Juízes 9
John MacArthur · Citado em PreceptAustin
Juízes 9
MacArthur - God sent an evil spirit. In the course of God’s providence, there appeared jealousy, distrust, and hate. God allowed it to work as punishment for the idolatry and mass murder. (See the MacArthur Study Bible). Evil Spirit occurs 10x in 9v (Note it is almost always associated with "from the LORD" or "from God" - God was in control) - Jdg. 9:23; 1Sa 16:14; 1Sa 16:15; 1Sa 16:16; 1Sa 16:23; 1Sa 18:10; 1Sa 19:9; Acts 19:15; Acts 19:16 As someone has written "When God sends evil it is always an intervening force of moral and righteous judgment, corresponding to the wickedness of the situation." Is God unfair? Is God responsible for sin? Clearly He is not not for as James records God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. (James 1:13, 14+) In this unusual passage God is letting us see into the supernatural realm for a moment and instead of upsetting us it should encourage us that He is sovereign over every creature and every event. No, obviously God is not the Author of evil, but on the other hand God does allow evil, and because He is sovereign and omnipotent will use evil to accomplish His purposes. We know God is just, and therefore can affirm that His actions in this incident were just. He never acts in a morally dubious manner to accomplish His purposes. God may use other people's evil to accomplish His righteous purposes, but He does not cause their evil actions. In the course of God’s providence, there appeared jealousy, distrust, hate and bloodshed. God allowed this as divine retribution for the idolatry and mass murder. That God would send an evil spirit or a demonic being, shows that He sovereignly rules over all the universe. Even Satan could not attack Job without God’s permission (Job 1:12; Job 2:6). Abimelech as well as those in Shechem were only reaping what they had sown (Galatians 6:8) A parallel passage is found in 1st Kings, where we read that… "So the king (Rehoboam) did not listen to the people; for it was a turn of events from the LORD ("This turn of events was the will of the LORD" NLT), that He might establish His word, which the LORD spoke through Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat." (1Ki 12:15) In this verse (in context) we discover that God sovereignly used the foolishness of Rehoboam to fulfill Ahijah’s prophecy (who informed King Solomon’s official, Jeroboam, of the approaching revolt of the 10 northern tribes). Here in Judges 9 God's Word had been spoken prophetically by Gideon's son Jotham and God was now seeing that Jotham's word would be fulfilled. and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously (bagad) with Abimelech: Dealt treacherously" (bagad) means to act unfaithfully, to violate a trust, to break an agreement or to be a traitor. The Septuagint translates bagad with the verb atheteo which means to reject, refuse or turn one's back upon! The Shechemites made Abimelech their king and agreed to recognize his authority, but now they rebelled against him. We are not told exactly how they did this, Why did they deal treacherously? The writer has just explained that an evil spirit was sent by God to fulfill Jotham’s curse by arousing distrust or jealousy in the Shechemites. What goes around comes around! (Gal 6:7-8+, Hos 8:7) God caused the treachery that Abimelech and the men of Shechem had committed against Gideon (Jdg 9:16) to return upon their own head! (Jdg 9:56, 57). A R Fausset - The men of Shechem dealt treacherously with [conspiring secretly against] Abimelech [nothing is more unstable than popularity gained by wickedness. The friendship of the wicked is a lie]. Related Resources: Why did God send an evil spirit to torment King Saul? | GotQuestions.org What are evil spirits? | GotQuestions.org Dealt treacherously (0898) bagad apparently from an Arabic root meaning to deceive) means to act deceitfully, unfaithfully, to commit faithlessness.. This word describes a traitor, one who violates his allegiance and betrays something or someone (e.g., God). Bagad means to ‘break faith’ which speaks of one who does not honour the terms of an existing agreement. The root idea of bagad is to cover or cloak things over, and so to act covertly or falsely, perfidiously (acting untrue to what should command one’s fidelity or allegiance and adds to faithless the implication of an incapacity for fidelity or reliability!). "The verb connotes unfaithfulness in relationships like marriage (Ex. 21:8; Jer. 3:20; Mal. 2:14); Israel’s covenant with the Lord (Ps. 78:57; 119:158); friendships (Job 6:15; Jer. 3:20; Mal. 2:10); leadership (Jdg. 9:23)." (Baker) Disciple's Study Bible (borrow for one hour) - GOD, Sovereignty-The belief in monotheism-the existence of one and only one God-means that ultimately all actions can be traced to the one God, either by His active intervention, His passive permission, or His choice not to act. We know from Jas 1:13-15 that God has absolutely nothing to do with evil temptations for people. God took advantage of a developing political split to punish both sides because each had committed atrocious crimes (v. 24). Because we know God is just, we can affirm that God's actions in this incident were just. He did not act in a morally dubious or arbitrary manner to accomplish His purposes. God may use other people's evil to accomplish His righteous purposes, but He does not cause their evil actions. Walter Kaiser - go to page 211 in Hard Sayings of the Bible for discussion of the question - 1 Samuel 16:14 An Evil Spirit from the Lord? Just as the prophet Samuel anointed David as the next king, King Saul became bereft of the Spirit of God and fell into ugly bouts of melancholia, which were attributed to an evil spirit sent from the Lord. The Spirit of God had overwhelmed Saul when he had assumed the role of king over the land (1 Sam 10:6, 10; 11:6). Exactly what the Spirit’s presence with Saul entailed is not explained, but it seems to have included the gift of government, the gift of wisdom and prudence in civil matters, and a spirit of fortitude and courage. These gifts can be extrapolated from the evidence that after Saul was anointed king, he immediately shed his previous shyness and reticence to be in the public eye. It is obvious that Saul did not have a natural aptitude for governing, for if he had, why did he hide among the baggage when he knew already what the outcome would be? But when the Spirit of God came upon him in connection with the threatened mutilation of the citizens of Jabesh Gilead (1 Sam 11), and Saul sent out word that all able-bodied men were to report immediately for battle, the citizens of Israel were so startled that this had come from the likes of Saul that they showed up in force. God had suddenly gifted him with the “Spirit of God” (1 Sam 11:6), and Saul was a great leader for twenty years (1 Sam 14:47–48). But all of this was lost as suddenly as it had been gained—the Spirit had removed his gift of government. But what was the evil spirit mentioned here and in 1 