Men without Ears
In 1943, C.S. Lewis published his short, apologetic work, The Abolition of Man, in which he tackles “The Green Book,” a new text being used in the British educational system, one that elevates observational science over the arts and moral norms. Lewis’ premise is ultimately that the educational system was producing “men without chests” — people who used reason and their passions without the constraints of moral virtue.
The Abolition of Man was written 75 years ago and time has been the judge of Lewis’ fears and predictions. And while the point of this reflection is not to go on a long diatribe about the state of the American educational system, if the violence present in the schools today is any indication of the moral standards of student bodies, then it is a pretty clear indication of Lewis’ insights into the consequences of a bad educational model. And, by violence, I am not simply referring to school shootings and stabbings, though that is a heinous crime, I am also talking about the violence in the hallways — bullying, verbal abuse of other students and teachers, and a general lack of respect for authority amongst the student body.
My concern this morning is to suggest that we have entered a stage beyond Lewis’ prediction of men without chests. We have also created heads without ears. Many people complain that in our world today the art of debate has been abandoned. Well-crafted argumentation has been replaced simply by arguments, most of which seem to be built on an ad hominem approach.
Truly, this is not a new thing. Ad hominem and the use of other logical fallacies are techniques that Arthur Schopenhauer suggested, for example, in his work entitled, The Art of Controversy. Further, it was the method of the Sophists in the 5th century B.C. Of course, it is arguments like these to which great thinkers like Socrates and Plato objected. Yet, today, thoughtless gibes seem to be the approach that people commonly take — a brief survey of recent presidential debates is a good indication of that reality. And, I am not convinced that audiences of these supposed debates really desire to hear competing ideas weighed out, I think that most only desire to have what they already believe echoed back to them in clever and novel ways: arguments rather than carefully discussed reasons.
And that brings me to ears. Ears are the organ by which we hear things. And, in principle, it is that which we hear in a conversation that ought to cause our minds to reason and understand the position of the other person. If you say, “I think we ought to do X rather than Y,” that is merely an opinion. But, if you say, “I think we ought to do X rather than Y, because of A, B, and C,” then that is a different matter altogether. Then we can carefully evaluate reasons “A, B, and C” to confirm that they are legitimate and pertinent to the question at hand. In addition, when I respond, “No, we need to do Y, because of reasons J, K, and L” then we have data and principles to discuss. As Sherlock Holmes often quipped to John Watson, “I cannot make bricks without straw!”
The problem is that it takes time and energy to come up with reasons for your position and to be able to defend those reasons in a thoughtful way. It also requires that we sincerely listen to one another, rather than using the time when the other person is talking to come up with our next attack.
Interestingly, Jesus teaches in parables precisely because people “hear but do not understand” and “see but never perceive” (Matthew 13:14). Such is seen as a judgment of God upon the unbeliever that they will remain blind and deaf to matters of spiritual truth. Yet, have we created a society that elevates this spiritual blindness and deafness? Have we created a society where we no longer can even hear the ideas of others in a meaningful way. We use our mouths then to spout off our thoughts, but without reasoned dialogue and an exchange if ideas, every man does what is right in his own eyes and we are left with chaos.
And, if a culture ceases to value its chests (moral virtue) and its ears (the exchange and deliberation of other ideas than our own), that what is it that is left? Anarchy? There is no question, if you have spent much time around this blog, that I have strong opinions. And, as a Christian pastor, there are certain presuppositions that I have that are fundamental to the way I think and evaluate ideas. At the same time, I have most enjoyed those rare, deep conversations with those from whom I differ, that have been held in respectful ways, carefully evaluating reasons for positions and not seeking to attack the person for holding said opinions. Given that said conversations do still happen in rare circumstances, I wonder (and pray) that the art of debate may one day be revived in our land.
INRI and Politics
“Therefore, many Jewish people read this notice, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city. It was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. So the Chief Priests of the Jews said to Pilate, ‘Do not write: ‘King of the Jews,’ but instead, this man said, ‘I am king of the Jews.’ Pilate answered, ‘What I have written, I have written.’”
(John 19:20-22)
As we noted above, there is no love lost between Pilate and the Jewish officials and there is certainly a lot of manipulating that has been taking place here. Nevertheless, Pilate lets the words that he wrote stand…perhaps as a bit of a passive-aggressive dig at the Jews on his part, but again, a fulfillment of God’s design in eternal matters. Pilate knew that the trials were a farce (yet he gave the Priests what they wanted to keep the peace), so this becomes his final response in the spectacle that has been put on — “The King of the Jews” will stand, written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, three common languages of his day.
