Click *H for Haydock Commentary. *Footnote for footnote etc.
Click any word in Latin Greek or Hebrew to activate the parser. Then click on the display to expand the parser.
*H These are the nations which the Lord left, that by them he might instruct Israel, and all that had not known the wars of the Chanaanites:
Ver. 1. Instruct. The original is translated try, v. 4, and C. ii. 22. — And all. Heb. "as many of Israel as had not," &c. H. — Those who had served under Josue, were so strongly impressed with a sense of the divine power and severity, that they never forgot them: but there was danger lest their children should grow careless, if they were suffered to enjoy a constant state of prosperity. Virtue or power is made perfect in infirmity. 2 Cor. xii. 9. C. — He that hath been experienced in many things, multiplieth prudence. Eccli. xxxiv. 10.
* Summa
*S Part 4, Ques 69, Article 3
[III, Q. 69, Art. 3]
Whether Baptism Should Take Away the Penalties of Sin That Belong to This Life?
Objection 1: It seems that Baptism should take away the penalties of sin that belong to this life. For as the Apostle says (Rom. 5:15), the gift of Christ is farther-reaching than the sin of Adam. But through Adam's sin, as the Apostle says (Rom. 5:12), "death entered into this world," and, consequently, all the other penalties of the present life. Much more, therefore, should man be freed from the penalties of the present life, by the gift of Christ which is received in Baptism.
Obj. 2: Further, Baptism takes away the guilt of both original and actual sin. Now it takes away the guilt of actual sin in such a way as to free man from all debt of punishment resulting therefrom. Therefore it also frees man from the penalties of the present life, which are a punishment of original sin.
Obj. 3: Further, if the cause be removed, the effect is removed. But the cause of these penalties is original sin, which is taken away by Baptism. Therefore such like penalties should not remain.
_On the contrary,_ on Rom. 6:6, "that the body of sin may be destroyed," a gloss says: "The effect of Baptism is that the old man is crucified, and the body of sin destroyed, not as though the living flesh of man were delivered by the destruction of that concupiscence with which it has been bespattered from its birth; but that it may not hurt him, when dead, though it was in him when he was born." Therefore for the same reason neither are the other penalties taken away by Baptism.
_I answer that,_ Baptism has the power to take away the penalties of the present life yet it does not take them away during the present life, but by its power they will be taken away from the just in the resurrection when "this mortal hath put on immortality" (1 Cor. 15:54). And this is reasonable. First, because, by Baptism, man is incorporated in Christ, and is made His member, as stated above (A. 3; Q. 68, A. 5). Consequently it is fitting that what takes place in the Head should take place also in the member incorporated. Now, from the very beginning of His conception Christ was "full of grace and truth," yet He had a passible body, which through His Passion and death was raised up to a life of glory. Wherefore a Christian receives grace in Baptism, as to his soul; but he retains a passible body, so that he may suffer for Christ therein: yet at length he will be raised up to a life of impassibility. Hence the Apostle says (Rom. 8:11): "He that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead, shall quicken also our [Vulg.: 'your'] mortal bodies, because of His Spirit that dwelleth in us [Vulg.: 'you']": and further on in the same chapter (Rom. 8:17): "Heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified with Him."
Secondly, this is suitable for our spiritual training: namely, in order that, by fighting against concupiscence and other defects to which he is subject, man may receive the crown of victory. Wherefore on Rom. 6:6, "that the body of sin may be destroyed," a gloss says: "If a man after Baptism live in the flesh, he has concupiscence to fight against, and to conquer by God's help." In sign of which it is written (Judges 3:1, 2): "These are the nations which the Lord left, that by them He might instruct Israel . . . that afterwards their children might learn to fight with their enemies, and to be trained up to war."
Thirdly, this was suitable, lest men might seek to be baptized for the sake of impassibility in the present life, and not for the sake of the glory of life eternal. Wherefore the Apostle says (1 Cor. 15:19): "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."
Reply Obj. 1: As a gloss says on Rom. 6:6, "that we may serve sin no longer--Like a man who, having captured a redoubtable enemy, slays him not forthwith, but suffers him to live for a little time in shame and suffering; so did Christ first of all fetter our punishment, but at a future time He will destroy it."
