Judges 3:12-30

ADDED SIN, RENEWED CHASTISEMENT, AND GRACIOUS DELIVERANCE. Judges 3:12

CRITICAL NOTES.— Judges 3:12. Did evil again in sight of the Lord.] The word הָרַע or רָעָה from רוּעַ is used the same both here and in Judges 3:7 to signify evil; but whereas in Judges 3:7 we have the verb יּעֲשׂוּ, meaning simply did, or wrought, in Judges 3:12 we have יֹּספוּ, meaning added to former sin (see also Judges 4:1; Judges 10:6; Judges 13:1), or continued to do evil. God does not forget to count the old sin, when He marks the commission of new sin. Did evil,] not evil generally, but the evil to which they were prone, and on account of which the Lord had a controversy with them, viz., idolatry. The Lord strengthened Eglon, the king of Moab, against Israel,] stirred him up, gave him facilities for carrying out the designs of his own heart against that people, and overruled all the circumstances of Providence, so as to give him easy success in oppressing Israel. The name Eglon signifies “little calf.” In the present instance, the contrary epithet would be more correct.

Judges 3:13. Gathered unto him—Ammon and Amalek.] Allied himself with these near neighbours. Moab and Ammon were brothers, having the same parentage, and might naturally be supposed to co-operate in all great enterprises. In the Amalekites the old spirit of Esau breathed, who looked on Jacob with undying hate, because by him he had been defrauded of the blessing. Now that spirit still rankles in the hearts of generations far down the scale; and if we even go on to the days of Jehoshaphat, we find it burning with undiminished intensity (2 Chronicles 20.)—if, as is probable, “the inhabitants of Mount Seir” there spoken of, be the same, in whole, or in part, with the Amalekites (comp. 1 Chronicles 4:42). (See also Exodus 17:14; Deuteronomy 25:18; 1 Samuel 15; Psalms 83:6.) “As God raised up deliverers to Israel when they were penitent, so He stirred up enemies to them, and gave them power to oppress them, when they revolted from Him. Since they worshipped the gods of the people round about them (Judges 2:12), it was fit that they should be punished by those very people.” [Patrick.] In this crusade against Israel, all the parties might not have the same motives, but they were at one in their bitter hatred of that people—the seed of the serpent as against that of the woman—the world as against the church of God. Moab was the chief actor, tempted partly by the richness of the country, for Josephus says it was a “divine country.” Cassel says, “The Moabites longed for the excellent oasis of “The city of Palms.” Jericho was indeed destroyed, but the indestructible wealth of its splendid site attracted them. Perhaps, too, they had began to observe signs of a certain weakness among the tribes of Israel, now that Othniel was dead; for it could not escape the notice of surrounding nations, that states of weakness and strength were periodical with Israel, according as God was absent from them, or was with them. This was now, therefore, reckoned a fit time to put in execution a long-cherished design. A large part of the territory occupied by Reuben and Gad, to the east of Jordan, was of old time possessed by Moab. Of this it had been dispossessed by the Amorites. When the Israelites came round on their march to Canaan, they routed and annihilated these Amorites under Sihon, and took possession of their lands. These lands Moab now claimed, and made this a pretext for war. Josephus says, Eglon first subjugated the tribes to the east of the river, and then made a sudden incursion to the west. He probably regarded the site of Jericho as a good strategical point for headquarters, whence he could stretch his hand on either side with ease. It was also the spot to command the fords; and so he could split Israel into two, preventing those on the east and west sides from helping each other. The city of palm trees.] A heavy curse was pronounced against it by Joshua, and a blight seems already to have fallen upon its name; for it is no longer known as “Jericho,” but as “the city of palm trees” (Joshua 6:26). Sixty years had passed since it had been burned, and it was not rebuilt until the time of Ahab (1 Kings 16:34). But the exceedingly desirable character of the site led the Israelites to occupy it as an unwalled town, or village, but not as a fortress, or compactly built city. Eglon would disregard the curse of Joshua.

Judges 3:14. Israel served Eglon.] He became their absolute master, which was very humbling at the hands of an old enemy, who was struck with dismay before them in the days of Balak. But probably the word has the force of stating that they lay at his mercy, i.e., the mercy of a cruel, despotic, and capricious tyrant. “Eighteen years” is more than double the period of their former servitude. But their sin being repeated was now aggravated.

Judges 3:15. Israel cried unto the Lord.] (See notes on Judges 3:9.) Probably “humbled themselves before Him, acknowledged their offence, begged His pardom, and besought His help.” [Patrick.] They may have used such supplications as are recorded in Psalms 44:20. The Lord raised.] “The same hand that raised up Eglon against Israel, raised up also Ehud for Israel against Eglon.” He was not chosen by the people on account of any supposed gifts of wisdom and prowess which he possessed, but was the instrument God was pleased to employ in working out His salvation for the people. Hengstenberg says, “the choice of means was left to Himself.” That is at best an assertion, to meet a difficulty. It is not likely that God would leave His chosen instrument to use means of which He would not Himself approve. The deliverance here wrought certainly was from God, whose servant in doing it Ehud was. Son of Gera, etc.], i.e., a. descendant of Gera, who was an immediate son of Benjamin (Genesis 46:21). He was a Benjamite in the line of Gera—of that family-tree. Shimei, who cursed David long afterwards, was also “a son of Gera,” which may mean a descendant of Gera; or there were very likely more persons of that name in the same tribe. Benjamin was the tribe which, being nearest, was likely to be most severely oppressed by the invader, and therefore it was fit that the deliverer should come from it. A man left-handed]—shut up, or bound in, his right hand. Some suppose that Ehud was an ambidexter, and could use both hands alike, corresponding with Judges 20:16, and 1 Chronicles 12:2. It is singular, as appears from these passages was the fact, that the descendants of the man who was “the son of the right hand,” should have coveted the distinction of being skilled in the use of the left. The word used here neither means strictly both-handed, nor one-handed, but rather that from some cause he was disabled as to his use of the right hand, and therefore, as Josephus expresses it, “of the two could use the left hand best.” There was some deficiency of power in the use of the right hand, whether from habitual non-use, or accidental defect, it matters not. It was by a man who had only the effective use of his left hand that God delivered His people. A deliverer] means one to set them free from bondage. Sent a present unto Eglon.] Some say, this was a voluntary offering sent to purchase peace with Eglon, or to secure the, lightening of the yoke he put upon them. But the general opinion is, that it was the annual tribute which they were required to pay in acknowledgment of their subjection, and which it was better for them to pay voluntarily, than to have exactors coming through among their homes. It also gratified the vanity of the monarch, and led him to be better pleased with them. The word מִגְחָה, though used of “meat offerings” in Leviticus 2:1, is generally a euphemistic phrase for tribute (1 Kings 5:1; 2 Samuel 8:2; 2 Samuel 8:6), an acknowledgment of dependence, but also a token of goodwill (Genesis 32:18; Psalms 72:10). Ehud was chosen to be the bearer of it, because he was recognised as raised up of God to be the deliverer or redeemer of Israel, and not because of the high place he held in the estimation of his countrymen. [Fausset.]

Judges 3:16. Made him a dagger which had two edges, etc.] The Hebrew word signifies sword (Sept. and Vulg.). The word dagger or dirk properly expresses it here; or, some regard it as a stiletto, as used by the Italians. It was a somewhat peculiar weapon, made very sharp and short, to be both very effective, and capable of being easily concealed. It was clear that the purpose for which it was eventually used was already in Ehud’s mind. The “word of God” is compared to a “sharp sword with two edges,” because it is a more powerful weapon, as applied to the heart and conscience than any other (Hebrews 4:12; Revelation 1:16, etc.). He did gird it on his right thigh (comp. Psalms 45:3), to be in readiness for use by the left hand, and where its presence would not be suspected, the left being the sword side. A cubit length.] Go-med is not the usual word for cubit. The Sept. translates it σπιθαμὴ, which the Greeks made half an ell, or three-fourths of a foot. Being thus only nine inches in length, and the handle also being short, it could easily be concealed. Put under raiment.] Military cloak, or wide flowing garments. He thus would have the appearance of a man unarmed. “With such daggers in their garments, the Sicarii raged among the crowds at the fall of Jerusalem.”

Judges 3:17. Eglon was a very fat man.] Probably was a luxurious liver, and belonged to the class described as “natural brute beasts” (2 Peter 2:12), “whose god is their belly” (Philippians 3:18), “who spend their days amid wealth, and in a moment go down to the grave” (Job 21:13; Luke 21:34; Romans 12:13). Belshazzar and Nabal are examples.

Judges 3:18. Dismissed the people.] His retinue, here called אֶת־הָעָם, implying that there was a considerable number of persons employed to bear the minchah. Also the phrase “made an end to offer the present” implies it was a matter of great ceremony. It is quite in keeping with Oriental customs to make great parade in presenting such offerings. To enhance the apparent value of the gift, a great number of persons, camels, and horses were employed to convey what might have been carried with ease by two or three. (See account in Pictorial Bible in loco.) This ceremony was now gone through with punctilious order, and signs of due submission.

Judges 3:19. Quarries.] פְּסִילִים. In other places where this word occurs it signifies graven images (Deuteronomy 7:25; Jeremiah 8:19; Jeremiah 51:52). So also the Sept. and Vulg., and the margin of our Bibles. The Targum renders as our version. Lias says it is never elsewhere used of stone qnarries; but it is derived from a word signifying to hew stones (Exodus 34:1; Exodus 34:4; Deuteronomy 10:1; Deuteronomy 10:3), where it is used of the making of the two tables of stone. Keil thinks it unlikely that stone idols were set up in the open air, and prefers rendering it as in the text, “stone quarries,” which is the one adopted by the Chaldee, by Rashi, and most Jewish commentators, also by the Syriac version. Fausset prefers “graven images.” which he says the Moabites would put up to mark the conquered country as under the tutelage of their gods, at the place which marked the boundary line of the Moabitish dominion. This was Gilgal, about four miles to the west of Jordan. The name signifies “rolled.” because here the Israelites rolled off the reproach of Egypt by being circumcised. Now that reproach is rolled back on them again, The sight of these images would fire Ehud’s zeal against Eglon. We prefer Cassel’s interpretation, who translates the word boundary stones—not quarries, for this does not harmonise with the locality, but stones set up to mark the borders of Eglon’s territory, which he had wrenched from Israel. They might be called posts, στηλαι or lapides sacri, which marked the line. Honours were generally paid to them, and hence they were called Pesilim, idol-images, or idolatrous objects. The Targum substantially agrees with this, which makes it to mean heaps of unhewn stones. Bachmann only slightly differs, who thinks the Pesilim were idolatrous images set up as boundary marks of the territory ruled over by the heathen king. So Ehud did not feel secure till he had passed the Pesilim. Edersheim concurs, who makes it signify terminal columns, which were always objects of idolatrous worship, that divided the territory of Israel from that of Eglon. He turned again from the boundary stones, etc.] The account now becomes very vivid and graphic. He returns all alone to the king, perhaps within a few hours. His coming alone both disarmed suspicion, and also consisted with his profession to have a sacred mission to the king. Eglon would doubtless be already fovourably impressed towards the man who had been, only a few hours ago, the bearer of so handsome an offering, and would be prepared to grant any reasonable request he might make. The way was thus open; and Ehud, as if eager and in haste, said—rather, bid say, to the king, “I have a secret word to thee, O king.” On hearing this, the call is given הָס Hush! All present at once understood, and retired, leaving the sovereign liege and his vassal together alone. “All that stood by.” The attendants did not sit in the royal presence; all stood. It was natural to suppose that Ehud wished to communicate something which, at his previous visit, he could not tell in the hearing of the people who were with him.