It may be speculated as to why Pilate did not have the same message written in Aramaic, the dialect of Hebrew that the Jews would have used in the marketplace and in their communities. Hebrew, the Jews tended to keep for religious matters in the Temple or the Synagogue. While it is speculative, I would suggest that once again, Pilate is seeking to make a point with the Jewish authorities…he will write the language of the charge in Hebrew — the language of the Temple — because it was the Temple officials who were responsible for bringing the charge. We cannot know for sure, but this seems a reasonable explanation.
It should also be noted that in many depictions of the cross, you see the letters INRI written on the scroll. This is the abbreviation for “Iesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum” — the Latin inscription: “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” As a curious tidbit, the letter “J” in English actually derives from a variant of the letter “I” in Latin (essentially, when the letter “I” is used as a consonant — originally a “Y” sound and then a “dʒ” sound…essentially the “J” of modern usage — it wasn’t until the middle ages that a distinct character was assigned).
A final note…while Pilate and the Jewish Priests were playing politics, a man was dying. And not just any man, the eternal Son of God. How often we, too, can get lost in our own agendas and, while seeking to make political points for ourselves, injustices abound all around us. How much wiser we would be to take the message of Jesus about being a servant to others and the words of the Apostle Paul about considering the needs of others as more significant than our own. The politics will play themselves out, but at the end of the day, which is more important, our own little empires or the Kingdom of Christ? Think carefully before you answer.
There’s Something Missing from Our Conversation on the Body
In 1 Corinthians 12, the Apostle Paul makes an impassioned plea for the unity of the body…a unity that can only built up in love, when the body itself is functioning properly (Ephesians 4:16). Love in the body is indeed the “better way” (1 Corinthians 12:31) toward which we should strive. To make his point, Paul reminds us that a body has many parts…there are eyes and hands and ears, etc… Because the body needs all of the parts to be whole, unity is that which must be striven for. Amen. For most of us who have grown up in Christian circles or in churches, this is an idea that is pretty basic to our existence. No matter what our personal gifts and passions may be, we need the whole to live out the Great Commission in this world.
I fear, though, in a society that has become as specialized as ours has become, Paul’s analogy is often misapplied. In today’s world, it seems, that there are specialists in just about every field. Medicine, Law, and Mechanics are all examples of areas where people specialize in a narrow field. Certainly, there is a base of knowledge that all specialists share in common (I’ll come back to that idea), but there are Dermatologists, Hematologists, and Cardiologists; there those who specialize in Criminal Law, Civil Law, and Business Law; and people also specialize in Motorcycle Mechanics, Heavy Machinery Mechanics, and Auto Mechanics — many even specializing only one a particular make of automobiles.
Even in my former trade there were specialists (I installed carpet for 11 years before entering the ministry full-time). My specialty was Residential Flooring and in that, I did a lot of custom work (borders, inlays, etc…). For several months, just after arriving in seminary, I worked for a Commercial Flooring company, laying tile and glue-down floors. While I knew the basics, the guys who did that kind of flooring for a living could work circles around me. At the same time, most of them had never used a carpet kicker before…something that is a mainstay of residential work. We were specialists — we had areas in which we overlapped, but there were things in which we each did particularly well, and it is in those areas that we each tended to stay.
So, how does this apply to the church? Certainly, there are specializations in the church. To some, God has given the gift of administration, and we need those who can wisely manage the resources that God has entrusted to the church. To others, God has given the gift of helping, which extends well past the work of the Deacons to the whole church body, who cares enough to reach out and meet the needs of others (as I write this, we have a team of people traveling home from Houston, who spent the last week doing just that). To others, God gives the gift of teaching, something that is essential in the process of discipling Christians as they grow in faith. Still, to others, God has given a heart for evangelism, and these members are wired by God to look for people with whom they can share the Gospel. All of these are specializations — we share a common basic set of skills (every Christian ought to be able to share the Gospel, but some are that much more zealous for it, etc…). And again, Paul’s analogy carries, we all are not gifted in the same way and so we need one another.
At the same time, there are things in the life of the body that keep the whole body healthy. For example, as I am closing in on 50, my family doctor has insisted that I start taking vitamins and be more intentional about daily exercise. And so, I take my “One-a-Day” and I ride my stationary bike 5 miles (or walk a mile) pretty much every day (pretty much, life gets busy). These actions do not just benefit my stomach or my heart, they benefit every part of my body, helping it to be more healthy overall. Further, I pray and spend time reading and reflecting on God’s Word, every day. This again, benefits my whole being.