Reply Obj. 2: As the gloss says on the same passage (cf. ad 1), "the punishment of sin is twofold, the punishment of hell, and temporal punishment. Christ entirely abolished the punishment of hell, so that those who are baptized and truly repent, should not be subject to it. He did not, however, altogether abolish temporal punishment yet awhile; for hunger, thirst, and death still remain. But He overthrew its kingdom and power" in the sense that man should no longer be in fear of them: "and at length He will altogether exterminate it at the last day."
Reply Obj. 3: As we stated in the Second Part (I-II, Q. 81, A. 1; Q. 82, A. 1, ad 2), original sin spread in this way, that at first the person infected the nature, and afterwards the nature infected the person. Whereas Christ in reverse order at first repairs what regards the person, and afterwards will simultaneously repair what pertains to the nature in all men. Consequently by Baptism He takes away from man forthwith the guilt of original sin and the punishment of being deprived of the heavenly vision. But the penalties of the present life, such as death, hunger, thirst, and the like, pertain to the nature, from the principles of which they arise, inasmuch as it is deprived of original justice. Therefore these defects will not be taken away until the ultimate restoration of nature through the glorious resurrection. _______________________
FOURTH
*H That afterwards their children might learn to fight with their enemies, and to be trained up to war:
Ver. 2. And be. Heb. "at least, such as before knew nothing thereof." Though war be in itself an evil, the passions of men render it necessary, and God makes use of it as a scourge, to punish the wicked, and at the same time to keep all under due restraint. H. — Too long a peace has proved sometimes fatal to states and to the virtue of individuals. In adversity we call upon God, and adhere to him with greater fervour and constancy. The Jews were so prone to evil, that, if they were permitted to enjoy tranquility for a few years, they presently forgot themselves and the author of all their good, and even turned their backs upon the only true God. Their enemies forced them to have recourse to Him. C.
*H The five princes of the Philistines, and all the Chanaanites, and the Sidonians, and the Hevites that dwelt in Mount Libanus, from Mount Baal Hermon to the entering into Emath.
Ver. 3. Princes, (satrapas) a Persian word. M. — These heads of the five great cities of the Philistines, are called Seranim, (H.) but never kings, whether they were governors of so many petty states, united in the same form of republican or aristocratical government, or independent of each other. See Jos. xiii. Three of these cities are said to have been take by Juda, (C. i. 18,) unless the Sept. be more accurate, as this passage would seem to insinuate. C. — They might have thrown off the yoke in a short time, as we before observed. These five cities were Gaza, Geth, Ascalon, Azotus, and Accaron. H. — All but Geth were on the Mediterranean sea. C. — All the Chanaanites, &c. who dwelt in Libanus, with some others, who were dispersed through the country, v. 5. H. — These chiefly inhabited the environs of Sidon. — Baal Hermon. The idol of Baal might probably be adored on this mountain. M. — We find Baal-gad in the same neighbourhood, and both may mean the same city. C.
*H And he left them, that he might try Israel by them, whether they would hear the commandments of the Lord, which he had commanded their fathers, by the hand of Moses, or not.
Ver. 4. Not. Various reasons are assigned, on the part of God, for not exterminating these nations at once. But their being spared so long, must be imputed to the disobedience of the Israelites, otherwise they would surely never have been tolerated with their idol-worship in the land of promise, to contaminate, by their wicked example, the manners of God's people. If they would have redeemed their lives, they must at least have given up the land and their idols. As the Israelites proved so little zealous in destroying the latter, they were justly punished by God, in being deprived of what would have contributed to make them richer and more comfortable in this world. H.
*H And they took their daughters to wives, and they gave their own daughters to their sons, and they served their gods.
Ver. 6. Gods. This was the fatal consequence which God had foretold. Deut. vii. 4. H.
*H And they did evil in the sight of the Lord, and they forgot their God, and served Baalim and Astaroth.
Ver. 7. Astaroth. Heb. Asheroth, Sept. "the groves," (M.) of which Astaroth was the goddess, (C.) like Diana. C. ii. 11. Various trees were sacred to idols. M.
*H And the Lord being angry with Israel, delivered them into the hands of Chusan Rasathaim, king of Mesopotamia, and they served him eight years.