Judges 3:20. And Ehud came unto him.] At first he appears to have been only in the ante-chamber. Now he is admitted into the inner apartment—the king’s own. This is called a summer parlour, an upper room of cooling. Luther calls it, his summer arbour. It was something like a Turkish kiosk—“a small room built by itself on the roof of the house, having many windows to catch the breeze.” At that part of the course of the river, its bed lies low, and there being high grounds on either side, it is necessarily very warm, so that such a cooling shelter is greatly needed. An Eastern traveller says, “there is often a door of communication from the cooling apartment, or alijah, into the gallery of the house, besides another which opens immediately from a privy stair, down into the porch or street, without giving the least disturbance to the house.” Persons having secret audience with the king might be admitted or dismissed through that private stair, without passing through the rooms of the house. The apartment where the king was sitting was properly intended for purposes of entire seclusion and rest, but might be used as an audience chamber—which he had for himself alone.] It was entirely for his own private use. Possibly Ehud found this out only on the early part of that same day, when he came with the present, and saw how things were arranged in the king’s palace. He then discovered that it would be perfectly possible to get access to him alone, could he but assign a proper reason for asking such a privilege. Doubtless he prayed for Divine direction and success in regard to what he was about to do, for he felt he was working for God. And Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee]—from Elohim—which Ehud would understand to mean the true God, the God of Israel, but which Eglon would probably regard as a name for the gods. We cannot suppose that Ehud a man chosen by God Himself for doing His work, should directly lie to the heathen king, saying that chemosh or some heathen deity had sent him, and so by a nefarious method seek to gain his end. It is also quite fanciful to suppose, as Cassel does, that the reference is not to the Deity at all, but to the supreme authority of Moab—the reigning monarch, of whom Eglon was only a satrap or liegeman. The reference must have been to the Deity; and even if Eglon had regarded it as meaning the God of Israel, princes sitting on his throne had trembled at that name before and might do so again. The story of Balak and his frantic efforts to get that people cursed by their God, had lived down through the three generations that had elapsed since; and the destruction of the whole of the Canaanitish peoples before the sword of Joshua, created a mighty shock among all the surrounding nations; so that the name of such a God was certain to strike with dismay every heart among the worshippers of idols (Joshua 2:9; Joshua 2:11; Joshua 9:24). To have a message sent direct to himself personally from such a Deity, would inspire Eglon with an undefined awe, and he would almost involuntarily rise from his seat, at the very mention of such a thing. It was really a message from the God of Israel to Moab’s ruler, in a way similar to that which was addressed to Pharaoh. To the latter the message was, “Let my people go, that they may serve me.” To the former, it was a message of doom. “Because thou hast oppressed my people so long, now the hour of thy doom and of their deliverance has come, and thou must die.” Ehud might have supposed that this statement would induce the king to rise, but the principal reason for his so addressing the monarch was to assure him from whose hand the blow came—the God whose people he had been treading down like the mire. We believe that Ehud’s conduct was straightforward throughout, and without deceit, however strong the step he was taking.

Judges 3:21. At once Ehud put forth his left hand, etc.] We now see the value of Ehud’s left-handedness. He could lay his hand on his dagger without exciting any suspicion, till it was too late for the victim to call for help. In like manner Cleander stabbed Parmenio while he was reading a letter. And Clement, a monk, who had obtained a commission to get into the presence of Henry III. of France, stabbed the king the moment he was bidden to draw near. Metillius Cimber, along with other conspirators, pressed closely on Cæsar, making most urgent entreaty for the recall of his banished brother, and so they all closed in upon their victim.

Judges 3:22. And the haft also went in, etc.] It appears there was an actual perforation of the body The poniard was so forcibly thrust into the abdomen, that the hilt followed the blade, and, the fat closing on both, it was impossible to draw the dagger out again. To show the force of the blow, it is added that the excrement came out. The king appears to have fallen without being able to utter a single cry; the deed was done so swiftly and so overwhelmingly. Ehud lost not a moment. First, he is careful to lock the door or doors (for there seems to have been two—one leading into the antechamber where the attendants usually stood in waiting, and the other leading to the private stair which conducted down to the porch or front hall and street). He must, at the foot of that stair, down which he went, have had to pass through some of the attendants before getting to the outside of the building. But his demeanour seems to have been so cool and collected, that no suspicion was excited of anything so terrible having happened in so incredibly short a space of time; and more especially, as not even the most distant hint, or sign, of throwing off the yoke of the conqueror had been given, but the very contrary had happened that very day. Nothing therefore was farther from their thoughts than such a suspicion. But what did occur to them we are told of in—

Judges 3:24. They said, Surely he covereth his feet, etc.] The rules required that they should not enter into the alijah or private cooling chamber, till the person who had been privileged with the secret audience had gone away, nor, indeed, till called. After waiting for some time, and no call being made, they examined the doors of the alijah, both of which they found locked. On which they concluded that their lord was taking his siesta—it still being the hot part of the day. In this case, it would have been dangerous for them to have awakened him, at any rate for some time. Hence they waited till they were ashamed of having waited so long. Then only they began to suspect that all was not right. These small circumstances, though natural, were yet overruled by Divine Providence to accomplish important ends. To gain time was essential to Ehud’s safety. Had the servants burst open the door at once, he would infallibly have been pursued, and brought back to be put to a certain and cruel death—that which they would reckon suitable to a regicide, and so the great cause of the liberation of God’s people from a foreign yoke, with which Ehud’s life was bound up, would have come to nought. It was of God that such thoughts should be made to rise in the minds of the servants, and so, that much time should have been allowed to elapse, ere a discovery was made of the fearful tragedy which had just been enacted. At length they opened the doors with another key, of which the chief officer of the house was in possession (for it was his privilege to keep a duplicate of the key) and behold their master was stretched on the floor quite dead!

Judges 3:26. And Ehud escaped while they tarried.] That Ehud should make a clear escape was of God. First he got to the boundary-stones. These are referred to, because they marked the border between Moab and Israel as it then existed. Then he took the direction towards Ephraim, and seems not to have halted till he reached “Seirath,” where he reckoned himself safe from pursuit. It was either a forest or weald, that bordered on the cultivated land near Gilgal, and extended into the mountain or hill country of Ephraim (Joshua 17:15); or it was a continuation of the bushy, rugged hills, that stretch to Judah’s northern territory from Mount Ephraim (Joshua 15:10). But Seirath is little known, and is not referred to again. It seems to have been in Ephraim, on the southern frontier, and near the borders of either Judah or Benjamin.

Judges 3:27. Having got among his own people Ehud felt there was not a moment to be lost. With vigorous hand he seized a trumpet, and blew a blast loud and long, awakening the whole land with the tidings, that now the door was open for regaining their precious liberties from the yoke of the oppressor. They had but to follow up the blow that had been struck, and every home in Israel would be free. It was a true “reveillé” note. Fresh with hope Israel rose at the call. As awakened out of sleep those who heard it sprung up, and came trooping to the deliverer—from the caves, the thickets, the rocks, and even the pits, in which the country abounded (1 Samuel 13:6), and to which the people in large numbers had betaken themselves, as a refuge from the oppression of Moab. It was chiefly the men of Ephraim and perhaps of Benjamin who responded to the call; and they went as one man, flushed with the hope that victory was already sure, and that God was with their deliverer in the work which had been so well begun. Ehud had already matured his plan of operations. Believing that so much depended on courage and confidence, he himself sets the example, not calling to them to move forward, but going forward himself in front, and then calling on them to follow him. The vital point of strategy was the fords of Jordan. With these in their possession, they could prevent the Moabites on the west side from returning homewards, and equally prevent those on the east side from crossing over to assist their countrymen who were attacked on all sides in the land of Israel.

Note to Judges 3:27. It has been noticed in connection with the people taking refuge in the mountains, that “in those days of cruel warfare and oppression, the home of liberty was always in the fastnesses of the mountains. As the narrative of Xenophon shows, the mountain peoples in the Persian empire were practically independent of the central power. So in the middle ages, the Swiss mountaineers defied alike the power of Austria and Burgundy. And among ourselves, the history of Wales and the Highlands of Scotland, are proofs, that even a powerful government had very little real authority in the inaccessible recesses of the mountains. It is only the rapid advance of modern discovery which has enabled us to penetrate these regions, and to place the invaders of a mountain district upon a footing of something more like equality with its defenders.”

Judges 3:28. The Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands, etc.] This announcement coming from the lips of the man whom God had already owned with such signal success, would inspire them with the assurance of victory. Moving on with leaps and bounds, they soon reached the fords of Jordan; of which they at once took possession, and slaughtered the Moabites who came in straggling bands from Jericho, with the view of crossing the river. Of the whole army of Eglon on the west side of the river, not a man seems to have escaped. There fell of them 10,000 men—all robust or chosen men—(אּישׁ שָׁמֵן robust, well-conditioned, חַיִל power, valour) and men of valour. This had the effect, we are told, in Judges 3:30, of crushing all further attempts of Moab to oppress Israel.

NOTE.—How we are to view Ehud’s conduct. Most commentators pass a severe censure on “the manner in which Ehud acted throughout this whole transaction, and feel difficulty in accounting for the fact, that God should make use of such means to emancipate His people from bondage. Some go so far as to deny to Ehud any grandeur of character at all, and accuse him of duplicity and sleight of hand. Others, while admitting that a measure of admiration is due to the courage he displayed, his heroic spirit of self-sacrifice for the good of his country, and his purity of motive on the whole; yet denounce the means he adopted as treacherous and savage. Most writers regard it as conduct of which God could not approve, and notice that it is not said “the Spirit of the Lord came upon him,” and that no special mark of commendation is put on his conduct, while his name is not found in the list of those “elders who by faith obtained a good report.” Neither, we might add, is it said that “the Spirit of the Lord came upon” Barak, or Tola or Jair, who were all “judges” of Israel, and the first of whom has his name enrolled in the honourable list of the men of faith. As to that list, it is evident, that only a few names are given as a specimen; otherwise, why should no mention be made in it of such men as Joshua, Caleb, Othniel, and many others? As to the means adopted, if these had been displeasing to God, would there not have been some special mark of His disapprobation given, of the manner in which the messenger had fulfilled his duty, as in the case of Saul, when he returned from his expedition against Amalek, and was severely reprimanded for having failed to perform the commandment of the Lord; or, as in the case of Moses, when, standing in the stead of God, he smote the rock, in a spirit of unhallowed impatience, in place of calmly and solemnly speaking to it.

It is affirmed in the record, that “God raised up Ehud to be a deliverer” to Israel (Judges 3:15). Admitting this, Hengstenberg says, “the choice of the means was left to himself.” Fausset adds, that “assassination by a lie and treachery was a method of his own devising.” The Speakers’ Commentary regards his adoption of such a method as due to the age in which he lived, when human society applauded such acts, though viewed in the light of Christianity and the advanced civilisation of the present day, it would be reckoned a serious crime. Dr. Cassell holds that the brilliancy of the act cannot exculpate its highly reprehensible character. Ehud had, indeed, zeal for God, but “the Spirit of the Lord inspires neither such artifice, nor such murder.” While The Pulpit Commentary sees, in this transaction, the Ruler among the nations making use of bad actions as well as good ones, to subserve His purposes. Thus, Jacob’s deceit in obtaining the blessing, is referred to as an illustration. But there the Divine disapprobation was distinctly marked in Jacob’s future history. If the Jews put the Saviour to death, and thereby God’s high purpose in our redemption was fulfilled, they never contemplated any such issue, but thought only of gratifying their own malicious feelings against a Messiah, in whom they were completely disappointed. This was no parallel to the case of Ehud, who had no end of his own to serve, but meant only to carry out the purpose of Him who sent him. Besides, the Divine displeasure with the conduct of the crucifiers has been expressed with unexampled emphasis in the whole of their subsequent history. Ehud’s name, on the contrary, has been handed down to immortality, without a single note of disapprobation at what he did, while the Providence of God wrought along with him, and protected him at every step in his perilous enterprise.