Likewise, in the life of the Church, there are things that we do that benefit the whole body — they act like vitamins for our soul. Spending time reading and reflecting on the Bible is not an activity that belongs just to the specialist, every part of the body must engage in this to keep the body well. Some often say that they are not good at prayer. Of course, if you can talk or think, you can pray and it again is an essential part of the Christian life, something not reserved for a specialist. Sometimes people say that they don’t really need Sunday School, but being discipled is again something that is to be a part of every Christian’s life and without a commitment to discipleship (personal and corporate), the body will not be healthy. They are exercises and vitamins for our overall health. True, my ears may not directly benefit from time on a stationary bike, but that time strengthens my heart which circulates blood all over my body, which in turn not only helps the blood flow to the ears, but it improves the health of the body to which my ears are attached. And so, they benefit indirectly, but they benefit nonetheless.
Sometimes Christians think that they don’t need corporate worship. Here, the analogy changes a little bit because our worship is not so much something we do to strengthen our body (though our body is strengthened as a by-product), it is our service to God. Our worship is our drawing near to our Almighty God and Savior according to His Word and giving him the praise and honor for who he is and for what he has done. This is a big part of what the church was created to do.
So, to say that you don’t need to worship as part of the church body is really to say that you are not part of the body at all. You exist, perhaps, in connection with the body for your own reasons, but that is to be like a parasite, not a functioning organ. Jesus speaks of this as well when he describes the church growing like a large tree from a small seed (see Mark 4:30-32). Once the tree (the Kingdom/Church) has grown and developed branches and leaves, the birds of the air (which often represent the unbelieving nations), make their nests in the midst of the tree. The birds benefit from the tree’s presence, but are not part of the tree and are not fed by the root of the tree. And, they will only nest in the branches of the tree for a season. Worship — being fed by the tap-root of the Spirit — drawing near according to the Word — is what distinguishes the tree from the bird in its nest.
Thus, in things like worship, the study of God’s word, and prayer, it is not a matter of specializing. It is a matter of being and being healthy. What is the goal of this healthy living? It is being united and built up in love. How is this love achieved? It is achieved through the growing mature in our doctrine so that we are not blown to and fro by the winds of human cunning and deceit (see Ephesians 4:13-16). This cannot happen apart from the whole body attending to the Word of God. Yes, we specialize, but we are also a part of a whole. To understand Paul’s analogy in 1 Corinthians 12, you need to preserve this balance…how often, though, we miss the second while over-emphasizing the first.
Simon of Cyrene
“But going out, they found a man from Cyrene who was named Simon, they pressed him into service in order that he might bear his cross. And they were going up to the place called ‘Golgotha,’ which is called the Place of the Skull.”
(Matthew 27:32-33)
“And they pressed into service one passerby, Simon the Cyrene, who was coming from the countryside, the father of Alexander and Rufus, in order to bear his cross. And he carried it to the place, Golgotha, that is translated as the Place of the Skull.”
(Mark 15:21-22)
“And as he was led away, they seized Simon the Cyrene who was coming from the countryside and laid on him the cross to carry behind Jesus.”
(Luke 23:26)
Sometimes people see these verses as being at odds with John’s passage above. Many will also note that the Scriptures are entirely silent as to whether or not Jesus stumbled or fell on the way to Golgotha under the weight of the cross. Let us begin with the first objection and then move to the second.
First, John harmonizes easily with the Synoptic Gospels if you order the chronology as I have here. After the trial, Jesus is sent off to be crucified. Originally, in good Roman tradition, Jesus has the cross (or perhaps a portion of the cross) placed on his shoulders. Yet, on the way out to Golgotha, the soldiers grab Simon from the crowd and compel him to finish carrying the cross the remainder of the walk.
Why would the soldiers do this? Remember, everything about crucifixion was meant as a deterrent to those who might become a threat to the Roman rule. The sentenced one was beaten, humiliated, and paraded through town so that all could see. This served as a warning. Even the honor of dying on a cross was meant as a reminder to passersby (crucifixions were carried out alongside of main roads and thoroughfares. There was no question as to what crime these people were guilty of and if you were considering an insurrection, the crucified bodies were clear warnings about what the consequences would look like.
