I feel rather daunted at the thought of studying Judges!
When I first read the Old Testament, I was aghast at all the killing, especially in consideration of the Ten Commandments and their forbiddance of killing. When I questioned a person more Bible savvy than I, I was told, “The Israelites took it to mean, You shall not kill an Israelite.”
(Did I make up a word there? Forbiddance!)
I turned to Dummelow’s One Volume Commentary Bible Commentary, which is often just what I can cope with in my study of the Bible.
I shall quote part of the Introduction, The Name:
The word ‘judge’ implies to us something very
different from what it implied to a Hebrew. The Hebrews…. knew nothing of the
complex machinery of the law-court; disputes were settled by the head of the
family, the elders of the tribe or of the village or town, or by the priests; later
on, in the more serious cases, by some person of national influence, and even
by the king. The procedure was informal, and regulated at most by custom and a
general sense of what was right. The
sentence could only be enforced when public opinion was behind it. But a man
who was qualified by age or experience, or both, or by special nearness to
Jehovah, to settle disputes, could also do something more; men would naturally
look to him for counsel, guidance, deliverance. To judge was thus to lead and
to govern... It is in this sense that Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah, and the other
heroes of this book are judges. In each case their rise is the result of divine
selection.
Further,
All the judges mentioned in this book appear to
have been military leaders.
When they proved their worth in battle, they naturally were trusted in peace.
I think the closest we in Australia have to a military person being called in civilian life to be a ‘judge’, would be their appointment as Governor General of Australia. Although, of course there have been many returned servicemen who have subsequently served as members of Parliament.
Joyce
Voysey
3 comments:
What an interesting post! Thanks!
I'm glad you mentioned Deborah, the judge and prophet from the time when women judged Israel. I wish we had more about her and the other women. I researched that era of history once and will have to read about it again.
What do you think of Judges 19, especially verses 22-26? How do you "judge" that story?
Thank you for your comments, dear Deborah in Florida.
What a challenge you have set.
Dummelow hasn't much to say about verses 22-26. Only,
22 Sons of Beliel. The Hebrew means simply 'worthless men' or 'rascals.' Beliel is not a proper name. 23 The old man dreads being compelled to violate the laws of Eastern hospitality.
Hospitality in those days was in private houses - no public inns.
This story reminds me of a book, I Myself a Mandarin, by Austen Coates
He was an English civil servant sent to Hong Kong in 1949. He was given the job of judging the problems of very backward folk in the New Territories district of Kowloon's hinterland. It stretched some twenty miles inland. "This was a grandly rugged area of grass-covered mountains and sharply-incised valleys." And "islands which varied in size from mere pinnacles of rock to one island larger than Hongkong itself."
There are some hilarious accounts of cases he heard. The blurb on the cover gives a taste of some of them, "Lovers who first me in an unlit train . . . three watercress-beds the size of a tomato patch which could have sparked off an international propaganda campaign from Peking . . . divisions of three cows between two women . . ." Some of it is quite racy.
Anyway, Coates needed at least the wisdom of Solomon, let alone any ordinary judge of Judges. But one can see that those judges could be set some interesting problems.
I can see that as students of Christian Science we must get to the spiritual facts rather than the material ones. And I am sure that your questioning will be answered at some time. They always are.
Best wishes from Gold Coast Australia.
Joyce Voysey
Post a Comment