These explanations of Ehud’s act appear to us to be alike defective and erroneous. We do not believe that God would choose an agent to do an important work in which His own glory was concerned, such as the emancipation of His own people from bondage, without both giving him qualification for the work (or causing the Spirit to rest upon him), and also giving him instructions as to how he should act so as to glorify God in the doing of it. Had Ehud out of revenge, and at his own instance, committed a cold-blooded murder on a defenceless man, without a note of warning, hurrying him into the presence of his God all unprepared, with his crimes on his head, even though he was lying under a ban, was a tyrant, a heathen, and an oppressor, we cannot suppose that God would accept such a deliberate act of assassination as the means of working out His holy purposes, without some explicit mark of reprobation of the means used. Had Ehud put Eglon to death of his own thought, it must have been murder, and that is a crime of such magnitude, that when committed by one who was acknowledged by God to be acting as His servant, it must have been marked by the sternest condemnation. Even among men, such an act could not escape severe reprehension, on the part of all who repudiate the principles of retaliation, and who believe it wrong to do evil that good may come. We feel then shut up to the conclusion, that, in what he did, he acted in obedience to Divine command. This agrees with his own declaration, “I have a message from Elohim unto thee,” and the parallel statement in Judges 3:19, “I have a secret errand unto thee, O King,” meaning a message, or errand of doom. In going to the king then, he acted as one commissioned; it was not at his own instance. The statement in Judges 3:28 corresponds, “Follow me, for the Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands.” This seems to be said oracularly, as by one who was under God’s guidance in the whole transaction, and had received the intimations of His will.

This we believe is the first step to any true explanation of the facts. The matter proceeded from the Lord. The Supreme Ruler took this method of executing sentence on a noted criminal under the administration of His moral government of the world. It is not Eglon’s personal sins as a man that are here referred to so much, as his crimes in his public character as the King of Moab, and the long-known oppressor of God’s people. To oppress any people without cause was a crime of itself; but Eglon was chargeable with something incomparably more heinous. He had dared to attack the people whom Jehovah had set apart for Himself, to be His own, to be His jewels, to be called by His name, and to be entrusted with the high duty of holding up that name for the reverence of the world. That people were the custodiers of the Divine honour, and their history was inseparably associated with the promotion of the Divine glory in the earth. To attempt to crush such a people, as Eglon had done, was to challenge the majesty of Israel’s King as their Protector; it was to stretch forth his hand against the Lord’s annointed; it was to maltreat the beloved children of the living God; it was to lay unholy hands on the sacred property of the Most High; it was to waste the church of the living God, an object incomparably dearer to Him than heaven and earth.

For such a crime Pharaoh and all his host had been cast like a millstone into the the sea. From the days of the redemption from Egyptian bondage onwards, every other potentate that had dared to lift a hand against this people had been ground to the dust. And now here was this Prince of Moab not only trampling them under foot, but taking occasion thereby to magnify his own gods, as superior to the great “I am” of the oppressed Israel. This contempt of the Divine name, and the treading down as the mire of that people whom God so dearly loved, constituted Eglon’s special crimes. It is for the Judge of all the earth to decide as to the time, the form, and the means, whereby any transgressor under His government shall be punished. Pharaoh He overthrew in the waters of the Red Sea. The Canaanites He wasted by the sword of Joshua. The ringleader in the sin of Baalpeor was put to death by the javelin of Phinehas. And now the head of the Moabitish nation must meet death at the hand of Ehud, the man whom God has raised up to deliver His chosen Israel. If such a proceeding should be thought harsh, what shall we say of the hundreds of thousands of Canaanites who were put to death so sternly and unrelentingly, that in all the cities attacked not a man, woman, or child was left to breathe. This was done by Jehovah’s express command on account of the extremely heinous character of their sins. And if such a spectacle is justifiable, where vast multitudes become victims, it is a comparatively insignificant matter to hear of the same thing being done where only a solitary individual is concerned.

But there is no cruelty, or barbarity in either case. Rather in such cases we see the Righteous Governor among the nations giving to the wicked the due reward of their deeds. Should the punishment inflicted seem to us appalling, the natural and wise inference is, that there must be something correspondingly awful in that which could have brought down such a doom upon them, at the hands of so merciful and just a God. If men wonder at the terrible nature of the calamity, which is not only permitted, but appointed, in such a case, to take place, why should they not equally wonder at the terrible character of the cause which has gone before—the greatness of the sins committed? Men are so accustomed to the exercise of God’s forbearing mercy, that they forget what is due to the majesty of His great name. They reflect not, that in conducting His holy government, He must, before all other things, maintain the purity of His own character as God, His authority as Supreme Ruler in His own universe, and give specimens of how He will, sooner or later, visit with just indignation flagrant and long-continued sin. To show forth God’s glory, by making His universe a scene of holiness and happiness, was the grand end for which all things were made, and not to suit men’s wishes by sparing them though running on to any length in a career of sin, and forgetfulness of Him to whom they owe their being. Men’s wishes are not the principal element that guides the formation of God’s purposes; and though He will never forget the length and breadth of His tender mercies in His dealings with men, what is due to His own character as God will ever form His first consideration in the moral government of His intelligent creatures.

It does seem strange, that many persons who write on this subject, and attempt to account for the tragic character of this death, should make little or no mention of the heinous character of the sins of him on whom the judgment fell. May we not suppose that, to fix the eye on the atrocious aspect which this man’s sin presented to the God of Israel, was the real reason why the naked narrative is allowed to stand as it is, without any farther explanation? All the spectacles of mourning and woe in this world are simply the natural consequences of sin. If the woe be so dreadful, even though it is but the beginning of sorrows, how dreadful in God’s estimation must be the character of the sin of which it is the index!

But to rise for a moment to the higher view of God’s method of acting in His government of this world. Human life is justly reckoned more precious in this age of advanced civilisation than it was in the days of Ehud, and especially under the light of a much longer and fuller experience of the value of Scriptural truth, than the early fathers had. Yet, however revolting to us the act of assassinating the King of Moab may seem; though we regard as truly terrible the massacre of whole Canaanitish peoples, the aged and the feeble, the women and the children, as well as those who could carry arms; and though we are appalled at the slaying of all the first-born in the land of Egypt in one night, or at the destruction of a formidable Assyrian army at one fell stroke—all these are but temporary specimens of Jehovah’s jealousy for the honour of His holy name, and fall far short of the height of that eternal monument which He has set up in sight of heaven and earth in the cross of Christ, as a spectacle to be looked at by all, where every eye may read, through everlasting ages, the real estimate in which He holds His own glorious perfections, the measure of reverence which is due to Him as God, and His unalterable determination not to lower His standard in judging of the evil of sin, but to give it a treatment to the full as it deserves, whatever sacrifice it may cost!

To sum up: We regard this act of Ehud as the infliction by Jehovah’s direction, of a special retribution on the head of the heathen monarch, for having dared to insult the majesty of the God of Israel, and for having oppressed the people that were called by his name. But though clearly justifiable as having been commanded of God, it is yet to be viewed as one of those special events that seldom happen, and form almost a class by themselves. It is on no account to be held as a warrant, or precedent, to authorise any one, however zealous, for God’s cause, to rise up against a blasphemer of God’s name, or a persecutor of God’s people, in any other age, and put him to death in like manner. For Ehud did nothing of himself, but only as he was commanded of God—God alone has the right to punish the adversaries of His own truth.

It is also to be particularly noted that this event belongs to the history of the Old Testament period, which takes its complexion throughout from the fact, that the great atonement had not yet been made, and that God, in all His dealings with man, acted as the unpropitiated deity. Hence a certain aspect of sternness and rigour in the divine dispensations, which disappears when the great sacrifice on Calvary has been offered. In that sacrifice, so grand an exhibition has been made of “the righteousness of God” with all its claims, and such security has been taken against all possible lowering of the standard of the evil of sin, that there is not now the same necessity for displays of the divine anger against men’s wickedness or for heavy judgments occurring in Providence to manifest God’s jealousy, as did exist in the anti-christian age. Though sin itself be the same still—ever hateful to a holy God, and though it is attended now with even higher aggravations than under the former economy, so gloriously complete is the satisfaction which has been rendered to the character of Him whose law has been transgressed, that the way is opened for a more benignant exercise of the Divine government among men, and other monuments are not needed to impress men’s minds with the terrible evil of sin, and God’s determination to punish it as it deserves, so far as the present world is concerned. Hence God’s attitude towards men in this the Christian age has in it the character of “the God of peace,” because all His transactions with them are done under the shadow of Calvary.

MAIN HOMILETICS.— Judges 3:12

SIN—SUFFERING; PENITENCE AND DELIVERANCE REPEATED

It is to be noticed that the history of mankind generally, and of this people in particular, is represented in the Bible as always taking place under the observation of God as “King of all the earth.” God is the faithful witness and rightful judge. It is His world which men occupy; they are His creatures, made to serve and to glorify Him; His sceptre is over them; and it is before Him, and to Him, that human life is led. Hence it is ever said, the actors, in history, did this or that “in the sight of the Lord.” “The children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord.” He is the constant observer of men’s conduct. “The ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and He pondereth all His goings.” He looks on men’s conduct not merely as a spectator, but as the judge who has to reckon with them at last. It is “He with whom they have to do.” To Him all that is done in human life belongs, and He is the proper judge of it all. To Him men are accountable for all their actions; for was not man brought into existence to show forth God’s glory by his love and obedience (1 Samuel 2:3). It is His prerogative to sit in review of men’s actions from day to day, and to pass an absolutely accurate verdict on every man’s character and conduct, with the authority of the judgment seat, from which there is no appeal. That man acts wisely who says, “with me it is a small thing to be judged of you, or of men’s judgment.; He that judgeth me is the Lord.” Here we have—

I. Now sin added (Judges 3:12).—“Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord.” There is emphasis in saying—“did evil again.” It implies—

1. A painful surprise. After such thorough yet tender dealing on the part of the covenant God, it might have been supposed that the ungodliness of the people would have been effectually cured, and that henceforth no accounts would have been heard, but those of hearty and permanent allegiance to Him, whom they had accepted as their own God. The disease had been so deeply lanced, that it might well have been supposed to be now entirely eradicated, and that we should hear no more of Israelitish apostacy. What long suffering had been shown! What arguments of loving kindness and tender mercy used! What faithfulness in using the rod rather than permit them to continue the infatuation of sleeping on in sin! But alas! for the inconstancy and shallowness of human good resolutions apart from the grace of God! Here they are, sinning as before, in the sight of God’s holy heavens, as if “the Lord did not see, and the God of Jacob did not regard.” After being crushed to the very dust under the weight of Divine chastisements, they yet show themselves capable, when the pressure of the Divine hand is removed, of committing over again the same fatal error, of going astray from the living and true God. But we have the same truth in every part of human history. Go back to the days of the great deluge. We have the same account given of the human heart after that catastrophe as before (comp. Genesis 8:21, with Judges 6:5)—or, come forward to our own times, and after all the superior advantages enjoyed, and greatly multiplied arguments used, the same melancholy truth comes out, that men are by nature “bent to backsliding” from the living and true God. After their long chapter of sad experiences, this people “did evil again in the sight of the Lord.”

2. Deeper guilt. It was heinous sin to apostatise the first time. It was greatly more aggravated sin to do it a second time. On many accounts it was so. It showed more deliberation in the act of rebellion, more stubbornness of will, and greater defiance of the Divine Authority. It also implied the heavy guilt of despising all the argument involved in the close and faithful dealing God had with them, in the terrible chastisements He had already brought down on their heads. To what purpose had all the severe remedies been made use of if the old evil should now break out again? Had the faithful use of the rod, by the wise and kind Father, in the awful scourge of the Syrian invasion, for eight years been wholly in vain? And must the same drastic process be gone through again, ere the cancerous spot be removed? Fearful was the guilt of this people to forget their sacred character so far, as “a holy nation and a peculiar people,” dedicated to the service of God by so many hallowed ties, as even once to cross the line between fealty and apostacy; but what shall we say of their daring to lift an unhallowed foot in that direction again, notwithstanding all the entreaties, warnings, and chastisements used to prevent them, by their gracious and long-suffering God? This was a systematic despising of the voice of their God.

