask of her father a field: ^{( g )} and she lighted from off [her] ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wilt thou?

^{( g )} Read (Jos 15:18).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:16

And the children of the ^{( h )} Kenite, Moses' father in law, went up out of the city of palm trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which [lieth] in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people.

^{( h )} This was one of the names of Moses father in law, read (Num 10:29).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:18

Also Judah took ^{( i )} Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof.

^{( i )} These cities and others were later possessed by the Philistines, (1Sa 6:17).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:21

And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that ^{( k )} inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.

^{( k )} For after the tribe of Judah had burnt it, they built it again.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:27

Neither did Manasseh drive out [the inhabitants of] Bethshean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: ^{( l )} but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.

^{( l )} Wherefore God permitted the Canaanites to still dwell in the land, read (Jdg 3:5).

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:30

Neither did ^{( m )} Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol; but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tributaries.

^{( m )} That is, the tribe of Zebulun as is also to be understood of the rest.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:32

But the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: for they did not drive them ^{( n )} out.

^{( n )} But made them pay tribute as the others did.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:35

But the Amorites would dwell in mount Heres in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim: yet the ^{( o )} hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributaries.

^{( o )} Meaning, when he was stronger than they.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 1:36

And the coast of the Amorites [was] from the going up to Akrabbim, from the ^{( p )} rock, and upward.

^{( p )} Or Selah, which was a city in Arabia.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Jdg 1:1-36

1 The acts of Judah and Simeon.

4 Adonibezek justly requited.

8 Jerusalem taken.

10 Hebron taken.

11 Othniel has Achsah to wife for taking of Debir.

16 The Kenites dwell in Judah.

17 Hormah, Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron taken.

21 The acts of Benjamin.

22 Of the house of Joseph, who take Beth-el.

30 Of Zebulun.

31 Of Asher.

33 Of Naphtali.

34 Of Dan.

Maclaren: Jdg 1:3

The Common Salvation

"The common salvation."--Jude 3. "The common faith."--Titus 1:4.

Jude was probably one of Christ's brothers, and a man of position and influence in the Church. He is writing to the whole early Christian community, numbering men widely separated from each other by nationality, race, culture, and general outlook on life; and he beautifully and humbly unites himself with them all as recipients of a common salvation.' Paul is writing to Titus, the veteran leader to a raw recruit. Wide differences of mental power, of maturity of religious experience, separated the two; and yet Paul beautifully and humbly associates himself with his pupil, as exercising a common faith.'

Probably neither of the writers meant more than to bring himself nearer to the persons whom they were respectively addressing; but their language goes a great deal further than the immediate application of it. The salvation' was common' to Jude and his readers, as the faith' was to Paul and Titus, because the salvation and the faith are one, all the world over.

It is for the sake of insisting upon this community, which is universal, that I have ventured to isolate these two fragments from their proper connection, and to bring them together. But you will notice that they take up the same thought at two different stages, as it were. The one declares that there is but one remedy and healing for all the world's woes; the other declares that there is but one way by which that remedy can be applied. All who possess the common salvation' are so blessed because they exercise the common faith.'

I. Note The Underlying Conception Of A Universal Deepest Need.

That Christian word salvation' has come to be threadbare and commonplace, and slips over people's minds without leaving any dint. We all think we understand it. Some of us have only the faintest and vaguest conception of what it means, and have never realised the solemn view of human nature and its necessities which lies beneath it. And I want to press that upon you now. The word to save' means either of two things--to heal from a sickness, or to deliver from a danger. These two ideas of sickness to be healed and of dangers to be secured from enter into the Christian use of the word. Underlying it is the implication that the condition of humanity is universally that of needing healing of a sore sickness, and of needing deliverance from an overhanging and tremendous danger. Sin is the sickness, and the issues of sin are the danger. And sin is making myself my centre and my law, and so distorting and flinging out of gear, as it were, my relations to God.

Surely it does not want many words to show that that must be the most important thing about a man. Deep down below all superficialities there lies this fundamental fact, that he has gone wrong with regard to God; and no amount of sophistication about heredity and environment and the like can ever wipe out the blackness of the fact that men willingly do break through the law, which commands us all to yield ourselves to God, and not to set ourselves up as our own masters, and our own aims and ends, independently of Him. I say that is the deepest wound of humanity.

In these days of social unrest there are plenty of voices round us that proclaim other needs as being clamant, but, oh, they are all shallow and on the surface as compared with the deepest need of all: and the men that come round the sick-bed of humanity and say, Ah, the patient is suffering from a lack of education,' or the patient is suffering from unfavourable environment,' have diagnosed the disease superficially. There is something deeper the matter than that, and unless the physician has probed further into the wound than these surface appearances, I am afraid his remedy will go as short a way down as his conception of the evil goes.

Oh, brethren, there is something else the matter with us than ignorance or unfavourable conditions. The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.' The tap-root of all human miseries lies in the solemn fact of human transgression. That is a universal fact. Wide differences part us, but there is one thing that we have all in common: a conscience and a will that lifts itself against disliked good. Beneath all surface differences of garb there lies the same fact, the common sickness of sin. The king's robe, the pauper's uniform, the student's gown, the mill-hand's fustian, the naked savage's brown skin, each cover a heart that is evil, and because it is evil, needs salvation from sickness and deliverance from danger.

For do not forget that if it is true that men have driven their rebellious chariots through God's law, they cannot do that without bringing down God's hand upon them, and they ought not to be able to do it; and He would not be a loving God if it were not so. There are dangers; dangers from the necessary inevitable consequences, here and yonder, of rebellion against Him.

Now, do not let us lose ourselves in generalities. That is the way in which many of us have all our lives long blunted the point of the message of the Gospel to our hearts. That is what we do with all sorts of important moral truths. For instance, I suppose there never was a time in your lives when you did not believe that all men must die. But I suppose most of us can remember some time when there came upon us, with a shock which made some of us cower before it as an unwelcome thing, the thought, And I must.'

The common sickness? Yes! Thou art the man.' Oh, brother, whatever you may have or whatever you may want, be sure of this: that your deepest needs will not be met, your sorest sickness will not be healed, your most tremendous peril not secured against, until the fact of your individual sinfulness and the consequences of that fact are somehow or other dealt with, stanched, and swept away. So much, then, for the first point.

II. Now A Word As To The Common Remedy. One Of Our Texts Gives Us That--The Common Salvation.'

You all know what I am going to say, and so, perhaps, you suppose that it is not worth while for me to say it. I dare say some of you think that it was not worth while coming here to hear the whole, threadbare, commonplace story. Well! is it worth while for me to speak once more to men that have so often heard and so often neglected? Let me try. Oh, that I could get you one by one, and drive home to each single soul that is listening to me, or perhaps, that is not listening, the message that I have to bring!

The common salvation.' There is one remedy for the sickness. There is one safety against the danger. There is only one, because it is the remedy for all men, and it is the remedy for all men because it is the remedy for each. Jesus Christ deals, as no one else has ever pretended to deal, with this outstanding fact of my transgression and yours.

He, by His death, as I believe, has saved the world from the danger, because He has set right the world's relations to God. I am not going, at this stage of my sermon, to enter upon anything in the nature of discussion. My purpose is an entirely different one. I want to press upon you, dear brethren, this plain fact, that since there is a God, and since you and I have sinned, and since things are as they are, and the consequences will be as they will be, both in this world and in the next, we all stand in danger of death--death eternal, which comes from, and, in one sense, consists of, separation in heart and mind from God.

You believe in a judgment day, do you not? Whether you do or not, you have only to open your eyes, you have only to turn them inwards, to see that even here and now, every sin and transgression and disobedience does receive its just recompense of reward. You cannot do a wrong thing without hurting yourself, without desolating some part of your nature, without enfeebling your power of resistance to evil and aspiration after good, without lowering yourself in the scale of being, and making yourself ashamed to stand before the bar of your own conscience. You cannot do some wrong things, that some of you are fond of doing, without dragging after them consequences, in this world, of anything but an agreeable kind. Sins of the flesh avenge themselves in kind, as some of you young men know, and will know better in the days that are before you. Transgressions which are plain and clear in the eyes of even the world's judgment draw after them damaged reputations, enfeebled health, closed doors of opportunity, and a whole host of such things. And all these are but a kind of premonitions and overshadowings of that solemn judgment that lies beyond. For all men will have to eat the fruit of their doings and drink that which they have prepared. But on the Cross, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, bore the weight of the world's sin, yours and mine and every man's. There is one security against the danger; and it is that He, fronting the incidence of the Divine law, says, as He said to His would-be captors in the garden,' If ye seek Me, let these go their way.' And they go their way by the power of His atoning death.

Further, Jesus Christ imparts a life that cures the sickness of sin.

What is the meaning of this Whitsuntide that all the Christian world is professing to keep to-day? Is it to commemorate a thing that happened nineteen centuries ago, when a handful of Jews for a few minutes had the power of talking in other languages, and a miraculous light flamed over their heads and then disappeared? Was that all? Have you and I any share in it? Yes. For if Pentecost means anything it means this, that, all down through the ages, Jesus Christ is imparting to men that cleave to Him the real gift of a new life, free from all the sickness of the old, and healthy with the wholesomeness of His own perfect sinlessness, so that, however inveterate and engrained a man's habits of wrong-doing may have been, if he will turn to that Saviour, and let Him work upon him, he will be delivered from his evil. The leprosy of his flesh, though the lumps of diseased matter may be dropping from the bones, and the stench of corruption may drive away human love and sympathy, can be cleansed, and his flesh become like the flesh of a little child, if only he will trust in Jesus Christ. The sickness can be cured. Christ deals with men in the depth of their being. He will give you, if you will, a new life and new tastes, directions, inclinations, impulses, perceptions, hopes, and capacities, and the evil will pass away, and you will be whole.

Ah, brethren, that is the only cure. I was talking a minute or two ago about imperfect diagnoses; and there are superficial remedies too. Men round us are trying, in various ways, to stanch the world's wounds, to heal the world's sicknesses. God forbid that I should say a word to discourage any such! I would rather wish them ten times more numerous than they are; but at the same time I believe that, unless you deal with the fountain at its head, you will never cleanse the stream, and that you must have the radical change, which comes by the gift of a new life in Christ, before men can be delivered from the sickness of their sins. And so all these panaceas, whilst they may do certain surface good, are, if I may quote a well-known phrase, like pills against an earthquake,' or like giving a lotion to cure pimples, when the whole head is sick and the whole heart faint. You will never cure the ills of humanity until you have delivered men from the dominion of their sin.

Jesus Christ heals society by healing the individual.

There is no other way of doing it. If the units are corrupt the community cannot be pure. And the only way to make the units pure is that they shall have Christ on the Cross for their redemption, and Christ in the heart for their cleansing. And then all the things that men try to produce in the shape of social good and the like, apart from Him, will come as a consequence of the new state of things that arises when the individuals are renewed. Apart from Him all human attempts to deal with social evils are inadequate. There is a terrible disillusioning and disappointment awaiting many eager enthusiasts to-day, who think that by certain external arrangements, or by certain educational and cultivated processes, they can mend the world's miseries. You educate a nation. Well and good, and one result of it is that your bookshops get choked with trash, and that vice has a new avenue of approach to men's hearts. You improve the economic condition of the people. Well and good, and one result of it is that a bigger percentage than ever of their funds finds its way into the drink-shop. You give a nation political power. Well and good, and one result of it is that the least worthy and the least wise have to be flattered and coaxed, because they are the rulers. Every good thing, divorced from Christ, becomes an ally of evil, and the only way by which the dreams and desires of men can be fulfilled is by the salvation which is in Him entering the individual hearts and thus moulding society.

III. Now, Lastly, The Common Means Of Possessing The Common Healing.

My second text tells us what that is--the common faith.' That is another of the words which is so familiar that it is unintelligible, which has been dinned into your ears ever since you were little children, and in the case of many of you excites no definite idea, and is supposed to be an obscure kind of thing that belongs to theologians and preachers, but has little to do with your daily lives. There is only one way by which this healing and safety that I have been speaking about can possibly find its way into a man's heart. You have all been trained from childhood to believe that men are saved by faith, and a great many of you, I dare say, think that men might have been saved by some other way, if God had chosen to appoint it so. But that is a clear mistake. If it is true that salvation is a gift from God, then it is quite plain that the only thing that we require is an outstretched hand. If it is true that Jesus Christ's death on the Cross has brought salvation to all the world, then it is quite plain that, His work being finished, we have no need to come in pottering with any works of ours, and that the only thing we have to do is to accept it. If it is true that Jesus Christ will enter men's hearts, and there give a new spirit and a new life, which will save them from their sins and make them free from the law of sin and death, then it is plain that the one thing that we have to do is to open our hearts and say Come in, Thou King of Glory, come in!' Because salvation is a gift; because it is the result of a finished work; because it is imparted to men by the impartation of Christ's own life to them: for all these reasons it is plain that the only way by which God can save a man is by that man's putting his trust in Jesus Christ. It is no arbitrary appointment. The only possible way of possessing the common salvation is by the exercise of the common faith.'

So we are all put upon one level, no matter how different we may be in attainments, in mental capacity --geniuses and blockheads, scholars and ignoramuses, millionaires and paupers, students and savages, we are all on the one level. There is no carriage road into heaven. We have all to go in at the strait gate, and there is no special entry for people that come with their own horses; and so some people do not like to have to descend to that level, and to go with the ruck and the undistinguished crowd, and to be saved just in the same fashion as Tom, Dick, and Harry, and they turn away.

Plenty of people believe in a common salvation,' meaning thereby a vague, indiscriminate gift that is flung broadcast over the mass. Plenty of people believe in a common faith.' We hear, for instance, about a national Christianity,' and a national recognition of religion,' and Christian nations,' and the like. There are no Christian nations except nations of which the individuals are Christians, and there is no common faith' except the faith exercised in common by all the units that make up a community.

So do not suppose that anything short of your own personal act brings you into possession of the common salvation.' The table is spread, but you must take the bread into your own hands, and you must masticate it with your own teeth, and you must assimilate it in your own body, or it is no bread for you. The salvation is a common,' like one of the great prairies, but each separate settler has to peg off his own claim, and fence it in, and take possession of it, or he has no share in the broad land. So remember that the common salvation' must be made the individual salvation by the individual exercise of' the common faith.' Cry, Lord! £ believe!' and then you will have the right to say, The Lord is my strength; He also is become my salvation.'

Maclaren: Jdg 1:20-21

Keeping Ourselves In The Love Of God

"But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost 21. Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life."--Jude 20-21.

Jude has been, in all the former part of the letter, pouring out a fiery torrent of vehement indignation and denunciation against certain men' who had crept' into the Church, and were spreading gross immorality there. He does not speak of them so much as heretics in belief, but rather as evil-doers in practice; and after the thunderings and lightning, he turns from them with a kind of sigh of relief in this emphatic, But, ye! beloved.' The storm ends in gentle rain; and he tells the brethren who are yet faithful how they are to comport themselves in the presence of prevalent corruption, and where is their security and their peace.

You will observe that in my text there is embedded, in the middle of it, a direct precept: Keep yourselves in the love of God'; and that that is encircled by three clauses, like each other in structure, and unlike if building,' praying,' looking.' The great diamond is surrounded by a ring of lesser jewels. Why did Jude put two of these similar clauses in front of his direct precept, and one of them behind it? I think because the two that precede indicate the ways by which the precept can be kept, and the one that follows indicates the accompaniment or issue of obedience to the precept. If that be the reason for the structure of my text, it suggests also to us the course which we had best pursue in the exposition of it.

I. So We Have, To Begin With, The Great Direct Precept For The Christian Life.

Keep yourselves in the love of God.' Now I need not spend a moment in showing that the love of God' here means, not ours to Him, but His to us. It is that in which, as in some charmed circle, we are to keep ourselves. Now that injunction at once raises the question of the possibility of Christian men being out of the love of God, straying away from their home, and getting out into the open. Of course there is a sense in which His tender mercies are over all His works.' Just as the sky embraces all the stars and the earth within its blue round, so that love of God encompasses every creature; and no man can stray so far away as that, in one profound sense, he gets beyond its pale. For no man can ever make God cease to love him. But whilst that is quite true, on the other side it is equally true that contrariety of will and continuance in evil deeds do so alter a man's relation to the love of God as that he is absolutely incapable of receiving its sweetest and most select manifestations, and can only be hurt by the incidence of its beams. The sun gives life to many creatures, but it slays some. There are crawling things that live beneath a stone, and when you turn it up and let the arrows of the sunbeams smite down upon them, they squirm and die. It is possible for a man so to set himself in antagonism to that great Light as that the Light shall hurt and not bless and soothe.

It is also possible for a Christian man to step out of the charmed circle, in the sense that he becomes all unconscious of that Light. Then to him it comes to the same thing that the love shall be non-existent, and that it shah be unperceived. If I choose to make my abode on the northern side of the mountain, my thermometer may be standing at freezing,' and I may be shivering in all my limbs on Midsummer Day at noontide. And so it is possible for us Christian people to stray away out from that gracious abode, to pass from the illuminated disc into the black shadow; and though nothing is hid from the heat thereof,' yet we may derive no warmth and no enlightening from the all-pervading beams. We have to keep ourselves in the love of God.'

Then that suggests the other more blessed possibility, that amidst all the distractions of daily duties, and the solicitations of carking cares, and the oppression of heavy sorrows, it is possible for us to keep ourselves perpetually in the conscious enjoyment of the love of God. I need not say how this ideal of the Christian life may be indefinitely approximated to in our daily experiences; nor need I dwell upon the sad contrast between this ideal unbrokenness of conscious sunning ourselves in the love of God, and the reality of the lives that most of us live. But, brethren, if we more fully believed that we can keep up, amidst all the dust and struggle of the arena, the calm sweet sense of God's love, our lives would be different. Nightingales will sing in a dusty copse by the roadside, however loud the noise of traffic may be upon the highway. And we may have, all through our lives, that song, unbroken and melodious. That sub-consciousness underlying our daily work, like some sweet beguiling melody, so sweet, we know not we are listening to it,' may be ever present with each of us in our daily work, like some hidden brook in the leafy month of June,' that murmurs beneath the foliage, and yet, is audible through all the wood.

And what a peaceful, restful life ours would be, if we could thus be like John, leaning on the Master's bosom. We might have a secret fortress into the central chamber of which we could go, whither no sound of the war in the plains could ever penetrate. We might, like some dwellers in a mountainous island, take refuge in a central glen, buried deep amongst the hills, where there would be no sound of tempest, though the winds were fighting on the surface of the sea, and the spin-drift was flying before them. It is possible to keep ourselves in the love of God.' And if we keep in that fortress we are safe. If we go beyond its walls we are sure to be picked off by the well-aimed shots of the enemy. So, then, that is the central commandment for the Christian life.

II. Now Let Me Turn To Consider The Methods By Which We Can Thus Keep Ourselves In The Love Of God.

These are two: one mainly bearing on the outward, the other on the inward, life. By building up yourselves on your most holy faith': that is the one. By praying in the Holy Ghost': that is the other. Let us look at these two.

Building up yourselves on your most holy faith.' I suppose that faith' here is used in its ordinary sense. Some would rather prefer to take it in the latter, ecclesiastical sense, by which it means, not the act of belief, but the aggregate of the things believed.--Our most holy faith,' as it is called by quotation--I think misquotation--of this passage. But I do not see that there is any necessity for that meaning. The words are perfectly intelligible in their ordinary meaning. What Jude says is just this:' Your trust in Jesus Christ has in it a tendency to produce holiness, and that is the foundation on which you are to build a great character. Build up yourselves on your most holy faith.' For although it is not what the world's ethics recognise, the Christian theory of morality is this, that it all rests upon trust in God manifested to us in Jesus Christ. Faith is the foundation of all supreme excellence and nobility and beauty of character; because, for one thing, it dethrones self, and enthrones God in our hearts; making Him our aim and our law and our supreme good; and because, for another thing, our trust brings us into direct union with Him, so that we receive from Him the power thus to build up a character.