Ver. 8. Chusan. This name leads us to conclude that this prince was of Scythian extraction, a descendant of Chus: (C.) it signifies "black, or an Ethiopian." M. — Rasathaim was perhaps the place of his nativity. As it means "of two sorts of malice," Arias thinks that the Syrian kings took this title to shew that they would punish or repress all crimes against the civil or criminal law, (M.) those which affected the property as well as the lives of their subjects. H. — Mesopotamia. In Hebrew Aram naharayim. Syria of the two rivers; so called because it lies between the Euphrates and the Tigris. It is absolutely called Syria, v. 10. Ch. — Eight years, by manual labour and presents, testifying their submission to their oppressor, who might not perhaps live among them. C. — Moir's edition, by mistake, reads eighty years. The Hebrews were equally fallible. C. iii. 30. H.
*H And they cried to the Lord, who raised them up a saviour, and delivered them; to wit, Othoniel, the son of Cenez, the younger brother of Caleb:
Ver. 9. Saviour. "We must remark, that the man by whom God grants us safety, is styled a saviour," (S. Aug. q. 18,) though Christ is the proper and principal Saviour. W. — Caleb. Sept. "the younger son of Cenez, who was the brother of Caleb." H. — Othoniel was one of the ancients. If he could not prevent the people from falling into idolatry, he rescued them from it. C.
* Summa
*S Part 2, Ques 105, Article 1
[I-II, Q. 105, Art. 1]
Whether the Old Law Enjoined Fitting Precepts Concerning Rulers?
Objection 1: It would seem that the Old Law made unfitting precepts concerning rulers. Because, as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 4), "the ordering of the people depends mostly on the chief ruler." But the Law contains no precept relating to the institution of the chief ruler; and yet we find therein prescriptions concerning the inferior rulers: firstly (Ex. 18:21): "Provide out of all the people wise [Vulg.: 'able'] men," etc.; again (Num. 11:16): "Gather unto Me seventy men of the ancients of Israel"; and again (Deut. 1:13): "Let Me have from among you wise and understanding men," etc. Therefore the Law provided insufficiently in regard to the rulers of the people.
Obj. 2: Further, "The best gives of the best," as Plato states (Tim. ii). Now the best ordering of a state or of any nation is to be ruled by a king: because this kind of government approaches nearest in resemblance to the Divine government, whereby God rules the world from the beginning. Therefore the Law should have set a king over the people, and they should not have been allowed a choice in the matter, as indeed they were allowed (Deut. 17:14, 15): "When thou . . . shalt say: I will set a king over me . . . thou shalt set him," etc.
Obj. 3: Further, according to Matt. 12:25: "Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate": a saying which was verified in the Jewish people, whose destruction was brought about by the division of the kingdom. But the Law should aim chiefly at things pertaining to the general well-being of the people. Therefore it should have forbidden the kingdom to be divided under two kings: nor should this have been introduced even by Divine authority; as we read of its being introduced by the authority of the prophet Ahias the Silonite (3 Kings 11:29, seqq.).
Obj. 4: Further, just as priests are instituted for the benefit of the people in things concerning God, as stated in Heb. 5:1; so are rulers set up for the benefit of the people in human affairs. But certain things were allotted as a means of livelihood for the priests and Levites of the Law: such as the tithes and first-fruits, and many like things. Therefore in like manner certain things should have been determined for the livelihood of the rulers of the people: the more that they were forbidden to accept presents, as is clearly stated in Ex. 23:8: "You shall not [Vulg.: 'Neither shalt thou'] take bribes, which even blind the wise, and pervert the words of the just."
Obj. 5: Further, as a kingdom is the best form of government, so is tyranny the most corrupt. But when the Lord appointed the king, He established a tyrannical law; for it is written (1 Kings 8:11): "This will be the right of the king, that shall reign over you: He will take your sons," etc. Therefore the Law made unfitting provision with regard to the institution of rulers.
_On the contrary,_ The people of Israel is commended for the beauty of its order (Num. 24:5): "How beautiful are thy tabernacles, O Jacob, and thy tents." But the beautiful ordering of a people depends on the right establishment of its rulers. Therefore the Law made right provision for the people with regard to its rulers.
_I answer that,_ Two points are to be observed concerning the right ordering of rulers in a state or nation. One is that all should take some share in the government: for this form of constitution ensures peace among the people, commends itself to all, and is most enduring, as stated in _Polit._ ii, 6. The other point is to be observed in respect of the kinds of government, or the different ways in which the constitutions are established. For whereas these differ in kind, as the Philosopher states (Polit. iii, 5), nevertheless the first place is held by the _kingdom,_ where the power of government is vested in one; and _aristocracy,_ which signifies government by the best, where the power of government is vested in a few. Accordingly, the best form of government is in a state or kingdom, where one is given the power to preside over all; while under him are others having governing powers: and yet a government of this kind is shared by all, both because all are eligible to govern, and because the rules are chosen by all. For this is the best form of polity, being partly kingdom, since there is one at the head of all; partly aristocracy, in so far as a number of persons are set in authority; partly democracy, i.e. government by the people, in so far as the rulers can be chosen from the people, and the people have the right to choose their rulers.