3. A perplexing problem to solve. Why should the children of such holy men as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob become such incorrigible rebels? This is the puzzle that meets us everywhere in the history of God’s Israel. Greater obstinacy in sin, or more wilful persistence in forsaking a holy and loving God, could hardly be found among the worst of the heathen nations. How then can we account for such a tendency among the descendants of the most pious stock that ever existed in the history of our humanity, and who, if any, might be expected to be an honour to our race, for their strictly religious character, and entire consecration to the keeping of God’s commandments? Some reasons, indeed, may be assigned for the present apostacy.

(1) The people had lost their leader. We hear of no outbreak of the tendency to go after other gods, so long as he was alive. Had he been at the helm of affairs now, there is little doubt how he would have acted. Swift and sure would have been the steps he would have taken to restore the spirit of reverence for Jehovah’s character and law throughout the kingdom. At whatever risk, he would have tolerated no disloyalty to the Divine King. He would have said, “It is not necessary for me to live; it is indispensable that I should be faithful to my God.” As a “judge” he was responsible for seeing that the people had at least a visible respect for the covenant of their God. And while he was alive, both by his example and personal influence, not to speak of his authority as judge, he would have deterred many from turning aside to crooked ways. But now that he was gone no barrier remained to the bursting of the banks of the river, so that, almost at once, idolatry again reached the floodmark among the chosen people!

(2) Aspostasy was due in part to the universal evil example. It is not easy to withstand the force of the current when surrounded by a multitude of waters. While the whole human race around them were moving strongly in one direction, it was hard for a single nation to stand out by itself, and dare to be singular. This may in part account for the fact, though it does not afford the slightest justification of the lapse into idolatry. If, on the one side the temptation was strong, the motives on the other side were incomparably stronger. The word and character of their God ought infinitely to have outweighed every other consideration; but to this had to be added the long course of gracious and solemn dealing He had had with them, from the beginning of their history onwards. Besides this general consideration, their aspostacy was inexcusable, on the ground of the strong representation of the dangers arising from giving way to it, and the many helps and encouragements supplied for maintaining their stedfastness in the covenant. The greatest care also was taken to make them live apart from “the world lying in wickedness.” Israel was to “dwell safely, being alone” (Deuteronomy 33:28.) Thus too is it with the people of God in every age. When they are separate from the world they are safe; when they are in it, they are in danger (2 Corinthians 6:17; 1 Corinthians 15:33; Acts 2:40; Acts 2:44; Proverbs 13:20; Psalms 26:8; Psalms 101:4; Ephesians 5:11).

(3) Idolatry was their easily-besetting sin. While all sin is strong in a sinful nature, there is a specially enslaving power in an “easily-besetting sin.” By it a man is led captive, even when his eyes are open to the terrible consequences which must come out in the end. He is like a captive in chains. Idolatry had a fascination for the eye of the Israelite. It allowed him free indulgence in all the corrupt propensities of his fallen nature. In one word, it allowed him to make his God after his own wishes. This was the great allurement to idolatry among mankind everywhere. No wonder if God should say of it, “Oh, do not this abominable thing which I hate.” It diverted the homage of the creature from being given to the Creator, and led to its being bestowed on the meanest and most grovelling things. Yet it presented to man the form of a religion, and gave room for the exercise of the devout feelings of the heart—so satisfying the craving for a religion which exists in man’s nature. Such a system kept the Israelite abreast of the religious fashion of the age. He did not require to be singular, and look sourly on every other form of religious worship that was practised among the nations.

(4) A new generation had sprung up. It was not the same generation that saw the great deliverance which God had wrought by Othniel. It was a new generation that had not seen God’s mighty works, on behalf of Israel, with their own eyes. Their fathers in all likelihood told them much of the glorious past, and they would listen with interest to the thrilling accounts; but not having personally passed through the scenes described, and regarding them only as matter of hearsay, they would be looked on as little better than beautiful shadows. Out of this circumstance would sin deceitfully construct an apology. The impression made by a bare recital is indeed not of so vivid a character as when one personally passes through the excitement of great perils, and is an eye-witness to sublime deliverances wrought. Yet the bare recital, accompanied by irrefragable evidence of the truth, and astonishing character of the wonders accomplished, was sufficient to inspire the most thorough belief, and to call forth earnest gratitude and devout obedience. It is thus that God always reckons—that after generations should give Him their allegiance and confidence, because of mercies which He has bestowed on generations that have gone before, of which an account is given to those that come after. The whole series of generations He views as hanging together, both as regards duties, and as regards privileges. He never addresses any one generation as if it stood apart from all the rest. Links are always supposed to exist, binding the whole in one—links of duty—of a common heritage—of a common example, instruction, and interest. They are always addressed as one people, allied in blood, as children of one father, heirs of the same promises, and partakers of the same Divine covenant-relationship, with its laws, and ordinances, and privileges, and hopes. The men of this backsliding generation, therefore, were verily guilty in not having been fully confirmed in their allegiance to God by the argument derived from the experience of the fathers. (See pp. 92–94.)

(5) The inveterate depravity of the human heart. This is too truly the principal reason that accounts for the apostacy of Israel from their God. Nothing could more strikingly bring out the fact of this inveterate depravity than the truth that in all ages, under all circumstances, and among all peoples, the heart shows an invariable tendency to depart from the living God. The tendency indeed shows itself with all the force and regularity of a law, and hence we read of “the law of sin.” We have also the distinct testimony of Scripture, “The Lord looked down from heaven on the children of men to see if there were any that did understand and seek God. They are all gone aside—there is none that doeth good; no, not one.” This testimony is given twice over (Psalms 14, 53). A melancholy confirmation of the testimony we have in the history recorded in the book of Judges. Of Israel it may be said that “though woo’d and aw’d” they are “rebels still.” “Neither ministry, nor miracle, nor misery, nor mercy, could mollify their hard hearts, or contain them within the bounds of obedience.” [Trapp.] The unqualified verdict of Him who searcheth the heart is, that it is “desperately wicked”—or incurable by any natural means. Alas! for the honour of our race, that it should pass into a proverb “humanum est peccare,” and yet this is mild compared with the Divine verdict.

II. New chastisement inflicted (Judges 3:12).—“The Lord strengthened Eglon against Israel,” etc.

1. The Lord chastises in faithfulness (pp. 118, 119). In all circumstances God marks sin with His abhorrence. As He would be faithful to Himself, He must keep up a due sense of His sovereign authority, and the unsullied purity of His character and government, before the eyes of His creatures. According to an established arrangement with His people (Psalms 89:30), He gives them to understand, it is due both to Him and to them, that they should be chastised when they sin against Him. He afflicts them to show His jealousy for His holy name; that He is deeply offended with sin even in His own people; that He cannot love them at the expense of His own glory as a holy God; that He cannot allow them to go on in sin at the expense of sacrificing their best interests; that He cannot trifle with that which would poison their happiness, and sap the foundations of their future good. By chastisement, too, He reminds them that sin implies loss of character, as well as loss of favour; that it brings them under the Divine frown, and sinks them in the scale of honour. And finally He afflicts them, to bring them quickly to a state of penitence and reformation of conduct. He impresses it on them, that while they continue to sin, He must continue to punish; and that if, after all His dealings with them, “they will not hearken, but walk contrary to Him, then He will walk contrary unto them in fury, and chastise them seven times for their sins.” The standard of His holiness as absolutely perfect must not be let down, in the estimation of the subjects of His government, however clamantly certain circumstances may seem to call for a relaxation. His moral government, even of a sinful world, must go on without a stain, notwithstanding that so much sin is ever being committed. How that could be so, consistently with His vast designs of mercy, was a problem for His Divine wisdom to solve. And in the great sacrifice of Calvary, we see the purity and righteousness of the Divine character kept up, for ever, at an absolute height. But as there is need, in every age, for some immediate expression of the Divine displeasure, in the case of individual sins as they are committed, this is supplied by chastisements, both to remind us of the sin-hating character of our God, and to be a check on farther indulgence in sin.

When sin is committed afresh, after the application of costly means of cure, men would be disposed to give up the case in despair, or to inflict summary vengeance once for all on the transgressors. God does neither; but with a patience which is calm and regular as the laws of nature, He proceeds again in the same course which has already proved abortive; and for many times he does so, to show the glory of His long-suffering, and the multitude of His mercies (Psalms 106:43).

2. He makes use of a new rod. It is not the same scourge that is now employed. A nation by their side is raised up, apparently one of the weakest of the surrounding nations, certainly one that hitherto had been too much awed by the mighty hand, and outstretched arm of the God of Israel, to dare to meet them in battle array. Moab now becomes “the rod of God’s anger” to chastise his people for their unfaithfulness to His covenant. For the greater part of a hundred years, they had longed to wreak their vengeance on this much hated people, but hitherto had lacked courage and opportunity. Now both are supplied, and with eager foot, they tread the soil of Israel, for purposes of plunder and oppression. God’s quiver is full of arrows, and it is glorifying to Him to show the fulness of His resources, by using a variety of instruments to execute His will. It proves His universal supremacy to make choice now of one, now of another nation, in turn all round, to serve His purpose—not always the most suited, but though the most unfit, yet made by Him most successful in gaining the end. (See pp. 88, 89).

3. He sends a more severe token of His displeasure. When a man has had the character of having been a transgressor in the past, and is brought up anew, charged with crime at the bar of justice, it must go harder with him, than if he had been spotless before. For now he shows more settledness of purpose as a criminal, and greater persistence in defying constituted authority. Thus it was with Israel. Theirs was now a case of sin added to sin. The old sin was remembered when the new sin was committed, and the guilt was accounted to be much greater than before, calling for many stripes. We do not know indeed, that the oppression of the Moabites was heavier than that of the Mesopotamian hordes. Probably there was not much to choose between them. But it was certainly much longer continued. Now it is 18 years of servitude, whereas formerly it was but eight years. In this respect, the scourge was much more severe, not only because the lash was longer applied, but also because God showed that His ear was more heavy to hear their prayer. It was also a deeper humiliation to be trodden upon by a people whom till now they had despised, from their birth onwards, and who had been accustomed for more than three generations to tremble at the name, and the mention of the God of Israel. “It must have been most mortifying to Israel to see Jericho, the very city which had been delivered into their hands by a miracle, now made a Moabite stronghold to guard the passes of Jordan, and to keep Israel down in lasting subjection. Now, too, their old enemies, Ammon and Amalek join against them. Their adversaries seem to flock together to crush them (Psalms 83:5). They would not serve the Lord with their corn, wine, and oil, which He had given them; so now they must serve the oppressor, and pay him tribute of all (Hosea 2:5; Deuteronomy 28:47.)”

As to their groanings under the yoke, the history is silent. These we can only imagine; but doubtless they implied a deep sense of degradation as well as suffering. This feature of passing over details in silence adds greatly to the sadness of the history of so many victims of oppression, in various countries of the world, in the terrible past. How much more miserable has this world been in its numerous wretched homes, than the world itself knows! What heavy clouds of sorrow have discharged their contents on these homes at various epochs, of which no record has been kept! Had that portion of the history of our race which has been left untold, been given in full on the printed page, in what red and dark colours must the pen have been dipped, suitably to pourtray the facts! How many heart-rending cries have gone up before high heaven, which no human ear has heard, from the wretched, down-trodden subjects of tyrannical and despotic rulers in the ages of the mournful past, not only among savage nations, but those also that are the so-called civilised! We need not conjecture what sufferings must have been endured but never told, under the iron hands of such incarnations of cruelty, as Jenghis Khan and Tamerlane, of Tartar notoriety, or the occupants of the throne of the great Mogul; but were the history of it written, what tales of misery might be given to the world from the prisons of Europe, the mines of Siberia, the slave-grounds of Africa and America, and the manifold homes of oppression and hardship in lands which have been ruled over by capricious and cruel monarchs! What cries of bleeding, tortured, mangled humanity have been raised which no ear of sympathy has ever listened to, save that of Him who “looks down from heaven to hear the groaning of the prisoners,” to mark the oppression of the poor, and the sighing of the needy, and who will appear in due time “to judge the world in righteousness, and the people with equity!”