Faith is the foundation. Ay! but faith is only the foundation. It is the potentiality of wealth,' but it is not the reality. All things are possible to him that believeth ; but all things are not actual except on conditions. A man may have faith, as a great many professing Christians have it, only as a fire-escape,' a means of getting away from hell, or have it only as a hand that is stretched out to grasp certain initial blessings of the spiritual life. But that is not its full glory nor its real aspect. It is meant to be the beginning in us of all things that are lovely and of good report.' What would you think of a man that carefully put in the foundations for a house, and had all his building materials on the ground, and let them lie there? And that is what a great many of you Christian people do, who' have fled for refuge,' as you say, to the hope set before you in the Gospel'; and who have never wrought out your faith into noble deeds. Remember what the Apostle says, Faith which worketh'; and worketh by love.' It is the foundation, but only the foundation.

The work of building a noble character on that firm foundation is never-ending. Tis a life-long task till the lump be leavened.' The metaphor of growth by building suggests effort, and it suggests continuity; and it suggests slow, gradual rearing up, course upon course, stone by stone. Some of us have done nothing at it for a great many years. You will pass, sometimes, in our suburbs, a row of houses begun by some builder that has become bankrupt; and there are mouldering bricks and gaping empty places for the windows, and the rafters decaying, and stagnant water down in the holes that were meant for the cellars. That is like the kind of thing that hosts of people who call themselves Christians have built. But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith … Keep yourselves in the love.'

Then the other way of building is suggested in the next clause, praying in the Holy Ghost'--that is to say, prayer which is not mere utterance of my own petulant desires which a great deal of our prayer' is, but which is breathed into us by that Divine Spirit that will brood over our chaos, and bring order out of confusion, and light and beauty out of darkness, and weltering sea:

"The prayers I make will then be sweet indeed,If Thou the Spirit give by which I pray."

As Michael Angelo says, such prayer inspired and warmed by the influences of that Divine Spirit playing upon the dull flame of our desires, like air injected into a grate where the fire is half out, such prayers are our best help in building. For who is there that has honestly tried to build himself up for a habitation of God' but has felt that it must be through a Spirit' mightier than himself, who will overcome his weaknesses and arm him against temptation? No man who honestly endeavours to re-form his character but is brought very soon to feel that he needs a higher help than his own. And perhaps some of us know how, when sore pressed by temptation, one petition for help brings a sudden gush of strength into us, and we feel that the enemy's assault is weakened.

Brethren, the best attitude for building is on our knees; and if, like Cromwell's men in the fight, we go into the battle singing,

"Let God arise, and scatteredLet all His enemies be,'

we shall come out victorious. Ye, beloved, building and praying, keep yourselves.'

III. Now, Lastly, We Have Here In The Final Clause The Fair Prospect Visible From Our Home, In The Love Of God.

Looking for the mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.'

After all building and praying, we need the mercy.' Jude has been speaking in his letter about the destruction of evil-doers, when Christ the Judge shall come. And I suppose that that thought of final judgment is still in his mind, colouring the language of my text, and that it explains why he speaks here of the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ' instead of, as is usual in Scripture, the mercy of God.' He is thinking of that last Day of Judgment and retribution, wherein Jesus Christ is to be the Judge of all men, saints as well as sinners, and therefore he speaks of mercy as bestowed by Him then on those who have kept themselves in the love of God.' Ah! we shall need it. The better we are the more we know how much wood, hay, stubble, we have built into our buildings; and the more we are conscious of that love of God as round us, the more we shall feel the unworthiness and imperfection of our response to it. The best of us, when we lie down to die, and the wisest of us, as we struggle on in life, realise most how all our good is stained and imperfect, and that after all efforts we have to cry God be merciful to me a sinner.'

Not only so, but our outlook and confident expectation of that mercy day by day, and in its perfect form at least, depends upon our keeping ourselves in the love of God.' We have to go high up the hill before we can see far over the plain. Our home in that love commands a fair prospect. When we stray from it, we lose sight of the blue distance. Our hope of the mercy of God unto eternal life' varies with our present consciousness and experience of His love.

That mercy leads on to eternal life. We get many of its manifestations and gifts here, but these are but the pale blossoms of a plant not in its native habitat, nor sunned by the sunshine which can draw forth all its fragrance and colour.

We have to look forward for the adequate expression of the mercy of God to all that fulness of perfect blessedness for all our faculties, which is summed up in the one great word--life everlasting.'

So our hope ought to be as continuous as the manifestation of the mercy, and, like it, should last until the eternal life has come. All our gifts here are fragmentary and imperfect. Here we drink of brooks by the way. There we shall slake our thirst at the fountainhead. Here we are given ready money for the day's expenses. There we shall be free of the treasure-house, where lie the uncoined and uncounted masses of bullion, which God has laid up in store for them that fear Him. So, brethren, let us hope perfectly for the perfect manifestation of the mercy. Let us set ourselves to build up, however slowly, the fair fabric of a life and character which shall stand when the tempest levels all houses built upon the sand. Let us open our spirits to the entrance of that Spirit who helps the infirmities of our desires as well as of our efforts. Thus let us keep ourselves in the charmed circle of the love of God, that we may be safe as a garrison in its fortress, blessed as a babe on its mother's breast.

Jude's words are but the echo of the tenderer words of his Master and ours, when He said, As My Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you. Abide ye in My love. If ye keep My commandments ye shall abide in My love.'

Maclaren: Jdg 1:24-25

Without Stumbling

"Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy. 25. To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.'--Jude 24-25.

I pointed out in a recent sermon on a former verse of this Epistle that the earlier part of it is occupied with vehement denunciations of the moral corruptions that had crept into the Church, and that the writer turns away from that spectacle earnestly to exhort the Christian community to keep themselves in the love of God,' by building themselves upon their most holy faith, and praying in the Holy Ghost.' But that is not all that Jude has to say. It is wise to look round on the dangers and evils that tempt; it is wise to look inward to the weaknesses that may yield to the temptations. But every look on surrounding dangers, and every look at personal weakness, ought to end in a look upwards to Him that is able to keep' the weakest from falling' before the assaults of the strongest foes.

The previous exhortation, which I have discussed, might seem to lay almost too much stress on our own strivings--Keep yourselves in the love of God.' Here is the complement to it' Unto Him that is able to keep you from falling.' So denunciations, exhortations, warnings, all end in the peaceful gaze upon God, and the triumphant recognition of what He is able to do for us. We have to work, but we have to remember that it is He that worketh in us both to will and to do of His own good pleasure.'

I. So I Think That, Looking At These Great Words, The First Thing To Be Noted Is The Solitary, All-Sufficient Stay For Our Weakness.

To the only wise God our Saviour.' Now it is to be noticed, as those of you who use the Revised Version will observe, that the word wise' seems to have crept in here by the reminiscence of another similar doxology in the Epistle to the Romans, and was probably inserted by some scribe who had not grasped the great thought of which the text is the expression. It ought to read, to the only God, our Saviour.' The writer's idea seems to be just this--he has been massing in a dark crowd the whole multitudinous mob of corruptions and evils that were threatening the faith and righteousness of professing Christians. And he turns away from all that rabble, multitudinous as they are, to look to the One who is all-sufficient, solitary, and enough. The only God' is the refuge from the crowds of evils that dog our steps, and from the temptations and foes that assail us at every point.

This is the blessed peculiarity of the Christian faith, that it simplifies our outlook for good, that it brings everything to the one point of possessing the one Person, beyond whom there is never any need that the heart should wander seeking after love, that the mind should depart in its search for truth, or that the will should stray in its quest after authoritative commands. There is no need to seek a multitude of goodly pearls; the gift of Christianity to men's torn and distracted hearts and lives is that all which makes them rich, and all which makes them blessed, is sphered and included in the one transcendent pearl of price, the only God.'

I have been in Turkish mosques, the roofs of which are held up by a bewildering forest of slender pillars. I have been in cathedral chapter-houses, where one strong stone shaft in the centre carries all the beauty of the branching roof; and I know which is the highest work and the fairest. Why should we seek in the manifold for what we can never find, when we can find it all in the One? The mind seeks for unity in truth; the heart seeks for oneness in love; no man is at rest until he has all his heart's treasures in one person; and no man who foolishly puts all his treasures in one creature-person but is bringing down upon his own head sorrow.

Do you remember that pathetic inscription in one of our country churches, over a little child, whose fair image is left us by the pencil of Reynolds: Her parents put all their wealth in one vessel, and the shipwreck was total'? It is madness to trust to but one refuge, unless that refuge is the only God. If we, like the disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration, are wise, we shall lift up our eyes and see no man any more, save Jesus only.' He can be our solitary Stay, Refuge, Wealth, and Companion, because He is sufficient, and He abides for ever.

But there is another peculiarity that I would point out in these words, and that is the unusual attribution to God, the Father, of the name Saviour'--the only God our Saviour.' The same various reading which strikes out wise' inserts here, as you will see in the Revised Version, through Jesus Christ our Lord.' But although the phraseology is almost unique, the meaning is in full harmony with the scope of New Testament teaching. It is a fault of evangelical and orthodox people that they have too often spoken and thought as if Jesus Christ's work modified and changed the Father's will, and as if God loved men because Christ died for them. The fact is precisely the converse. Christ died because God loved men; and the fontal source of the salvation, of which the work of Jesus Christ is the channel, bringing it to men, is the eternal, unmotived, infinite love of God the Father. Christ is the well-beloved Son,' because He is the executor of the Divine purpose, and all which He has done is done in obedience to the Father's will. If I might use a metaphor, the love of God is, as it were, a deep secluded lake amongst the mountains, and the work of Christ is the stream that comes from it, and brings its waters to be life to the world. Let us never forget that, however we love to turn our gratitude and our praise to Christ the Saviour, my text goes yet deeper into the councils of Eternity when it ascribes the praise to the only God our Saviour through Jesus Christ our Lord.'

II. And Now Notice The Possibility Of Firm Standing In The Slippery Present.

To Him that is able to keep us from falling.' Now the word that is rendered from falling' is even more emphatic, and carries a larger promise. For it literally means' without stumbling,' and stumbling is that which precedes falling. We are not only kept from falling, we are kept even from stumbling over the stumbling-stones that are in the way. The metaphor, perhaps, was suggested by the words of Isaiah, who, in one of his lovely images, describes God as leading Israel through the depths as a horse in the desert, that they stumble not.' Do you not see the picture? The nervous, susceptible animal, slipping and sliding over the smooth rock, in a sweat of terror, and the owner laying a kindly hand and a firm one on the bridle-rein, and speaking soothing words of encouragement, and leading it safely, that it stumble not. So God is able to lay hold of us when we are in perilous places, and when we cry, My foot slippeth,' His mercy will hold us up.

Is that rhetoric? Is that merely pulpit talk? Brethren, unless we lay firm hold of this faith, that God can and does touch and influence hearts that wait upon Him, so as by His Spirit and by His Word, which is the sword of the Spirit, to strengthen their feeble good, and to weaken their strong evil, to raise what is low, to illumine what is dark, and to support what is weak, we have not come to understand the whole wealth of possible good and blessedness which lies in the Gospel. This generation has forgotten far too much the place which the work of God's Holy Spirit on men's spirits fills in the whole proportioned scheme of New Testament revelation. It is because we believe that so little, in comparison with the clearness and strength of our faith in the work of Jesus Christ, the atoning sacrifice, that so many of us find it so foreign to our experience that any effluences from God come into our hearts, and that our spirits are conscious of being quickened and lifted by His Spirit! Ah! we might feel, far more than any of us do, His hand on the bridlerein We might feel, far more than any of us do, His strong upholding, keeping our feet from slipping as well as falling.' And if we believed and expected a Divine Spirit to enter into our spirits and to touch our hearts, the expectation would not be in vain.

I beseech you, believe that a solid experience and meaning lies in that word able to keep us from stumbling.' If we have that Divine Spirit moving in our spirits, moulding our desires, lifting our thoughts, confirming our wills, then the things that were stumbling-stones--that is to say, that appealed to our worst selves, and tempted us to evil--will cease to be so. The higher desires will kill the lower ones, as the sunshine is popularly supposed to put out household fires. If we have God's upholding help, the stumbling-stone will no more be a stumbling-stone, but a stepping-stone to something higher and better; or like one of those erections that we see outside old-fashioned houses of entertainment, where three or four steps are piled together, in order to enable a man the more easily to mount his horse and go on his way. For every temptation overcome brings strength to the overcomer.

Only let us remember Him that is able to keep.' Able! What is wanted that the ability may be brought into exercise; that the possibility of which I have spoken, of firm standing amongst those slippery places, shall become a reality? What is wanted? It is of no use to have a stay unless you lean on it. You may have an engine of ever so many horse-power in the engine-house, but unless the power is transmitted by shafts and belting, and brought to the machinery, not a spindle will revolve. He is able to keep us from stumbling, and if you trust Him, the ability will become actuality, and you will be kept from falling. If you do not trust Him, all the ability will lie in the engine-house, and the looms and the spindles will stand idle. So the reason why--and the only reason why--with such an abundant, and over-abundant, provision for never falling, Christian men do stumble and fall, is their own lack of faith.

Now remember that this text of mine follows on the heels of that former text which bade us build ourselves,' and keep ourselves in the love of God.' So you get the peculiarity of Christian ethics, and the blessedness of Christian effort, that it is not effort only, but effort rising from, and accompanied with, confidence in God's keeping hand. There is all the difference between toiling without trust and toiling because we do trust. And whilst, on the one hand, we have to exhort to earnest faith in the upholding hand of God, we have to say on the other, Let that faith lead you to obey the apostolic command, "Stand fast in the evil day . . taking unto you the whole armour of God."

III. Further, We Have Here The Possible Final Perfecting In The Future.

To Him that is able … to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy.' Now that word rendered faultless' has a very beautiful meaning. It is originally applied to the requirement that the sacrificial offerings shall be without blemish. It is then applied more than once to our Lord Himself, as expressive of His perfect, immaculate sinlessness. And it is here applied to the future condition of those who have been kept without stumbling; suggesting at once that they are, as it were, presented before God at last, stainless as the sacrificial lamb; and that they are conformed to the image of the Lamb of God without blemish and without spot.' Moral perfectness, absolute and complete; a standing before the presence of His glory,' the realisation and the vision of that illustrious light, too dazzling for eyes veiled by flesh to look upon, but of which hereafter the purified souls will be capable, in accordance with that great promise, Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God'; with exceeding joy,' which refers not to the joy of Him that presents, though that is great, but to the joy of them who are presented. So these three things are the possibilities held out before such poor creatures as we. And miraculous as it is, that all stains should melt away from our characters--though I suppose not the remembrance of them from our consciousness--and be shaken off as completely as the foul water of some stagnant pond drops from the white swan-plumage, and leaves no stain; that perfecting is the natural issue of the present being kept from stumbling.

You have seen sometimes in a picture-dealer's shop window a canvas on which a face is painted, one half of which has been cleaned, and the other half is still covered with some varnish or filth. That is like the Christian character here. But the restoration and the cleansing are going to be finished up yonder; and the great Artist's ideal will be realised, and each redeemed soul will be perfected in holiness.

But as I said about the former point, so I say about this, He is able to do it. What is wanted to make the ability an actuality? Brethren, if we are to stand perfect, at last, and be without fault before the Throne of God, we must begin by letting Him keep us from stumbling here. Then, and only then, may we expect that issue.

Now I was going to have said a word, in the last place, about the Divine praise which comes from all these dealings, but your time will not allow me to dwell upon it. Only let me remind you that all these things, which in my text are ascribed to God, glory and majesty, dominion and power,' are ascribed to Him because He is our Saviour, and able to keep us from stumbling, and to present us faultless before His glory.' That is to say, the Divine manifestation of Himself in the work of redemption is the highest of His self-revealing works. Men are not presumptuous when they feel that they are greater than sun and stars; and that there is more in the narrow room of a human heart than in all the immeasurable spaces of the universe, if these are empty of beings who can love and inquire and adore. And we are not wrong when we say that the only evil in the universe is sin. Therefore, we are right when we say that high above all other works of which we have experience is that miracle of love and Divine power which can not only keep such feeble creatures as we are from stumbling, but can present us stainless and faultless before the Throne of God.

So our highest praise, and our deepest thankfulness, ought to arise, and will arise--if the possibility has become, in any measure, an actuality, in ourselves--to Him, because our experience will be that of the Psalmist who sang, When I said, my foot slippeth, Thy mercy, O Lord, held me up.' Let us take the comfort of believing, He shall not fall, for the Lord is able to make him stand ; and let us remember the expansion which another Apostle gives us when, with precision, he discriminates and says, Kept by the power of God through faith, unto salvation.'

THE END

Revelation

MHCC: Jdg 1:1-8

The Israelites were convinced that the war against the Canaanites was to be continued; but they were in doubt as to the manner in which it was to be carried on after the death of Joshua. In these respects they inquired of the Lord. God appoints service according to the strength he has given. From those who are most able, most work is expected. Judah was first in dignity, and must be first in duty. Judah's service will not avail unless God give success; but God will not give the success, unless Judah applies to the service. Judah was the most considerable of all the tribes, and Simeon the least; yet Judah begs Simeon's friendship, and prays for aid from him. It becomes Israelites to help one another against Canaanites; and all Christians, even those of different tribes, should strengthen one another. Those who thus help one another in love, have reason to hope that God will graciously help both. Adoni-bezek was taken prisoner. This prince had been a severe tyrant. The Israelites, doubtless under the Divine direction, made him suffer what he had done to others; and his own conscience confessed that he was justly treated as he had treated others. Thus the righteous God sometimes, in his providence, makes the punishment answer the sin.

MHCC: Jdg 1:9-20

The Canaanites had iron chariots; but Israel had God on their side, whose chariots are thousands of angels, Psa 68:17. Yet they suffered their fears to prevail against their faith. About Caleb we read in Jos 15:16-19. The Kenites had settled in the land. Israel let them fix where they pleased, being a quiet, contented people. They that molested none, were molested by none. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

MHCC: Jdg 1:21-36

The people of Israel were very careless of their duty and interest. Owing to slothfulness and cowardice, they would not be at the pains to complete their conquests. It was also owing to their covetousness: they were willing to let the Canaanites live among them, that they might make advantage of them. They had not the dread and detestation of idolatry they ought to have had. The same unbelief that kept their fathers forty years out of Canaan, kept them now out of the full possession of it. Distrust of the power and promise of God deprived them of advantages, and brought them into troubles. Thus many a believer who begins well is hindered. His graces languish, his lusts revive, Satan plies him with suitable temptations, the world recovers its hold; he brings guilt into his conscience, anguish into his heart, discredit on his character, and reproach on the gospel. Though he may have sharp rebukes, and be so recovered that he does not perish, yet he will have deeply to lament his folly through his remaining days; and upon his dying bed to mourn over the opportunities of glorifying God and serving the church he has lost. We can have no fellowship with the enemies of God within us or around us, but to our hurt; therefore our only wisdom is to maintain unceasing war against them.

Matthew Henry: Jdg 1:1-8

Here, I. The children of Israel consult the oracle of God for direction which of all the tribes should first attempt to clear their country of the Canaanites, and to animate and encourage the rest. It was after the death of Joshua. While he lived he directed them, and all the tribes were obedient to him, but when he died he left no successor in the same authority that he had; but the people must consult the breast-plate of judgment, and thence receive the word of command; for God himself, as he was their King, so he was the Lord of their hosts. The question they ask is, Who shall go up first? Jdg 1:1. By this time, we may suppose, they were so multiplied that the places they were in possession of began to be too strait for them, and they must thrust out the enemy to make room; now they enquire who should first take up arms. Whether each tribe was ambitious of being first, and so strove for the honour of it, or whether each was afraid of being first, and so strove to decline it, does not appear; but by common consent the matter was referred to God himself, who is the fittest both to dispose of honours and to cut out work.

II. God appointed that Judah should go up first, and promised him success (Jdg 1:2): " I have delivered the land into his hand, to be possessed, and therefore will deliver the enemy into his hand, that keeps him out of possession, to be destroyed."And why must Judah be first in this undertaking? 1. Judah was the most numerous and powerful tribe, and therefore let Judah venture first. Note, God appoints service according to the strength he has given. Those that are most able, from them most work is expected. 2. Judah was first in dignity, and therefore must be first in duty. He it is whom his brethren must praise, and therefore he it is who must lead in perilous services. Let the burden of honour and the burden of work go together. 3. Judah was first served; the lot came up for Judah first, and therefore Judah must first fight. 4. Judah was the tribe out of which our Lord was to spring: so that in Judah, Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, went before them. Christ engaged the powers of darkness first, and foiled them, which animates us for our conflicts; and it is in him that we are more than conquerors. Observe, The service and the success are put together: "Judah shall go up; let him do his part, and then he shall find that I have delivered the land into his hand. "His service will not avail unless God give the success; but God will not give the success unless he vigorously apply himself to the service.