Samuel 18:10 and 19:9? The ancient historian Josephus explained it as follows: “But as for Saul, some strange and demonical disorders came upon him, and brought upon him such suffocations as were ready to choke him” (Antiquities 6.8.2). Keil and Delitzsch likewise attributed Saul’s problem to demon possession. They specified that this was not merely an inward feeling of depression at the rejection announced to him, … but a higher evil power, which took possession of him, and not only deprived him of his peace of mind, but stirred up the feelings, ideas, imagination, and thoughts of his soul to such an extent that at times it drove him even into madness. This demon is called “an evil spirit [coming] from Jehovah” because Jehovah sent it as a punishment. A second suggestion is that this evil spirit was a messenger, by analogy with the situation in 1 Kings 22:20–23. This unspecified messenger did his work by the permission of God. A third suggestion is that this evil spirit was a “spirit of discontent” created in Saul’s heart by God because of his continued disobedience. Whatever the malady was, and whatever its source, one of the temporary cures for its torments was music. David’s harp-playing would soothe Saul’s frenzied condition, so that he would once again gain control of his emotions and actions (1 Sam 16:14–23). All this happened by the permission of God rather than as a result of his directive will, for God cannot be the author of anything evil. But the exact source of Saul’s torment cannot be determined with any degree of certitude. The Lord may well have used a messenger, or even just an annoying sense of disquietude and discontent. Yet if Saul really was a believer—and I think there are enough evidences to affirm that he was—then it is difficult to see how he could have been possessed by a demon. Whether believers can be possessed by demons, however, is still being debated by theologians. Gleason Archer - go to page 183 in The Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties for the discussion of the topic - First Samuel 18:10 says that an evil spirit from God came on King Saul. How can this be explained if only good comes from God? It is not quite accurate to say that only good comes from God. While it is true that God’s original creation was good (Gen. 1:31) and that God Himself is not tempted by evil, nor does He tempt (in the sense of attracting or enticing) any man to evil (James 1:13), nevertheless it remains true that genuine goodness in a moral God requires that a real difference be made between good and evil. As the ordainer and preserver of the moral order, it is absolutely necessary for God to punish sin, no matter how much love and compassion He may feel toward the sinner. In Isaiah 45:7 we read, “[I am] the One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these” (NASB). The word rendered by NASB as “calamity” is the Hebrew rāʿ, which has the basic meaning of “evil” (either moral evil or misfortune evil). Here it points to the painful, harmful consequences that followed the commission of sin. Notice how James goes on to indicate how this process works: “But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death” (James 1:14–15, NASB). In Saul’s case, he had knowingly flouted the law of God—first, by performing priestly sacrifice at the Lord’s altar contrary to the divine command (1 Sam. 13:12–13), and, second, by sparing King Agag and some of the cattle of the Amalekites after he had been ordered to put them all to death (1 Sam. 15:20–23). Moreover in 1 Samuel 18:8 it is stated that Saul became insanely jealous of young David because of the public praise he had received for his prowess in slaying Goliath and the Philistines. By these successive acts of rebellion against the will and law of God, King Saul left himself wide open to satanic influence—just as Judas Iscariot did after he had determined to betray the Lord Jesus (cf. John 13:2). Insofar as God has established the spiritual laws of cause and effect, it is accurate to say that Saul’s disobedience cut him off from the guidance and communion of the Holy Spirit that he had formerly enjoyed and left him a prey to a malign spirit of depression and intense jealousy that drove him increasingly to irrational paranoia. Although he was doubtless acting as an agent of Satan, Saul’s evil bent was by the permission and plan of God. We must realize that in the last analysis all penal consequences for sin come from God, as the Author of the moral law and the one who always does what is right (Gen. 18:25). QUESTION - Why did God send an evil spirit to torment King Saul? ANSWER - First Samuel 16:14 says, “The Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD tormented him.” This is also mentioned in 1 Samuel 16:15–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9. Why did God let an evil spirit torment Saul? In what way was the evil spirit “from” the Lord? First, the evil spirit was “from” the Lord in that it was allowed by God to harass Saul. Ultimately, all created things are under God’s control. It is likely that this evil spirit was part of God’s judgment upon Saul for his disobedience. Saul had directly disobeyed God on two occasions (1 Samuel 13:1–14; 15:1–35). Therefore, God removed His Spirit from Saul and allowed an evil spirit to torment him. Likely, Satan and the demons had always wanted to attack Saul; God was now simply giving them permission to do so. Second, the evil spirit was used to bring David into the life of Saul. This account is recorded immediately following David’s anointing as the future king of Israel. The reader would be wondering how a shepherd boy would become king. First Samuel 16 reveals the first step in this journey. When the king’s servants saw the torment Saul was enduring, they suggested, “See, an evil spirit from God is tormenting you. Let our lord command his servants here to search for someone who can play the lyre. He will play when the evil spirit from God comes on you, and you will feel better” (1 Samuel 16:15–16). One of the king’s servants referred David to the king, describing the youth as a great harp player, among other things (verse 18). Saul called David to come and found him to be a great comfort: “David came to Saul and entered his service. Saul liked him very much, and David became one of his armor-bearers. Then Saul sent word to Jesse, saying, ‘Allow David to remain in my service, for I am pleased with him.’ Whenever the spirit from God came on Saul, David would take up his lyre and play. Then relief would come to Saul; he would feel better, and the evil spirit would leave him” (1 Samuel 16:21–23). It is important to note that this evil spirit that troubled Saul was only temporary. The final verse notes that the evil spirit came on multiple occasions to bother Saul, but also it departed from him. A related question is, does God send evil spirits to torment people today? There are examples of individuals in the New Testament being turned over to Satan or demons for punishment. God allowed Ananias and Sapphira to be filled with the spirit of Satan as a warning and example to the early church (Acts 5:1–11). A man in the Corinthian church was committing incest and adultery, and God commanded the leaders to “hand him over to Satan” to destroy his sinful nature and save his soul (1 Corinthians 5:1–5). God allowed a messenger of Satan to torment the apostle Paul in order to teach him to rely on God’s grace and power and not become conceited because of the tremendous abundance of spiritual truth he was given (2 Corinthians 12:7). The New Testament reveals how God can use the presence of evil spirits to reveal His power. Jesus showed His power over demons on multiple occasions; every time Jesus cast out a demon, it was an affirmation of the Lord’s authority. The account of Jesus’ casting out the demons who entered a herd of pigs indicates that perhaps as many as 2,000 evil spirits were present, yet they all feared the power of Christ (Mark 5:1–13). If God does allow evil spirits to torment people today, He does so with the goal of our good and His glory (Romans 8:28). And, just as in Job’s case, Satan and his minions can do only what God allows them to do (Job 1:12; 2:6). They never act independently of God’s sovereign and perfect will and purpose. If believers suspect they are being tormented by demonic forces, the first response is to repent of any known sin. Then we should ask for wisdom to understand what we are to learn from the situation. Then we are to submit to whatever God has allowed in our lives, trusting that it will result in the building up of our faith and the glory of God. Evil spirits are no match for the power of God. As Ephesians 6:10–12 commands, “Be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” GotQuestions.org Related Resources: For a thorough treatment of the Holy Spirit's role in the OT I would strongly recommend Dr Leon Wood's book The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament which can be borrowed. He has an entire chapter on Saul and Evil Spirits An Evil Spirit from the Lord'-Demonic Influence or Divine Instrument?" The Evangelical Quarterly 70.1 (Jan.-Mar. 1998): 3-22. [1 Samuel 16:14] Robin Routledge What are evil spirits? | GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What was the role of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament? ANSWER - The role of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament is much like His role in the New Testament. When we speak of the role of the Holy Spirit, we can discern four general areas in which the Holy Spirit works: 1) regeneration, 2) indwelling (or filling), 3) restraint, and 4) empowerment for service. Evidence of these areas of the Holy Spirit’s work is just as present in the Old Testament as it is in the New Testament. The first area of the Spirit’s work is in the process of regeneration. Another word for regeneration is “rebirth,” from which we get the concept of being “born again.” The classic proof text for this can be found in John’s gospel: “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again” (John 3:3). This begs the question: what does this have to do with the Holy Spirit’s work in the Old Testament? Later on in His dialogue with Nicodemus, Jesus has this to say to him: “You are Israel’s teacher…and do you not understand these things?” (John 3:10). The point Jesus was making is that Nicodemus should have known the truth that the Holy Spirit is the source of new life because it is revealed in the Old Testament. For instance, Moses told the Israelites prior to entering the Promised Land that “The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live” (Deuteronomy 30:6). This circumcision of the heart is the work of God’s Spirit and can be accomplished only by Him. We also see the theme of regeneration in Ezekiel 11:19-20 and Ezekiel 36:26-29. The fruit of the Spirit’s regenerating work is faith (Ephesians 2:8). Now we know that there were men of faith in the Old Testament because Hebrews 11 names many of them. If faith is produced by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, then this must be the case for Old Testament saints who looked ahead to the cross, believing that what God had promised in regard to their redemption would come to pass. They saw the promises and “welcomed them from a distance” (Hebrews 11:13), accepting by faith that what God had promised, He would also bring to pass. The second aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is indwelling, or filling. Here is where the major difference between the Spirit’s roles in the Old and New Testaments is apparent. The New Testament teaches the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers (1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19-20). When we place our faith in Christ for salvation, the Holy Spirit comes to live within us. The apostle Paul calls this permanent indwelling the “guarantee of our inheritance” (Ephesians 1:13-14). In contrast to this work in the New Testament, the indwelling in the Old Testament was selective and temporary. The Spirit “came upon” such Old Testament people as Joshua (Numbers 27:18), David (1 Samuel 16:12-13) and even Saul (1 Samuel 10:10). In the book of Judges, we see the Spirit “coming upon” the various judges whom God raised up to deliver Israel from their oppressors. The Holy Spirit came upon these individuals for specific tasks. The indwelling was a sign of God’s favor upon that individual (in the case of David), and if God’s favor left an individual, the Spirit would depart (e.g., in Saul’s case in 1 Samuel 16:14). Finally, the Spirit “coming upon” an individual doesn’t always indicate that person’s spiritual condition (e.g., Saul, Samson, and many of the judges). So, while in the New Testament the Spirit only indwells believers and that indwelling is permanent, the Spirit came upon certain Old Testament individuals for a specific task, irrespective of their spiritual condition. Once the task was completed, the Spirit presumably departed from that person. The third aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is His restraint of sin. Genesis 6:3 would seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit restrains man’s sinfulness, and that restraint can be removed when God’s patience regarding sin reaches a "boiling point." This thought is echoed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8, when in the end times a growing apostasy will signal the coming of God’s judgment. Until the preordained time when the “man of lawlessness” (v. 3) will be revealed, the Holy Spirit restrains the power of Satan and will release it only when it suits His purposes to do so. The fourth and final aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is the granting of ability for service. Much like the way the spiritual gifts operate in the New Testament, the Spirit would gift certain individuals for service. Consider the example of Bezalel in Exodus 31:2-5 who was gifted to do much of the artwork relating to the Tabernacle. Furthermore, recalling the selective