Such was the form of government established by the Divine Law. For Moses and his successors governed the people in such a way that each of them was ruler over all; so that there was a kind of kingdom. Moreover, seventy-two men were chosen, who were elders in virtue: for it is written (Deut. 1:15): "I took out of your tribes wise and honorable, and appointed them rulers": so that there was an element of aristocracy. But it was a democratical government in so far as the rulers were chosen from all the people; for it is written (Ex. 18:21): "Provide out of all the people wise [Vulg.: 'able'] men," etc.; and, again, in so far as they were chosen by the people; wherefore it is written (Deut. 1:13): "Let me have from among you wise [Vulg.: 'able'] men," etc. Consequently it is evident that the ordering of the rulers was well provided for by the Law.
Reply Obj. 1: This people was governed under the special care of God: wherefore it is written (Deut. 7:6): "The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be His peculiar people": and this is why the Lord reserved to Himself the institution of the chief ruler. For this too did Moses pray (Num. 27:16): "May the Lord the God of the spirits of all the flesh provide a man, that may be over this multitude." Thus by God's orders Josue was set at the head in place of Moses; and we read about each of the judges who succeeded Josue that God "raised . . . up a saviour" for the people, and that "the spirit of the Lord was" in them (Judges 3:9, 10, 15). Hence the Lord did not leave the choice of a king to the people; but reserved this to Himself, as appears from Deut. 17:15: "Thou shalt set him whom the Lord thy God shall choose."
Reply Obj. 2: A kingdom is the best form of government of the people, so long as it is not corrupt. But since the power granted to a king is so great, it easily degenerates into tyranny, unless he to whom this power is given be a very virtuous man: for it is only the virtuous man that conducts himself well in the midst of prosperity, as the Philosopher observes (Ethic. iv, 3). Now perfect virtue is to be found in few: and especially were the Jews inclined to cruelty and avarice, which vices above all turn men into tyrants. Hence from the very first the Lord did not set up the kingly authority with full power, but gave them judges and governors to rule them. But afterwards when the people asked Him to do so, being indignant with them, so to speak, He granted them a king, as is clear from His words to Samuel (1 Kings 8:7): "They have not rejected thee, but Me, that I should not reign over them."
Nevertheless, as regards the appointment of a king, He did establish the manner of election from the very beginning (Deut. 17:14, seqq.): and then He determined two points: first, that in choosing a king they should wait for the Lord's decision; and that they should not make a man of another nation king, because such kings are wont to take little interest in the people they are set over, and consequently to have no care for their welfare: secondly, He prescribed how the king after his appointment should behave, in regard to himself; namely, that he should not accumulate chariots and horses, nor wives, nor immense wealth: because through craving for such things princes become tyrants and forsake justice. He also appointed the manner in which they were to conduct themselves towards God: namely, that they should continually read and ponder on God's Law, and should ever fear and obey God. Moreover, He decided how they should behave towards their subjects: namely, that they should not proudly despise them, or ill-treat them, and that they should not depart from the paths of justice.
Reply Obj. 3: The division of the kingdom, and a number of kings, was rather a punishment inflicted on that people for their many dissensions, specially against the just rule of David, than a benefit conferred on them for their profit. Hence it is written (Osee 13:11): "I will give thee a king in My wrath"; and (Osee 8:4): "They have reigned, but not by Me: they have been princes, and I knew not."
Reply Obj. 4: The priestly office was bequeathed by succession from father to son: and this, in order that it might be held in greater respect, if not any man from the people could become a priest: since honor was given to them out of reverence for the divine worship. Hence it was necessary to put aside certain things for them both as to tithes and as to first-fruits, and, again, as to oblations and sacrifices, that they might be afforded a means of livelihood. On the other hand, the rulers, as stated above, were chosen from the whole people; wherefore they had their own possessions, from which to derive a living: and so much the more, since the Lord forbade even a king to have superabundant wealth to make too much show of magnificence: both because he could scarcely avoid the excesses of pride and tyranny, arising from such things, and because, if the rulers were not very rich, and if their office involved much work and anxiety, it would not tempt the ambition of the common people; and would not become an occasion of sedition.