So…perhaps Simon (being from the countryside) looked like a potential troublemaker. This might be a way of dissuading him from acting out even before he committed his crime. Perhaps the Romans were simply making a point to those city folks who had just asked for Barabbas to be released…beware. Perhaps Jesus was moving too slowly and they wanted to expedite the process. Perhaps, because of Pilate’s reluctance to crucify Jesus, the captain of the guard chose to show Jesus a small degree of mercy on the way up to his execution. Leo (known as “The Great,” a 5th century church bishop) suggested that Simon’s inclusion was symbolic of the Gentiles being brought into the suffering of Christ (see Romans 8:17). Or, perhaps, most simply, Jesus stumbled and was unable to bear the physical weight of the cross.
We don’t know for sure. Church tradition has held that Jesus stumbled and fell under the cross’ weight. That is not only understandable, but also emphasizes the humanity of Christ as he was being tortured and murdered. Now, obviously the tradition is non-canonical, but it is supported by reason, so while we must not be overly dogmatic here, the notion of our Lord falling is a reasonable explanation for why Simon was pulled out of the crowd and impressed into service.
Who was Simon? Cyrene is a region that is located in what is modern-day Libya, so much like the Ethiopian eunuch, we find an early African Christian being involved in a very significant way. Africa became a place of refuge for the child, Jesus, as his parents fled king Herod, and now an African becomes a minister of grace to Jesus as he walks to the hill on which he will die. It is considered that this man is one and the same with Simeon who was called “Black,” found in Acts 13:1. What a profound impression this must have made on this man as he followed Jesus with the cross on the way up the hill to Golgotha. It may also be suggested that this influence touched Simon’s family as well, for Rufus is mentioned in Romans 16:13 as a friend and acquaintance of Paul’s (clearly, by the mention of their names, Mark’s audience was familiar with these men).
And, so our Lord, still in the lead, was followed with Simon carrying the cross. What a sad day in the history of mankind…yet, what wonderful hope and promise comes from this, not only that our Lord would be willing to bear such pain for us, but that he would privilege us to bear sorrow and pain as well so that we might appreciate our Lord’s sorrow and pain that much more profoundly.
The Place of the Skull
“And he bore his own cross and went to what is called the Place of the Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha.”
(John 19:17)
After the third unjust and unfair trial, our Lord is led toward the place of his execution. He begins, battered and torn as he was, carrying his own cross. This, of course, will not last long as he understandably collapses under its weight, but we get ahead of ourselves. It is here that Jesus’ words, “Take up your cross and follow me,” find their ultimate meaning. How often we see people using Jesus’ phrase to talk about the problems and challenges they face in life, but truly, what can compare to this? What financial or family matter can compare? What difficulty or impairment could you have that would look like this? When Jesus said, “take up your cross,” this is what he was speaking of — an implement of torture and death. And to demonstrate the horror of what he commanded, Jesus literally takes up his own cross to walk to Golgotha.
The Place of the Skull, or Golgotha…literally, “the skull place,” appropriately named given that it is a roundish hill, like the top of a bald skull…in fact the name Calvary, which it is often called in old hymns, comes from the Latin, Calvarius, meaning “bald skull.” The Gospel accounts record that this is just along the road a short way out of the city…a logical place for Roman executions and an appropriate name for the purpose to which it was put.
There is also a certain sense of prophetic irony to this as the prophesy that is being fulfilled there on the cross is the crushing of the head of the serpent. Thus, much like Jael’s tent-stake driven through the skull of Sisera, Jesus’ cross was driven through the top of the skull to signify that his sacrificial death is crushing the skull of the great enemy of God’s people — the Devil, the serpent himself.
Salting the Earth
“And it came to pass on the morrow that the people went out to the fields and it was reported to Abimelek. And he took the people and divided them up under three heads and he laid in wait in the field and he beheld the people coming out of the city. And he rose up over them and slew them. Abimelek and the head that was with him charged and stood at the entrance gate of the city. Two companies charged upon all who were in the field and struck them down. Abimelek fought in the city all that day and he overthrew the city and he slew the people who were in it. Then he razed the city and sowed it with salt.”
(Judges 9:42-45)
And so, the siege of Shekem goes into the second day and there is a group of people that seek to enter the fields. Some suggest that this is the leaders of Shekem trying to break through Abimelek’s lines. Others might suggest that these are people who think that, since they have given Ga’al the boot and evicted him from the city, life can go back to normal. The best answer, though, given the context, is that these people were likely trying to flee the city now that it is clear that the city is under the judgment of Abimelek. Yet, at this point, they have made their bed with Shekem, it is time for them to sleep in it. Thus Abimelek counters by dividing his forces again and attacking them in the fields while also rushing the gate of the city and holding it (standing in the gate is a figure of speech referring to holding it and keeping it open for the rest of Abimelek’s army to flood in. After the people in the fields are slaughtered, the soldiers rush into the city and lay waste to it, burning it to the ground and executing the people..