and temporary indwelling of the Holy Spirit discussed above, we see that these individuals were gifted to perform certain tasks, such as ruling over the people of Israel (e.g., Saul and David). We could also mention the Spirit’s role in creation. Genesis 1:2 speaks of the Spirit “hovering over the waters” and superintending the work of creation. In a similar fashion, the Spirit is responsible for the work of the new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17) as He is bringing people into the kingdom of God through regeneration. All in all, the Spirit performs much of the same functions in Old Testament times as He does in this current age. The major difference is the permanent indwelling of the Spirit in believers now. As Jesus said regarding this change in the Spirit’s ministry, “But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you” (John 14:17). GotQuestions.org Related Resource: Can you lose the Holy Spirit? | GotQuestions.org Exposing the Permissive Will of God R.C. Sproul John 7:17 The distinction between the sovereign will of God and the permissive will of God is fraught with peril and tends to generate untold confusion. In ordinary language, the term permission suggests some sort of positive sanction. To say that God “allows” or “permits” evil does not mean that He sanctions it in the sense that He approves of it. It is easy to discern that God never permits sin in the sense that He sanctions it in His creatures. What is usually meant by divine permission is that God simply lets it happen. That is, He does not directly intervene to prevent its happening. Here is where grave dangers lurk. Some theologies view this drama as if God were impotent to do anything about human sin. This view makes man sovereign, not God. God is reduced to the role of spectator or cheerleader, by which God’s exercise in providence is that of a helpless Father who, having done all He can do, must now sit back and simply hope for the best. He permits what He cannot help but permit because He has no sovereign power over it. This ghastly view is not merely a defective view of theism; it is unvarnished atheism. Coram Deo - How has a false view of God’s permissive will affected your Christian walk in the past? Do you have a different view of His permissive will now? How will it affect your walk in the future? George Bush - God sent an evil spirit. That is, permitted the evil spirit of discord and treachery to break out. Under the direction of providence, but not in consequence of any positive agency, jealousies were suffered to arise, which produced factions, and these factions in their turn produced insurrections, civil contentions, and bloodshed. Comp. 1 Kings 22:23; Ps. 78:49. The throne of violence never stands secure. The blood upon which it has been established seldom fails to undermine it at last. Dealt treacherously. The original properly implies faithlessness, or the being wanting to one’s engagements, and is especially applied, Jer. 3:20, to conjugal infidelity. The Shechemites broke their covenant with Abimelech and shook off his yoke, but how far they were chargeable in this with a moral delinquency in the sight of God, we pretend not to say. The word, perhaps, in this connexion, does not carry any such implication with it. (Judges 9 Commentary) Judges 9:24 in order that the violence done to the seventy sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood might be laid on Abimelech their brother, who killed them, and on the men of Shechem, who strengthened his hands to kill his brothers. in order that the violence done to the 70 sons of Jerubbaal might come: 1Sa 15:33 1Ki 2:32 Es 9:25 Ps 7:16 Mt 23:34-36 Judges 9 Resources Related Passages: 1 Samuel 15:33 But Samuel said, “As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.” And Samuel hewed Agag to pieces before the LORD at Gilgal. 1 Kings 2:32 “The LORD will return his blood on his own head, because he fell upon two men more righteous and better than he and killed them with the sword, while my father David did not know it: Abner the son of Ner, commander of the army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, commander of the army of Judah. COMPLICIT PARTIES HELD ACCOUNTABLE in order that - Purpose clause, giving the purpose of the "evil spirit" Wycliffe Bible Commentary - The principle of divine retribution is evident throughout the Book of Judges. Here we are told how Abimelech fell prey to treachery, even as he had treacherously killed his brothers The violence (chamas; Lxx = adikia - act that violates standards of right conduct) done to the seventy sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood might be laid on Abimelech their brother, who killed them, and on the men of Shechem, who strengthened his hands to kill his brothers - The Shechemites were in a sense accomplices to Abimelech's murders. They deserved each other and deserved the justice meted out on them. As Bush says "Sooner or later the justice of God will make inquisition for blood, especially the blood of the innocent." The accessories to the crime would be reckoned with, as well as the principal perpetrator, which is a basic principle of God's retributive justice. The Shechemites aided and abetted Abimelech in his bloody project, and underscored their approval of the evil by making him king after he had done it. "Those that combine together to do wickedly, are justly dashed in pieces one against another." The statement their blood might be laid on Abimelech their brother, who killed them suggests that Abimelech personally took each of the his brother's (really half-brother's) lives! When lust for power corrupts one's heart, it knows no limit of evil. Strengthened… hands is translated by the NIV as they helped him. They strengthened him by giving him money, and encouraging him to make way to the throne by killing his brothers. Abimelech and his men actually committed the murder (Jdg 9:5), but the Shechemites had paid Abimelech the money he needed to hire the men and after the deed was committed, they made him king in place of his brothers. God agreed with Jotham (cf. v. 18); from his perspective the Shechemites aided and abetted Abimelech and were guilty of murder as well. Stone regarding the interpretation of Jotham's parable - The author clearly delineates a single meaning: the divine condemnation and punishment of Abimelech as a fratricidal usurper who seized power by brute force rather than being chosen and empowered by God. The parable also censures Abimelech's co-conspirators, the leaders of Shechem, who repudiated their ties with Gideon and his God. (See commentary) Violence (02555) chamas/hamas from the verb chamas = to treat violently or wrong) means wrong, violence (to God's law = Ezek 22:26, Zeph 3:4, "violent hatred" = Ps 25:19), malicious (witness - Ex 23:1, Dt 19:16), , and is used almost always in connection with sinful violence, not with the violence of natural catastrophes. Vine says "Basically chamas connotes the disruption of the divinely established order of