Reply Obj. 5: That right was not given to the king by Divine institution: rather was it foretold that kings would usurp that right, by framing unjust laws, and by degenerating into tyrants who preyed on their subjects. This is clear from the context that follows: "And you shall be his slaves [Douay: 'servants']": which is significative of tyranny, since a tyrant rules is subjects as though they were his slaves. Hence Samuel spoke these words to deter them from asking for a king; since the narrative continues: "But the people would not hear the voice of Samuel." It may happen, however, that even a good king, without being a tyrant, may take away the sons, and make them tribunes and centurions; and may take many things from his subjects in order to secure the common weal. ________________________
SECOND
*H And the spirit of the Lord was in him, and he judged Israel. And he went out to fight, and the Lord delivered Chusan Rasathaim, king of Syria, and he overthrew him:
Ver. 10. In him, to instruct and enable him both to rout the enemy, and to govern the people with prudence. H. — Chal. "the spirit of prophecy." The oracle excited him to attack Chusan. Joseph. v. 3. He was entrusted with an extraordinary authority, in a wonderful manner, and God gave him all those virtues which were requisite for his exalted station. C. — Him. Heb. "his hand was strong upon Chusan Rasathaim." He gained a complete victory over him, (H.) the particulars of which are not mentioned, though they must have been very interesting and extraordinary, as the power of Chusan was so extensive. C.
*H And the land rested forty years, and Othoniel, the son of Cenez, died.
Ver. 11. Died, "forty years after Josue, according to the chronology of Usher, which we follow," (C.) or rather Usher translates the land began to rest "in the fortieth year" from the peace of Josue. He places the death to that leader A. 2570, and the end of Chusan's dominion 2599; so that, if we deduct 40 years from this last date, we shall come to the year 2559, the sixth of Josue's administration, when he began to divide the conquered lands. He supposes that the peace of Othoniel lasted about 62 years, when Eglon disturbed it for eighteen years. "Aod delivered Israel. After him Samgar appeared, and the land rested till the 80th year from the peace of Othoniel." Houbigant censures this indiscriminate use of cardinal and of ordinal numbers, and the blending the times of servitude with those of peace; (H.) and "surely this method of reckoning is very harsh, and contrary to the usual acceptation of words." C. — Yet it is adopted by many. W. — It may suit to form a system, but can have no solid foundation. H. — The epoch from which Usher dates is no where so distinctly specified, as that we should suppose that the author of the Book of Judges had it in view. Moreover, by this method, we are left to guess how long each of the judges reigned, or how long the peace which they had procured, subsisted. Usher admits that the years of servitude are specified; and, why not also the years of peace, since they are expressed exactly in the same manner? If the ordinal numbers 40th, 80th, &c. were intended, b would be prefixed, as Deut. i. 3.; and this grammatical observation alone, suffices to overturn the calculation of Usher. Houbig. Proleg. — Salien dates from the death of Josue in 2600, and allows that 40 years elapsed from that period till the decease of Othoniel; including the years which some attribute to the ancients, and to the anarchy; (C. xvii. &c. to the end,) and also the eight years of servitude; so that instead of a rest of 40 years, we shall find that all was in confusion the greatest part of the time. The idolatry of Israel, which shortly brought on the servitude under Eglon, commenced immediately after the conclusion of these 40 years, when Salien begins to enumerate the years of Aod's government. Thus he does from one judge to another. This system does not indeed make the text bend to uphold it, but it supposes that the sacred writer includes anarchy and servitude under the name of rest. In these matters much is to be supplied by conjecture, and hence the chronological difficulties which infidels propose, to invalidate the authority of the Scripture, can have but little weight, till the learned shall have discovered the exact disposition of former times. The first judge of Israel was of the tribe of Juda. The second was chosen from the almost ruined tribe of Benjamin, as the learned commonly place the dreadful catastrophe which befel that tribe during the anarchy which ensued, and the death of Josue and of the ancients. Aod had no share in the crime. H.
*H And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord: who strengthened against them Eglon, king of Moab: because they did evil in his sight.
Ver. 12. Eglon, signifies "a calf." C. — God made use of this prince to scourge his people, with the assistance of the neighbouring nations. He took Engaddi, in the plains of Jericho, and was thus enabled to keep an eye both upon his own subjects and the conquered Israelites. C. — Here he probably met with his untimely end. H.