Having torn down the city, he now takes salt and scatters the earth with it. The tradition in the middle-east was that salting the earth was a sign of curse on the land. While one has to bring in a lot of salt to do any long-term damage to the ground, the principle of the matter is that it was meant as a reminder to those who would pass by that the city had been judged.
This passage makes me think of Jesus’ statement that Christians are salt of the earth (Matthew 5:13). Typically we speak about salt as a preservative for meat (which it is) and as a seasoning for food (which it again is). But perhaps we also ought to think of salt in the context of being a judgment on the earth, that the presence of believers is to be a reminder to the world that they are under the curse of God unless they repent and believe. Indeed, this even helps to shine light on Jesus’ statement that if salt loses its saltiness that it is not good for anything (and the saltiness cannot be restored — Matthew 5:13, plus Mark 9:50 and Luke 14:34). In other words, if we become so worldly that we are no longer a reminder to the world of God’s wrath upon them, what good have we done? And oh, in refusing to preach on the need for repentance, but only on grace, how many churches have ceased to be salty?
Fire Consuming Everything
“And if not, may fire go out from Abimelek and consume the leaders of Shekem and the house of Millo. Then, let fire go out from the leaders of Shekem and the house of Millo and consume Abimelek.”
(Judges 9:20)
Why fire? Sure, fire is a sign of judgment, but more importantly, fire is the only proper way to destroy the brambles (Psalm 58:9). Yet, when the brambles are choking out the forest, there is no good way of burning out the brambles without burning the trees as well. Such is the judgment of Jotham’s parable — he is essentially saying to them that if they think that what they have done is proper, then fine, God will be the judge, but if your conscience convicts you, then let your actions destroy you under God’s hand of wrath.
Paul writes much the same thing in Romans 1, when he speaks of God giving the people up to their sin and lust of their hearts. The point that Paul is making is that one of God’s forms of judgment is to allow people to pursue their lusts, removing his hand of restraint from them, for sin destroys us not only in eternity, but in this life as well. Did the leaders of Shekem know that what they were doing was wrong? Surely they must have. Did the people of whom Paul speaks know that what they were doing was wrong? Again, they must, that is the work of their conscience, yet how often (as Paul also points out) we suppress our conscience and the things that we know are right when we desire to pursue sin.
We sometimes talk about how much times change over the generations. And were we just simply talking about the application of technology, then we are entirely right to do so. My first computer, for example, had 16 Kilobytes of RAM, no hard drive, and took up my whole desktop. Today, I take my MacBook Pro wherever I go. But, if we are talking about human nature, very little has changed. We still are sinners to the core, we still think that the end justifies the means, and we still pursue what we think we want instead of what God thinks is best for us. We still wallow in our sin and are in desperate need of a savior.
Jotham’s Warning
“So then, if you acted in faith and devotion when you coronated Abimelek, and if you have created goodwill with Jeruba’al and his sons, and if the honor due his works has been given to him — for my father fought for you and risked his life, and with that he delivered you from the hand of Midian — yet, you rose up against my father’s house on the day and slaughtered his sons — seventy men on one stone — and coronated Abimelek, the son of his servant, before the leaders of Shekem, because he is your brother — if then you have acted in faith and in devotion to Jeruba’al and with his house on this day, then rejoice in Abimelek and let him rejoice also with you.”
(Judges 9:16-19)
There is another principle that really ought to be addressed in this context, and that is the matter of loyalty to those men whom God has raised up to lead. Clearly, the men of Shekem are loyal only to themselves and to their own interests, that is the only explanation for what took place. Had it been otherwise, they would have submitted to the plan and design of God and not sought to raise up their own king…especially not one who was illegitimate.
Yet, how often we see churches acting much like these Shekemites. People dislike a pastor or an Elder in the church and seek to undermine his work. Or if they do not seek to undermine it, they don’t submit to his teaching or they simply find teachers who will scratch their itching ears. And sometimes they even rise up with the aim of removing these God-ordained men from their offices.