things." Chamas signifies extreme wickedness and the first two uses are very instructive (especially God's reaction)…(Ge 6:11) Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. (Lxx translates with adikia = an act that violates the standards of right conduct) and (Ge 6:13) Then God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence (Lxx translates with adikia) because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth. George Bush - the violence done...might come - That is, the just revenge of that cruelty; indicating the end, the scope, of the sovereign permission mentioned in the preceding verse. (Judges 9 Commentary) A R Fausset - That the cruelty [chamas “the wrong” or ‘violence’] (done) to the threescore and ten sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother [who ought to have been their defender: an awful aggravation of the crime (Gen. 4:8, 9), which slew them; and upon the men of Shechem, who aided him [Heb., strengthened his hands: viz., by supplying the money to hire murderers (ver. 4, 5] in the killing of his brethren [compare 1 Kings 2:5, 32, 33; Matt. 23:35]. Judges 9:25 And the men of Shechem set men in ambush against him on the tops of the mountains, and they robbed all who might pass by them along the road; and it was told to Abimelech. Jos 8:4,12,13 Pr 1:11,12 Judges 9 Resources Mt Ebal and Mt Gerizim with Shechem in middle THE WEB WOVEN TO TRAP ABIMELECH And the men of Shechem set men in ambush against him (Abimelech) on the tops of the mountains, and they robbed all who might pass by them along the road; and it was told to Abimelech: This would have brought discredit to Abimelech who was such a weak king that he could not guarantee safety for travelers in his territory. If the ambush was on Ebal, it is like an "exclamation point" to Jotham's parabolic curse spoken from that very mount! Pulpit Commentary - The men of Shechem, etc. The narrative now gives the details of that "treacherous dealing" on the part of the Shechemites which was spoken of in the gross in Jdg 9:. 23. Their disaffection first showed itself in acts of brigandage "against the peace of their lord the king," to use the language of our own mediaeval lawyers. The road to Shechem was no longer safe; lawless freebooters, in defiance of Abimelech's authority, stopped and robbed all travellers that passed that way, probably including Abimelech's own officers and servants. Stone - The judgment of God unfolds not in a direct, miraculous intervention, but in the ripening fruit of Abimelech's own treachery, energized by the divinely sown spirit of hostility. The very men he had won now turn against him. The text (ON THE TOPS OF THE MOUNTAINS) probably refers to the heights of Gerizim and Ebal. Ebal in particular offers a commanding view in all directions. A vast portion of the land of Israel becomes visible in a dramatic panorama from its peak (Smith 1931:115-121). (See commentary)
Juízes 9
MacArthur: a diviners’ oak = a tree regarded superstitiously where mystical ceremonies and soothsaying were done. (Borrow The MacArthur Study Bible) Stone on diviner's oak - Many trees in the OT are named for various types of religious functions conducted there. Diviners and divination were prohibited in the OT (Lev 19:26; Deut 18:10-14), though prophetic denunciations make it clear that divination was practiced (cf. Isa 2:6; Mic 5:12). (See context Joshua, Judges, Ruth) Charles Pfeiffer - The first company appeared to come from the middle, (NAS - "HIGHEST PART") literally the navel, of the land. This was doubtless the central hill in the district. Another came from Elon-meonenim (SEE Jdg 9:37NRSV), meaning the terebinth of the diviners. This may be equated with the terebinth (OAK) of Jdg 9:6 (Hebrew - elon = oak). (Borrow Wycliffe Bible Commentary) George Bush - By the middle of the land. Heb. מעם טבור הארץ mëim tabbur hââretz, from the navel of the land. That is, as Gesenius and other lexicographers explain it, from the height, the most elevated summit, of the land. By the plain of Meonenim. Or, Heb. מדרך אלון מעוננים midderek ëlōn meonedim, by the way of the oak of the augurers, or regarders of times; probably a tree or cluster of trees where superstitious auguries were performed, or where certain soothsayers dwelt. (Judges 9 Commentary) A R Fausset - “The Wizard’s oak:” the Hebrew is translated “Observers of times” in Deut. 18:10, 14. Abimelech’s idolatrous force possibly observed omens here to augur as to the success of their expedition (compare Jdg 9:6 above and Ge 35:4), a distinct oak. Judges 9:38 Then Zebul said to him, "Where is your boasting now with which you said, 'Who is Abimelech that we should serve him?' Is this not the people whom you despised? Go out now and fight with them!" NLT - Then Zebul turned on him triumphantly. "Now where is that big mouth of yours?" he demanded. "Wasn't it you that said, 'Who is Abimelech, and why should we be his servants?' The men you mocked are right outside the city! Go out and fight them!" NIV - Then Zebul said to him, "Where is your big talk now, you who said, 'Who is Abimelech that we should be subject to him?' Aren't these the men you ridiculed? Go out and fight them!" NET Zebul said to him, "Where now are your bragging words, 'Who is Abimelech that we should serve him?' Are these not the men you insulted (depised)? Go out now and fight them!" Jdg 9:28,29 2Sa 2:26,27 2Ki 14:8-14 Jer 2:28 Judges 9 Resources ZEBUL TAUNTS GAAL Then Zebul said to him, "Where is your boasting (literally "mouth") now with which you said, 'Who is Abimelech that we should serve him?' Is this not the people whom you despised? Go out now and fight with them!" Zebul knew that Gaal was at a disadvantage. The taunt (or rebuke) was intended to force Gaal into a direct conflict with Abimelech. When he could deceive Gaal no longer, Zebul goaded him into leading his forces outside the protective walls of the city to fight against Abimelech’s troops. After all his bragging, Gaal had no other choice but to engage in the encounter, and his Shechemite followers were soundly defeated by Abimelech. To save face Gaal had to fight. Had Gaal stayed within the walled city he may have been safe. But Gaal responded out of pride to save face illustrating the truth of Solomon's wise saying that… Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before stumbling. -- Proverbs 16:18 Stone on "Now where is that big mouth of yours?" (NLT's paraphrase) - More than just mockery, Zebul shamed Gaal. They were in the city gate, where the town elders gathered for legal and civil business. In the presence of the same men to whom Gaal had boasted the night before, Zebul threw his boast back in his face. In an ancient society where honor and shame exerted a powerful force on behavior, Gaal had no choice, if he wanted to retain his standing before the men of Shechem, but to gather his men and engage Abimelech's force. (See context Joshua, Judges, Ruth) Pulpit Commentary - Zebul now throws off the mask, and dares Gaal to carry out his boast in Jdg 9:28. Wolf comments