III. Judah hereupon prepares to go up, but courts his brother and neighbour the tribe of Simeon (the lot of which tribe fell within that of Judah and was assigned out of it) to join forces with him, Jdg 1:3. Observe here, 1. That the strongest should not despise but desire the assistance even of those that are weaker. Judah was the most considerable of all the tribes, and Simeon the least considerable, and yet Judah begs Simeon's friendship, and prays an aid from him; the head cannot say to the foot, I have no need of thee, for we are members one of another. 2. Those that crave assistance must be ready to give assistance: Come with me into my lot, and then I will go with thee into thine. It becomes Israelites to help one another against Canaanites; and all Christians, even those of different tribes, should strengthen one another's hands against the common interests of Satan's kingdom. Those who thus help one another in love have reason to hope that God will graciously help them both.

IV. The confederate forces of Judah and Simeon take the field: Judah went up (Jdg 1:4), and Simeon with him, Jdg 1:3. Caleb, it is probable, was commander-in-chief of this expedition; for who so fit as he who had both an old man's head and a young man's hand, the experience of age and the vigour of youth? Jos 14:10, Jos 14:11. It should seem too, by what follows (Jdg 1:10, Jdg 1:11), that he was not yet in possession of his own allotment. It was happy for them that they had such a general as, according to his name, was all heart. Some think that the Canaanites had got together into a body, a formidable body, when Israel consulted who should go and fight against them, and that they then began to stir when they heard of the death of Joshua, whose name had been so dreadful to them; but, if so, it proved they did but meddle to their own hurt.

V. God gave them great success. Whether they invaded the enemy, or the enemy first gave them the alarm, the Lord delivered them into their hand, Jdg 1:4. Though the army of Judah was strong and bold, yet the victory is attributed to God: he delivered the Canaanites into their hand; having given them authority, he here gives them ability to destroy them - put it in their power, and so tried their obedience to his command, which was utterly to cut them off. Bishop Patrick observes upon this that we meet not with such religious expressions in the heathen writers, concerning the success of their arms, as we have here and elsewhere in this sacred history. I wish such pious acknowledgments of the divine providence had not grown into disuse at this time with many that are called Christians. Now, 1. We are told how the army of the Canaanites was routed in the field, in or near Bezek, the place where they drew up, which afterwards Saul made the place of a general rendezvous (1Sa 11:8); they slew 10,000 men, which blow, if followed, could not but be a very great weakening to those that were already brought so very low. 2. How their king was taken and mortified. His name was Adoni-bezek, which signifies, lord of Bezek. There have been those that called their lands by their own names (Psa 49:11), but here was one (and there has been many another) that called himself by his land's name. He was taken prisoner after the battle, and we are here told how they used him; they cut off his thumbs, to disfit him for fighting, and his great toes, that he might not be able to run away, Jdg 1:6. It had been barbarous thus to triumph over a man in misery, and that lay at their mercy, but that he was a devoted Canaanite, and one that had in like manner abused others, which probably they had heard of. Josephus says, "They cut off his hands and his feet,"probably supposing those more likely to be mortal wounds than only the cutting off of his thumbs and his great toes. But this indignity which they did him extorted from him an acknowledgment of the righteousness of God, Jdg 1:7. Here observe, (1.) What a great man this Adoni-bezek had been, how great in the field, where armies fled before him, how great at home, where kings were set with the dogs of his flock; and yet now himself a prisoner, and reduced to the extremity of meanness and disgrace. See how changeable this world is, and how slippery its high places are. Let not the highest be proud, nor the strongest secure, for they know not how low they may be brought before they die. (2.) What desolations he had made among his neighbours: he had wholly subdued seventy kings, to such a degree as to have them his prisoners; he that was the chief person in a city was then called a king, and the greatness of their title did but aggravate their disgrace, and fired the pride of him that insulted over them. We cannot suppose that Adoni-bezek had seventy of these petty princes at once his slaves; but first and last, in the course of his reign, he had thus deposed and abused so many, who perhaps were many of them kings of the same cities that successively opposed him, and whom he thus treated to please his own imperious barbarous fancy, and for a terror to others. It seems the Canaanites had been wasted by civil wars, and those bloody ones, among themselves, which would very much facilitate the conquest of them by Israel. "Judah,"says Dr. Lightfoot, "in conquering Adoni-bezek, did, in effect, conquer seventy kings."(3.) How justly he was teated as he had treated others. Thus the righteous God sometimes, in his providence, makes the punishment to answer the sin, and observes an equality in his judgments; the spoiler shall be spoiled, and the treacherous dealer dealt treacherously with, Isa 33:1. And those that showed no mercy shall have no mercy shown them, Jam 2:13. See Rev 13:10; Rev 18:6. (4.) How honestly he owned the righteousness of God herein: As I have done, so God has requited me. See the power of conscience, when God by his judgments awakens it, how it brings sin to remembrance, and subscribes to the justice of God. He that in his pride had set God at defiance now yields to him, and reflects with as much regret upon the kings under his table as ever he had looked upon them with pleasure when he had them there. He seems to own that he was better dealt with than he had dealt with his prisoners; for though the Israelites maimed him (according to the law of retaliation, an eye for an eye, so a thumb for a thumb), yet they did not put him under the table to be fed with the crumbs there, because, though the other might well be looked upon as an act of justice, this would have savoured more of pride and haughtiness than did become an Israelite.

VI. Particular notice is taken of the conquest of Jerusalem, Jdg 1:8. Our translators judge it spoken of here as done formerly in Joshua's time, and only repeated on occasion of Adoni-bezek's dying there, and therefore read it, "they had fought against Jerusalem,"and put this verse in a parenthesis; but the original speaks of it as a thing now done, and this seems most probable because it is said to be done by the children of Judah in particular, not by all Israel in general, whom Joshua commanded. Joshua indeed conquered and slew Adoni-zedec, king of Jerusalem (Jos. 10), but we read not there of his taking the city; probably, while he was pursing his conquests elsewhere, this Adoni-bezek, a neighbouring prince, got possession of it, whom Israel having conquered in the field, the city fell into their hands, and they slew the inhabitants, except those who retreated into the castle and held out there till David's time, and they set the city on fire, in token of their detestation of the idolatry wherewith it had been deeply infected, yet probably not so utterly as to consume it, but to leave convenient habitations for as many as they had to put into the possession of it.

Matthew Henry: Jdg 1:9-20

We have here a further account of that glorious and successful campaign which Judah and Simeon made. 1. The lot of Judah was pretty well cleared of the Canaanites, yet not thoroughly. Those that dwelt in the mountain (the mountains that were round about Jerusalem) were driven out (Jdg 1:9, Jdg 1:19), but those in the valley kept their ground against them, having chariots of iron, such as we read of, Jos 17:16. Here the men of Judah failed, and thereby spoiled the influence which otherwise their example hitherto might have had on the rest of the tribes, who followed them in this instance of their cowardice, rather than in all the other instances of their courage. They had iron chariots, and therefore it was thought not safe to attack them: but had not Israel God on their side, whose chariots are thousands of angels (Psa 68:17), before whom these iron chariots would be but as stubble to the fire? Had not God expressly promised by the oracle (Jdg 1:2) to give them success against the Canaanites in this very expedition, without excepting those that had iron chariots? Yet they suffered their fears to prevail against their faith, they could not trust God under any disadvantages, and therefore durst not face the iron chariots, but meanly withdrew their forces, when with one bold stroke they might have completed their victories; and it proved of pernicious consequence. They did run well, what hindered them? Gal 5:7. 2. Caleb was put in possession of Hebron, which, though given him by Joshua ten or twelve years before (as Dr. Lightfoot computes), yet being employed in public service, for the settling of the tribes, which he preferred before his own private interests, it seems he did not till now make himself master of; so well content was that good man to serve others, while he left himself to be served last; few are like-minded, for all seek their own, Phi 2:20, Phi 2:21. Yet now the men of Judah all came in to his assistance for the reducing of Hebron (Jdg 1:10), slew the sons of Anak, and put him in possession of it, Jdg 1:20. They gave Hebron unto Caleb. And now Caleb, that he might return the kindness of his countrymen, is impatient to see Debir reduced and put into the hands of the men of Judah, to expedite which he proffers his daughter to the person that will undertake to command in the siege of that important place, Jdg 1:11, Jdg 1:12. Othniel bravely undertakes it, and wins the town and the lady (Jdg 1:13), and by his wife's interest and management with her father gains a very good inheritance for himself and his family, Jdg 1:14, Jdg 1:15. We had this passage before, Jos 15:16-19, where it was largely explained and improved. 3. Simeon got ground of the Canaanites in his border, Jdg 1:17, Jdg 1:18. In the eastern part of Simeon's lot, they destroyed the Canaanites in Zephath, and called it Hormah - destruction, adding this to some other devoted cities not far off, which they had some time ago, with good reason, called by that name, Num 21:2, Num 21:3. And this perhaps was the complete performance of the vow they them made that they would utterly destroy these cities of the Canaanites in the south. In the western part they took Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, cities of the Philistines; they gained present possession of the cities, but, not destroying the inhabitants, the Philistines in process of time recovered the cities, and proved inveterate enemies to the Israel of God, and no better could come of doing their work by the halves. 4. The Kenites gained a settlement in the tribe of Judah, choosing it there rather than in any other tribe, because it was the strongest, and there they hoped to be safe and quiet, Jdg 1:16. These were the posterity of Jethro, who either went with Israel when Moses invited them (Num 10:29) or met them about the same place when they came up from their wanderings in the wilderness thirty-eight years after, and went with them then to Canaan, Moses having promised them that they should fare as Israel fared, Num 10:32. They had at first seated themselves in the city of palm-trees, that is, Jericho, a city which never was to be rebuilt, and therefore the fitter for those who dwelt in tents, and did not mind building. But afterwards they removed into the wilderness of Judah, either out of their affection to that place, because solitary and retired, or out of their affection to that tribe, which perhaps had been in a particular manner kind to them. Yet we find the tent of Jael, who was of that family, far north, in the lot of Naphtali, when Sisera took shelter there, Jdg 4:17. This respect Israel showed them, to let them fix where they pleased, being a quiet people, who, wherever they were, were content with a little. Those that molested none were molested by none. Blessed are the meek, for thus they shall inherit the earth.

Matthew Henry: Jdg 1:21-36

We are here told upon what terms the rest of the tribes stood with the Canaanites that remained.

I. Benjamin neglected to drive the Jebusites out of that part of the city of Jerusalem which fell to their lot, Jdg 1:21. Judah had set them a good example, and gained them great advantages by what they did (Jdg 1:9), but they did not follow the blow for want of resolution.

II. The house of Joseph,

1. Bestirred themselves a little to get possession of Beth-el, Jdg 1:22. That city is mentioned in the tribe of Benjamin, Jos 18:22. Yet it is spoken of there (Jdg 1:13) as a city in the borders of that tribe, and, it should seem, the line went through it, so that one half of it only belonged to Benjamin, the other half to Ephraim; and perhaps the activity of the Ephraimites at this time, to recover it from the Canaanites, secured it entirely to them henceforward, or at least the greatest part of it, for afterwards we find it so much under the power of the ten tribes (and Benjamin was none of them) that Jeroboam set up one of his calves in it. In this account of the expedition of the Ephraimites against Beth-el observe,

(1.) Their interest in the divine favour: The Lord was with them, and would have been with the other tribes if they would have exerted their strength. The Chaldee reads it here, as in many other places, The Word of the Lord was their helper, namely, Christ himself, the captain of the Lord's host, now that they acted separately, as well as when they were all in one body.

(2.) The prudent measures they took to gain the city. They sent spies to observe what part of the city was weakest, or which way they might make their attack with most advantage, Jdg 1:23. These spies got very good information from a man they providentially met with, who showed them a private way into the town, which was left unguarded because, being not generally known, no danger was suspected on that side. And here, [1.] He is not to be blamed for giving them this intelligence if he did it from a conviction that the Lord was with them, and that by his donation the land was theirs of right, any more than Rahab was for entertaining those whom she knew to be enemies of her country, but friends of God. Nor, [2.] Are those to be blamed who showed him mercy, gave him and his family not only their lives, but liberty to go wherever they pleased: for one good turn requires another. But, it seems, he would not join himself to the people of Israel, he feared them rather than loved them, and therefore he removed after a colony of the Hittites, which, it should seem, had gone into Arabia and settled there upon Joshua's invasion of the country; with them this man chose to dwell, and among them he built a city, a small one, we may suppose, such as planters commonly build, and in the name of it preserved the ancient name of his native city, Luz, an almond-tree, preferring this before its new name, which carried religion in it, Bethel - the house of God.

(3.) Their success. The spies brought or sent notice of the intelligence they had gained to the army, which improved their advantages, surprised the city, and put them all to the sword, v. 25. But,

2. Besides this achievement, it seems, the children of Joseph did nothing remarkable (1.) Manasseh failed to drive out the Canaanites from several very considerable cities in their lot, and did not make any attempt upon them, Jdg 1:27. But the Canaanites, being in possession, were resolved not to quit it; they would dwell in that land, and Manasseh had not resolution enough to offer to dispossess them; as if there was no meddling with them unless they were willing to resign, which it was not to be expected they ever would be. Only as Israel got strength they got ground, and served themselves, both by their contributions and by their personal services, Jdg 1:28, Jdg 1:35. (2.) Ephraim likewise, though a powerful tribe, neglected Gezer a considerable city, and suffered the Canaanites to dwell among them (Jdg 1:29), which, some think, intimates their allowing them a quiet settlement, and indulging them with the privileges of an unconquered people, not so much as making them tributaries.

III. Zebulun, perhaps inclining to the sea-trade, for it was foretold that it should be a haven for ships, neglected to reduce Kitron and Nahalol (Jdg 1:30), and only made the inhabitants of those places tributaries to them.

IV. Asher quitted itself worse than any of the tribes (Jdg 1:31, Jdg 1:32), not only in leaving more towns than any of them in the hands of the Canaanites, but in submitting to the Canaanites instead of making them tributaries; for so the manner of expression intimates, that the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, as if the Canaanites were the more numerous and the more powerful, would still be lords of the country, and the Israelites must be only upon sufferance among them.

V. Naphtali also permitted the Canaanites to live among them (Jdg 1:33), only by degrees they got them so far under as to exact contributions from them.

VI. Dan was so far from extending his conquests where his lot lay that, wanting spirit to make head against the Amorites, he was forced by them to retire into the mountains and inhabit the cities there, but durst not venture into the valley, where, it is probable, the chariots of iron were, Jdg 1:34. Nay, and some of the cities in the mountains were kept against them, Jdg 1:35. Thus were they straitened in their possessions, and forced to seek for more room at Laish, a great way off, Jdg 18:1, etc. In Jacob's blessing Judah is compared to a lion, Dan to a serpent; now observe how Judah with his lion-like courage prospered and prevailed, but Dan with all his serpenting subtlety could get no ground; craft and artful management do not always effect the wonders they pretend to. What Dan came short of doing, it seems, his neighbours the Ephraimites in part did for him; they put the Amorites under tribute, Jdg 1:35.

Upon the whole matter it appears that the people of Israel were generally very careless both of their duty and interest in this thing; they did not what they might have done to expel the Canaanites and make room for themselves. And, 1. It was owing to their slothfulness and cowardice. They would not be at the pains to complete their conquests; like the sluggard, that dreamed of a lion in the way, a lion in the streets, they fancied insuperable difficulties, and frightened themselves with winds and clouds from sowing and reaping. 2. It was owing to their covetousness; the Canaanites' labour and money would do them more good (they thought) than their blood, and therefore they were willing to let them live among them, that they might make a hand of them. 3. They had not that dread and detestation of idolatry which they ought to have had; they thought it a pity to put these Canaanites to the sword, though the measure of their iniquity was full, thought it would be no harm to let them live among them, and that they should be in no danger from them. 4. The same thing that kept their fathers forty years out of Canaan kept them now out of the full possession of it, and that was unbelief. Distrust of the power and promise of God lost them their advantages, and ran them into a thousand mischiefs.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:3

Judah invited Simeon his brother, i.e., their brother tribe, to take part in the contest. The epithet is applied to Simeon, not because Simeon and Judah, the sons of Jacob, were the children of the same mother, Leah (Gen 29:33, Gen 29:35), but because Simeon's inheritance was within the territory of Judah (Jos 19:1.), so that Simeon was more closely connected with Judah than any of the other tribes. " Come up with me into my lot (into the inheritance that has fallen to me by lot), that we may fight against the Canaanites, and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him, "i.e., joined with Judah in making war upon the Canaanites. This request shows that Judah's principal intention was to make war upon and exterminate the Canaanites who remained in his own and Simeon's inheritance. The different expressions employed, come up and go , are to be explained from the simple fact that the whole of Simeon's territory was in the shephelah and Negeb , whereas Judah had received the heart of his possessions upon the mountains.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:4-7

"And Judah went up," sc., against the Canaanites, to make war upon them.

The completion of the sentence is supplied by the context, more especially by Jdg 1:2. So far as the sense is concerned, Rosenmüller has given the correct explanation of ויּעל , "Judah entered upon the expedition along with Simeon."" And they smote the Canaanites and the Perizzites in Bezek, 10,000 men. "The result of the war is summed up briefly in these words; and then in Jdg 1:5-7 the capture and punishment of the hostile king Adoni-bezek is specially mentioned as being the most important event in the war. The foe is described as consisting of Canaanites and Perizzites, two tribes which have been already named in Gen 13:7 and Gen 34:30 as representing the entire population of Canaan, " the Canaanites "comprising principally those in the lowlands by the Jordan and the Mediterranean (vid., Num 13:29; Jos 11:3), and " the Perizzites "the tribes who dwelt in the mountains (Jos 17:15). On the Perizzites , see Gen 13:7. The place mentioned, Bezek , is only mentioned once more, namely in 1Sa 11:8, where it is described as being situated between Gibeah of Saul (see at Jos 18:28) and Jabesh in Gilead. According to the Onom . ( s. v. Bezek ), there were at that time two places very near together both named Bezek , seventeen Roman miles from Neapolis on the road to Scythopolis , i.e., about seven hours to the north of Nabulus on the road to Beisan. This description is perfectly reconcilable with 1Sa 11:8. On the other hand, Clericus ( ad h. l .), Rosenmüller , and v. Raumer suppose the Bezek mentioned here to have been situated in the territory of Judah; though this cannot be proved, since it is merely based upon an inference drawn from Jdg 1:3, viz., that Judah and Simeon simply attacked the Canaanites in their own allotted territories-an assumption which is very uncertain. There is no necessity, however, to adopt the opposite and erroneous opinion of Bertheau , that the tribes of Judah and Simeon commenced their expedition to the south from the gathering-place of the united tribes at Shechem, and fought the battle with the Canaanitish forces in that region upon this expedition; since Shechem is not described in Josha as the gathering-place of the united tribes, i.e., of the whole of the military force of Israel, and the battle fought with Adoni-bezek did not take place at the time when the tribes prepared to leave Shiloh and march to their own possessions after the casting of the lots was over. The simplest explanation is, that when the tribes of Judah and Simeon prepared to make war upon the Canaanites in the possessions allotted to them, they were threatened or attacked by the forces of the Canaanites collected together by Adoni-bezek, so that they had first of all to turn their arms against this king before they could attack the Canaanites in their own tribe-land. As the precise circumstances connected with the occasion and course of this war have not been recorded, there is nothing to hinder the supposition that Adoni-bezek may have marched from the north against the possession of Benjamin and Judah, possibly with the intention of joining the Canaanites in Jebus, and the Anakim in Hebron and upon the mountains in the south, and then making a combined attack upon the Israelites. This might induce or even compel Judah and Simeon to attack this enemy first of all, and even to pursue him till they overtook him at his capital Bezek, and smote him with all his army. Adoni-bezek , i.e., lord of Bezek, is the official title of this king, whose proper name is unknown.