4. He helps His enemies against His own people. “He strengthened Eglon against Israel,” etc. How He did so we are not informed, but in Providence He so ordered it that all Eglon’s schemes and efforts should succeed, while disastrous failure attended all the movements of Israel. On a former occasion, while the Lord was with His people, Balak had no power to curse them, or to lift a finger against them; but now Jehovah not only permits the heathen king to triumph, but Himself actually takes the side of the enemy against His own. How deep must have been the provocation given, when the Divine Father proceeds to take the part of a ruthless stranger, in the enslavement and degradation of His own son! It was even worse. It was giving up His wellbeloved child, whom He had so tenderly cared for all along, to be savagely beaten by a slave; while He, the Father, stands by, not to protect Him from chastisement, but rather to see that a sufficient number of stripes is given! This is the same God, who was always so ready to exalt the horn of Israel, in opposition, or in preference to, all others! How great the offence which He must have taken at Israel’s sins! Yet this mysterious dealing of the God of Jacob was really a blessing in disguise. Seeming to work against them, He was by this course all the more effectually working for them. He was casting the metal into the fire to get the dross consumed. He was thus opening their eyes, and leading them to see that things must be fearfully out of course, when their God deemed it necessary to join Himself to their enemies. It was God fulfilling, in part, the awful threatening which He had long ago made in the days of Moses (Leviticus 26:28), when He would walk contrary to them in like manner as they had walked contrary to Him. In short, it was lifting the veil of warning in time, to prevent the fearful issue of being for ever cast off.

III. New expressions of penitence (Judges 3:15).—“The children of Israel cried unto the Lord.”

1. In distress they flee to the universal refuge. As when a ship is overtaken by a great storm at sea, those who sail in it either cast anchor, or betake themselves to some accessible harbour of refuge, so these Israelites in their extremity fell back on the Divinely-established means of relief in prayer. Taught by a bitter experience that “the ways of transgressors are hard,” the unfaithful Church soliloquises in her bondage thus—“I will go and return to my first husband; for then it was better with me than now.” Prayer is indeed a refuge for all. It is the instinctive cry of the creature to Him who made it, when feeling its feebleness, its wants, its perils, above all its sins and their threatening consequences. “Should not a people seek unto their God?” “Is any afflicted? let him pray.”

Prayer is the cry of the heart in returning to its God. It is a refuge for all. “O thou that hearest prayer, to thee shall all flesh come” (Isaiah 56:7). While we are in the land of the living, we are in the place of hope, and on praying ground. While the gospel trumpet blows, prayer is never shut against the guilty during the day of human life. For all classes, mercy’s gate in prayer stands open—at all times, and under all circumstances. God is said to sit on a “throne of grace” to receive all the petitioners who come to Him. By whatever name miserable men are known, it is the privilege of all to come to this throne, before which a brother-man as mediator between God and man continually pleads.

As the “Creator” of all, God finds an interest in every living being. As the “Father of mercies,” He is “kind even to the evil and unthankful.” Rejoicing in the consciousness of His own fulness, He is naturally disposed to supply the wants of the needy. As being Himself the “ever-blessed God,” He finds pleasure in diffusing happiness among His creatures around Him. But it is a guilty world that He has before Him, and a special mode of approach is established. Christ as sacrifice and intercessor is the way. “Through Him we all have access by one Spirit, unto the Father.”

The voice which Christianity raises among the abodes of our suffering humanity, is one, not only of hope, but of assurance, that the God in whose hands we are, is disposed to listen to all the cries and plaints that come from distressed hearts. The notion of the ancient Epicureans, who represented the Deity as indolently reposing in His own high region of undisturbed happiness, careless of what might pass among men under His footstool, on whom He could hardly deign to look, has long since been exploded as a dream of the murky nights which brooded over men, ere yet the “Day-spring from on high” began to gleam on their dwellings of sorrow. Abortive, too, have proved the efforts of the men of cold intellect, during the past, and a portion of the present century, who would represent the Deity as dwelling apart from men amid the unapproachable splendours of His own heavens, having cut off every tie with His creatures, regarding their history as too insignificant to engage His attention, and their interests too unimportant to claim His aid. On the contrary, Christianity teaches that “The Lord looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth, and considereth all their works; that He is good unto all and His tender mercies are over all His works; that the eyes of all wait on Him, He opens His hand and satisfies the desire of every living thing; that His eye is on the righteous, and His ear is open unto their prayer; that He is the helper of the fatherless, relieveth the widow, preserveth the strangers, and looseth the prisoners”—in one word, that He is “The preserver of all men specially of them that believe.” To this God all men are taught to pray, coming with penitent hearts, and asking, in the name of Christ, for such things as may be agreeable to His will.

2. They had a special plea with God as children of the Covenant. The plea which men had with God merely as His creatures, is lost on their becoming sinners. “For we know that God heareth not sinners.” He cannot continue to be the Father of apostate children. He cannot bless the guilty, till some great thing is done to dispose of their guilt. But this people were adopted by God into the relation of Father and children, on the ground of the covenant He had been pleased to establish with them; and thus though by nature “far off” from God, they were “made nigh.” The great promise, “I will be a God to thee,” went with them as a pillar of hope in all the steps of their wonderful history. And however often they might come with their requests to His throne, He was never weary of remembering the word of His covenant, and acting according to it in all the difficulties through which they had to pass. “I said not to the seed of Jacob, seek ye me in vain.”

3. Their temporary apostasy did not shut them out from the privilege of prayer. It might be said, that if men as God’s creatures, lost their title to call God Father because of their sins, for the same reason, these children of the covenant ought to be held as having lost all title to any of the blessings of the covenant. This would have been the case but for two reasons;

(1) They had a mediator to plead for them in their priesthood, and the continual sacrifices were laid on the altar, as the means of propitiating.
(2) Their apostasy was not allowed by their covenant God to become permanent. For if so, they must, in the nature of things, necessarily have forfeited every title they had to God’s favour and promised blessings, on the ground of their sacred relationship. That is, God must have cast them off. In these latter times the most solid and permanent security is taken that the privileges and blessings reserved for the people of God shall not be lost—prayer included. The rule which is laid down objectively reads thus: “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the Righteous.” “We have a Great High Priest that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God: let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace,” etc. No case that is once fairly put into the hands of that advocate can be considered hopeless. For “He is able to save to the uttermost,” etc. And we have “boldness to enter into the holiest, by a new and living way, even by the blood of Jesus, which He hath consecrated for us,” etc. And there is provision made subjectively also. “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever.” What is the force of this but practically saying, on the one hand, if the Spirit is given, no other blessing can be withheld; and such arrangement is everlasting; while, on the other, it is doing the same thing as “putting God’s laws into the mind, and writing them in the heart,” so that the most effectual security is taken for the fulfilling of the condition of the covenant, and so it is established for evermore.

IV. New Deliverances experienced (Judges 3:15).—For an account of this we must read the narrative, and mark how providence overruled events so as to secure the complete emancipation of the people from their state of vassalage. The point to be noticed is, that the hand of the Lord specially directed the events to this issue.

1. This deliverance came in answer to prayer. Thus is it best seen, that all is “of Him, through Him, and to Him,” and so it is the mode most glorifying to God. It is the fixed rule—“Ask, and ye shall receive.” Acknowledge the Fountainhead. “When the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, He raised up a deliverer.” His compassion and tender mercy would prompt Him to save them at the mere spectacle of their misery, but to maintain His character as the Holy One of Israel, He grants deliverance only in answer to their professions of return to God, and suitable expressions of their sorrow for sin. Their professions in most cases might be only in appearance, and in only a few cases might there be “that godly sorrow for sin which needeth not to be repented of.” The majority of the people may only have done what they did in Hosea’s days—“howled to God on their beds,” without crying to Him with their hearts (Hosea 7:14). Yet God is pleased to see even the appearance of penitence, and in cases where temporal blessings are concerned, He often gives these though there should be nothing more than the appearance (1 Kings 21:27). There is however, in every age “a remnant”—“the living in Jerusalem”—“the Israelites indeed”—“the tenth”—who “follow the Lord fully,” and whose “hearts are circumcised.” These would now act the part of Ezra (Ezra 9:6), or of David (Psalms 51:17).

2. It was brought about by a suitable instrument. God Himself made the selection. “He raised him up.” As a particular description is given of him, the features of that description must he held to indicate the reason of his fitness to serve as an instrument for accomplishing the Divine purpose. It was a man who wanted the natural use of his right hand, and had only left to him the effective use of his left. He seems likely to have been among the last who could do any great thing by his own power. And his fitness seems to have consisted rather in his defects, than in his powers. God at one time chooses one that is specially gifted, at another one that is defective, to show that He can do his work with any kind of instrument. For while a man’s natural gifts are not despised, but made use of so far as they can be of service, it is not so much by these that he succeeds in discharging his mission, as by the special aid given him by the Spirit of God. “Not by might, nor by power,” etc.

The manner of the Deliverance. We believe the manner of accomplishment, as well as the end to be gained, were matter of Divine direction to Ehud. He was commissioned to deliver Israel from Moabitish bondage. This was to be accomplished.

(1) By the death of the King. The oppressor was marked to die. Eglon had served God’s purpose in being a rod wherewith to chastise His children, and now that the purpose is served, there being no further need for it, He casts it into the fire. [Trapp]. How many illustrations of this kind occur throughout history! All the nations round about the ancient Israel so suffered in the end, because of the injuries or indignities they inflicted on the people of God. How many examples might be found among the kingdoms or powers of Europe during the Christian era, who once persecuted the church of God, and have had troubles and degradation in their future history. For it is specially to be noticed that whilst a valuable purpose was served by the chastisement of the backsliding church, that was as far as possible away from the intention of these persecuting powers. Their only thought was partly to gratify their malice against a religion which they intensely hated, and so they strove to put it down; and partly to extend their own power and possessions. To do this at the expense of the interests of the church of God, was to offer an insult and defiance to Him to whom the church belonged.

Eglon’s sins, therefore, were not merely, that he had acted the part of a public robber, in seizing the property which belonged to another nation, and that as a tyrant and oppressor he had for a great length of time filled the homes of that nation with misery and wailing. But he had dared to stretch forth his hand against the Lord’s anointed—a sin which even David shrunk from after he had himself been anointed, and when the object was the wicked Saul, whom the Lord had now rejected, from being king. Because this monarch had been chosen to the sacred office of being king over God’s people, and so had the Divine seal set upon him in that office, David preferred to risk his own life rather than do harm to one whose person had thus become consecrated. It was therefore a grave crime of which Eglon had been guilty, for Israel had been thus consecrated, and so were regarded by their God as sacred property. Their name He had associated in the most intimate manner with His own great name. By them, and their history, was His name known on the earth. In attacking such a people, Eglon was virtually making war upon Jehovah Himself! A worm of the dust was defying the Omnipotent at arms! God’s jewels he had been appropriating to himself, and treating them as if they were the merest dross! Eglon, though himself an alien, had dared for so long a time to treat God’s dear children as if they had been the veriest slaves! This was the same people before whose march God had dried up the sea, and rolled back Jordan when in full flood; for whose &c in the desert, for He had caused the rock to gush forth streams, and the heavens above to rain down manna; before whom every nation in Canaan, from the one end to the other, had been either annihilated or paralysed, and who still lay under the shelter of the same Almighty arm.

Now the time was come for delivering Israel, and at the same hour, Eglon’s sins come into remembrance before God, not having been repented of, nor a pardon given. Hence the sentence goes forth that the oppressor of God’s Israel must die, and His ransomed ones be set free from the yoke, while Ehud is the man appointed to execute the work.

(2.) Special qualifications were given to the instrument chosen.