that "Gaal probably was not prepared for a siege; so he had little choice but to leave the city walls behind and confront Abimelech out in the open.” (Judges) A R Fausset - Then said Zebul unto him [throwing off the mask, when Abimelech was near], Where (is) now thy mouth, wherewith thou saidst, Who (is) Abimelech, that we should serve him? (Is) not this the people that thou hast despised? [Satan tries to persuade sinners, hell is but a ‘shadow’ (ver. 36) without a substance: then taunts those whom he tempted (Matt. 27:4). They shall then too late repent having said, “Who is the Almighty that we should serve him” (Job 21:15; Exod. 5:2); and having despised the people of God, when they see them returning with Christ (Zech. 14:5; Rev. 19:14)]. Go out, I pray now, and fight with them. George Bush - Where is now thy mouth, &c. Where is now thy boasting thy vain bravado, of which thou wert lately so profuse? Does thy courage begin to quail upon the bare sight of the enemy? In proportion as Abimelech approached, Zebul begins to speak with more effrontery, and throw off his disguise, though his words still had the air of merely exciting Gaal to go forth like a man and redeem the pledge he had before given. Gaal thus had proof that those who are rebels themselves must not expect fidelity in their associates. (Judges 9 Commentary) Judges 9:39 So Gaal went out before the leaders of Shechem and fought with Abimelech. Judges 9 Resources GAAL DRAWN INTO THE NET So Gaal went out before the leaders of Shechem and fought with Abimelech Gaal forced to leave the protection of the city and take his troops to fight Abimelech in the open fields. Gaal went out in front of his troops (cf Ex 13:21). Zebul made it impossible for him to retreat back into Shechem for safe haven George Bush - And Gaal went out, &c. The only becoming answer to such cutting taunts and sarcasms was to sally boldly forth against the enemy. But the special hand of God was in the event for his punishment. ‘Where iniquity breakfasts, calamity will be sure to dine.’ Trapp. (Judges 9 Commentary) A R Fausset - And Gaal went out before [not at the head of, for Gaal had only “the people with him” of his own retinue (ver. 33), but “in the sight of”] the men [‘masters,’ ‘owners,’ baale] of Shechem [whose champion he wished to prove himself (ver. 26, 29)], and fought with Abimelech. 3 things about Gaal’s rise to leadership: - Comes in with network of relatives; reminds us of Abimelech - Jdg 9:28 – questions the ties of Abimelech to this city; turns the table - Focus on the Baal temple as the setting Text is describing Poetic Justice; what goes around comes around; has had a bit too much to drink and is emboldened to speak against Abimelech; wickedness may flourish for a time but God’s judgment will be executed; lot of references to ambushes in this narrative; color of deception and treachery throughout this text; all under the sovereign hand of God; - Overthrow of Gaal (Jdg 9:34-41) - Overthrow of the city – a second battle a bit of time later; - Overthrow of the leaders - Abimelech overthrown himself Do not seek refuge in the gods of this world because there is no refuge in Baal; what is this Baal worship really all about? The Canaanite god of prosperity; land flowing with milk and honey; god of sexual, agricultural and economic prosperity; keep faith with Yahweh and His worship and His regulations for worship in His law Judges 9:40 And Abimelech chased him, and he fled before him; and many fell wounded up to the entrance of the gate. he fled before him: 1Ki 20:18-21,30 Judges 9 Resources And Abimelech chased him, and he fled before him; and many fell wounded up to the entrance of the gate - NLT = "but he was defeated and ran away. Many of Shechem's warriors were killed, and the ground was covered with dead bodies all the way to the city gate." Recall that Shechem (see map) was about 5 miles from Arumah (see map), Pulpit Commentary - The simple translation of the Hebrew is, and there fell many slain even unto the entering of the gate, showing that Abimelech's men pursued them to the very gate of the city. Judges 9:41 Then Abimelech remained at Arumah, but Zebul drove out Gaal and his relatives so that they could not remain in Shechem. Zebul: Jdg 9:28,30 Judges 9 Resources Then Abimelech remained at Arumah, but Zebul drove out Gaal and his relatives so that they could not remain in Shechem - NLT = "Abimelech stayed in Arumah, and Zebul drove Gaal and his brothers out of Shechem." Pulpit Commentary - Gaal was so much weakened by his defeat that Zebul was now strong enough to expel him and the remainder of "his brethren from the city. Stone - The expulsion of Gaal and his gang from town and Abimelech's return to Arumah likely persuaded the Shechemites that this unhappy little episode was past. They could return either to their harvest or to their looting of caravans. (See context Joshua, Judges, Ruth) George Bush on Zebul thrust out Gaal and his brethren. These words, it would seem, are not to be taken as indicating a violent expulsion. For if Zebul and his party had obtained a complete ascendency in the city, why did they not at once deliver up Gaal and his faction to Abimelech, and receive him within the walls? The fact undoubtedly was, that notwithstanding the recent defeat, the crafty Zebul saw that Abimelech’s interest in the city was not strong enough to justify him in completely throwing off the mask, and he accordingly went to work, like a skilful master of intrigue, to undermine Gaal in the affections of the people, by hypocritically grieving over the recent disaster, and persuading them that it was owing to the cowardice and bad management of their leader. This is the account Josephus gives of the matter, and we think the correct one. The consequence was, that Gaal made an ignominious exit from the city, and we hear no more of him. (Judges 9 Commentary) Judges 9:42 Now it came about the next day, that the people went out to the field, and it was told to Abimelech. Judges 9 Resources Judges 9:42-49 describes the Destruction of Shechem Now (Jdg 9:42,43,44,45) describes the second phase of Abimelech's bloody revenge on the rebellious Shechemites. it came about the next day, that the people (the Shechemites) went out to the field: Looks like the men of Shechem thought that the conflict was over and they could just go about their normal daily activities; they did not think that Abimelech would hold them accountable for aligning themselves with Gaal. Stone - The Shechemites might simply be resuming their grape harvest, the onset of which they celebrated earlier, since the crisis appeared to have passed (Boling 1975:179; Soggin 1981:191-192). Or they could have resumed their armed interdiction of traffic. Whatever their errand, they were caught off guard and massacred. Abimelech—and God—had plans for the residents of Shechem as well as for Gaal. (See context Joshua, Judges, Ruth) Bush adds "To follow their usual employments. As Abimelech had withdrawn his forces, they issued forth, not dreaming but