In the principal engagement, in which 10,000 Canaanites fell, Adoni-bezek escaped; but he was overtaken in his flight (Jdg 1:6, Jdg 1:7), and so mutilated, by the cutting off of his thumbs and great toes, that he could neither carry arms nor flee. With this cruel treatment, which the Athenians are said to have practised upon the capture Aegynetes ( Aelian, var. hist. ii. 9), the Israelites simply executed the just judgment of retribution, as Adoni-bezek was compelled to acknowledge, for the cruelties which he had inflicted upon captives taken by himself. " Seventy kings, "he says in Jdg 1:7, "with the thumbs of their hands and feet cut off, were gathering under my table. As I have done, so God hath requited me." מקצּצים ... בּהנות , lit. "cut in the thumbs of their hands and feet"(see Ewald , Lehrb. §284 c .). The object to מלקּטים , "gathering up"(viz., crumbs), is easily supplied from the idea of the verb itself. Gathering up crumbs under the table, like the dogs in Mat 15:27, is a figurative representation of the most shameful treatment and humiliation. "Seventy"is a round number, and is certainly an exaggerated hyperbole here. For even if every town of importance in Canaan had its own king, the fact that, when Joshua conquered the land, he only smote thirty-one kings, is sufficient evidence that there can hardly have been seventy kings to be found in all Canaan. It appears strange, too, that the king of Bezek is not mentioned in connection with the conquest of Canaan under Joshua. Bezek was probably situated more on the side towards the valley of the Jordan, where the Israelites under Joshua did not go. Possibly, too, the culminating point of Adoni-bezek's power, when he conquered so many kings, was before the arrival of the Israelites in Canaan, and it may at that time have begun to decline; so that he did not venture to undertake anything against the combined forces of Israel under Joshua, and it was not till the Israelitish tribes separated to go to their own possessions, that he once more tried the fortunes of war and was defeated. The children of Judah took him with them to Jerusalem, where he died.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:8-15

After his defeat, Judah and Simeon went against Jerusalem, and conquered this city and smote it, i.e., its inhabitants, with the edge of the sword, or without quarter (see Gen 34:26), and set the city on fire. בּאשׁ שׁלּח , to set on fire, to give up to the flames, only occurs again in Jdg 20:48; 2Ki 8:12, and Psa 74:7. Joshua had already slain the king of Jerusalem and his four allies after the battle at Gibeon (Jos 10:3, Jos 10:18-26), but had not conquered Jerusalem, his capital. This was not done till after Joshua's death, when it was taken by the tribes of Judah and Simeon. But even after this capture, and notwithstanding the fact that it had been set on fire, it did not come into the sole and permanent possession of the Israelites. After the conquerors had advanced still farther, to make war upon the Canaanites in the mountains, in the Negeb , and in the shephelah (vv. 9ff.), the Jebusites took it again and rebuilt it, so that in the following age it was regarded by the Israelites as a foreign city (Jdg 19:11-12). The Benjaminites, to whom Jerusalem had fallen by lot, were no more able to drive out the Jebusites than the Judaeans had been. Consequently they continued to live by the side of the Benjaminites (Jdg 1:21) and the Judaeans (Jos 15:63), who settled, as time rolled on, in this the border city of their possessions; and in the upper town especially, upon the top of Mount Zion, they established themselves so firmly, that they could not be dislodged until David succeeded in wresting this fortress from them, and make the city of Zion the capital of his kingdom (2Sa 5:6.).

(Note: In this way we may reconcile in a very simple manner the different accounts concerning Jerusalem in Jos 15:63; Jdg 1:8, Jdg 1:21; Jdg 19:11., 1Sa 17:54, and 2 Sam 5-6, without there being the slightest necessity to restrict the conquest mentioned in this verse to the city that was built round Mount Zion, as Josephus does, to the exclusion of the citadel upon Zion itself; or to follow Bertheau , and refer the account of the Jebusites dwelling by the children of Judah in Jerusalem (Jos 15:63) to a time subsequent to the conquest of the citadel of Zion by David-an interpretation which is neither favoured by the circumstance that the Jebusite Araunah still held some property there in the time of David (2Sa 24:21.), nor by the passage in 1Ki 9:20., according to which the descendants of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites who still remained in the land were made into tributary bondmen by Solomon, and set to work upon the buildings that he had in hand.)

Jdg 1:9-15

After the conquest of Jerusalem, the children of Judah (together with the Simeonites, Jdg 1:3) went down to their own possessions, to make war upon the Canaanites in the mountains, the Negeb , and the shephelah (see at Jos 15:48; Jos 21:33), and to exterminate them. They first of all conquered Hebron and Debir upon the mountains (Jdg 1:10-15), as has already been related in Jos 15:14-19 (see the commentary on this passage). The forms עלּית and תּחתּית (Jdg 1:15), instead of עלּיּות and תּחתּיּות (Jos 15:19), are in the singular, and are construed with the plural form of the feminine גּלּות , because this is used in the sense of the singular, "a spring"(see Ewald , §318, a .).

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:16

The notice respecting the Kenites, that they went up out of the palm-city with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah in the south of Arad, and dwelt there with the Judaeans, is introduced here into the account of the wars of the tribe of Judah, because this migration of the Kenites belonged to the time between the conquest of Debir (Jdg 1:12.) and Zephath (Jdg 1:17); and the notice itself was of importance, as forming the intermediate link between Num 10:29., and the later allusions to the Kenites in Jdg 4:11; Jdg 5:24; 1Sa 15:6; 1Sa 27:10; 1Sa 30:29. " The children of the Kenite, "i.e., the descendants of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses (compare Jdg 4:11, where the name is given, but קין occurs instead of קיני , with Num 10:29), were probably a branch of the Kenites mentioned in Gen 15:19 along with the other tribes of Canaan, which had separated from the other members of its own tribe before the time of Moses and removed to the land of Midian, where Moses met with a hospitable reception from their chief Reguel on his flight from Egypt. These Kenites had accompanied the Israelites to Canaan at the request of Moses (Num 10:29.); and when the Israelites advanced into Canaan itself, they had probably remained as nomads in the neighbourhood of the Jordan near to Jericho, without taking any part in the wars of Joshua. But when the tribe of Judah had exterminated the Canaanites out of Hebron, Debir, and the neighbourhood, after the death of Joshua, they went into the desert of Judah with the Judaeans as they moved farther towards the south; and going to the south-western edge of this desert, to the district on the south of Arad (Tell Arad, see at Num 21:1), they settled there on the border of the steppes of the Negeb (Num 33:40). " The palm-city "was a name given to the city of Jericho, according to Jdg 3:13; Deu 34:3; 2Ch 28:15. There is no ground whatever for thinking of some other town of this name in the desert of Arabia, near the palm-forest, φοινικών , of Diod. Sic . (iii. 42) and Strabo (p. 776), as Clericus and Bertheau suppose, even if it could be proved that there was any such town in the neighbourhood. ויּלך , " then he went (the branch of the Kenites just referred to) and dwelt with the people "(of the children of Judah), that is to say, with the people of Israel in the desert of Judah. The subject to ויּלך is קיני , the Kenite, as a tribe.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:17-21

Remaining Conquests of the Combined Tribes of Judah and Simeon . - Jdg 1:17.

Zephath was in the territory of Simeon. This is evident not only from the fact that Hormah (Zephath) had been allotted to the tribe of Simeon (compare Jos 19:4 with Jos 15:30), but also from the words, "Judah went with Simeon his brother,"which point back to Jdg 1:3, and express the thought that Judah went with Simeon into his territory to drive out the Canaanites who were still to be found there. Going southwards from Debir, Judah and Simeon smote the Canaanites at Zephath on the southern boundary of Canaan, and executed the ban upon this town, from which it received the name of Hormah , i.e., banning. The town has been preserved in the ruins of Se p âta, on the south of Khalasa or Elusa (see at Jos 12:14). In the passage mentioned, the king of Hormah or Zephath is named among the kings who were slain by Joshua. It does not follow from this, however, that Joshua must necessarily have conquered his capital Zephath; the king of Jerusalem was also smitten by Joshua and slain, without Jerusalem itself being taken at that time. But even if Zephath were taken by the Israelites, as soon as the Israelitish army had withdrawn, the Canaanites there might have taken possession of the town again; so that, like many other Canaanitish towns, it had to be conquered again after Joshua's death (see the commentary on Num 21:2-3). There is not much probability in this conjecture, however, for the simple reason that the ban pronounced by Moses upon the country of the king of Arad (Num 21:2) was carried out now for the first time by Judah and Simeon upon the town of Zephath, which formed a part of it. If Joshua had conquered it, he would certainly have executed the ban upon it. The name Hormah , which was already given to Zephath in Jos 15:30 and Jos 19:4, is no proof to the contrary, since it may be used proleptically there. In any case, the infliction of the ban upon this town can only be explained from the fact that Moses had pronounced the ban upon all the towns of the king of Arad.

Jdg 1:18-21

From the Negeb Judah turned into the shephelah , and took the three principal cities of the Philistines along the line of coast, viz., Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron, with their territory. The order in which the names of the captured cities occur is a proof that the conquest took place from the south. First of all Gaza, the southernmost of all the towns of the Philistines, the present Guzzeh ; then Askelon ( Ashkulân ), which is five hours to the north of Gaza; and lastly Ekron, the most northerly of the five towns of the Philistines, the present Akîr (see at Jos 13:3). The other two, Ashdod and Gath, do not appear to have been conquered at that time. And even those that were conquered, the Judaeans were unable to hold long. In the time of Samson they were all of them in the hands of the Philistines again (see Jdg 14:19; Jdg 16:1.; 1Sa 5:10, etc.). - In Jdg 1:19 we have a brief summary of the results of the contests for the possession of the land. " Jehovah was with Judah; "and with His help they took possession of the mountains. And they did nothing more; " for the inhabitants of the plain they were unable to exterminate, because they had iron chariots. " הורישׁ has two different meanings in the two clauses: first ( ויּרשׁ ), to seize upon a possession which has been vacated by the expulsion or destruction of its former inhabitants; and secondly ( להורישׁ , with the accusative, of the inhabitants), to drive or exterminate them out of their possessions-a meaning which is derived from the earlier signification of making it an emptied possession (see Exo 34:24; Num 32:21, etc.). " The mountain "here includes the south-land (the Negeb ), as the only distinction is between mountains and plain. " The valley "is the shephelah (Jdg 1:9). להורישׁ לא , he was not (able) to drive out. The construction may be explained from the fact that לא is to be taken independently here as in Amo 6:10, in the same sense in which אין before the infinitive is used in later writings (2Ch 5:11; Est 4:2; Est 8:8; Ecc 3:14 : see Ges . §132-3, anm. 1; Ewald , §237, e .). On the iron chariots, i.e., the chariots tipped with iron, see at Jos 17:16. - To this there is appended, in v. 20, the statement that " they gave Hebron unto Caleb, "etc., which already occurred in Jos 15:13-14, and was there explained; and also in Jdg 1:12 the remark, that the Benjaminites did not drive out the Jebusite who dwelt in Jerusalem, which is so far in place here, that it shows, on the one hand, that the children of Judah did not bring Jerusalem into the undisputed possession of the Israelites through this conquest, and, on the other hand, that it was not their intention to diminish the inheritance of Benjamin by the conquest of Jerusalem, and they had not taken the city for themselves. For further remarks, see at Jdg 1:8.

The hostile attacks of the other tribes upon the Canaanites who remained in the land are briefly summed up in Jdg 1:22-36. Of these the taking of Bethel is more fully described in Jdg 1:22-26. Besides this, nothing more is given than the list of the towns in the territories of western Manasseh (Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:28), Ephraim (Jdg 1:29), Zebulun (Jdg 1:30), Asher (Jdg 1:31, Jdg 1:32), Naphtali (Jdg 1:33), and Dan (Jdg 1:34, Jdg 1:35), out of which the Canaanites were not exterminated by these tribes. Issachar is omitted; hardly, however, because that tribe made no attempt to disturb the Canaanites, as Bertheau supposes, but rather because none of its towns remained in the hands of the Canaanites.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:22-23

Like Judah, so also ("they also,"referring back to Jdg 1:2, Jdg 1:3) did the house of Joseph (Ephraim and western Manasseh) renew the hostilities with the Canaanites who were left in their territory after the death of Joshua. The children of Joseph went up against Bethel, and Jehovah was with them, so that they were able to conquer the city. Bethel had indeed been assigned to the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:22), but it was situated on the southern boundary of the tribe-land of Ephraim (Jos 16:2; Jos 18:13); so that the tribe of Joseph could not tolerate the Canaanites in this border town, if it would defend its own territory against them, and purge it entirely of them. This is a sufficient explanation of the fact that this one conquest is mentioned, and this only, without there being any necessity to seek for the reason, as Bertheau does, in the circumstance that the town of Bethel came into such significant prominence in the later history of Israel, and attained the same importance in many respects in relation to the northern tribes, as that which Jerusalem attained in relation to the southern. For the fact that nothing more is said about the other conquests of the children of Joseph, may be explained simply enough on the supposition that they did not succeed in rooting out the Canaanites from the other fortified towns in their possessions; and therefore there was nothing to record about any further conquests, as the result of their hostilities was merely this, that they did not drive the Canaanites out of the towns named in Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:29, but simply made them tributary. יתירוּ , they had it explored, or spied out. תּוּר is construed with בּ here, because the spying laid hold, as it were, of its object. Bethel , formerly Luz, now Beitin : see at Gen 28:19 and Jos 7:2.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:24-25

And the watchmen (i.e., the spies sent out to explore Bethel) saw a man coming out of the town, and got him to show them the entrance into it, under a promise that they would show him favour, i.e., would spare the lives of himself and his family (see Jos 2:12-13); whereupon they took the town and smote it without quarter, according to the law in Deu 20:16-17, letting none but the man and his family go. By " the entrance into the city "we are not to understand the gate of the town, but the way or mode by which they could get into the town, which was no doubt fortified.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:26

The man whom they had permitted to go free, went with his family into the land of the Hittites, and there built a town, to which he gave the name of his earlier abode, viz., Luz . The situation of this Luz is altogether unknown. Even the situation of the land of the Hittites cannot be more precisely determined; for we find Hittites at Hebron in the times of Abraham and Moses (Gen 23), and also upon the mountains of Palestine (Num 13:29), and at a later period on the north-east of Canaan on the borders of Syria (1Ki 10:29). That the Hittites were one of the most numerous and widespread of the tribes of the Canaanites, is evident from the fact that, in Jos 1:4, the Canaanites generally are described as Hittites.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:27-28

Manasseh did not root out the Canaanites from the towns which had been allotted to it in the territory of Asher and Issachar (Jos 17:11), but simply made them tributary. וגו בּית־שׁאן הורישׁ לא , considered by itself, might be rendered: " Manasseh did not take possession of Bethshean, "etc. But as we find, in the further enumeration, the inhabitants of the towns mentioned instead of the towns themselves, we must take הורישׁ in the sense of rooting out, driving out of their possessions, which is the only rendering applicable in Jdg 1:28; and thus, according to a very frequent metonymy, must understand by the towns the inhabitants of the towns. "Manasseh did not exterminate Bethshean," i.e., the inhabitants of Bethshean, etc. All the towns mentioned here have already been mentioned in Jos 17:11, the only difference being, that they are not placed in exactly the same order, and that Endor is mentioned there after Dor ; whereas here it has no doubt fallen out through a copyist's error, as the Manassites, according to Jos 17:12-13, did not exterminate the Canaanites from all the towns mentioned there. The change in the order in which the towns occur, - Taanach being placed next to Bethshean, whereas in Joshua Bethshean is followed by Ibleam, which is placed last but one in the present list, - may be explained on the supposition, that in Jos 17:11, Endor, Taanach, and Megiddo are placed together, as forming a triple league, of which the author of our book has taken no notice. Nearly all these towns were in the plain of Jezreel, or in the immediate neighbourhood of the great commercial roads which ran from the coast of the Mediterranean to Damascus and central Asia. The Canaanites no doubt brought all their strength to bear upon the defence of these roads; and in this their war-chariots, against which Israel could do nothing in the plain of Jezreel, were of the greatest service (see Jdg 1:19; Jos 17:16). For further particulars respecting the situation of the different towns, see at Jos 17:11. Dor only was on the coast of the Mediterranean (see at Jos 11:2), and being a commercial emporium of the Phoenicians, would certainly be strongly fortified, and very difficult to conquer.

Jdg 1:28

As the Israelites grew strong, they made serfs of the Canaanites (see at Gen 49:15). When this took place is not stated; but at all events, it was only done gradually in the course of the epoch of the judges, and not for the first time during the reign of Solomon, as Bertheau supposes on the ground of 1Ki 9:20-22 and 1Ki 4:12, without considering that even in the time of David the Israelites had already attained the highest power they ever possessed, and that there is nothing at variance with this in 1Ki 4:12 and 1Ki 9:20-22. For it by no means follows, from the appointment of a prefect by Solomon over the districts of Taanach, Megiddo, and Bethshean (1Ki 4:12), that these districts had only been conquered by Solomon a short time before, when we bear in mind that Solomon appointed twelve such prefects over all Israel, to remit in regular order the national payments that were required for the maintenance of the regal court. Nor does it follow, that because Solomon employed the descendants of the Canaanites who were left in the land as tributary labourers in the erection of his great buildings, therefore he was the first who succeeded in compelling those Canaanites who were not exterminated when the land was conquered by Joshua, to pay tribute to the different tribes of Israel.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:29-35

Ephraim did not root out the Canaanites in Gezer (Jdg 1:29), as has already been stated in Jos 16:10.

Jdg 1:30

Zebulun did not root out the Canaanites in Kitron and Nahalol .

Jdg 1:31-32

Asher did not root out those in Acco , etc. Acco : a seaport town to the north of Carmel, on the bay which is called by its name; it is called Ake by Josephus , Diod . Sic ., and Pliny , and was afterwards named Ptolemais from one of the Ptolemy s (1 Macc. 5:15, 21; 10:1, etc.; Act 21:7). The Arabs called it Akka , and this was corrupted by the crusaders into Acker or Acre . During the crusades it was a very flourishing maritime and commercial town; but it subsequently fell into decay, and at the present time has a population of about 5000, composed of Mussulmans, Druses, and Christians (see C. v. Raumer , Pal. p. 119; Rob . Bibl. Res.; and Ritter , Erdk. xvi. pp. 725ff.). Sidon , now Saida : see at Jos 11:8. Achlab is only mentioned here, and is not known. Achzib , i.e., Ecdippa : see at Jos 19:29. Helbah is unknown. Aphek is the present Afkah : see Jos 13:4; Jos 19:30. Rehob is unknown: see at Jos 19:28, Jos 19:30. As seven out of the twenty-two towns of Asher (Jos 19:30) remained in the hands of the Canaanites, including such important places as Acco and Sidon, it is not stated in Jdg 1:32, as in Jdg 1:29, Jdg 1:30, that "the Canaanites dwelt among them," but that " the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, "to show that the Canaanites held the upper hand. And for this reason the expression "they became tributaries"(Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:35, etc.) is also omitted.

Jdg 1:33

Naphtali did not root out the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh and Beth-anath , two fortified towns, the situation of which is still unknown (see at Jos 19:38); so that this tribe also dwelt among the Canaanites, but did not make them tributary.