*H And afterwards they cried to the Lord, who raised them up a saviour, called Aod, the son of Cera, the son of Jemini, who used the left hand as well as the right. And the children of Israel sent presents to Eglon, king of Moab, by him.
Ver. 15. Aod, signifies "praise," whence perhaps Josephus calls him Judes which has the same import. M. — He was a descendant of Jemini or Benjamin, by his son Gera. Gen. xlvi. 1. — Right. Sept. and many interpreters agree, that Aod was "Ambidexter," a quality which Plato exhorted those who were designed for war, to strive to acquire. Several of the heroes before Troy are praised on this account; and the Scripture takes particular notice of 700 citizens of Gabaa, who could use both hands alike, and could hit even a hair with a stone. C. xx. 16. The Jews explain itter, very absurdly; Aod "had his right hand maimed or tied:" (C.) and Prot. render "a man left-handed." H. — This would be a very awkward recommendation for a warrior, though it is pretended that such are more resolute, and more difficult to encounter than others. The number of the men at Gabaa who are praised for their skill, as well as the brave men of David, (1 Par. xii. 2,) shews sufficiently that the term does not mean left-handed. But the Scripture here takes notice that Aod could use his left hand so well, because he placed his dagger, contrary to custom, on his right side, and the motions of his left hand would not be so narrowly watched. Rufin does not agree with the present text of Josephus, which indeed seems very confused, saying, "that all the strength of Aod lay in his left hand." Gelenius also translates, utraque manu ex æquo promptus; (Ant. v. 5,) so that perhaps the Greek of Josephus may have been altered. — Presents; that is, tribute; an odious expression, instead of which the Scripture often puts presents, 1 K. x. 27. 1 Par. xviii. 2. No tribute was imposed in Persia till the reign of Darius Hystaspes; the subjects had to make presents to the king. Herod. iii. 89. C.
*H And he made himself a two-edged sword, with a haft in the midst of the length of the palm of the hand, and was girded therewith, under his garment, on the right thigh.
Ver. 16. He made, or procured, though it was formerly honourable for a person to do such things himself. C. — Hand. Heb. gomed, is translated by the Prot. "of a cubit length," (H.) though the term is never used elsewhere for that measure. Sept. have spithamé, a measure of 12 fingers. — Garment. The sagum, as well as the Sept. mandua, from the Heb. mad, denote a military garment. But such a dress might have rendered Aod suspected, (C.) unless an uniform might then be deemed a suitable dress for an ambassador. H. — Thigh. The Jews wore the sword there; (Ps. xliv. 4,) and it would be more convenient on the left thigh, as the nations of Gaul and Germany had it, while the Roman cavalry wore the sword on the right; and the infantry had two swords, the long one on the left, and a shorter, about an hand's length, on the right. Joseph. Bel. iii. 3. Lipsius.
*H And he presented the gifts to Eglon, king of Moab Now Eglon was exceeding fat.
Ver. 17. Fat. The ancient version used by S. Aug. had, "lean," which he justly took in an ironical sense. Sept. asteios, signifies "beautiful and genteel." C. — Serarius explains it in the same sense as the Vulgate. M.
*H And when he had presented the gifts unto him he followed his companions that came along with him.
Ver. 18. Him; or according to the Heb. Sept. and Chal. "he sent away the men who had brought the presents." C. — But it seems he followed after them as far as Galgal, (H.) whence he returned, as if he had been consulting the oracle, and had orders to communicate something of importance to the king, unless we translate, "He dismissed, &c. (19.) and as he was returned from the idols at Galgal, he said," &c. at the same interview. C. — He would not expose his companions to danger. M.
*H Then returning from Galgal, where the idols were, he said to the king: I have a secret message to thee, O king. And he commanded silence: and all being gone out that were about him,
Ver. 19. Idols. Heb. pesilim. Some take these to be only heaps of stones. Prot. "quarries." H. — But the Sept. &c. represent them as "carved" idols. The same expression is used Ex. xx. 4, &c. The Moabites had probably placed idols here, to profane that sacred place, which was resorted to out of devotion by the Israelites. Osee iv. 14. Amos iv. 5. Here also the prophets inform us that the ten tribes adored and consulted idols; resembling perhaps that of Michas, C. xvii. 4. — Silence to Aod, (C.) that none of the people might be able to divulge the secret. Heb. "be thou silent." M.