(a.) We hold it to be a rule, that in all cases where God sends a man on a special mission, He both qualifies and directs him more or less in the discharge of the duties of that mission. Many have felt a difficulty in supposing that God had given instructions to Ehud in the present case, because there seems to be a cold-blooded and deliberate murder committed, with circumstances of treachery and lying accompanying it. But we have already seen, that before God, Eglon’s death was not regarded as murder, or the unlawful taking away of life, but a just retribution on a daring criminal, under the Divine government, for his great sins, at a point when the time had come for the emancipation of his vassals, and for the infliction of his own doom as their oppressor.

(b.) Objection. As to the charge of duplicity and deceit, our judgment must be guided by the interpretation we put on the narrative itself. To us the main features of the story are consistent with perfect honesty of purpose and truthfulness of statement. His principal statements are, “I have a secret errand unto thee, O King,” and “I have a message from God unto thee.” It has been generally supposed, that by this he meant some statement which he was to make in words, which was used as a mere blind to gain for him admission into the royal presence, and also to deceive the king and throw him off his guard. But why make any such supposition? We believe Ehud sincerely meant what he said. He had a message from God to deliver, but it was one of deeds not words. He meant to say, “I have come with a message from that God against whom you have so dreadfully sinned, whose name you have blasphemed, whose people you have trampled on, and whose power you have defied; and that message is, that your hour is come, and you are doomed by my hand to die! There is no strain in this interpretation; it seems most natural, and yet it vindicates the uprightness of Ehud throughout the transaction. That Eglon put another interpretation on the words is beside the question. He was already a doomed man before Ehud’s visit, and had no right to any mercy shown. Already he had had a long day of mercy, and the last moment had now expired. From Ehud’s words he was given distinctly to understand whence and why the blow came that stretched him a corpse at his feet.

(c.) On Ehud rested the spirit of loyalty to his God. He was specially called by God to be the saviour of his people, who formed at that time the only church of God in the world. Like as God said to Saul, “Go and smite Amalek, and spare them not; slay man and woman, infant and suckling,” or like as Joshua was commanded concerning the Canaanites and other nations, “thou shalt utterly destroy them, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” So now Ehud received the command, “Go and slay Eglon, the oppressor of my people, and spare him not.” It was a very stern duty that was imposed upon him, both very revolting in itself, and involving the greatest risks to his personal safety. It was, we believe, the last thing which he would have chosen to do, if it had been left to himself to decide. But believing that all God’s commands were in truth and uprightness, he went forward in Joshua-like spirit at the call of duty. It was, indeed, not a duty of so bewildering a character as that imposed on Abraham, when required to offer up his only son as a burnt offering, yet it was a severe test of his loyalty to his God, and his staunchness to the call of duty.

(d.) He had the spirit of self-sacrifice for the cause of God on earth. He had to discharge this duty alone. “Of the people there was none with him.” He dismissed all that accompanied him on his first visit to the king. He kept the secret locked up in his own bosom. He prepared the instrument of death unknown to others; and every step of the omnious journey was undertaken alone. Other “judges” were commanded to raise an army, generally one far inferior in number and equipment to the force of the enemy. But in such a case there is something, however little it might be, to sustain natural courage. But here there is nothing. Only such is the will of his God; and the end to be gained is the liberation of his country, and, what was to him more important still, the preservation of the Church of God on the earth. And for that he risks all. Since not only the well-being, but the very existence, of the cause of God on the earth depended on his going through with the perilous duty entrusted to him, he takes his life in his hand; and without a murmur proceeds to discharge it. He stood the test of zeal for the holy cause in which he was embarked.

(e.) He had the spirit of great boldness and courage. Many such cases stand out in history, such as that of the Roman Seæva, a soldier of Cæsar’s, who at the siege of Dyrrachium alone resisted Pompey’s army until he had two hundred and twenty darts sticking in his shield. It was said of the great Caesar that he always said to his soldiers, “Come,” never “Go”—meaning that he himself ever went first. It was also said of Hannibal, the Carthagenian general, that he was always first in the battle and the last out. Truly heroic courage was displayed also by the Swiss Tell, and the Scottish Wallace, and many other great patriots. But in the courage and boldness displayed by these “judges,” there was a higher than the natural element. They went forward in a state of absolute fearlessness, conscious that Omnipotence itself was with them, that all obstacles must give way before them, and that success would attend their action with the certainty of a law of nature. Thus moral considerations were at the root of their courage.

(f.) He had the spirit of strong faith. He believed that God would, by his hand, work a great deliverance; both because he believed that He had such complete control of all events and issues, that He could in any circumstances open a way of escape, and also because he had the conviction that God was with him, and would not fail him. Over all his other armour, this warrior threw “the shield of faith,” and so became not only mighty, but invincible. This accounts for all his high qualities, and for his noble bearing throughout the whole occasion. It was by his faith that he obtained a good report. His allegiance to his God, his spirit of self sacrifice for the cause of God, his courage, coolness, zeal, and fearlessness all arise from his strong faith.

When he left his companions and returned alone, the thought which he carried in his heart was the terrible one of taking a life, and that in cold blood. It was too the life of a king surrounded by all the attendants of his household, and chosen troops within easy call. It was a king too who had long been able to crush Ehud’s people. It was to be done in open day and in the very heart of the palace. He knew that if he should make the attempt and not succeed, his own life was certain to be forfeited, and that he would die a very cruel death. He was single handed in the project; he had no backing; nor any place of shelter to flee to. The deed itself was of the most tragic character, and in all but universal estimation, would be reckoned infamous. Even if successful it was fitted to mark his name with a stigma to future ages. Yet he is calm, intrepid, and decided. There is no hesitation, no flurry, not a doubt as to what he should do—not a trace of blanching seen in his countenance, nor a moment’s misgiving felt in his heart. He is in no hurry, neither before nor after, nor does he show the slightest discomposure in any of the steps taken. How do we account for this demeanour? Was it merely natural courage? Was he a fanatic, or a desperado? Was he nothing more than a patriot in the usual sense of the term? Did he hold human life so cheap, and regard it so legitimate a thing to get rid of tyrants, that he was reckless what means might be used if only the end could be accomplished?

We do not so interpret the character. Ehud, we believe, acted as a man who felt he had received a sacred commission from Jehovah to execute judgment, not on a fellow man merely, or on a wicked man, but on one who held the church of God bound down under oppression, and whom it was necessary to get rid of, now that the hour was come for setting the captive free.

(3.) The Providence of God co-operates in bringing out the issue. Ehud found remarkable facility in carrying out every step of the process. He might have said, “I came; I saw; I conquered.” Not an obstacle remained standing in the way. We hear of no demurring on the part of his companions, that he should return to the city of palm-trees, nor does any suspicion seem to have been awakened among the enemy by his return visit. He had already secured favour at court by the presentation of his handsome gift. The effect of his statement that he had a secret errand to the king (the nature of which he was not bound to explain), was that admission was at once granted to the royal presence, for still there was no suspicion. Nor in Eglon’s own mind was there any apprehension of danger, for he gave the signal for their being left alone together. The other circumstances—his never supposing that Ehud came as an enemy, his rising up to meet him, and his not calling aloud for help—all seemed arranged for the successful execution of the project. Ehud’s firmness of nerve and coolness of manner, his locking the door of the summer-parlour and abstracting the key, his going down by the privy stairs into the porch, and calmly passing through such of the attendants as might be there, while no suspicion of anything wrong having been done was excited, seemed all to be providentially arranged. And still more striking was the fact, of the attendants waiting so long, before they entertained the thought that something wrong had occurred. Every minute of time during which they waited was most precious to Ehud, for it allowed him to get clear away, not only beyond the boundary stones, but also to escape as far as Mount Ephraim, before any arrangements could be made for pursuit.

Farther, the fact that no pursuit was made, and that the Moabites were paralysed from taking any kind of energetic action by the death of their king, specially favoured the success of the scheme. All this was crowned by the activity which was awakened on the other hand in Israel, the spirit of enthusiasm which in a moment took possession of all classes, and the vigour with which they threw themselves on the astonished Moabites, ere they had time to recover from their consternation. In all these items there was not a single interruption to what might be called Ehud’s good fortune, or as we interpret it, not a single break in the chain of favouring providential circumstances. Had there been only two or three particulars propitious, success might either have not come at all, or have been greatly delayed, and so the hand of God might not have been distinctly traceable in the occurrences. But when so many circumstances hang all together in a chain, and several of them were less likely to have happened than their opposites, while yet every one of them directly favoured the result that was sought, we cannot resist the conviction that all was arranged by the Ruler of Providence to effect the emancipation of his chosen people.

COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS.— Judges 3:12

GOD’S MESSAGES

What constitutes a message from God to any man? Any intimation of His will made, either directly to a single individual alone, or generally to a number of persons together, with individual application to each. It may be made:—

(1.) By words, written or spoken.

(2.) By Providential events or dealings.

(3.) By the workings of conscience, or impressions made on the mind consistently with right reason, or it may be in other ways still. Scripture throughout is generally a Book full of messages from God to each individual reader.

I. God’s messages are of different kinds.

That at now sent from God to Eglon by the hand of Ehud was of a very special character. It was determined altogether by Eglon’s relations to the people with whom God’s name was intimately associated, and under whose special protection they were. It was one, therefore, of an awful character, corresponding with these two facts, that he had dared to stretch out his hand to crush God’s church on earth, and he had dared to blaspheme the name of the Holy One of Israel. Hence, it was a message of doom. But messages addressed to men generally are of all different kinds. In God’s word there are messages of:—

1. Reconciliation. Sometimes an individual man is addressed, as in the case of Nicodemus, Zaccheus, or the jailor of Philippi. More frequently men in masses are addressed with a strict application to each distinctly understood. But either way, this message which is sent to all, is the most important of all messages, and gives colour to all. Nothing can be more important for guilty men than to hear that God is willing to receive them back again into His favour, and has actually provided means complete and effectual for their being so received; and that now He calls them, commands them, and pleads with them to become reconciled to Him. The sentiment of 2 Corinthians 5:18, is not only paralleled by many passages, but is the general drift of God’s addresses to men every where in Scripture.

2. Repentance. This is a message which God sends to every man in connection with the message of reconciliation, Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17; Luke 13:3; Luke 13:5; Acts 17:30; Acts 20:21; Acts 2:38; Isaiah 1:16; Ezekiel 18:31; also Daniel 4:27; Jeremiah 3:12; Psalms 95:8; Joel 2:12, etc., etc.

3. Faith. That every man all the world over should believe in Christ—is God’s message in chief to every reader of the Bible, and every hearer of the preached Gospel. Compliance with that message carries with it compliance with all others. Hence we find this message put in the fore ground in every part of God’s word—for the most part addressed to men generally with an individual application, as John 6:29; John 5:24; John 3:16; John 3:36; 1 John 5:11. And this call to believe which is so often made is always accompanied by the assurance that pardon of sins, peace with God, and the gift of eternal life shall follow the true exercise of faith, John 6:47; Mark 16:16; Romans 5:1; Romans 10:4; Romans 3:25.

4. Life and Salvation. These appear in many forms, but are all messages from God, properly so called to mankind sinners as such. These are offers of pardon, peace, and every blessing through Christ; invitations to come to Christ; calls to accept of Christ as a Saviour; promises to give every blessing from first to last, which the blood of Christ has procured; entreaties to accept what is put within our reach; expostulations employed to overcome men’s backwardness, or reluctance; and threatenings made use of when other means fail, so that men may be appealed to on every side of their nature.

5. Gospel privileges. Such as:—

(1.) Access to God, in prayer and otherwise; as Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 10:19; Ephesians 2:18., etc., etc.

(2.) Acceptance with God. This, along with pardon, constitutes justification before God, as in Romans 5:1; Romans 3:24; Galatians 2:16, etc.

(3.) Peace of conscience. Romans 8:1; Romans 8:6; Philippians 4:6; Psalms 119:165, etc.

(4.) Adoption. All who receive Christ to become theirs are greatly raised in rank, and cannot be regarded as less than sons. Hence, John 1:12; Galatians 4:4, etc.