Jdg 1:34-35

Still less were the Danites able to drive the Canaanites out of their inheritance. On the contrary, the Amorites forced Dan up into the mountains, and would not suffer them to come down into the plain. But the territory allotted to the Danytes was almost all in the plain (see at Jos 19:40). If, therefore, they were forced out of that, they were almost entirely excluded from their inheritance. The Amorites emboldened themselves (see at Deu 1:5) to dwell in Har-cheres, Ajalon, and Shaalbim . On the last two places see Jos 19:42, where Ir-shemesh is also mentioned. This combination, and still more the meaning of the names Har-cheres , i.e., sun-mountain, and Ir-shemesh , i.e., sun-town, make the conjecture a very probable one, that Har-cheres is only another name for Ir-shemesh , i.e., the present Ain Shems (see at Jos 15:10, and Rob . Pal. iii. pp. 17, 18). This pressure on the part of the Amorites induced a portion of the Danites to emigrate, and seek for an inheritance in the north of Palestine (see Judg 18). On the other hand, the Amorites were gradually made tributary by the powerful tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who bounded Dan on the north. "The hand of the house of Joseph lay heavy," sc., upon the Amorites in the towns already named on the borders of Ephraim. For the expression itself, comp. 1Sa 5:6; Psa 32:4.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 1:36

In order to explain the supremacy of the Amorites in the territory of Dan, a short notice is added concerning their extension in the south of Palestine. " The territory of the Amorites was, "i.e., extended (viz., at the time of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites), " from the ascent of Akrabbim, from the rock onwards and farther up. " Maaleh-Akrabbim ( ascensus scorpiorum ) was the sharply projecting line of cliffs which intersected the Ghor below the Dead Sea, and formed the southern boundary of the promised land (see at Num 34:4 and Jos 15:2-3). מהסּלע , from the rock, is not doubt given as a second point upon the boundary of the Amoritish territory, as the repetition of the מן clearly shows, notwithstanding the omission of the copula ו . הסּלע , the rock, is supposed by the majority of commentators to refer to the city of Petra , the ruins of which are still to be seen in the Wady Musa (see Burckhardt , Syr. pp. 703ff.; Rob . Pal. ii. pp. 573ff., iii. 653), and which is distinctly mentioned in 2Ki 14:7 under the name of הסּלע , and in Isa 16:1 is called simply סלע . Petra is to the southeast of the Scorpion heights. Consequently, with this rendering the following word ומעלה (and upward) would have to be taken in the sense of ulterius (and beyond), and Rosenmüller's explanation would be the correct one: "The Amorites not only extended as far as the town of Petra, or inhabited it, but they even carried their dwellings beyond this towards the tops of those southern mountains."But a description of the territory of the Amorites in its southern extension into Arabia Petraea does not suit the context of the verse, the object of which is to explain how it was that the Amorites were in a condition to force back the Danites out of the plain into the mountains, to say nothing of the fact that it is questionable whether the Amorites ever really spread so far, for which we have neither scriptural testimony nor evidence of any other kind. On this ground even Bertheau has taken ומעלה as denoting the direction upwards, i.e., towards the north, which unquestionably suits the usage of מעלה as well as the context of the passage. But it is by no means in harmony with this to understand הסּלע as referring to Petra ; for in that case we should have two boundary points mentioned, the second of which was farther south than the first. Now a historian who had any acquaintance with the topography, would never have described the extent of the Amoritish territory from south to north in such a way as this, commencing with the Scorpion heights on the north, then passing to Petra, which was farther south, and stating that from this point the territory extended farther towards the north. If ומעלה therefore refers to the extension of the territory of the Amorites in a northerly direction, the expression "from the rock"cannot be understood as relating to the city of Petra, but must denote some other locality well known to the Israelites by that name. Such a locality there undoubtedly was in the rock in the desert of Zin, which had become celebrated through the events that took place at the water of strife (Num 20:8, Num 20:10), and to which in all probability this expression refers. The rock in question was at the south-west corner of Canaan, on the southern edge of the Rakhma plateau, to which the mountains of the Amorites extended on the south-west (comp. Num 14:25, Num 14:44-45, with Deu 1:44). And this would be very appropriately mentioned here as the south-western boundary of the Amorites, in connection with the Scorpion heights as their south-eastern boundary, for the purpose of giving the southern boundary of the Amorites in its full extent from east to west.

Constable: Jdg 1:1--3:7

I. THE REASONS FOR ISRAEL'S APOSTASY 1:1--3:6

The first major section in the book (1:1-3:6) explains very clearly why the period of the judges was a dark chapter in Israel's history. God revealed the reasons for Israel's apostasy and consequent national problems in terms too clear to miss.

The years immediately following Joshua's death saw a transition from success to failure. The events of this period set the scene for the amphictyony (rule by judges) and provide a background for the main part of the book (3:7-16:31).

"The Book of Judges may be viewed as having a two-part introduction (1:1-2:5 and 2:6-3:6) and a two-part epilogue (17:1-18:31 and 19:1-21:25). Parallel ideas and motifs link the first introduction (1:1-2:5) with the second epilogue (19:1-21:25), and in like manner the second introduction (2:6-3:6) with the first epilogue (17:1-18:31)."¹⁹

Constable: Jdg 1:1--2:6

A. Hostilities between the Israelites and the Canaanites following Joshua's death 1:1-2:5

". . . archaeology shows that the superpowers (Babylonia, Assyria, the Hittites, and Egypt) were relatively weak during the days of the judges and the monarchy. Internal affairs kept them busy at home. This, humanly speaking, made possible the survival of the nation of Israel. The smaller, local enemies were trouble enough for her armies."²⁰

Constable: Jdg 1:1-36

1. Initial successes and failures ch. 1

The attitude of the Israelites toward the Canaanites changed in the years following Joshua's death.

Constable: Jdg 1:1-21

The leadership of Judah 1:1-21

1:1 The Book of Judges begins with a conjunction translated "now" or "and." God intended Judges to continue the narrative of Israel's history where the Book of Joshua ended (cf. Josh. 1:1). This verse provides a heading for the whole Book of Judges with the actual events following Joshua's death not being narrated until after the record of his death in 2:8.²¹

The Israelites wisely sought God's strategy in proceeding against their foe. They may have done this with the high priest and his use of the Urim and Thummim (cf. Num. 27:21).

Each of the major divisions of 1:1-2:5 opens with a form of the verb alah (to go up; 1:4, 22; 2:1).²²

1:2 The Lord's appointment of Judah as the first tribe to initiate hostility was in harmony with Jacob's prophecy that Judah would be the leader of the tribes (Gen. 49:8-12).

"The opening scene of the book offers so much promise. The theocratic system is still in place. Israel is sensitive to the will of God, and God responds to the overtures of his people. . . . By raising the reader's expectations this way the narrator invites us to share the intensity of his own and God's disappointment with his people in the period of settlement. Verses 1-2 throw the remainder of the chapter and the book into sharpest relief."²³

1:3 Judah naturally and properly, I believe, invited Simeon to join in this battle. After all, the Simeonites lived within the territory of Judah and therefore enjoyed an unusually close relationship with the people of Judah.

1:4 Bezek was obviously a stronghold of the Canaanites and Perizzites at this time since the Israelite forces were able to smite them near this town. The word translated "thousand" (Heb. eleph) can also mean "military unit." In 20:10 it refers to a unit of 10 men. Consequently the meaning here may be 10 military units rather than 10 thousand soldiers.²⁴

1:5-7 Adoni-bezek (lit. Lord of Bezek) was the title of the king of that town (cf. 1 Sam. 11:8-11) rather than his proper name.²⁵ The Israelites probably cut off this man's thumbs so he could not wield a sword and his big toes so he could not run away, as well as to humiliate him. These were temporary measures until they could carry out God's will and slay him. The loss of these digits also made it impossible for him to serve as a priest as well as a warrior, a dual function among many ancient eastern kings.²⁶ The king's boast that he had similarly crippled 70 kings seems to have been an exaggerated one. Such boasts by warriors were common in the ancient world. Joshua had smitten fewer than 70 kings and in so doing had subdued the major part of Canaan (cf. Josh. 12). Gathering crumbs under the table like dogs (v. 7; cf. Matt. 15:27) represented "the most shameful treatment and humiliation."²⁷ The soldiers evidently took Adoni-bezek with them to Jerusalem, the site of their next offensive, and either executed him there or he died from his wounds there.

1:8 Even though the soldiers of Judah and Simeon captured and burned Jerusalem the Israelites were not able to keep the Jebusites from returning to control their ancient capital (cf. v. 21; 19:11-12; Josh. 15:63).

"The Jebusites were a mixed people who descended from early colonies of Hittites and Amorites in Canaan."²⁸

Jerusalem became Israel's permanent possession years later when David finally exterminated the Jebusites (2 Sam. 5:6-9). The Israelites' unfaithfulness in subduing the land is one of the major emphases of Judges.²⁹

1:9-10 Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai (v. 10) were evidently the ruling lords of Hebron (lit. confederacy), the highest city in elevation in Judah (ca. 3,000 ft.).³⁰ The Anakim had become proverbially great and fearsome foes (cf. Deut. 9:2).

1:11-15 Othniel was a bold warrior who followed in the train of his older brother Caleb. God later raised him up to be the first of the heroic judges listed in this book (3:7-11). The incident related here is also in Joshua (Josh. 15:15-19) and took place before Joshua died. The writer probably recorded it again here because the event was a significant part of the conquest of Judah's inheritance (cf. v. 20).

Caleb rewarded Othniel's bravery by giving him his daughter's hand in marriage. The blessing she respectfully asked was the springs of water over which Caleb had authority. They watered the area around Debir, Othniel's prize. Being in the Negev, water would have been essential for Debir to flourish.

1:16 The descendants of the Kenite, Jethro (Reuel), ". . . were probably a branch of the Kenites mentioned in Gen. xv. 19 along with the other tribes of Canaan, which had separated from the other members of its own tribe before the time of Moses and removed to the land of Midian, where Moses met with a hospitable reception from their chief Reguel [Reuel] on his flight from Egypt. These Kenites had accompanied the Israelites to Canaan at the request of Moses (Num. x. 29 sqq.); and when the Israelites advanced into Canaan itself, they had probably remained as nomads in the neighborhood of the Jordan near Jericho [the "city of palms," v. 16], without taking part in the wars of Joshua."³¹

1:17-21 The soldiers of Judah and Simeon also conquered Hormah (lit. devotion or destruction), Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron (vv. 17-18). The "valley" from which the Israelites could not drive out the Canaanites (v. 19) probably refers to the flat Coastal Plain. This inability was, of course, due to a failure in Israel's trust and obedience (cf. Josh. 1:5-8; 17:16-18).

The reference to iron chariots (v. 19) has caused problems for some readers since archaeologists have dated the Iron Age beginning in 1200 B.C., about 150 years after the event recorded here took place. However the Hittites had mastered the production of iron by 1400 B.C. Evidently the Canaanites and Philistines had iron implements by 1350 B.C. The Iron Age is, after all, a general description of the period during which iron was the most important metal.³²

Caleb had driven out the Anakim in Hebron earlier (v. 20; cf. Josh. 15:13-14). The writer probably repeated the account here to fill out the record of the subjugation of Judah's territory. "Then" (v. 20) can also mean "and." It does not imply that the events of verse 20 followed those of verse 19 in chronological sequence.

Jerusalem (v. 21) was on the border of Judah and Benjamin but mainly within Benjamin's territory. The Hinnom Valley on the southern edge of the city was the boundary. Even though the soldiers of Judah and Simeon captured Jerusalem the Benjamites could not hold it. This is evidently why the writer referred to the Benjamites at this point. This failure was another significant incident of inadequate trust and obedience (cf. v. 19). It also foreshadowed the Benjamites' role in the final disastrous chapters of the book (chs. 19-21).

Constable: Jdg 1:22-36

The activities of the other tribes 1:22-36

1:22-26 The writer described Ephraim and Manasseh together as "the house of Joseph" (vv. 22-29). First, he narrated Ephraim's activity (vv. 22-26). The Ephraimites' treatment of the man of Bethel who gave them information violated God's orders. They should have put him to death along with the rest of the Bethelites whom they did kill. This incomplete obedience is what the writer again emphasized in this passage alluding to Bethel's illustrious history (Gen. 28:18-22; 35:1-15; 48:3) and tragic future (1 Kings 12:25-33; 13:1-19; 2 Kings 23:15-17).

1:27-28 Manasseh failed to be strong in faith and trust too. Rather than exterminating the Canaanites, as God had commanded, the Israelites made them their servants.

1:29 The writer mentioned Ephraim again here because he was emphasizing the Israelites' treatment of the Canaanites as well as the failure of each tribe.

1:30-33 The tribes of Zebulun, Asher, and Naphtali also failed to drive the Canaanites out of their territories but compromised with these enemies.

1:34-36 The Amorites in the Shephelah in the territory of Dan did not even allow the Danites to occupy the coastal areas of their possession. They forced them to stay in the eastern hill country of their territory.

"One does not have to look far for an explanation of Dan's difficulties in settling its tribal allotment. The International Coastal Highway passed directly through its territory. This meant that any attempt to take control of the region automatically cut the main land link between Africa (Egypt) and Asia (Mesopotamia). Local centers and peoples in the area would be expected to resist any Danite offensive action. This is brought out vividly in the first chapter of the book of Judges, which in a few sentences [vv. 34-35] accurately describes this region of valleys (Sorek and Aijalon) and nearby Hill Country (just east of the Aijalon-Eshtaol route)."³³

The Amorites retained domination of a section of territory in southern Canaan as far south as Sela (Petra), a stronghold in the land of Edom (v. 36). Like the earlier reference to the Benjamites' failure (v. 21), this mention of the Danites' weakness anticipates that tribe's tragic role in chapters 17-18.

The writer's primary purpose in this chapter is obvious. It was to relate his selective narrative of Israel's victories and defeats to impress the reader with the failure of God's people to drive out their enemies increasingly as the passage unfolds.

"The lesson of Judges 1 is very clear. The people of Israel chose deliberately to obey God only partly. Rather than following the Lord wholeheartedly, they compromised. They went part way, and that compromise meant inevitable catastrophe."³⁴

In the Pentateuch we saw God preparing the chosen people to live under His theocracy in the Promised Land. In Joshua we saw Him establishing them in the land so they could function as a theocracy. In Judges we see Israel for the first time in position to live under theocratic rule. From the very beginning of Judges we see that they failed to take advantage of their great privilege to be a unique nation in the world. They failed because they would not trust and obey God consistently but allowed the Canaanites to remain in the land God wanted them to occupy exclusively. Theocratic rule began to break down as soon as Joshua's generation died. Consequently God raised up judges to act as His spokesmen in the theocracy. Eventually He replaced them with the kings. The only time in Israel's history when the theocracy functioned as God intended it to was in the later years of Joshua and in the early years of the next generation.³⁵ The first part of this chapter describes that period.

"Its [the Book of Judges'] primary purpose is to let the readers know why Israel did not experience the blessings that were available."³⁶

Guzik: Jdg 1:1-36

Judges 1 - Victory and Defeat in the Promised Land

A. Continuing victory in Israel.

1. (1a) After the death of Joshua.

Now after the death of Joshua

a. After the death of Joshua: In this period Israel lost a critical link in its godly leadership. Moses had been the great leader used by God to bring them out of Egypt; Joshua had been Moses' assistant, and the great leader used by God to bring them into the land of promise. But Joshua had no assistant that he could appoint to lead the whole nation. They were in a critical place where they had to trust God more intimately than they ever had before.

i. God gives wonderful human leaders to His work on this earth, and it is always difficult for God's people when those human leaders pass from the scene. In such a situation, we may live in the past, wishing that leader were still with us.

b. After the death of Joshua: During this period of the judges (which lasted some 340 years), there was no standing "office" of national leadership. Israel had no king, no president, no prime minister on earth - only God in heaven. And at the necessary and appropriate time, God would bring forth a leader for nation who would pretty much rise up, do his (or her) job, and then move on back to their obscurity. This required that Israel have a real, abiding trust in God.

i. These national deliverers were not elected, and they didn't come to leadership through succession - they were specially gifted by God for leadership in their times, and the people of God recognized and respected that gifting.

ii. When this book uses the term judge, it doesn't mean someone who sits in a court and decides legal issues; the Hebrew word shaphat has more the idea of a heroic leader.

iii. They had formidable obstacles - they were surrounded by people who lived in the most terrible immorality and idolatry; there were constant dangers to their walking with God. The lives of the Canaanites who lived around Israel were focused mainly on three things: money, sex, and having a relationship with God on my terms instead of God's terms.

c. After the death of Joshua: The book of Judges shows us a time that is sometimes confusing, difficult, and dark. For this reason, many have neglected the book of Judges, and regarded this period of time as a "dark ages" of Israel's history. But if we neglect this book, we neglect a wonderful account of the love and graciousness of God, and how He lovingly corrects His people.

i. What we find out about man in Judges is depressing; but what we find out about God in Judges is spectacular.

2. (1b-2) After Joshua's death, Israel seeks the LORD.

It came to pass that the children of Israel asked the LORD, saying, "Who shall be first to go up for us against the Canaanites to fight against them?" And the LORD said, "Judah shall go up. Indeed I have delivered the land into his hand."

a. The children of Israel asked the LORD: Here, they do the right thing - the thing Joshua would have wanted them to do. With Joshua gone, they are not left without a leader; they are simply called to a new trust in God.

b. And the LORD said: When Israel sought the LORD, He guided them. Jesus said the same in Luke 11:9 - So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. Often when we think the LORD isn't answering us, it is really more of a matter of Him speaking in a way we wouldn't expect Him to.

c. Judah shall go up: God directs that the tribe of Judah - the tribe the Messiah would come from - would lead the way.

i. Under Joshua, Israel had broken the back of the Canaanite's military strength; yet it remained for each individual tribe to actually go in and possess what God had given them.

3. (3-7) Judah (with the tribe of Simeon) defeats Bezek and their king.

So Judah said to Simeon his brother, "Come up with me to my allotted territory, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I will likewise go with you to your allotted territory." And Simeon went with him. Then Judah went up, and the LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand; and they killed ten thousand men at Bezek. And they found Adoni-Bezek in Bezek, and fought against him; and they defeated the Canaanites and the Perizzites. Then Adoni-Bezek fled, and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes. And Adoni-Bezek said, "Seventy kings with their thumbs and big toes cut off used to gather scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me." Then they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died.

a. Judah said to Simeon his brother, "Come up with me": Judah is walking wisely; by partnering with another tribe, the work is much easier. Here, the tribes are functioning like God wants the church to function - as a body, with each part of the body helping out other parts of the body.

b. The LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand: Seeking the LORD, obeying His guidance, and working together as a body always produces great results: the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hands.

c. They killed tne thousand men at Bezek: This place where the conquered was called Bezek; and the leader of this city was Adoni-Bezek, which means "Lord of Lightning" - a fearful name, but Judah and Simeon defeated him none the less.

i. Their punishment of him may seem cruel, but realize that it is justice in its truest sense - he had done this same thing to seventy kings, now he has his own toes and fingers cut off.

ii. The punishment made Adoni-Bezek worthless as a warrior; he could trouble Israel no more as a military man. "It was a custom among those Romans who did not like a military life, to cut off their own thumbs, that they might not be called into the army. Sometimes the parents cut off the thumbs of their children, that they might not be called into the army." (Clarke).

iii. We also see Judah and Simeon being unselfish; they are fighting a battle in a territory that did not directly belong to them. The city of Bezek was far to the north of Judah's tribal lands.

4. (8-20) Judah's victories in the southern part of the land given to Israel.