*H Aod went in to him: now he was sitting in a summer parlour alone, and he said: I have a word from God to thee. And he forthwith rose up from his throne.
Ver. 20. Alone. Heb. "Aod approached unto him, and he was sitting in a summer parlour, which he had for himself, alone." It seems to have been a private closet, to which he retired for greater secrecy, as his officers concluded that he was there only to ease nature. H. — It might be rendered, "a hall of audience." C. — But the place where Aod presented the tribute, was more probably of this description, and Eglon retired thence into a back parlour, and was followed by Aod, alone, v. 24. H. — A word. What Aod, who was judge and chief magistrate of Israel, did on this occasion, was by a special inspiration of God: but such things are not to be imitated by private men. Ch. S. Aug. q. 20. Num. xxv. W. — Heb. "a thing (message, &c.) from God, (Aleim) or the gods." Probably the king would imagine that he was speaking of the idols at Galgal, and being full of awe for them, would be off his guard, and rise up out of respect. See Num. xxiii. 18. Ex. iii. 5. C. — But as the word Elohim was only abusively applied to idols and to great men, Aod might say with truth, that he had a word or an errand from Elohim to the king, without minding in what sense Eglon would take the expression. See S. Aug. q. 20. Orig. hom. 4. Though God permitted this king to attack his people, and to scourge them for a time, he did not approve of his injustice, and now authorized the chief magistrate of Israel to revenge their wrongs. H. — God is the arbiter of our lives, and may order whomsoever he pleases to put us to death. But the doctrine of J. Huss, who preached, "It is lawful for every subject to kill any tyrant," was condemned in the C. of Constance. David severely punished the man who pretended that he had slain Saul. The first Christians never entered into any revolt against those cruel and impious emperors who oppressed them, and whose title to the throne was evidently unjust. See Rom. xiii. 1. Under what government are all satisfied, or of the same religion with the sovereign? Even if any should pretend that they have an order from God to kill a tyrant, they must give proof of their commission to the lawful superiors, or them must expect to be treated as fanatical impostors. C. — Throne; or Heb. "seat." The throne of state would not probably be placed in a retired chamber. H. — The king rose up out of respect to the deity; (M.) and at the same moment, Aod plunged the dagger into his bowels. H.
*H With such force that the haft went in after the blade into the wound, and was closed up with the abundance of fat. So that he did not draw out the dagger, but left it in the body as he had struck it in: and forthwith, by the secret parts of nature, the excrements of the belly came out.
Ver. 22. With, &c. Heb. Prot. "And the haft also went in after the blade, and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger out of his belly, and the dirt came out." By the word belly, the Jews mean all the vital parts. C. — The wound was so deep, that Aod did not think proper to strive long to extract his sword; and indeed, being all bloody, it would have only tended to excite suspicion. H. — The Chal. agrees with the Vulg. in rendering parshedona "excrements," though it seem to be rather irregularly in construction with a masc. [], &c. If we should read peristana, "a porch," the difficulty would be avoided. C. — Sept. "(23) and Aod went out into the porch, (prostada) and he shut the doors of the upper chamber...(24) and he himself went out." H.
*H Went out by a postern door. And the king's servants going in, saw the doors of the parlour shut, and they said: Perhaps he is easing nature in his summer parlour.
Ver. 24. Door. Lyranus would prefer porticum, "the porch," as the Chal. explains the Heb. by exedra, a portico highly ornamented with pillars and seats, where the princes formerly used to administer justice. Homer give a grand description of the portico of Alcinous. Odys. H. — See that of Solomon described, 3 K. vii. 6. C. — The Rom. Sept. adds after prostada, what may perhaps be a second version, "and he went through those who were drawn up," or the guards. He shewed no signs of fear. H. — It was not necessary for him to take the key with him, as a common one was used for several chambers, and was necessary only to unloose some bands, with which the doors were fastened. The keys in the East are very large, and of a very different construction from ours. C. — Nature. Heb. "he covereth his feet." The ancients did not wear breeches: they covered themselves with great care. C. See Deut. xxiii. 13. H. — Parlour. Heb. "chamber." Sept. "bed-chamber."
*H And waiting a long time, till they were ashamed, and seeing that no man opened the door, they took a key: and opening, they found their lord lying dead on the ground.