(5.) lndwelling of the Holy Spirit. Galatians 4:6; Romans 8:9; Romans 8:16; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Galatians 5:25; Ephesians 5:18, etc.

(6.) Fruits and witnessing of the Spirit, such as love, hope, joy, gentleness, humility, etc. See Galatians 5:22; Romans 8:16; 1 John 4:7; Romans 5:2; Romans 5:5; Romans 8:24; Romans 15:13; Philippians 4:4; 1 Corinthians 13:4; 2 Timothy 2:24; 1 Peter 5:5.

(7.) Guidance. Psalms 32:8; Psalms 73:24; Psalms 107:6; Proverbs 2:1; Psalms 37:5; Proverbs 4:13; Acts 16:6; Acts 16:9, etc.

(8.) Support and protection. Psalms 37:3; Psalms 34:9; Psalms 23:1; Psalms 23:5; Psalms 55:22; Psalms 91; Exodus 19:4; Deuteronomy 33:27.

6. Special tokens of Divine favour. Given to David in 2 Samuel 7; to Abraham in Genesis 22:15; to Jacob in Genesis 28:10, and in Genesis 32:28, also Revelation 3:5; Revelation 3:10, etc.

7. Deliverances. Message to Hezekiah in 2 Kings 19:28; 2 Kings 19:32; Isaiah 10:24; chariots, of fire round about Elisha, 2 Kings 6:15; to Joram, 2 Kings 7:1, etc.; to Joram and other two kings, 2 Kings 3:17; to Joash, King of Israel, 2 Kings 13:17, etc.; to Ahab, 1 Kings 18:44, Exodus 3:7; to Jehoshaphat, 2 Chronicles 20:15, etc.

8. Messages of warning and threatening to the false prophet, Jeremiah 28:16; to Hezekiah, Isaiah 38:1; to Pharaoh, Genesis 41:1; Genesis 41:25; to Eli, 1 Samuel 3:11; to house of Israel, Hosea 2:6; 2 Kings 8:11; to Ahaziah, 2 Kings 1:16; also adverse providences, such as sickness, bereavements, defeating of schemes, losses—each and all of which have a voice of reproof, warning or threatening.

9. Calls to Duty,—to Saul of Tarsus; Acts 9:15; Acts 22:21; Acts 13:2; to Joshua, Judges 1:1; to the different Judges; to smite Midian, Numbers 31:1; to anoint a king, 1 Samuel 8:7; 1 Samuel 8:22; to build a temple, 1 Chronicles 22:7; to build it after captivity, Ezra 1:1; many exhortations to duties.

10. Commands. Messages from Moses to Pharaoh, from Exodus 4:21 to Exodus 11:8; all the Decalogue in Exodus 20:3; the laws and ordinances given through Moses; all the commands or messages given by the prophets, priests, or kings; many special commands given at different times.

11. Encouragement to Israel at Red Sea, Exodus 14:15; the name of Israel’s God, Exodus 34:6; Ebenezer, 1 Samuel 7:12; comfort, Isaiah 40:1; Isaiah 61:3; chaps. 60, 62; to Solomon in 1 Kings 9:2; by Haggai, Haggai 2:1; Isaiah 41:10; also Psalms 34:8; Psalms passim. Hosea 14:4, calls, to trust, wait, hope, be glad, fear, be grateful, be strong, etc. in Psalms.

12. Doom. Eglon as here; Cain Genesis 4:12; Genesis 4:15; Belshazzar, Daniel 5; Pharaoh and Egyptians, Exodus 11:4; Exodus 14:13, Antediluvians, Genesis 6:13; Ahab, 1 Kings 21:21; also 1 Kings 22:28; Proverbs 1:24; Proverbs 14:32; Herod, Acts 12:21.

II. Every man has Divine messages sent to him personally. In the Gospel, in the ordinary Providence of God, and in the workings of His own conscience every man has messages sent to him. Thus Herod’s conscience was set to work when he heard of the works done by Jesus. “It is John! it is John!” That good man’s blood was on his hands; and every moment he feared some messenger of judgment would visit him from the other world. Mark 6:16. Thus too did Joseph’s brethren feel as to the past. Genesis 42:21.

(1.) God individualises every man. None are passed over, sooner or later every man hears a voice saying to him, “I have a message from God unto thee.” None are lost in the crowd. “Some one hath touched me” said the Saviour, when the multitude thronged around Him. He knew all about every individual that was there; and all over the land where He went, He knew about every case without being told. He knew every individual person on land, as he knew about every individual fish in the sea—where he was, what he was, the life he was leading, and the state of his heart as to receiving or rejecting Christ. He knew Zaccheus—his person, name, character, wants, wishes—all about him, though for the first time He met him on that day when He passed through Jericho. And he addressed him accurately. So does He with all—no inaccurate messages. In God’s vast universe there is not an object great, or small but He knows in its place.

(2.) The wise thing for every man is to act as if he were the only person dealt with. As the Judge dealt with the first culprit, so does He deal still with all culprits. “Adam! where art thou?” every man should count on having his conduct as narrowly scanned, and his purposes and motives as fully known, as if he were the only subject of God’s moral government in the world. We are expressly told that at the final reckoning, “every one of us shall give an account of himself unto God.” It follows that every one now must regard the great message of salvation as sent to him personally, the same as if he were the only person addressed. Men may be addressed in masses, but they are saved only as individuals. Multitudes came around the Saviour, and He spake to them all together, yet the good experienced by each individual hearer depended entirely on how he heard for himself. Of the thousands that were sometimes present, every individual felt that the message was for him equally as if he had formed the sole auditor—the eye of the Master was upon his heart, and the finger of the Speaker was pointed to him, saying, “Thou art the man!” And on the solemn day of account, every hearer will be singled out and dealt with by the judge as if he were the only person placed at the bar.

(3.) The messages are framed so as to have always an individual application. “Ho! every one that thirsteth;” “come ye—he that hath no money, come;” “incline your ear and come;” “hear (thou) and your soul shall live;” “if any man thirst let him come to Me,” etc.; “if any man hear My voice and open the door, I will come in to him,” etc.; “him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out;” believe (thou) in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved;” “he that believeth shall be saved,” etc.; “whosoever will, let him take,” etc.

III. God’s messages are always to be reverently received. What Mary said to the servants at the marriage is still said to all who have the privilege of hearing Christ’s voice—“Whatsoever He saith unto you, do it.” “Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.” This was the final conclusion to which the wise man was brought in all his meditations. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all they that keep His commandments.” All God’s messages are “holy, just, and good,” most reasonable and wise, never against but always for our interests. And a solemn caution is given respecting the manner in which God’s messages should be received. “If thou be wise, thou shalt be wise for thyself; but if thou scornest, thou alone shalt bear it.” Every message from the officer must be obeyed implicitly by the soldier, otherwise the battle cannot be won; and he would be treated as a deserter from duty if he did not yield such obedience. The farmer must obey the messages he receives from God, in the laws of nature, if he would reap a harvest in due season. The child must obey the messages, or rules for his guidance, which his father laysdown for him, all through his early life, if he would receive in the long run the great promise anrexed to the Fifth Commandment. To “hearken to God’s voice” in all His messages was the one thing indispensable to securing His favour in the former dispensation. And to hearken to the messages of life and salvation sent to men over the blood of His Son, is the one condition of enjoying all the blessings set forth under the new and better covenant.

IV. It is dangerous to turn a deaf ear to God’s messages (Proverbs 29:1). When Pharaoh would not listen to God’s messages though warned by one plague after another, he was at last visited by the death of his first born; and when after a pause, he would not listen even to that, he was drowned and all his host in the waters of the Red Sea! When the Israelites in their wanderings would not believe in God’s course of leading them, but complained of every new trial they met with, He at last condemned them to wander in the desert for life, so that they never reached the promised rest (Psalms 95:10). When Eli did not set forth with sufficient reprobation the evil conduct of his sons in the priests’ office, but allowed them to remain in the priesthood, notwithstanding their grievous sins, God punished both father and sons, by the terrible death which befell the latter in one day (1 Samuel 2:26; 1 Samuel 4:17). When Saul disobeyed repeatedly the commandment of the Lord by-and-bye “the Spirit of the Lord departed from him, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him” (1 Samuel 16:14). This ended in his going to a sorceress for comfort, and finally finding a tragic death in the battle-field (chap. 31). The curse of barrenness in Ahab’s days came because of the wide-spread idolatries in the land, and the refusal of both king and people to hear the Divine messages sent to them (1 Kings 18:18). For a like reason destruction came on Ahab’s house (Judges 21:20). (See also 2 Chronicles 25:16; 2 Chronicles 33:10), and on the kingdom of Israel first, and then of Judah, for their long-continued idolatries (2 Kings 17:5; 2 Chronicles 36:15; Jeremiah 25:3). Destruction of Jerusalem (Luke 19:41).

V. Messages of good to the righteous, and of evil to the wicked often come together. The message of a son at last to be born to Abraham, and so the first step taken to fulfil the great promises made to him, came the same day and by the same hands as the message that the hour of Sodom’s doom was at last come (Genesis 18:10, with Judges 3:20). Here, the message of doom to Eglon was also a message of liberty to his captives. Ehud was a death-bearer to the one, but a “Saviour” to the other. The death of the first-born meant deliverance to the bond-men, see also Isaiah 10:5, with Judges 3:20.

The condemnation of unbelievers always goes with the message of pardon and eternal life to those who believe. The future lot of the righteous and that of the wicked are also set side by side in parallel columns on the page of Scripture, Isaiah 3:10; Matthew 13:41, with Matthew 13:43; Matthew 25:34, Matthew 25:41, also Matthew 25:46. Here Judges 5:20 with Judges 5:28. See Psalms 37:18 with Judges 20:9 with Judges 11:34 with Judges 11:37.

VI. God sends messages of mercy before He sends messages of judgment. He would prevent the necessity of sending the latter by sending the former first. When Moses gave the final messages of his God to the people, he narrates first the blessings which shall come on the people, if they should obey, and afterwards denounces the curses which shall come on them on their disobedience, (Deuteronomy 28:1, with Judges 3:15; comp. Leviticus 26:3, with Judges 3:14). In the Gospel dispensation, God uniformly sends messages of peace and reconciliation to all classes of sinners in the first instance, calling on them to repent and believe, and assuring them that if they do so, the thunder cloud will pass away—but adding that if they refuse “the wrath of God shall abide upon them.” The present is “the day of merciful visitation “to every man; but at death comes the message of judgment to all the impenitent (Acts 17:30; Revelation 21:6, with 8; and N. T. passim).

VII. It is our duty and our wisdom to be always ready to receive the Lord’s messages. Most men are not ready when the message comes, Luke 17:27; Luke 12:20; Luke 16:19, with Luke 16:23; Matthew 25:5; 1 Thessalonians 5:3; 1 Kings 22:26, with 1 Kings 22:34; Proverbs 14:32; Matthew 7:13; 2 Samuel 18:9.

Some are ready, Luke 2:29; 2 Timothy 4:6; Acts 7:59; Hebrews 11:13; 2 Corinthians 5:2; 2 Corinthians 5:9; 2 Samuel 15:26; 2 Samuel 23:5; 1 Samuel 3:18.

HARD TESTS OF LOYALTY

I. Fidelity to God’s cause costs much. If a man would be faithful to God in standing up for the cause of righteousness in a world of sin, he must be ready to sacrifice flesh and blood. Christ lays it down as a rule, that we must “bear a cross,” if we would follow after him. He even goes the length of saying—“If a man come to me, and hate not father and mother, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” These judges had, each of them to take his life in his hand, in proving his fidelity to his God. Most of them were at the head of armies in the field, yet these armies were small in comparison with the force of the enemy; and all hope of victory according to mere natural calculation was taken away. But Ehud’s case was one that required a greater sacrifice still. He had to do the work of an army all alone; and in this respect bore some analogy to the case of Samson. The work assigned him was to emancipate the church by putting to death the persecutor. The duty was a stern one. It was most revolting in itself—a savage and cruel act, having all the appearance of murder—the murder too of a king, without the least warning, in the midst of his guards and the entire responsibility rested on him alone. But the victim was the oppressor of God’s church, and Ehud’s eye must not spare. The question was how far would he go in loyalty to God’s command, and for the good of God’s church. Would he go through the most disagreeable, revolting and dangerous duty without flinching, when it became a question of duty to his God?