Now the children of Judah fought against Jerusalem and took it; they struck it with the edge of the sword and set the city on fire. And afterward the children of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites who dwelt in the mountains, in the South, and in the lowland. Then Judah went against the Canaanites who dwelt in Hebron. (Now the name of Hebron was formerly Kirjath Arba.) And they killed Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai. From there they went against the inhabitants of Debir. (The name of Debir was formerly Kirjath Sepher.) Then Caleb said, "Whoever attacks Kirjath Sepher and takes it, to him I will give my daughter Achsah as wife." And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, took it; so he gave him his daughter Achsah as wife. Now it happened, when she came to him, that she urged him to ask her father for a field. And she dismounted from her donkey, and Caleb said to her, "What do you wish?" So she said to him, "Give me a blessing; since you have given me land in the South, give me also springs of water." And Caleb gave her the upper springs and the lower springs. Now the children of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law, went up from the City of Palms with the children of Judah into the Wilderness of Judah, which lies in the South near Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people. And Judah went with his brother Simeon, and they attacked the Canaanites who inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. So the name of the city was called Hormah. Also Judah took Gaza with its territory, Ashkelon with its territory, and Ekron with its territory. So the LORD was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron. And they gave Hebron to Caleb, as Moses had said. Then he expelled from there the three sons of Anak.

a. Judah fought against Jerusalem and took it: Jerusalem falls to Judah; it was occupied for a time (Adoni-Bezek was taken there and died there), but it later fell back to the Jebusites (see Judges 1:21). David re-conquered the city some 400 years later (2 Samuel 5:6-10).

b. Then Judah went against the Canaanites who dwelt in Hebron: Judah also conquers Hebron, and it is given to faithful Caleb and his family (see Joshua 15:13-19).

i. Hebron was the ancient city of Abraham, and the city which discouraged the ten unfaithful spies from taking the promised land in Moses' day, because of the Anakim which lived there (Numbers 13:22-23).

c. Give me a blessing: Spurgeon has a wonderful sermon on verses 12-15 ("Aschsah's Asking, A Pattern of Prayer"); he shows how the request from a daughter (Aschsah) to a father (Caleb) gives us a "parable of prayer."

i. She thought about what she wanted before she went to her father. Before you pray, know what you need before God. She came to God with a very definite request, that had been considered before hand. "Think what you are going to ask before you begin to pray, and then pray like business men. This woman does not say to her father, 'Father, listen to me,' and then utter some pretty little oration about nothing; but she knows what she is going to ask for, and why she is going to ask it." (Spurgeon)

ii. She asked for help with her request, asking her husband - she urged him to ask her father for a field. "A friend, some time ago, said to me, 'My dear pastor, whenever I cannot pray for myself, and there are times when I feel shut up about myself, I always take to praying for you: 'God bless him, at any rate!' and I have not long been praying for you before I begin to feel able to pray for myself.' I should like to come in for many of those odd bits of prayer. Whenever any of you get stuck in the mud, do pray for me. It will do you good, and I shall get a blessing." (Spurgeon)

iii. She knew it was her father she asked.

iv. She went humbly, yet eagerly.

v. Her father asked her what she wanted - God will ask us the same thing, and we should know what we want.

vi. You should actually ask for it; it is a pleasure for God to hear you ask.

vii. Her prayer: give me a blessing.

viii. She mingled gratitude with her petition (you have given me land in the South).

ix. She used past blessing as a reason to ask for more.

x. She realized that what she had been given before was of no use without continual springs of water. "What is the use of the hearers if there be not the power of the Holy Spirit going with the Word to bless them? Give me springs of water." (Spurgeon)

xi. Her father gave her what she asked.

xii. Her father gave to her in large measure.

xiii. Her father was not critical of the request in the slightest way.

d. The city of Palms: This is Jericho; the Kenites went from there to Arad, a city out in the Judean wilderness, west of Masada and the Dead Sea; Zephath isn't too far from there; Gaza and Ashkelon were out towards the coast and later became Philistine strongholds.

e. They had chariots of iron: As impressive as Judah's victory was, it was incomplete; they could not win over nations that had the latest military technology: chariots of iron.

i. Of course, this spoke more to Judah's lack of full trust in God than it did to Canaanite military superiority. Chariots were not problem for God's people when they were trusting God (Exodus 14:7-29; Joshua 11:1-8; 1 Kings 20:21); their attitude should have been like in Psalm 20:7 - Some trust in chariots, and some in horses; But we will remember the name of the LORD our God.

ii. They believed one promise of God, and not another. They believed that God was with them in the hills, but not in the lowlands. Many believers find it easy to believe one area of God's promises, but not another.

B. Incomplete victory and defeat.

1. (21) The tribe of Benjamin does not take possession of Jerusalem.

But the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who inhabited Jerusalem; so the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day.

a. The children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites: This is a case where the battle had already been won (Judges 1:8). They just had to enter into what was theirs. It would take effort, to be certain, but the battle was over. Jerusalem belonged to them.

2. (22-26) The house of Joseph (the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh) take the city of Bethel.

And the house of Joseph also went up against Bethel, and the LORD was with them. So the house of Joseph sent men to spy out Bethel. (The name of the city was formerly Luz.) And when the spies saw a man coming out of the city, they said to him, "Please show us the entrance to the city, and we will show you mercy." So he showed them the entrance to the city, and they struck the city with the edge of the sword; but they let the man and all his family go. And the man went to the land of the Hittites, built a city, and called its name Luz, which is its name to this day.

a. And the LORD was with them: We might credit the victory to their effective use of military espionage; but the real reason was because the LORD was with them.

3. (27-29) Ephraim and Manasseh fail to drive out all the Canaanites.

However, Manasseh did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth Shean and its villages, or Taanach and its villages, or the inhabitants of Dor and its villages, or the inhabitants of Ibleam and its villages, or the inhabitants of Megiddo and its villages; for the Canaanites were determined to dwell in that land. And it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites under tribute, but did not completely drive them out. Nor did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites who dwelt in Gezer; so the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.

a. The Canaanites were determined to dwell in the land: At first, there were pockets of Canaanites that these tribes were unable to push out of the land. But when the tribes eventually grew strong enough, they compromised with those Canaanites and thought they could use them to their advantage (they put the Canaanites under tribute).

b. Did not completely drive them out: In the same way, when someone first begins their Christian life, they may not be strong enough in the LORD to deal with all the things they see that need changing; yet as they grow in the LORD, they must not slack in dealing with those areas. We are to never make a peace treaty with sin.

4. (30) The tribe of Zebulun compromises and accommodates the Canaanites, putting them under tribute.

Nor did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron or the inhabitants of Nahalol; so the Canaanites dwelt among them, and were put under tribute.

5. (31-32) The tribe of Asher fails in taking full possession of their land.

Nor did Asher drive out the inhabitants of Acco or the inhabitants of Sidon, or of Ahlab, Achzib, Helbah, Aphik, or Rehob. So the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land; for they did not drive them out.

6. (33) The tribe of Naphtali compromises and accommodates the Canaanites, putting them under tribute.

Nor did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Beth Shemesh or the inhabitants of Beth Anath; but they dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land. Nevertheless the inhabitants of Beth Shemesh and Beth Anath were put under tribute to them.

7. (34-36) The tribe of Dan fails in taking full possession of their land.

And the Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountains, for they would not allow them to come down to the valley; and the Amorites were determined to dwell in Mount Heres, in Aijalon, and in Shaalbim; yet when the strength of the house of Joseph became greater, they were put under tribute. Now the boundary of the Amorites was from the Ascent of Akrabbim, from Sela, and upward.

a. The Amorites forced the children of Dan into the mountains: Here, we see the people of God being pushed around by their enemies; this should never be the case when God's people are walking in the strength God has for them.

b. When the strength of the house of Joseph became greater, they were put under tribute: Again, instead of doing what God said should be done with these enemies (completely drive them out), they decide they will use them as they think best - putting these enemies under tribute.

c. The boundary of the Amorites: Finally, the Amorites have an appointed boundary within the inheritance of God's people; we should never accommodate our spiritual enemies in this way.

d. Lessons from Israel's incomplete occupation of what God intended for them.

i. Essentially, the question is: what will we be satisfied with in our Christian life? For Israel, in Judges 1, they were satisfied with far less than what God wanted them to have, and far less than what God had provided for them.

ii. These Israelites didn't say "let's forsake God"; they simply decided that they would be satisfied with less. Once we satisfy ourselves with less than God's best for us, we will never be what God wants us to be.

© 2003 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Jdg 1:20

JUDGES 1:20 —Did Caleb kill the sons of Anak or just expel them?

PROBLEM: In Judges 1:10 , the three sons of Anak were “killed” by Judah. But, in verse 20 it says they were merely “expelled” from the land, which is what Joshua 15:14 says as well. Which was it?

SOLUTION: There are two basic views in response to this problem. One view assumes that these two passages refer to the same event, while the other view maintains that they refer to different events.

The Same Event. According to this position, the children of Judah were led by Caleb. Thus, one passage could refer to the men who did it and the other to their leader. Further, the Hebrew word for “expel” can mean to “drive out” or “destroy.” In this sense they were expelled not only from the land of Judah, but also from the land of the living.

Different Events. According to this view, the first chapter of Judges does not follow in chronological order, being almost verbatim from Joshua 15:13-19 . If so, the events would be as follows: when Joshua conquered the land, the sons of Anak were simply “expelled,” only to return when Joshua turned elsewhere. Later, after the initial campaigns, Judah settled the land and Caleb and his men actually “killed” them. Either position would resolve the difficulty.   

Critics Ask: Jdg 1:28

JUDGES 1:28 ff—Were the Canaanites destroyed or merely subjugated?

PROBLEM: Joshua 10:40 declares that “Joshua conquered all the land … he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel had commanded.” But only a short time later, when the people occupied the land they had conquered, Judges 1:28 says Israel “did not completely drive them out,” but “put the Canaanites under tribute.” But if they had been utterly destroyed, then how could they still be there a few years later?

SOLUTION: It seems evident that Joshua at first only conquered the land as a whole, but did not literally destroy every part of it. He first swept through and gained the major victories, leaving the minor battles for the later settlers to fight. So, “utterly destroying all that breathed” is either a figure of speech for his general victory or a hyperbole for his complete success. However, even if it is understood more literally, it is qualified by the phrase “left none remaining” ( Josh. 10:40 ). This says nothing about those who fled only to return after Joshua’s armies turned northward to fight other battles. No doubt, in this interim, many of the Canaanites returned to occupy their homes and to be a continual thorn in Israel’s flesh.   

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Judges (Book Introduction)

JUDGES is the title given to the next book, from its containing the history of those non-regal rulers who governed the Hebrews from the time of Joshua to that of Eli, and whose functions in time of peace consisted chiefly in the administration of justice, although they occasionally led the people in their wars against their public enemies. The date and authorship of this book are not precisely known. It is certain, however, that it preceded the Second Book of Samuel (compare Jdg 9:35 with 2Sa 11:21), as well as the conquest of Jerusalem by David (compare Jdg 1:21 with 2Sa 5:6). Its author was in all probability Samuel, the last of the judges (see Jdg 19:1; Jdg 21:25), and the date of the first part of it is fixed in the reign of Saul, while the five chapters at the close might not have been written till after David's establishment as king in Israel (see Jdg 18:31). It is a fragmentary history, being a collection of important facts and signal deliverances at different times and in various parts of the land, during the intermediate period of three hundred years between Joshua and the establishment of the monarchy. The inspired character of this book is confirmed by allusions to it in many passages of Scripture (compare Jdg 4:2; Jdg 6:14 with 1Sa 12:9-12; Jdg 9:53 with 2Sa 11:21; Jdg 7:25 with Psa 83:11; compare Jdg 5:4-5 with Psa 7:5; Jdg 13:5; Jdg 16:17 with Mat 2:13-23; Act 13:20; Heb 11:32).

JFB: Judges (Outline)

• THE ACTS OF JUDAH AND SIMEON. (Jdg 1:1-3)
• ADONI-BEZEK JUSTLY REQUITED. (Jdg. 1:4-21)
• SOME CANAANITES LEFT. (Jdg 1:22-26)
• AN ANGEL SENT TO REBUKE THE PEOPLE AT BOCHIM. (Jdg 2:1-10)
• WICKEDNESS OF THE NEW GENERATION AFTER JOSHUA. (Jdg 2:11-19)
• NATIONS LEFT TO PROVE ISRAEL. (Jdg 3:1-4)
• BY COMMUNION WITH THESE THE ISRAELITES COMMIT IDOLATRY. (Jdg 3:5-7)
• OTHNIEL DELIVERS ISRAEL. (Jdg 3:8-11)
• EHUD SLAYS EGLON. (Jdg. 3:12-30)
• DEBORAH AND BARAK DELIVER ISRAEL FROM JABIN AND SISERA. (Jdg. 4:1-17)
• DEBORAH AND BARAK'S SONG OF THANKSGIVING. (Jdg. 5:1-31)
• THE ISRAELITES, FOR THEIR SINS, OPPRESSED BY MIDIAN. (Jdg 6:1-6)
• A PROPHET REBUKES THEM. (Jdg 6:7-10)
• AN ANGEL SENDS GIDEON TO DELIVER THEM. (Jdg 6:11-16)
• GIDEON'S PRESENT CONSUMED BY FIRE. (Jdg. 6:17-32)
• THE SIGNS. (Jdg 6:33-39)
• GIDEON'S ARMY. (Jdg 7:1-8)
• HE IS ENCOURAGED BY THE DREAM AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BARLEY CAKE. (Jdg 7:9-15)
• HIS STRATAGEM AGAINST MIDIAN. (Jdg 7:16-24)
• THE EPHRAIMITES OFFENDED, BUT PACIFIED. (Jdg 8:1-9)
• ZEBAH AND ZALMUNNA TAKEN. (Jdg. 8:10-27)
• MIDIAN SUBDUED. (Jdg 8:28)
• ABIMELECH IS MADE KING BY THE SHECHEMITES. (Jdg 9:1-6)
• JOTHAM BY A PARABLE REPROACHES THEM. (Jdg 9:7-21)
• GAAL'S CONSPIRACY. (Jdg. 9:22-49)
• ABIMELECH SLAIN. (Jdg 9:50-57)
• TOLA JUDGES ISRAEL IN SHAMIR. (Jdg 10:1-5)
• ISRAEL OPPRESSED BY THE PHILISTINES AND AMMONITES. (Jdg 10:6-9)
• THEY CRY TO GOD. (Jdg 10:10-15)
• THEY REPENT; GOD PITIES THEM. (Jdg 10:16-18)
• JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 11:1-3)
• THE GILEADITES COVENANT WITH JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 11:4-11)
• HIS VOW. (Jdg 11:29-31)
• HE OVERCOMES THE AMMONITES. (Jdg 11:32-33)
• THE EPHRAIMITES QUARRELLING WITH JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 12:1-3)
• DISCERNED BY THE WORD SIBBOLETH, ARE SLAIN BY THE GILEADITES. (Jdg 12:4-15)
• ISRAEL SERVES THE PHILISTINES FORTY YEARS. (Jdg 13:1)
• AN ANGEL APPEARS TO MANOAH'S WIFE. (Jdg 13:2-10)
• THE ANGEL APPEARS TO MANOAH. (Jdg 13:11-14)
• MANOAH'S SACRIFICE. (Jdg 13:15-23)
• SAMSON BORN. (Jdg 13:24-25)
• SAMSON DESIRES A WIFE OF THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 14:1-5)
• HE KILLS A LION. (Jdg 14:5-9)
• HIS MARRIAGE FEAST. (Jdg 14:10-11)
• HIS RIDDLE. (Jdg 14:12-18)
• HE SLAYS THIRTY PHILISTINES. (Jdg 14:19-20)
• SAMSON IS DENIED HIS WIFE. (Jdg 15:1-2)
• HE BURNS THE PHILISTINES' CORN. (Jdg 15:3-8)
• HE IS BOUND BY THE MEN OF JUDAH, AND DELIVERED TO THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 15:9-13)
• SAMSON CARRIES AWAY THE GATES OF GAZA. (Jdg 16:1-3)
• DELILAH CORRUPTED BY THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 16:4-14)
• HE IS OVERCOME. (Jdg 16:15-20)
• THE PHILISTINES TOOK HIM AND PUT OUT HIS EYES. (Jdg 16:21-22)
• THEIR FEAST TO DAGON. (Jdg 16:23-25)
• HIS DEATH. (Jdg 16:26-31)
• MICAH RESTORING THE STOLEN MONEY TO HIS MOTHER, SHE MAKES IMAGES. (Jdg 17:1-4)
• THE DANITES SEEK OUT AN INHERITANCE. (Jdg. 18:1-26)
• THEY WIN LAISH. (Jdg 18:27-29)
• THEY SET UP IDOLATRY. (Jdg 18:30-31)
• A LEVITE GOING TO BETHLEHEM TO FETCH HIS WIFE. (Jdg 19:1-15)
• AN OLD MAN ENTERTAINS HIM AT GIBEAH. (Jdg 19:16-21)
• THE GIBEAHITES ABUSE HIS CONCUBINE TO DEATH. (Jdg 19:22-28)
• THE LEVITE, IN A GENERAL ASSEMBLY, DECLARES HIS WRONG. (Jdg 20:1-7)
• THEIR DECREE. (Jdg 20:8-17)
• THE PEOPLE BEWAIL THE DESOLATION OF ISRAEL. (Jdg 21:1-15)
• THE ELDERS CONSULT HOW TO FIND WIVES FOR THOSE THAT WERE LEFT. (Jdg 21:16-21)

TSK: Judges (Book Introduction)

The book of Judges forms an important link in the history of the Israelites. It furnishes us with a lively description of a fluctuating and unsettled nation; a striking picture of the disorders and dangers which prevailed in a republic without magistracy; when " the high-ways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through by-ways" (Jdg 5:6), when few prophets were appointed to control the people, and " every one did that which was right in his own eyes" (Jdg 17:6). It exhibits the contest of true religion with superstition; and displays the beneficial effects that flow from the former, and the miseries and evil consequences of impiety. It is a most remarkable history of the long-suffering of God towards the Israelites, in which we see the most signal instances of his justice and mercy alternately displayed. the people sinned, and were punished; they repented, and found mercy. These things are written for our warning. none should presume, for God is just; none need despair, for God is merciful. Independently of the internal evidence of the authenticity of this sacred book, the transactions it records are not only cited or alluded to by other inspired writers, but are further confirmed by the traditions current among heathen nations.

TSK: Judges 1 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Jdg 1:1, The acts of Judah and Simeon; Jdg 1:4, Adonibezek justly requited; Jdg 1:8, Jerusalem taken; Jdg 1:10, Hebron taken; Jdg 1:11, Othniel has Achsah to wife for taking of Debir; Jdg 1:16, The Kenites dwell in Judah; Jdg 1:17, Hormah, Gaza, Askelon, and Ekron taken; Jdg 1:21, The acts of Benjamin; Jdg 1:22, Of the house of Joseph, who take Beth-el; Jdg 1:30, Of Zebulun; Jdg 1:31, Of Asher; Jdg 1:33, Of Naphtali; Jdg 1:34, Of Dan.

Poole: Judges (Book Introduction)

BOOK OF JUDGES

THE ARGUMENT

THE author of this book is not certainly known, whether it was Samuel, or Ezra, or some other prophet; nor is it material to know.

1. It matters not who was the king’ s secretary, or with what pen it was written, if it be once known that it was. the king who made the order or decree: it is sufficient that unto the Jews were committed to the oracles of God , Rom 3:2 , i.e. the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, one part of which this was, by confession of all; and that the Jews did not falsify their trust therein, but kept those holy books themselves, and delivered them to the world, entire, without addition or diminution; for neither Christ nor his apostles, who severely rebuke them for their mistakes and misunderstandings of some passages of Scripture, ever charge them with any perfidiousness about the canon or books of the Scripture. This book is called the Book of Judges , because it treats of the judges, or of the state of the commonwealth of Israel under all the judges, except Eli and Samuel, who being the last of the judges, and the occasions or instruments of the change of this government, are omitted in this book. The judges were a sort of magistrates inferior to kings, and could neither make new laws, nor impose any tributes, but were the supreme executors of God’ s laws and commands, and the generals of their armies.

Poole: Judges 1 (Chapter Introduction)

JUDGES CHAPTER 1

The tribe of Judah, by God’ s command, begin to make war against the Canaanites, Jud 1:1-4 . Adoni-bezek justly requited, Jud 1:5-7 . They take Jerusalem, Jud 1:8 ; and Hebron. Anak’ s sons slain, Jud 1:9,10 . Othniel subdueth Debir, and so obtaineth Caleb’ s daughter to wife, Jud 1:11-15 . The Kenites dwell in Judah, Jud 1:16 . Simeon subdueth Zephath, Jud 1:17 ; and Judah divers cities of the Philistines, Jud 1:18-20 . The Jebusites dwell with Benjamin, Jud 1:21 . They of the house of Joseph subdue Beth-el, Jud 1:22-26 . Manasseh, Ephraim, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan drive not out the Canaanites; for which they are vexed by them, and are left to dwell one among another, Jud 1:27-36 .

MHCC: Judges (Book Introduction)

The book of Judges is the history of Israel during the government of the Judges, who were occasional deliverers, raised up by God to rescue Israel from their oppressors, to reform the state of religion, and to administer justice to the people. The state of God's people does not appear in this book so prosperous, nor their character so religious, as might have been expected; but there were many believers among them, and the tabernacle service was attended to. The history exemplifies the frequent warnings and predictions of Moses, and should have close attention. The whole is full of important instruction.