Solomon reminds us that a faithful, or a loyal man brings great blessings, but when we pursue getting rich by our own designs, we will be punished for doing so (Proverbs 28:20). Loyalty is one of the virtues to which Christians ought to strive. Society says, “to yourself be true (loyal).” The Bible says, be loyal to God. How does this apply to the church? When we are loyal to godly men whom God has raised up into leadership, then we are being loyal to God. When we are loyal to the Word of God which he has given to us, then we are being loyal to God. When we are faithful to submitting to the commands of God found in the Word we are being loyal to God. When we seek our own agenda, we are being loyal to self.
Hear the warning of Jotham, oh church; let it not fall on deaf ears. If you are loyal to God in God’s house then you will be a blessing to all. If you seek to bring about your own gain in God’s church, God’s hand of judgment will be upon you.
Jotham’s Accusation
“So then, if you acted in faith and devotion when you coronated Abimelek, and if you have created goodwill with Jeruba’al and his sons, and if the honor due his works has been given to him — for my father fought for you and risked his life, and with that he delivered you from the hand of Midian — yet, you rose up against my father’s house on the day and slaughtered his sons — seventy men on one stone — and coronated Abimelek, the son of his servant, before the leaders of Shekem, because he is your brother — if then you have acted in faith and in devotion to Jeruba’al and with his house on this day, then rejoice in Abimelek and let him rejoice also with you.”
(Judges 9:16-19)
And so, as Jotham so eloquently puts it, the bramble is preparing to suffocate the trees and the trees are blindly following along, consumed by their lust for a king of their own making, they cannot see the devastation that their sin will bring. And such is the way with men. These final words of Jotham’s are more of an accusation than a parable — his very presence, as a legitimate son of Gideon (Jeruba’al), seals the condemnation in its fullness. For how can the murderers of the sons of Gideon say with clear conscience that they have acted with faithfulnesss and goodwill or devotion in doing so?
More will come as we are not yet done with Jotham, but the condemnation has been made. As my mother used to say, “You’ve made your bed, now lie in it.” Jotham says, “rejoice together” — essentially, “you deserve one another and you deserve the fire that is to come.”
As we have mentioned before, how often churches are short-sighted. People wish for instant gratification and immediate results rather than taking the harder road of charting a path of faithfulness in the midst of a world that pulls people in many directions. Even here it would be three years before God would bring the curse of Jotham upon the head of Abimelek and his co-conspirators. People forget that God works on his own timetable, but the judgment he promises will come; one never “dodges a bullet” with respect to the God of eternity. Those who conspire to build their empires by enticing a generation away from the church will, in time, reap the vengeance of our God. Woe to them lest they repent of their wicked ways.
A Covenant with the Bramble
“And the bramble said to the trees, ‘If in truth you anoint me to be king over you, enter and take refuge in my shadow. But if there is not, let fire go out from the bramble, and let it consume the cedars of Lebanon!’” (Judges 9:15)
The sad irony of this picture is that here we have the great cedar trees, trees known to grow up to 130 feet in height, who are bowing down before a bramble bush — a thicket in the wilderness — just because they are desperate to have a king and ruler over them that is of their own making. Much like the person who carves an idol out of wood by the labor of his own hands and then bows before it, their folly will bring their downfall. And what a downfall it is as we look forward toward the leadership (or lack thereof) that Abimelek will bring and the warfare that will follow.
Notice, too, the change in language. The previous trees spoke of “shaking over” or dominating the other trees (which of course, would rob them of their good fruit), the bramble speaks of the trees taking refuge in his shadow. For this to happen, the bramble must literally consume the trees in its prickly vines. If you want to know what this looks like, take a visit to the mountains of West Virginia where the Kudzu vine has overrun the trees.
Notice, too, the imprecation that the bramble utters — that if they do not submit to the bramble’s consuming spread, fire will go out and consume the cedars. Do not miss the covenantal nature of this language. The agreement is binding and the cedars are being instructed that they will receive the same fate as the bramble if they do not submit. And so, the fire the bramble deserves will be shared with the cedars. The greater is essentially enslaving itself to the weaker. Such indeed is the case with the people and Abimelek; it would also be the case with Saul to come and so many of the kings that would be raised up amongst the people of Israel.
While there is a clear and direct application to Abimelek, intended by Joab, we can apply the principles within to our lives and churches today. How often do we raise people up into church leadership who are not spiritually mature? How often do we pursue sin and permit it to ensnare our hearts rather than to submit to God’s law for our lives? Are we any less guilty than the people of Shekem? I think not.