Ver. 25. Ashamed, perceiving that their hopes had been vain, (C.) and not knowing what to do, (M.) they began to fear the worst. H.
*H But Aod, while they were in confusion, escaped, and passed by the place of the idols from whence he had returned. And he came to Seirath:
Ver. 26. Confusion. Heb. "tarrying," as they waited a long time before they ventured to open the door.
*H And forthwith he sounded the trumpet in Mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel went down with him, he himself going in the front.
Ver. 27. Seirath seems to have been on the road from Galgal to Mount Ephraim. Some conjecture that Josephus speaks of it under the name of Syriad, (C). where he saw the inscriptions, which he asserts were left by the children of Seth before the deluge. H. — They might perhaps be the idols which are mentioned here.
*H And he said to them: Follow me: for the Lord hath delivered our enemies, the Moabites, into our hands. And they went down after him, and seized upon the fords of the Jordan, which are in the way to Moab: and they suffered no man to pass over:
Ver. 28. Fords. That none, from the other side, might come to the assistance of the Moabites, (M.) who were at their prince's court, in the territory of Jericho, and that none of these might make their escape. H.
*H But they slew of the Moabites at that time, about ten thousand, all strong and valiant men: none of them could escape.
Ver. 29. Strong. Heb. lit. "the fatness," denoting what is most excellent. Ps. xxi. 30. and lxxvii. 31. C. — Eglon would have his chief nobility and most valiant soldiers round his person. H.
*H And Moab was humbled that day under the hand of Israel: and the land rested eighty years.
Ver. 30. Eighty. The Hebrews use the letter p to express this number; and, as it is very like their c, which stands for 20, Houbigant suspects that he first number is a mistake of the transcribers. Usher confesses that it is "extremely improbable" that Aod should have governed so long, after he had slain Eglon, as he must have been at that time, about 40 years old; and the Israelites were not often so constant for such a length of time. Houbig. Proleg. — But this difficulty does not affect Usher, as he brings Aod forward only in the 80th year from the peace of Othoniel; and instead of allowing him 80 years of peaceful sway, he says Samgar appeared after him; but, it seems, both together did not reign a year, since in that 80th year, he commences the servitude, which Jabin brought upon Israel, from A. 2679 till 2699, and peace was not restored by Barac for other 20 years! H.
*H After him was Samgar, the son of Anath, who slew of the Philistines six hundred men with a ploughshare: and he also defended Israel.
Ver. 31. Samgar. His reign seems to have been short, and only perhaps extended over the tribes of Juda, Simeon, and Dan, while Debbora governed in another part. Some exclude him from the list of judges. But Josephus, Origen, &c. allow his title, with most of the moderns. C. — The Alex. Chronicle gives his reign of 24 years, which Salien would understand, as if he had acted under the orders of Aod, when the latter was grown too old, if the author had not said that "after the death of Aod, Samgar, his son, judged Israel 24 years," which he subtracts from the 80 years allotted to Aod. He makes Bocci succeed Abisue in the pontificate, at the same time, which Salien admits, A. 2696. — Hundred. Sept. "as far as 600," which might be at different times, when the Philistines were dispersed through the country in order to plunder. — Plough-share. Sept. aratropodi. H. — Some translate the Heb. "an ox-goad." Maundrell describes those, which are used in Palestine, as eight feet long; and, at the thick end, 10 inches round, with a kind of spade, to clean the plough, while the other end is very sharp. Samgar might probably use such an instrument. From its being mentioned, we may gather that he did not engage the enemy in a pitched battle, (C.) but as he could find an opportunity. Thus Samson slew 1000 of the same nation with the jaw-bone of an ass. C. xv. H. — Defended. Heb. and Sept. "saved," which shews that he was a proper judge. M. — It is true, he did not rescue the Israelites entirely, but he stood up in their defence. C. — The duration of his government is not specified, nor is it said that the land rested, because he ruled for a short time only: Josephus says not quite a year; and the roads were continually infested with the incursions of the Philistines on the south, and of the Chanaanites on the North. C. v. 6. Samgar seems to have been a ploughman, and he seized the first weapon that came to hand. The Hungarians and Spaniards formerly defended themselves against the attacks of the Turks and Moors with their plough-shares, in memory of which the Spaniards long after went armed to plough. The most valiant Roman generals, Camillus, Curius, Cincinnatus, and Fabricius, were called from the plough to the Dictatorship; and Pliny (xviii.) observes, that "countrymen make the best soldiers."