MHCC: Judges 1 (Chapter Introduction)

(Jdg 1:1-8) Proceedings of the tribes of Judah and Simeon.

(Jdg 1:9-20) Hebron and other cities taken.

(v. 21-36) The proceedings of other tribes.

Matthew Henry: Judges (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of Judges

This is called the Hebrew Shepher Shophtim , the Book of Judges, which the Syriac and Arabic versions enlarge upon, and call it, The Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel; the judgments of that nation being peculiar, so were their judges, whose office differed vastly from that of the judges of other nations. The Septuagint entitles it only Kritai , Judges. It is the history of the commonwealth of Israel, during the government of the judges from Othniel to Eli, so much of it as God saw fit to transmit to us. It contains the history (according to Dr. Lightfoot's computation) of 299 years, reckoning to Othniel of Judah forty years, to Ehud of Benjamin eighty years, to Barak of Naphtali forty years, to Gideon of Manasseh forty years, to Abimelech his son three years, to Tola of Issachar twenty-three, to Jair of Manasseh twenty-two, to Jephtha of Manasseh six, to Ibzan of Judah seven, to Elon of Zebulun ten, to Abdon of Ephriam eight, to Samson of Dan twenty, in all 299. As for the years of their servitude, as were Eglon is said to oppress them eighteen years and Jabin twenty years, and so some others, those must be reckoned to fall in with some or other of the years of the judges. The judges here appear to have been of eight several tribes; that honour was thus diffused, until at last it centred in Judah. Eli and Samuel, the two judges that fall not within this book, were of Levi. It seems, there was no judge of Reuben or Simeon, Gad or Asher. The history of these judges in their order we have in this book to the end of ch. 16. And then in the last five chapters we have an account of some particular memorable events which happened, as the story of Ruth did (Rth 1:1) in the days when the judges ruled, but it is not certain in which judge's days; but they are put together at the end of the book, that the thread of the general history might not be interrupted. Now as to the state of the commonwealth of Israel during this period, I. They do not appear here either so great or so good as one might have expected the character of such a peculiar people would be, that were governed by such laws and enriched by such promises. We find them wretchedly corrupted, and wretchedly oppressed by their neighbours about them, and nowhere in all the book, either in war or council, do they make any figure proportionable to their glorious entry into Canaan. What shall we say to it? God would hereby show us the lamentable imperfection of all persons and things under the sun, that we may look for complete holiness and happiness in the other world, and not in this. Yet, II. We may hope that though the historian in this book enlarges most upon their provocations and grievances, yet there was a face of religion upon the land; and, however there were those among them that were drawn aside to idolatry, yet the tabernacle-service, according to the law of Moses, was kept up, and there were many that attended it. Historians record not the common course of justice and commerce in a nation, taking that for granted, but only the wars and disturbances that happen; but the reader must consider the other, to balance the blackness of them. III. It should seem that in these times each tribe had very much its government in ordinary within itself, and acted separately, without one common head, or council, which occasioned many differences among themselves, and kept them from being or doing any thing considerable. IV. The government of the judges was not constant, but occasional; when it is said that after Ehud's victory the land rested eighty years, and after Barak's forty , it is not certain that they lived, much less that they governed, so long; but they and the rest were raised up and animated by the Spirit of God to do particular service to the public when there was occasion, to avenge Israel of their enemies, and to purge Israel of their idolatries, which are the two things principally meant by their judging Israel. Yet Deborah, as a prophetess, was attended for judgment by all Israel, before there was occasion for her agency in war, Jdg 4:4. V. During the government of the judges, God was in a more especial manner Israel's king; so Samuel tells them when they were resolved to throw off this form of government, 1Sa 12:12. God would try what his own law and the constitutions of that would do to keep them in order, and it proved that when there was no king in Israel every man did that which was right in his own eyes; he therefore, towards the latter end of this time, made the government of the judges more constant and universal that it was at first, and at length gave them David, a king after his own heart; then, and not till then, Israel began to flourish, which should make us very thankful for magistrates both supreme and subordinate, for they are ministers of God unto us for good. Four of the judges of Israel are canonized (Heb 11:32), Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephtha. The Learned bishop Patrick thinks the prophet Samuel was the penman of this Book.

Matthew Henry: Judges 1 (Chapter Introduction)

This chapter gives us a particular account what sort of progress the several tribes of Israel made in the reducing of Canaan after the death of Joshua. He did (as we say) break the neck of that great work, and put it into such a posture that they might easily have perfected it in due time, if they had not been wanting to themselves; what they did in order hereunto, and wherein they came short, we are told. I. The united tribes o Judah and Simeon did bravely. 1. God appointed Judah to begin (Jdg 1:1, Jdg 1:2). 2. Judah took Simeon to act in conjunction with him (Jdg 1:3). 3. They succeeded in their enterprises against Bezek (Jdg 1:4-7), Jerusalem (Jdg 1:8). Hebron and Debir (Jdg 1:9-15), Hormah, Gaza, and other places (Jdg 1:17-19). 4. Yet where there were chariots of iron their hearts failed them (Jdg 1:19). Mention is made of the Kenites settling among them (Jdg 1:16). II. The other tribes, in comparison with these, acted a cowardly part. 1. Benjamin failed (Jdg 1:21). 2. The house of Joseph did well against Beth-el (Jdg 1:22-26), but in other places did not improve their advantages, nor Manasseh (Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:28), nor Ephraim (Jdg 1:29). 3. Zebulun spared the Canaanites (Jdg 1:30). 4. Asher truckled worse than any of them to the Canaanites (Jdg 1:31, Jdg 1:32). 5. Naphtali was kept out of the full possession of several of his cities (Jdg 1:33). 6. Dan was straitened by the Amorites (Jdg 1:34). No account is given of Issachar, nor of the two tribes and a half on the other side Jordan.

Constable: Judges (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The English title, Judges, comes to us from the Latin translation (Vulgate) that the Greek translation (Septuagint) influenced. In all three languages the title means "judges." This title is somewhat misleading, however, because most English-speaking people associate the modern concept of a judge with Israel's judges. As we shall see, judges then were very different from judges now. The Hebrew title is also Judges (Shophetim). The book received its name from its principle characters, as the Book of Joshua did.

The judge in Israel was not a new office during the period of history that this book records. Moses ordered the people to appoint judges in every Israelite town to settle civil disputes (Deut. 16:18). In addition, there was to be a chief justice at the tabernacle who would, with the high priest, help settle cases too difficult for the local judges (Deut. 17:9). Evidently there were several judges at the tabernacle who served as a supreme court (Deut. 19:17).

When Joshua died God did not appoint a man to succeed him as the military leader of the entire nation of Israel. Instead each tribe was to proceed to conquer and occupy its allotted territory. As the need arose God raised up several different individuals who were judges in various parts of Israel at various times to lead segments of the Israelites against local enemies. These judges were similar to modern mayors of towns. God endowed them with certain qualities and identified them in various ways as being those He had chosen to lead His people. This leadership sometimes involved military command. As God had raised up Moses and Joshua, and as he would raise up David (1 Sam. 16:13), so He also raised up the judges. The writer also described Yahweh as a judge in Judges (11:27). This points out the fact that the judges were God's agents in Israel who judged under Him at this period in the nation's history.

"Though the judge enjoyed great prestige, he was in no sense a king. His authority was neither absolute, nor permanent, nor in any case hereditary; it rested solely in those personal qualities (the charisma) that gave evidence that he was the man of Yahweh's spirit. It was a type of authority perfectly expressive of the faith and constitution of early Israel: the God-King's direct leadership of his people through his spirit-designated representative. . . .

"The judges were by no means men of identical character. Some (e.g., Gideon) rose to their task at the behest of a profound experience of divine vocation; one (Jephthah) was no better than a bandit who knew how to strike a canny bargain; one (Samson) was an engaging rogue whose fabulous strength and bawdy pranks became legendary. None, so far as we know, ever led a united Israel into battle. All, however, seem to have had this in common: they were men who, stepping to the fore in times of danger, by virtue only of those personal qualities (charisma) which gave evidence to their fellows that Yahweh's spirit was upon them, rallied the clans against the foe."¹

Judges is the second book of the Former Prophets section of the Hebrew Old Testament. As I pointed out in the notes on Joshua, the fact that the Hebrews placed the book in this section of their canon is significant. It demonstrates that they recognized it as God's selective history of the period designed to teach spiritual lessons more than simply to record historical facts. God revealed Himself through the events of life and history as well as through the sermons of the prophets.

Date and Writer

Internal references help us locate the approximate date of composition of this book. The clause, "In those days there was no king in Israel," (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25) suggests that someone wrote Judges during the monarchical period that followed the period of rule by judges (amphictyony). Someone probably wrote it after 1051 B.C. when Saul became king. However at the time of writing Jerusalem was still in the hands of the Jebusites (1:21). David captured Jerusalem about 1004 B.C. Therefore the writing of Judges seems to date between 1051 and 1004 B.C.

Jewish tradition suggests that Samuel wrote Judges.² This was the opinion of the writers of the Talmud, the collection of Jewish writings that grew up around revealed Scripture beginning very early in Israel's history. Samuel is a likely writer because of his role in Israel when someone wrote Judges. Samuel's ministry began about 1090 B.C. and apparently ended a few years before Saul's death (ca. 1021 B.C.). If Samuel wrote Judges, he probably did so between 1051 and about 1021 B.C.

Scope

In contrast to Joshua, which spans only about 35 years, Judges covers a much longer period of Israel's history.

The book opens shortly after the death of Joshua (1:1). God did not give us sufficient information to enable us to fix the date of Joshua's death. Leon Wood figured that he died about 1390 B.C.³ Eugene Merrill calculated his death at about 1366 B.C.⁴ The latest event the writer of Judges recorded is probably the death of Samson (16:30-31). Wood believed Samson died about 1055 B.C.⁵ Merrill wrote that he died near 1084 B.C.⁶ Consequently the Book of Judges records about 300 years of Israel's history (cf. 11:26).⁷ The period of rule by the judges, however, extended beyond the events the Book of Judges records to Saul's coronation in 1050 or 1051 B.C.⁸ According to Wood's chronology this was five years beyond the end of Judges and according to Merrill's it was 33 years beyond.

The judgeships of some of the individual judges apparently overlapped. Some ruled in one area of Israel while one or more others ruled elsewhere in some cases.⁹

The Book of Judges does not record the ministries of all Israel's judges. Eli and Samuel were also judges whose work the writer of 1 Samuel recorded. Only the judges whom the divine Author selected for inclusion appear in this book.

Purpose

Arthur Cundall suggested that one of the purposes of Judges may have been to provide apologetic justification for Israel's monarchy.¹⁰ William Dumbrell believed its purpose was primarily to show the sovereign grace of God in preserving Israel in spite of Israel.¹¹ Leon Wood wrote that its primary purpose was to show why Israel did not experience God's promised blessings.¹² Herbert Wolf believed the primary purpose was to show that Israel's spiritual condition determined its political and material situation.¹³ Daniel Block argued that it was to reveal the Canaanization of Israel in the premonarchic period of Israel's history.¹⁴ All these explanations seem to me to be in harmony with what the book records.

Message¹⁵

Joshua reveals that victory, success, and progress result when God's people trust and obey Him consistently. Judges shows that defeat, failure, and retrogression follow when they fail to trust and obey consistently. In this respect Joshua and Judges are like two sides of one coin. The former is a positive lesson and the latter a negative one.

Judges portrays the deterioration of the nation of Israel: what caused it, the course it followed, and the chaos that resulted.

Israel failed because her heart turned from Yahweh, and then her head forsook His covenant. Keil and Delitzsch wrote, "The writer writes throughout from a prophet's point of view. He applies the standard of the law to the spirit of the age by which the nation was influenced as a whole, and pronounces a stern and severe sentence upon all deviations from the path of rectitude set before it in the law."¹⁶

We could visualize the structure of the book as a descending spiral. Israel departed from God, fell under His discipline, repented, experienced deliverance from her oppressors, dedicated herself anew to Yahweh, experienced His blessing, and then apostatized again. In each cycle Israel seems to have sunk lower than she had been previously even though each cycle included a spiritual revival.

Judges reveals the course and process by which Israel deteriorated as a nation. The same process takes place on the personal level as well as on the national level, but it is easier to observe on the national level in Judges.

The root cause of Israel's deterioration was religious apostasy. The Israelites turned from God. They did not drive out the Canaanites as God had commanded (1:21, 27-33). Instead they made covenants with them (2:1-2). Rather than destroying the pagan altars, the Israelites served idols and forsook the Lord (2:11-12, 17, 19).

Their apostasy began with toleration of things that God had condemned and prohibited. In time the Israelites began to admire these things. Finally they conformed to them.

The story of Micah and the Danites (chs. 17-18) is a short illustration of the religious apostasy in Israel at this time. Chapters 17-21 are an appendix to the book.

Religious apostasy led to political disorganization in Israel. Shortly after Israel departed from God it began to come apart as a nation. The people stopped working together toward their God-given goal of possessing the entire land and began fighting with one another instead. At the beginning of the amphictyony the tribes were fairly united, but by the end of this period of Israel's history anarchy prevailed (21:25).

The government in Israel deteriorated from theocracy (rule by God) to anarchy (no rule or government). Israel became fragmented, weak, and unable to withstand her enemies. This is ironic because after Joshua died Israel was in position to begin to enjoy the benefits of the theocracy in the land for the first time. Until Judges opens, God was preparing Israel to enjoy the theocracy in the land.

There are several examples of tribal jealousies in Judges (e.g., 8:1-3; 12:1-6), but the worst example of political disorganization is the vignette that concludes the book. This is the civil war in which 11 of the tribes almost annihilated the twelfth, Benjamin (chs. 20-21). Instead of destroying the Canaanites, God's people allowed them to live among them while the Israelites proceeded to destroy one another.

Another evidence of Israel's deterioration as a nation was social chaos.

Three characteristics marked the social chaos in Israel during the period of the judges. Lawlessness characterized national life. People were afraid to go out in public and traveled the byways rather than the highways of the land (5:6). People committed violent crimes without fear of punishment (ch. 19). Blindness also characterized the people. They were blind to what was happening in their midst, namely, God using discipline after apostasy to bring them to repentance and deliverance. They were also blind to God's dealings with their ancestors in their history. Third, immorality marked Israel's social life. Even Samson, one of the judges, was a victim of this cancer.

The story of the Levite and his concubine who visited the town of Gibeah (ch. 19) is a slice of life out of the period of the judges that shows the immorality that characterized Israel's social life. The behavior demonstrated in this story was the fruit of departure from God. The sin that had previously characterized the Canaanites of Sodom (Gen. 19) now marked God's people. Chapter 19 is a third part of the appendix to the book.

God revealed this process of deterioration to warn all people. Spiritual apostasy leads to political disorganization and social chaos. Social and governmental evils rise out of spiritual conditions. When the Israelites repented and rededicated themselves to God, God brought political deliverance and restored social order.

Judges not only reveals what causes deterioration, but it also clarifies the steps to restoration. Israel's history during this period resembles a downward spiral. The general trend was downward. Nevertheless there were six revivals of the peoples' faith in God and commitment to him too. These revivals cycled in Israel's history at this time.

Israel began from a privileged position of divine blessing.

In time the people apostatized by turning away from God and His covenant to the gods and practices of the Canaanites.

To bring them back to Himself God disciplined His people by allowing them to fall under the control and domination of their enemies. Israel chose to bow down to idols, so God allowed the idolaters to bend her over in bondage. The Israelites tolerated the Canaanites, but God made the Canaanites intolerant of them. The people with the birthright to the land had to hide in caves and among the rocks fearing to show themselves (6:2). God disciplined them severely for their apostasy. In Joshua God dealt with sin primarily among the Canaanites, but in Judges He dealt with it primarily among the Israelites. However, God's discipline was always remedial. God designed it to bring the Israelites back to a consciousness of sin and their need for God.

When the Israelites cried out to Yahweh in repentance, God heard their cry and delivered them mercifully. I mean "repentance" in the general sense of turning to God, not in the specific sense of cleaning up the life. God did not give deliverance as a reward the people had earned, but as grace in response to their helpless cry, as the text makes clear.

When they truly repented, He delivered them by raising up a judge. In each case, deliverance came at the right moment. It always came by the right instrument. God raised up the right person in each case. In almost every case God used one person, either a man or a woman. Judges reveals how God remarkably works through all types of different individuals to accomplish His purposes. He raised up the judge whom He had prepared for the needs of his time and place. Each judge was just right for his mission. In almost every case God used one single individual to change the whole course of history in Israel. E. M. Bounds wrote, "The Holy Spirit does not flow through methods, but through man. He does not come on machinery, but on men. He does not anoint plans, but people--people of prayer."

As a result of this deliverance the people rededicated themselves anew to Yahweh. Spiritual revival was the result of God's physical deliverance.

The people then began to enjoy God's blessing again. God gave them rest from the oppression of their enemies. Arthur Cundall labeled these stages "sin, servitude, supplication, and salvation."¹⁷

God's methods are the same today as they were in the days of the judges.

The fact that the writer repeated this cycle of events six times in Judges points to its timeless quality and its universality. Charles Feinberg wrote, "If ever there were history with a purpose it is here."¹⁸

I would state the message of the Book of Judges therefore as follows. Apostasy leads to disorganization and chaos, but repentance results in deliverance and blessing. This is true nationally and personally.

Constable: Judges (Outline)

Outline

I. The reason for Israel's apostasy 1:1-3:6

A. Hostilities between the Israelites and the Canaanites after Joshua's death 1:1-2:5

1. Initial successes and failures ch. 1

2. The announcement of God's discipline 2:1-5

B. Israel's conduct toward Yahweh and Yahweh's treatment of Israel in the period of the judges 2:6-3:6

1. Review of Joshua's era 2:6-10

2. The pattern of history during the judges' era 2:11-23

3. God's purposes with Israel 3:1-6

II. The record of Israel's apostasy 3:7-16:31

A. The first apostasy 3:7-11

B. The second apostasy 3:12-31

1. Oppression under the Moabites and deliverance through Ehud 3:12-30

2. Oppression under the Philistines and deliverance through Shamgar 3:31

C. The third apostasy chs. 4-5

1. The victory over Jabin and Sisera ch. 4

2. Deborah's song of victory ch. 5

D. The fourth apostasy 6:1-10:5

1. The story of Gideon 6:1-8:32

2. Israel's departure from Yahweh 8:33-35

3. The story of Abimelech ch. 9

4. The judgeships of Tola and Jair 10:1-5

E. The fifth apostasy 10:6-12:15

1. Renewed oppression 10:6-7

2. Oppression under the Ammonites 10:8-18

3. Deliverance through Jephthah 10:1-12:7

4. The judgeships of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon 12:8-15

F. The sixth apostasy chs. 13-16

1. Samson's birth ch. 13

2. Samson's intended marriage to the Timnite ch. 14

3. Samson's vengeance on the Philistines ch. 15

4. Samson's final fatal victory ch. 16

III. The results of Israel's apostasy ch. 17-21

A. The idolatry of Micah and the Danites ch. 17-18

1. The idolatry of Micah ch. 17

2. The apostasy of the Danites ch. 18

B. The immorality of Gibeah and the Benjamites chs. 19-21

1. The atrocity in Gibeah ch. 19

2. The civil war in Israel ch. 20

3. The preservation of Benjamin ch. 21

Constable: Judges

Judges

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan. Land of the Bible. Phildelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969.

Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Poetry. New York: Basic Books, 1985.

Amit, Yairah. "Judges 4: Its Contents and Form." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 39 (October 1987):89-111.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Armerding, Carl. "Samson." Interest 49:3 (October 1983):4-7.

Auld, A. G. "Judges I and History: A Reconsideration." Vetus Testamentum 25 (1975):261-85.

"Avraham Biran--Twenty Years of Digging at Tell Dan." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:4 (July-August 1987):12-25.

Barré, Michael L. "The Meaning of prsdn in Judges III 22." Vetus Testamentum 41:1 (1991):1-11.