And then they Asked the Bramble…
“Then all of the trees said to the bramble, ‘You come and reign over us.’”
(Judges 9:14)
The final candidate is the bramble — אָטָר (atar) — a thorny bush that has no real redemptive value — it is simply fit for the fire (and even in that, the bramble does not produce much heat — Psalm 58:9). The rule of thumb is that if you look hard enough for someone to take advantage of you, well, you will eventually find one. History is filled with examples of the catastrophic effects of actions like this.
In principle, these events are reminders of what Paul speaks of toward the end of Romans 1. As the people will not bow to the God of creation, but instead, prefer to bow to things in the created order or to the works of their own hands, he gives them up to their depravity. The bottom line is that God does restrain our sin and the sin of society to great degrees. Yet, when the people rebel hard enough or consistently enough, God gives them over to their wickedness and removes his hand of restraint. Sin unrestrained will cause a society to implode upon itself.
Yet, this does not just happen in societies and communities, it happens within churches as well. Often, for one reason or another, the truth of God is compromised. Whether the justification seems good at the time, when you compromise the Truth of God’s word, that one compromise always leads to another, and another, and another. Before long, the Bible is no longer held up as authoritative, but becomes simply a book of good suggestions. And when that happens, the church is no longer a church, but just an organization that gathers as a parody of the true church. Such are the effects of seeking to go about matters in man’s fashion of things rather than in submission to God’s Word.
The Vine’s Rejection!
“And the vine said to them, ‘Shall I leave my new wine, which is joy to God and men, and shall I go to dominate the trees?’” (Judges 9:13)
And thus, the “New King Search Committee” has received their third rejection. On one level, we might be tempted to feel sorry for these trees, working hard to find a candidate but no one wants to do so. At the same time, we ought to see this as a mark of God’s grace, restraining the people from sin for a season. How often, when God holds us back from what we wish to do, we see that as a frustration, yet how often it is a gift of God’s restraint…we just cannot see it at that point in time.
Do you see the irony of the contrast here? The trees are seeking to meet what they perceive as their immediate need and the vine is looking at the long-term ramifications of this act. How so? He speaks of the sacrifice of his new wine, but it is new wine that replenishes the stock-pile of old wine. So, unlike the fruit of the Olive or the Fig, for the fruit of the grapevine to be genuinely valuable, it must age for five, ten, or twenty years.
How often, in our churches, leadership finds itself stuck in the challenges of the immediate rather than forward planning for the life of the church decades from now. Obviously there are changes that we cannot predict, but wisdom seeks to both prepare for the lean years and come out stronger and more focused from the challenges the body faces. This cannot be done unless the leadership is prayerfully evaluating their direction and vision. That cannot be done without the wisdom of the vine that recognizes the long term ramifications of meeting the short-term-perceived-need of these bully trees (how often church leaders miss that reality).
Ask the Vine!
“And the trees said to the vine, ‘Come, you reign over us.’” (Judges 9:12)
So, once again, it is back to the drawing board for the trees. They want a king to shake over them and to dominate them, yet they are also seeking out a small tree that is incapable of doing so. In other words, they like the idea of a king — shucks, everyone else has one — but they want a king they can control. Of course, as the old saying goes, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Thus the trees go to the next person in line, which is the vine. The term that is used here, גֶּפֶן (gephen), is a generic term that can be used to describe any kind of climbing plant, yet in the context of the next verse, it is most likely a grapevine to which they are appealing. Like the fig tree, the grapevine is a symbol of God’s blessing here in this life and in the next (Deuteronomy 8:8, Zechariah 8:12). And, as with the other plants mentioned beforehand, to step up to this task would cost the vine his fruit, hence the rejection to come.
It also raises the question, if your king requires something to climb on to give it strength, upon what will it climb? And how will it have to domineer the other trees to genuinely lead. Without a fence or support on which it may climb, the grapevine is unproductive and prone to all sorts of frailties and diseases.
Again, people are seeking a king because these candidates are suited to their own ends. Instead, they ought to be seeking a leader who is godly and who will point people toward ends that glorify God and provide faithful government to God’s people. The vine cannot do this and frankly, the trees do not want this…which will become all too apparent in their next candidate. And while we could rail against the political process in our nation, what about the process of choosing leaders in our churches? To what do church nominating committee’s appeal first? Are they looking for warm bodies to fill offices? Are they looking for people who are good businessmen who can make frugal decisions for the church body? Or are they looking first at the godly character of the individual? The first two are of value, but godly character must always be the driving question, lest you end up with a bramble in office.