II. Examples from Scripture.

(1.) The case of the Levites. When Moses called on them to go from gate to gate of the camp, and slay every man, his brother, his companion, his neighbour, and even his children, who had been guilty of the capital crime of idolatry. The test was stern; but they stood it, and in proof of their loyalty to their God no less than 3000 perished in this way. A greater sacrifice of their feelings they could not make. Hence they are honoured ever afterwards, and rewarded with the Divine blessing, Deuteronomy 33:9, with Exodus 32:26.

(2.) The case of Abraham and his son. Genesis 22:1; Genesis 22:10.

(3.) The case of Aaron making no mourning for his sons. Leviticus 10:1.

(4.) The case of Phinehas. Numbers 25:6.

(5.) The case of Abraham yielding up the richest soil to Lot, rather than have any quarrel; for the Canaanite was still in the land, and strife was a reproach to religion. Genesis 13:9.

(6.) The case of those who acquiesce in the destruction of all that are disloyal to the Saviour. 1 Corinthians 16:22; Revelation 19:3; Luke 16:24.

III. General examples.

(1.) At a critical moment in the battle of Waterloo, when everything depended on the steadiness of the soldiery, the iron Duke himself rode up to one of the bravest regiments in the British army, to encourage them in the perilous position which they occupied. It was in the heat of the fight, when the bullets were flying thick as hail. Many had fallen, and many were falling. The men were most anxious to be allowed to meet the enemy with the bayonet. And when they saw their commander so near, the cry went up, “Let us at ’em, my lord! let us at ’em!” “Not yet, my brave men” was the reply; “but you shall have at ’em soon! Stand firm—stand firm!” “Enough my lord!” was the rejoinder, “We stand here till the last man falls!” Severe was the test of loyalty, and nobly did these heroes stand the test.

(2.) Memento of fidelity. That fatal day on which Vesuvius, at whose feet Pompeii stood, burst out into an eruption that shook the earth, a sentinel kept watch by the gate which looked to the burning mountain, and amidst the fearful disorder the sentinel had been forgotten; as it was the stern rule, that happen what might, the sentinels must hold their posts till relieved, he had to choose between death and dishonour. He resolved to stand by his post. Slowly but surely the ashes rise on his manly form; now they reach his breast; and now, covering his lips they choke his breathing. He was faithful to his soldier’s duty unto death. After nearly eighteen centuries, they found his skeleton standing erect in a marble niche, clad in its rusty armour, the helmet on his empty skull, and his bony fingers still closed upon spear.

(3.) An incident of the Seikh war. (1846). At the celebrated battle of Ferozeshahr, when the English Empire in India hung by a thread, an incident is related by one who was present on the field, which forcibly illustrates the stedfastness and loyalty of the British troops under severely trying circumstances. The battle had been raging throughout the day. A deadly storm of lead and iron, consisting of round shot, shells, grape and musketry had been playing on the small British army throughout the day, while mines also were sprung under their feet. Not a man had tasted food, that day, nor had had a drop of water to cool his parched lips. A fearful night followed. The enemy kept firing on incessantly. The glare of the burning camp, the explosion of mines, shells, and ammunition wagons, mixed with the wild cries of the enemy, the huzzas of our men, and the groans of the wounded and dying—the trampling of men and horses, and the continual plunging of the shot among us, altogether formed a scene of terrific and awful grandeur which it is impossible to describe.

Many a gallant fellow was lying in those silent squares, bleeding to death, yet not a murmur was heard. Among other cases, a man of a cowardly spirit was struck with a grape-shot in the shoulder, receiving a flesh wound. The foolish fellow wished to get out of the square, and would not be quiet, but kept on telling everyone he was wounded, as if his wound was of more consequence than that of anybody else. Being refused by a Sergeant of his company, he went to his Colour-Sergeant, saying, “Sir! I am badly wounded; let me go out of the square, that I may get a surgeon.” The reply was, “Lie down where you are, sir!—look at me,” lifting up his leg without a foot! But he was determined to gain his point, and came to a Lieutenant, who commanded his company, and was lying near me, saying, “O, sir! I wish you would give orders to let me out of the square—I am wounded.” “So am I,” coolly answered the Lieutenant, at the same time lifting up his left arm, which hung shattered by his side. Though he was so near me, I knew not till then that he was hurt.
The man still persisted, and went to a higher officer with the same request, who replied, “I too am wounded as well as you.” Still he persevered, and came now to the Colonel commanding the regiment, who was still on horseback. He was only two yards distant from me. “Sir!” the man cried, “I am wounded.” “Oh! you are wounded, are you?” said the Colonel. “And so am I!” I then perceived that he was wounded just below the knee, and the blood having filled his boot, was trickling from the heel to the ground! The Assistant Sergeant-Major was watching the man, and being annoyed at the disturbance he was causing, determined to stop it. He ran and seized him, and was about to give him a severe reprimand. But just at that instant, a large cannon-ball carried away both his head and that of the cowardly complainer at the same moment—so killing both! What a severe test to the loyalty of those noble troops!

[An Eye-witness.]

PERIOD OF REST.—Judges 3:30

30. The land had rest fourscore years.] This must mean the whole country, and not merely the tribes of Benjamin, Judah, and Ephraim. The fourscore years would date from the deliverance by Ehud till the oppression by Jabin. During some part of that long course, Ehud died; and it may have been a considerable time after his death that the invasion by Jabin commenced. The mention of Ehud’s name in Judges 4:1 does not mean that Ehud had just died, open sin again began, and the scourge by that northern power was sent—all simultaneously. But the case stood thus: Ehud, while he lived, was a check on the open exhibition of idolatry, which all the time had been more or less secretly cherished in the hearts of most of the people. On his death, the obstruction being removed, the tide again began to flow, and gradually reached high-water mark. But then there was no Ehud to roll it back. Therefore the Divine judgments again fell, on the land. This may have been a considerable time after Ehud was dead.

It is instructive to notice, what a beneficent influence for good a single righteous man at the helm of power, may exercise in giving a tone to the character of his people and his age. If he is but faithful to his trust, and skilful at the helm, he may, under the Divine blessing, steer the vessel safely through all the mountain waves that threaten to engulph her, and in due time bring her into a smooth sea, with canvas spread to a favouring breeze, giving promise of a prosperous voyage and a rich harvest of results to all concerned. On this topic we do not now dwell, as it will come under review again. But meanwhile it speaks much for Ehud, that he was so much missed after he was gone. This is one of the best testimonies a man can have—that when he is gone things go wrong, and it is hard to get one to fill his place.

SHAMGAR

After him was Shamgar, the son of Anath.] Not after his example [Cassel], meaning, in like manner as Shamgar did so did Shamgar. Nor yet does it imply, that after Ehud was dead, Shamgar came as his successor. But the next deliverance in the series was that wrought through the instrumentality of Shamgar. Some suppose that this exploit of Shamgar took place during Ehud’s time, at some part of the period of the eighty years. [Jewish Expositors generally, Cassel, etc.] This is most unlikely, both because Ehud while alive acted as the protector of the land, and also because the times of Shamgar were times of great oppression (Judges 5:6), which was not true of Ehud’s time. It is indeed all but certain that Ehud was dead, and that another time of oppression had come on the land, when there was no Ehud to stand in the gap. The people were again going on sinning, and God was again beginning to smite them with the rod—Jabin in the north, and the Philistines in the south. Anath, some suppose to be the same with Anathoth, which was a sacerdotal city of the tribe of Benjamin, a few miles to the north of Jerusalem, and the birthplace afterwards of the prophet Jeremiah.

Slew of the Philistines six hundred men with an ox goad.] The Septuagint uses the word ἀροτροπούς, or the plough handle—that part which the ploughman holds in his hand, and with which he guides the plough. But the Targum version seems more correct, viz., the “prick” against which the oxen “kicked” when struck with it—the ox-goad proper. Jamieson says “this implement was eight feet long, and about six inches in circumference. It is armed at the lesser end with a sharp prong for driving the cattle, and on the other with a small iron paddle for removing the clay which encumbers the plough in working. Such an instrument, wielded by a strong arm, would do no mean execution. He may, however, have been only the leader of a band of peasants, who, by means of such implements of labour (and in particular the ox-goads), as they could lay hold of at the moment, achieved this heroic exploit.”

The Greeks called it βουπληξ. With such an instrument, king Lycurgus is said to have attacked the wandering Bacchus and his followers. In like manner Camillus and Curius went from the plough to save Rome from the Gauls. A tradition in Holstein says, that in the Swedish time a peasant armed with a pole put to flight a multitude of Swedes, who had entered his house and threatened to burn it.

He also delivered Israel.] There is something peculiar in the manner in which these victories of the judges are gained. It is not in the exact proportion in which the spirit of heroism is possessed. There is a deeper element than bravery, or skill, or physical force. There is the element of piety. The victors were more than patriots. They were men of faith. While ardently devoted to their country, they saw in their land a sacred possession given them by their God as a pledge of His covenant love; and they saw in their people the church of the living God, among whom He had planted His institutions and His laws. Faith in the promises He had given His Church and people lay at the root of all their action, both as regards the object they had in view, and the confidence of victory which they cherished. “The Lord of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge.”

It is for this reason that Shamgar’s act receives an honourable mention in this Book. It was an act of deliverance wrought for the Church of God in an evil time; it was done on the spot where his lot was cast; it was done of his own free will when no others appeared ready to repair the breach; it was done against the greatest odds; and, above all, it was done in faith—that sacred feature of character by which “all the elders obtained a good report.” On this account a single verse is added to notice this noble act of a man of true faith; and through this single verse his name “will be held in everlasting remembrance.” More imperishable is the monument thus raised to an otherwise humble man, than to those mighty Egyptian monarchs who have the Pyramids for their memorial. God has always a few names, in a backsliding age, of those who are loyal to His cause, to show that His Spirit has not left His Church on earth. And now there was at least one man of the Joshua and Caleb spirit still in the land. Though only one man comes to the front, there may have been, as in Elijah’s day, other 7000 hidden behind the curtain, who did not bow the knee to Baal.

Was Shamgar entitled to the honourable distinction of being a Judge over the people of God? Many answer in the negative, because it is not said, “the Lord raised him up,” nor that “the Spirit of the Lord came upon him;” nor is he said to have ruled, but only to have gained a victory with small means. He is also passed over in Judges 4:1. Yet his name stands in the same honourable roll, (“After Ehud rose Shamgar,” etc.) Few could doubt on reflection, that it was the Spirit of the Lord coming upon him that led him to do as he did The value of his act affected the whole land, for it was not merely the slaughter of a few hundred men in some isolated foray; it seems rather to have been the nipping of an invasion in the bud—arresting a calamity at its outset, which but for this timely extinction might have overspread the whole country. There can be little doubt, that if Shamgar had not stood forward to the rescue, this incursion of the Philistines would have rapidly overshadowed the nation.

Besides, it is expressly stated, that he “delivered Israel” like the other Judges. The office of a “judge” in that age was not to administer justice in the ordinary way. It was rather to act the part of a “saviour,” (so it is expressly termed in Nehemiah 9:27)—one who accomplishes a deliverance on the foundation of righteousness. He was to lead the people to penitence, not only to sorrow for the past, but to reformation for the future. His duty was to see that the law of God be kept by the people as the only secure foundation for a lasting peace. On this footing, all the “judges” were types of the Saviour, whose great work in this world was to work out an eternal redemption on the ground of perfect righteousness—to make “grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life,” etc. It is easy for God to work deliverance for any people when His law is kept. When that is not done, He cannot deliver, because He cannot offer a slight to His own character.