Bienkowski, Piotr. "The Role of Hazor in the Late Bronze Age." Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 119:1 (January-June 1987):50-61.

Block, Daniel I. "Gideon: A Rough Vessel." The Standard 77:2 (February 1987):25-27.

_____. Judges, Ruth. The New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999.

_____. "The Period of the Judges: Religious Disintegration under Tribal Rule." In Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, pp. 39-58. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

_____. "The Role of Language in Ancient Israelite Perception of National Identity." Journal of Biblical Literature 103:3 (September 1984):321-340.

_____. "Will the Real Gideon Please Stand Up? Narrative Style and Intention in Judges 6-9." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):353-66.

Boling, Robert G. Judges. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975.

Bright, John. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Bruce, F. F. "Judges." In The New Bible Commentary: Revised, pp. 252-276. Edited by D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970.

Bush, George. Notes on Judges. New York: Newman & Ivison, 1852; reprint ed., Minneapolis: James & Klock Publishing, 1976.

Cassel, Samuel H. "Strong Man: A Scripture Study of the Weaknesses in Strength." Foundations 2 (1959):264-68.

Childe, V. Gordon. New Light on the Most Ancient East. New York: Norton, 1969.

Constable, Thomas L. "A Theology of Joshua, Judges, and Ruth." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 89-113. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Cottrell, Leonard. The Anvil of Civilization. New York: New American Library, 1957.

Craigie, Peter C. "A Reconsideration of Shamgar ben Anath (Judg. 3:31 and 5:6)." Journal of Biblical Literature 91.2 (June 1971):239-40.

_____. Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Creason, James Frederick, Jr. "A Biblical Theology of Judges." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):73-77.

Culver, Robert D. "Did Jephthah Really Slay His Daughter and Offer Her Body as a Burnt Offering?" Evangelical Christian 55:2 (February 1959):69-70.

Cundall, Arthur E. "Judges." In Judges and Ruth by Arthur E. Cundall and Leon Morris. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1968.

_____. "Judges--An Apology for the Monarchy." Expository Times 81 (October 1969-September 1970):178-81.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Daube, D. "Gideon's Few." Journal of Jewish Studies 7 (1956):155-61.

Davis, Dale Ralph. "Comic Literature--Tragic Theology: A Study of Judges 17-18." Westminster Theological Journal 46 (1984):156-63.

_____. Such a Great Salvation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990.

Davis, John J. "Conquest and Crisis." In A History of Israel by John J. Davis and John C. Whitcomb. N.p., 1970; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Day, John. "Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Literature." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):385-408.

Dothan, Trude. "What We Know About the Philistines." Biblical Archaeology Review 8:4 (July-August 1982):20-44.

Dumbrell, William J. "In Those Days There Was No King in Israel; Every Man Did What Was Right in His Own Eyes.' The Purpose of the Book of Judges Reconsidered." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. 25 (1983):23-33.

Dyer, Charles H., and Eugene H Merrill. The Old Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing, 2001.

Emmrich, Martin. "The Symbolism of the Lion and the Bees: Another Ironic Twist in the Samson Cycle." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001):

Exum, J. Cheryl. "Aspects of Symmetry and Balance in the Samson Saga." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 19 (1981):3-29.

_____. "The Centre Cannot Hold: Thematic and Textual Instabilities in Judges." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52 (July 1990):410-31.

_____. "The Theological Dimension of the Samson Saga." Vetus Testamentum 33:1 (1983):30-45.

Exum, J. Cheryl, and J. William Whedbee. "Isaac, Samson, and Saul: Reflections on the Comic and Tragic Visions." Semeia 32 (1984):5-40.

Feinberg, Charles L. "Notes on the Book of Judges." Unpublished class notes, Dallas Theological Seminary, n.d.

Ferguson, Robert U., Jr. "The Danger of Playing Games with God." Pulpit Digest 64:468 (July-August 1984):31-34.

Fritz, Volkmar. "Conquest or Settlement? The Early Iron Age in Palestine." Biblical Archaeologist 50:2 (June 1987):84-100.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Garstang, John. Joshua, Judges. The Foundations of Bible History series. New York: Richard R. Smith, 1931.

Gooding, D. W. "The Composition of the Book of Judges." Eretz Israel 16 (1982):70-79.

Gordon, Cyrus. The Ancient Near East. New York: W. W. Horton, 1965.

Gottlieb, Freema. "Three Mothers." Judaism 30 (Spring 1981):194-203.

Gray, G. Buchanan. The Forms of Hebrew Poetry. Library of Biblical Studies series. Revised ed. New York: Ktav Publishing Co., 1972.

Gray, John. Joshua, Judges and Ruth. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1967.

Greenspahn, Frederick E. "An Egyptian Parallel to Judg 17:6 and 21:25." Journal of Biblical Literature 101:1 (1982):129-35.

_____. "The Theology of the Framework of Judges." Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):385-96.

Gunn, D. M. "Narrative Patterns and Oral Tradition in Judges and Samuel." Vetus Testamentum 24:3 (July 1974):286-317.

Halpern, Baruch. "The Rise of Abimelek Ben-Jerubbaal." Hebrew Annual Review 2 (1978):79-100.

Hawkes, Jacquetta. The First Great Civilizations. New York: Knopf, 1973.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. 6 vols. New York: Revell, n.d.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Inrig, Gary. Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1939 ed. S.v. "Judges, Book of," by A. S. Geden, 3:1772-75.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kallai, Z. "The Conquest of Northern Palestine in Joshua and Judges." Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol I. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1969.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 3 From Joshua to Solomon." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 61 (1971):5-14.

Klein, L. R. The Triumph of Irony in the Book of Judges. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement 68. Sheffield, England: Almond Press, 1987.

Lasine, Stuart. "Guest and Host in Judges 19: Lot's Hospitality in an Inverted World." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 29 (1984):37-59.

Laughlin, John C. H. "Dan." Biblical Illustrator 9:4 (Summer 1983):40-46.

Lawhead, Alvin S. "Grace in the Book of Judges." Preacher's Magazine 58:3 (March-May 1983):25-27.

Lewis, Arthur H. Judges and Ruth. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

Lindars, Barnabas. "Deborah's Song: Women in the Old Testament." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 65:2 (Spring 1983):158-75.

Lindsey, F. Duane. "Judges." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 373-414. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

MacIntosh, A. A. "The Meaning of MKLYM in Judges XVIII 7." Vetus Testamentum 35:1 (January 1985):68-76.

Malamat, A. "The Danite Migration and the Pan-Israelite Exodus-Conquest: A Biblical Narrative Pattern." Biblica 51 (1970):1-16.

Manor, Dale W. "The Topography and Geography of the Jezreel Valley as they Contribute to the Battles of Deborah and Gideon." Near Eastern Archaeology Society Bulletin NS28 (Winter 1987):25-32.

Margalith, Othniel. "The Legends of Samson/Heracles." Vetus Testamentum 37:1 (January 1987):63-70.

_____. "More Samson Legends." Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):397-405.

_____. "Samson's Foxes." Vetus Testamentum 35:2 (April 1985):224-29.

_____. "Samson's Riddle and Samson's Magic Locks." Vetus Testamentum 36:2 (April 1986):225-34.

Matthews, Victor H. "Hospitality and Hostility in Judges 4." Biblical Theology Bulletin 21 (Spring 1991):13-21.

Mazar, Amihai. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000-586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday, 1990.

_____. "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite High place' From the Time of the Judges." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):34-40.

_____. "On Cult Places and Early Israelites: A Response to Michael Coogan." Biblical Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):45.

_____ "A Philistine Temple at Tell Qasile." Biblical Archaeologist 36 (1973):43-48.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "Paul's Use of About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.

Mitchell, T. Crichton. "Abimelech--The Bramble King." Preacher's Magazine 58:3 (March-May 1983):16-19, 61.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the Author, P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Mosca, Paul G. "Who Seduced Whom? A Note on Joshua 15:18// Judges 1:14." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 (1984):18-22.

Mullen, E. Theodore, Jr. "The Minor Judges': Some Literary and Historical Considerations." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44 (April 1982):185-201.

Nel, Philip. "The Riddle of Samson (Judg. 14, 14.18)." Biblica 66:4 (1985):534-45.

The New Bible Dictionary. 2nd ed. S.v. "Judges," by G. T. Manley and D. J. Wiseman.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Mesopotamia," by D. J. Wiseman.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Mill, Millstone," by A. R. Millard.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Number," by R. A. H. Gunner.

Niditch, Susan. "The Sodomite' Theme in Judges 19-20: Family, Community, and Social Disintegration." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44:3 (July 1982):365-78.

Noth, Martin. The History of Israel. 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1960.

O'Connell, R. H. The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges. Vetus Testamentum Supplement 63. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1996.

O'Connor, M. "The Women in the Book of Judges." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):277-93.

The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Second ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Paterson, John H. "The Touchy Tribe." Toward the Mark 16:6 (November-December 1987):110-13.

Peet, J. H. John. "The Chronology of the Judges--Some Thoughts." Journal of Christian Reconstruction 9:1-2 (1982-83):161-81.

Pfeiffer, Robert H. Introduction to the Old Testament. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1941.

Rediger, G. Lloyd. "The Samson Syndrome." Church Management--The Clergy Journal 60:7 (May-June 1984):78-79.

Rendall, Ted S. "The Samson Syndrome." Prairie Overcomer 27:7 (July-August 1984):4-19.

Revell, E. J. "The Battle with Benjamin (Judges xx 29-48) and Hebrew Narrative Techniques." Vetus Testamentum 35:4 (October 1985):417-33.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Scott, Walter. Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. London: Pickering and Inglis Ltd., n.d.

Shanks, Hershel. "Two Early Cult Sites Now Questioned." Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-February 1988):48-52.

Soggin, J. A. Judges: A Commentary. Translated by J. S. Bowden. Old Testament Library series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981.

Stek, John H. "The Bee and the Mountain Goat: A Literary Reading of Judges 4." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 53-86. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Tanner, J. Paul. "The Gideon Narrative as the Focal Point of Judges." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:594 (April-June 1992):146-61.

Torcszyner, Harry. "The Riddle in the Bible," Hebrew Union College Annual 1 (1924):125-49.

Tsevat, Matitiahu. "Two Old Testament Stories [Gen. 32:23-32 and Judg. 10:1-5; 12:7-15] and their Hittite Analogues." Journal of the American Oriental Society 103:1 (January-March 1983):321-26.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. 1957 ed., S.v. "Philistines," by Merrill F. Unger, pp. 859-61.

Unterman, Jeremiah. "The Literary Influence of The Binding of Isaac' (Genesis 22) on The Outrage at Gibeah' (Judges 19)." Hebrew Annual Review 4 (1980):161-66.

van Wyk, W. C. "The Fable of Jotham in its Ancient Near Eastern Setting." In Studies in Wisdom Literature, pp. 89-95. Edited by W. C. van Wyk. OTWSA Series, nos. 15 & 16. N.p., n.d.

Vickery, John B. "In Strange Ways: The Story of Samson." In Images of Man and God: Old Testament Short Stories in Literary Focus. Edited by Burke O. Long. Sheffield, England: Almond Press, 1981.

Walvoord, John F. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

Washburn, David L. "The Chronology of Judges: Another Look." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:588 (October-December 1990):414-25.

Webb, Barry G." The Book of Judges: An Integrated Reading. JSOT Supplement Series 46. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987.

_____. The Theme of the Jephthah Story (Judges 10:6-12:7)." Reformed Theological Review 45:2 (May-August 1986):34-43.

Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language. College ed. Cleveland and New York: World Publishing Co., 1953.

Wilkinson, Elizabeth. "The Hapax Legomenon of Judges IV 18." Vetus Testamentum 33:4 (1983):512-13.

Williams, J. G. "The Structure of Judges 2:6-16:31." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 49 (1991):77-85.

Wolf, Herbert. "Judges." In Deuteronomy-2 Samuel. Vol. 3 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Wood, Leon. Distressing Days of the Judges. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

_____. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Wright, G. Ernest. Shechem, the Biography of a Biblical City. New York: McGraw Hill, 1965.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Judges (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

This Book is called Judges, because it contains the history of what passed under the government of the judges, who ruled Israel before they had kings. The writer of it, according to the more general opinion, was the prophet Samuel. (Challoner) --- Some are of opinion, that the judges might have each left records of their respective administration, (Menochius) which might be put in order by Samuel. The author of this book seems to have lived under the reign of Saul, before David had expelled the Jebusites, chap. xviii. 31. (Du Hamel) --- The captivity, which is mentioned [in] ver. 30, must be understood of that when the ark of God, as well as the idol Micha, and may of the people were taken by the Philistines. (Huet) --- Many passages of the Psalms, &c., are taken from this book, which shew its antiquity, Psalm lxvii. 8., and 2 Kings xi. 21. The divine Providence is here displayed in a very striking manner. (Du Hamel) --- The theocracy still subsisted and God generally chose these judges to be his ministers, and to deliver the people, on their repentance, from some dreadful calamity. (Haydock) --- They exercised a supreme power, yet without bearing the insignia of regal authority, or imposing taxes, or making any alteration in the established laws. The Suffetes, who were Carthaginian magistrates, seem to have taken their name from these Ssuptim. (Du Hamel) --- When God did not raise up judges, in an extraordinary manner, a kind of ananchy prevailed. (Haydock) --- Each of the tribes regarded only their own affairs, and the republic was dissolved. (Grotius) --- Prosperous and unfortunate days succeeded each other, in proportion as the people gave themselves up to repentance or to dissolution. Sicut se habebant peccata populi & misericordia Dei, alternaverunt prospera & adversa bellorum. (St. Augustine, City of God xviii. 23.) St. Jerome (ep. ad Eust. & ad Paulin.) exhorts us to penetrate the spiritual sense of the historical books, and he regards "the judges as so many figures" of the apostles, who established the church of Christ. Though some of them had been noted for their misconduct, they were reclaimed by the grace of God. Then all the judges, every one by name, whose heart was not corrupted, who turned not away from the Lord, that their memory might be blessed, &c., Ecclesiasticus xlvi. 13, 14. (Worthington) --- St. Paul mentions four of them, though the conduct of Jephte and of Samson might have been regarded as more exceptionable than that of Othoniel, who is said to have been filled with the spirit of the Lord, chap. iii. 10. Serarius doubts not but they are all in heaven. Salien (in the year of the world 2640,) supposes that the transactions recorded in the five last chapters, took place before this 40th year from the death of Josue, which was the last of Othoniel. With respect to the chronology of these times, there are many opinions. Houbigant endeavours to shew that the system of Usher is inadmissible, as well as that of Petau. Marsham maintains that many of the captivities, and of the Judges, related only to some tribes, so that the different years which are specified, must be referred to the same period of time. Thus while Jephte ruled over those on the east side of the Jordan, and fought against the Ammonites, other judges endeavoured to repel the armies of the Philistines on the west. See 3 Kings vi. 1., and Judges xi. 16. By this expedient, he finds no difficulty in shewing that 480 years elapsed from the departure out of Egypt till the building of the temple, and that the Israelites had occupied the country of the Ammonites during the space of 300 years. (Haydock) --- Houbigant seems to adopt this system in some respects, and he thinks that errors have crept into some of the numbers, so that Aod procured a peace of only 20 instead of 80 years, &c. He observes that the name of judge here designates, 1. A warrior, like Samson; 2. a person who passes sentence according to the law, which was the office of Heli; 3. one divinely commissioned to exercise the sovereign authority, as Samuel did, even after Saul had been elected king. (Proleg. Chronol.) Others have compared the power of these judges with that of the Roman Dictators, or the Archontes of Athens. (Serarius) --- They were properly God's lieutenants. Their revenue seems to have been very precarious, and their exterior deportment modest and unassuming. They were guided by the declarations of the high priests, when arrayed with the Urim and Thummim; and their business was to promote the observance of the true religion, and to defend the people of God. This book concludes with the history of Samson, describing the transactions of 317 years, (Calmet) according to the calculation of Usher, which has met with the approbation of many of the learned, and is therefore chiefly inserted in this edition, as it was in that which was published in 1791, at Dublin, by the care of the Rev. B. Mac Mahon, who seems to have made some alterations. It is not indeed free from many serious difficulties. But we have not leisure to examine them at present. See chap. iii. 11, 30. We shall only subjoin the chronological table of Houbigant, which is not very common, that the reader may perceive where they are chiefly at variance. Moses governed 40 years, Josue 20, the Ancients 20, king of Mesopotamia 8, Othoniel 40, Moabites 18, Aod 20, Samgar 0, the Chanaanites 20, Debora and Barac 40, Madianites 7, Gedeon 40, Abimelech 3, Thola 23, Ammonites 0, Jair 22, Jephte 6, Abesan 7, Ahialon 10, Abdon 8, Philistines 0, Samson 20, and with Heli 20, Heli and Samuel 25, Samuel and Saul 20, David 40, Solomon 3. In the 4th year of his reign the temple was begun, 480 years after the liberation from Egypt. Those to whom no years are assigned, lived at the same time with others whose years enter into the calculation. Thus Samgar gained a victory over the Philistines, while the Chanaanites held the Israelites in subjection, chap. iii. 31. For other particulars we must refer to the author. (Chron. sacra.) (Haydock)

Gill: Judges (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JUDGES

The title of this book in the Hebrew copies is Sepher Shophetim, the Book of Judges; but the Syriac and Arabic interpreters call it,

"the Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel;''

and the Septuagint only Judges; so called, not because it was written by them, though some think it was compiled out of annals and diaries kept by them; but it seems to be the work of one person only: the true reason of its name is, because it treats of the judges of Israel, gives an account of their lives and actions, and especially such as concerned their office; which office was different from that of kings, and seems only to have been occasional, and chiefly lay in delivering the people out of the hands of their enemies, when oppressed, distressed, or carried captive by them; in protecting them in the enjoyment of their country, rights, and liberties; in leading out their armies against their enemies when needful; and in settling differences, judging law suits, and administering justice. The government of the nation, during their time, was a theocracy. It is not certain who was the penman of this book; some ascribe it to King Hezekiah, others to Ezra; but the Jewish writers ^a are generally of opinion that it was written by Samuel, which is most likely, who was the last of the judges; and it seems plainly to be written before the times of David, us appears from a speech of Joab, 2Sa 11:21; and from some passages in Psa 68:8, which seem to refer or allude to Jdg 5:4; and from Jerusalem being called Jebus, which shows it to be inhabited by the Jebusites in the time of the writer of this book, whereas it was taken out of their hands by David; besides, Samuel himself refers to the annals of this book; 1Sa 12:9; and from whose testimonies, as well as from others in the New Testament, there is no doubt to be made of its being genuine and authentic, and written by divine inspiration; as is evident from the use the Apostle Paul, and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, have made of it, Act 13:20; it is useful as an history, and without which the history of the people of Israel would not be complete; it containing an account of all their judges, excepting the two last, Eli and Samuel, of whom an account is given in the following books, and of some facts incidental to those times, related in an appendix at the end of it, concerning the idol of Micah, and the war of Benjamin; and furnishes out many useful moral observations concerning God's displeasure at sin in his own people Israel, and his corrections for it; and about his providential care of them in raising up for them deliverers in their time of need, as well as points at various virtues and excellencies in great and good men, worthy of imitation. It contains, according to Piscator, Dr. Lightfoot, and others, an history of two hundred ninety and nine years.

Gill: Judges 1 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JUDGES 1

The children of Israel, after Joshua's death, inquiring of the Lord which tribes should first go up against the remaining Canaanites, Judah is ordered to go up, who with Simeon did, Jdg 1:1; and had success against the Canaanites under Adonibezek, whom they brought to Jerusalem Jdg 1:4; and against the Canaanites in Hebron, Debir, Zephath, Hormah, Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, Jdg 1:9; the Benjamites had not such good success as Judah against the Jebusites in Jerusalem, Jdg 1:21; nor as the house of Joseph had against Bethel, Jdg 1:22; nor could the tribes of Manasseh, Ephraim, Zebulun, Asher, and Naphtali, drive out the Canaanites from several places which belonged unto them, though many of them became their tributaries, Jdg 1:27; and as for the Amorites, they were too powerful for the tribe of Dan, though some of them became tributaries to the house of Joseph, Jdg 1:34.