they were entirely secure. But the wrath of a king does not so easily subside. (Commentary) and it was told to Abimelech: This was now his opportunity. Abimelech had one more score to settle (the second phase of his revenge) and that was with the citizens of Shechem who had cursed him (Jdg 9:27) and were attacking the caravans and robbing him of both money and reputation. Pulpit Commentary - The Shechemites, believing Abimelech to have retired, and hoping that he would be satisfied with the chastisement inflicted upon them in the battle of the day before, left the protection of their walls next morning to pursue their usual avocations in the field. Abimelech's spies in the city being aware of their intention immediately reported it to him. Upon which he hastily took his army, divided them as before into three companies, lay in ambush in the field till the Shechemites were well out in the country, then attacked the Shechemites in the field with two of the companies, and himself at the head of the third rushed to the city gate to intercept their retreat. Judges 9:43 So he took his people and divided them into three companies, and lay in wait in the field; when he looked and saw the people coming out from the city, he arose against them and slew them. Judges 9 Resources So he took his people (his men) and divided them into three companies, and lay in wait in the field; when he looked and saw the people coming out from the city, he arose against them and slew them - NLT = "he divided his men into three groups and set an ambush in the fields. When Abimelech saw the people coming out of the city, he and his men jumped up from their hiding places and attacked them." Fausset comments that Abimelech "had thrown the Shechemites off their guard by retiring to Arumah, as if he meant no further operations against them, and was content with the expulsion of Gaal." Judges 9:44 Then Abimelech and the company who was with him dashed forward and stood in the entrance of the city gate; the other two companies then dashed against all who were in the field and slew them. dashed forward: Jdg 9:15,20 Ga 5:15 Judges 9 Resources Then Abimelech and the company who was with him dashed forward and stood in (NET - "blocked") the entrance of the city gate; the other two companies then dashed against (NET - "attacked") all who were in the field and slew them - These would most likely have been weaponless workers. Abimelech had paid for his KINGSHIP with 70 brother's lives so a few more lives to ensure that there would be no further Shechemite uprising was worth the price. This ruthless, godless tyrant would stop at nothing to achieve his selfish ends. George Bush - And Abimelech and the company that was with him, &c. This verse details in a more particular manner the circumstance of the ‘smiting,’ mentioned above, and at the same time anticipates the question, why the people attacked did not at once betake themselves to the city. Because, says the narrative, Abimelech with a strong detachment interposed himself, and cut off the communication between them and the city, that they might neither make their retreat within the walls, nor receive any succors from thence. ‘When we go out about our business, we are not sure that we shall come home again; there are deaths both in the city and in the field.’ Henry. (Judges 9 Commentary) Judges 9:45 And Abimelech fought against the city all that day, and he captured the city and killed the people who were in it; then he razed the city and sowed it with salt. then he razed the city: Dt 29:23 1Ki 12:25 2Ki 3:25 Ps 107:34 *marg: Eze 47:11 Zep 2:9 Jas 2:13 Judges 9 Resources SHECHEM SLAUGHTERED AND SALTED And Abimelech fought against the city all that day, and he captured the city and killed the people who were in it - Abimelech’s power and authority must have been substantial since he was able, within 3 years of his becoming king, to amass a force able to destroy rebellious Shechem and was about to complete his conquest of Thebez. Daniel Block: It is evident from this paragraph that not every corner of the city had fallen to him. The previous verses seem to have involved his destruction of the lower part of the city, as opposed to the acropolis on which the temple fortress stood. The former, which represented the areas where people lived and carried on their daily activities, took up the larger portion of the city, to be sure, but the last line of defensive personnel and structures still remained. (Borrow Judges, Ruth. Vol. 6: New American Commentary ) Then he razed the city and sowed it with salt: Razed the city apparently refers to the lower city because it is followed by an assault on the acropolis. Salting was a symbolic ritual, which also had direct real effects, effects that condemned the city to a lengthy desolation. Salt was scattered over the site of a city for destruction and seems elsewhere in Scripture to be be the symbol of barrenness and desolation (cp Dt 29:23; Job 39:6, Ps 107:34, Je17:6, Zeph 2:9). Shechem was not rebuilt until about 200 years later by Jeroboam (1Ki 12:25). “Put salt on Moab, for she will be laid waste; her towns will become desolate, with no one to live in them” (Jer. 48:9NIV). To sow a land with salt, signifies its utter barrenness and desolation; a condition often illustrated in the Bible by allusions to the region of Sodom and Gomorrah, with its soil impregnated with salt, or covered with acrid and slimy pools. Pulpit Commentary - When all the Shechemites in the field were smitten or dispersed, Abimelech stormed the city, weakened as it was by the previous loss of so many of its defenders. The city made an obstinate defence notwithstanding, but was taken before night, and all the inhabitants were put to the sword. The walls were then razed to the ground, and the site was sown with salt to express the wish that it might be barren and uninhabited for ever (cf. Psalm 107:34, marg.; Jeremiah 17:6). This action of sowing with salt is not elsewhere mentioned; but it is well known that salt destroys vegetation, and is used by gardeners for this very purpose. Pliny (quoted by Rosenmuller) says, Omnis locus in quo reperitur sal sterilis est. ("Every place in which salt is found is barren.") Salting the Earth (Wikipedia Article) - sowing with salt, is the ritual of spreading salt on conquered cities to symbolize a curse on their re-inhabitation. It originated as a symbolic practice in the ancient Near East and became a well-established folkloric motif in the Middle Ages. Although concentrated salt is toxic to most crops, there is no evidence that sufficient salt has been applied to render large tracts of land unusable. NET NOTE - The spreading of salt over the city was probably a symbolic act designed to place the site under a curse, deprive it of fertility, and prevent any future habitation. The practice is referred to outside the Bible as well. For example, one of the curses in the Aramaic Sefire treaty states concerning Arpad: “May Hadad sow in them salt and weeds, and may it not be mentioned again!” See J. A. Fitzmyer, The Aramaic Inscriptions of Sefire (BibOr), 15, 53. Deut 29:23, Jer 17:6, and Zeph 2:9 associate salt flats or salty regions with infertility and divine judgment. Adam
Juízes 9
MacArthur - In Jotham’s parable of trees asking for a king (Jdg 9:7–15), the olive, fig, and vine decline. They do not represent specific men who declined, rather they build the suspense and heighten the idea that the bramble (thornbush) is inferior and unsuitable. The bush represents Abimelech (Jdg 9:6, 16). (See MacArthur Study Bible or borrow The MacArthur study Bible) Wycliffe Bible Commentary - As the last alternative, the trees approached the thorn bush, or bramble, which could be seen clinging to the rocks in the neighborhood of Shechem. (In Jdg 9:15) The bramble ironically said, Put your trust in my shadow, an obvious absurdity. With a feeling of self-importance, it threatened to devour the cedars of Lebanon if the other trees did not accord it due deference. The dry thorn often was the starting place for destructive fires. Adam
Juízes 9
MacArthur - An act polluting soil and water, as well as symbolizing a verdict of permanent barrenness (Dt 29:23; Jer 17:6). Abimelech’s intent finally was nullified when Jeroboam I rebuilt the city as his capital (1Ki 12:25), ca. 930–910 B.C. (See context in The MacArthur Bible Commentary or borrow The MacArthur study Bible) Resources on Salt: American Tract Society Salt Bridgeway Bible Dictionary Salt Easton's Bible Dictionary Salt Fausset Bible Dictionary Salt Holman Bible Dictionary Covenant of Salt Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible Salt Hastings' Dictionary of the NT Salt Salt (2) KItto - Salt McClintock and Strong's Bible Encyclopedia Salt The Jewish Encyclopedia Salt George Bush - Took the city, &c. Though the city of his nativity, yet he fell upon in with merciless barbarity, laid it in ruins, by beating down its walls and buildings, and slew all the inhabitants! His sowing it with salt, was in token that he designed it to become a perpetual desolation. The salt was not intended to render it barren, for a town or city is not designed for culture, but for building; but as salt is an emblem of incorruption and perpetuity, it was employed to perpetuate the memory of this transaction. By comparing Deut. 29:23, it would appear mat there was an allusion in the act to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet all his efforts did not avail to make its desolation permanent, for it was afterwards rebuilt, and became so considerable a place that all Israel resorted thither to make Rehoboam king, 1 Kings 12:1. (Judges 9 Commentary) A R Fausset - And Abimelech fought against the city all that day: and he took the city, and slew the people that (was) therein, and beat down the city, and sowed it [the site] with salt [symbolising his detestation, and his dooming the ground, not only never to be built upon (Mic. 3:12), but to become perpetually a barren salt waste (margin, Job 39:6; Ps. 107:34; Jer. 17:6). He gave it over to the curse of Sodom and Gomorrah (Deut. 29:23). Salt injures vegetation, and is the symbol of perpetuity]. Judges 9:46 When all the leaders of the tower of Shechem heard of it, they entered the inner chamber of the temple of El-berith. NET When all the leaders of the Tower of Shechem heard the news, they went to the stronghold of the temple of El-Berith. they entered the inner chamber of the temple of El-berith: Jdg 9:4,27 8:33 1Ki 8:26 2Ki 1:2-4 Ps 115:8 Isa 28:15-18 37:38 Judges 9 Resources LAST STAND AT THE IDOL SANCTUARY Judges 9:46-49 describes the 3rd phase of Abimelech's revenge against Shechem. The Bramble bush was blazing! The result was that 1000 people were roasted alive in the pagan temple. When all the leaders of the tower(migdal) of Shechem heard of it: These verses probably explain an incident within the city, included in the destruction previously recorded in [Jdg 9:45], rather than a subsequent event outside the destroyed city. On hearing of either the slaughter in the fields (Jdg 9:43,44) or the capture of the city gate (Jdg 9:44), the Shechemites who had retreated into the tower of Shechem (probably the same as the Beth Millo of [Jdg 9:6]), secured themselves in the stronghold of the temple of El-Berith (an alternate title for Baal-Berith, [Jdg 9:4]), probably a part of the tower of Shechem. Pulpit Commentary - The men of the tower of Sechem. The tower of Shechem is no doubt (OTHERS AGREE ALBEIT NOT 100% CERTAIN) the same fortified building as was spoken of in Jdg 9:6 and Jdg 9:20 by the name of the house of Millo (see Jdg 9:6). An (an hold - Jdg 9:46KJV), or rather the, hold. The word so rendered occurs elsewhere only in 1 Samuel 13:6, where it is rendered high places, and is coupled with caves, thickets, rocks, and pits, as one of the hiding-places of the Israelites from the Philistines. It was probably some kind of keep built on an eminence, and the place where the treasure of the temple was kept (Jdg 9:4). It appears from the narrative that the tower of Shechem, or house of Millo, was not actually part of Shechem, nor immediately contiguous, since the report of the capture of Shechem had to be carried thither. The god Berith. It should rather be El-berith, the same as Baal-berith in Jdg 9:4 — El, i.e. god, being substituted for Baal. Ryrie on the tower - Apparently a stronghold outside the city. The nearby temple of Baal, to which the men of the tower fled, was burned down by Abimelech and his men (v. 49). They entered the inner chamber of the temple of El-berith: El was the name of a well-known Canaanite god, and was supposedly the father of Baal. This is probably another way to refer to Baal-berith (Jdg 8:33-35+). Their purpose in so doing was evidently not to defend themselves, but to seek "safety" at the sanctuary of their god from the vengeance of Abimelech. So much for dead idols providing live protection! NET Note on inner chamber (stronghold) - Apparently this rare word refers here to the most inaccessible area of the temple, perhaps the inner sanctuary or an underground chamber. It appears only here and in 1 Sa 13:6, where it is paired with "cisterns" and refers to subterranean or cave-like hiding places. El-Berith means "God of the Covenant" and is probably a reference to the Canaanite high god El not the true God Elohim. How paradoxical that they ran into the this place in a vain attempt to seek safety from Abimelech. The antithesis is seen in Pr 18:10+ - "The name of the LORD is a strong tower; The righteous runs into it and is safe." THOUGHT - Let me ask you dear reader - Where do you run when you seek refuge from the storms, afflictions and adversities of this life - into El-Berith (the counterfeit) or into Jehovah Elohim (the real deal!). The ONLY source of refuge from the coming storm of God's wrath is Jehovah Jesus. As He Himself declares "Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other." (Isaiah 45:22) This is the very passage God's Spirit used to save Charles Haddon Spurgeon! Are you saved? (See his testimony) John