The Fig’s Rejection
“And the fig said to them, ‘Should I end my sweetness and my good fruit and shall I go to dominate the trees?’” (Judges 9:11)
The fig has rejected the request of the trees, making this the second denial that the people receive. And, once again, the implication is that the fig tree understands the cost of dominating the other trees — the way humans lead when they reject God’s authority and timing — the way Abimelek will lead… Good fruit disappears and is replaced by the bitterness of force.
It is also worth noting that once again, the kind of tree being appealed to is not a large, stately, and powerful tree, like a cedar, but the fig and the olive are smaller and more frail. They would not be able to “shake over” the other trees even if they wanted to. The suggestion can be made that the trees didn’t really want a true ruler who could compel them to do this or to do that. Instead they wanted a king that they could control like a puppet. Remember, it was not Abimelek who initiated the agenda to be made king, it was his mother by her choice of names (Abimelek means, “My father is king…” How people love to look at the world around them and be jealous of the things that the pagans have, but oh, how people do not wish to receive the consequences of such things.
And thus, there is a second denial. The people should have understood their folly by that point…but then again, how often we become so filled by our foolishness that the greater the wall God places against it, the more desperate we become to embrace the foolishness wholeheartedly. In the end, it is sin, no matter which way you look at it. And sin brings death.
The Fig Tree
“Then the trees said to the fig tree, ‘Come, you reign over us.’” (Judges 9:10)
Do you see how the trees are trying to take the initiative over God? They first asked the one who would have been the rightful king and he turned down the job. Rather than turning back to God to bring them a king in His time, they start going to others—others who do not belong on the throne. And this is just what the people were doing. Gideon had turned down the kingship, so as soon as he died, they sought out another. And, oh what a mess they ended up with.
The fig tree is another staple fruit of Israel. In good years, it will bear fruit twice in a season — once early and once late. Its fruit is sweet and highly nutritious and their presence and imagery is a sign of abundance for the people. The promised land is a land described as a land of fig trees (Deuteronomy 8:8). Further, during times of peace, both in this world and in the new creation, the people are spoken of as being able to recline under their own fig trees (1 Kings 4:25, Micah 4:4).
Yet, peace does not come to us when we seek to run ahead of God. The people were not happy with the fact that other nations had human kings and they did not have one, though how much more wonderful it is to have God as king. Through Gideon’s rejection of kingship, God was telling the people to wait for the appropriate time. They found that entirely unacceptable and went to another.
How often it is in our lives that we try and run ahead of God rather than stopping and waiting for God’s timing? How often do we receive a “no” from God and we proceed anyhow? Friends, trying to run ahead of God is never profitable behavior. God will work in his own time. That time is perfect and proper and we need to learn to be patient, waiting upon the Lord to open doors when he is ready.
The Olive Tree’s Response
“And the olive tree said to them, ‘Should I leave my fatness, which in me God and men are honored and shall I go to dominate the trees?’” (Judges 9:9)
As God’s prophetic word goes out in this parable, it becomes clear from the words of the Olive Tree that Jotham is speaking about his father. While not perfect and while Gideon permitted the setting up of the Ephod, he rightly rejected the offer to become king. It is not the role of man to anoint a king over the people; that privilege belongs to God himself. Indeed, one need not look very far forward in the Bible to see the mess that men brought when they anointed Saul as their king — a king after their own hearts. How often we are prone to doing much the same.
There is also important significance to the way in which the Olive responds. He asks if he is really expected to leave behind his honored abundance to dominate the other trees. In Hebrew the word “dominate,” נוע (nawa), literally means “to shake violently.” The violent shaking creates fear in others, but at the same time, would very literally cause the tree to lose its fruit…and how else shall we judge a tree? The reality is that rule over men generates violence and this tree wishes none of that. Perhaps one might suggest that the trade-off is worth it, that the power and benefits from becoming king would outweigh the cost of one’s fruit. That, indeed, is the way the world views things. Yet, this idea can be explored on both an earthly and a spiritual level.
On an earthly level, this opens the door to the conversation about the doctrine of vocation. In other words, God calls and gifts each person with the ability to serve him in some section of his church or community. Some are called to be pastors and teachers in the church. Others are called to be teachers in the community or farmers, mechanics, administrators, or one of numerous other vocations that are necessary to maintain society. And thus, in God’s eyes, the auto-mechanic is no more or less important than the computer-programmer who is no more or less important than the builder and who is no more or less important than the banker…and the list goes on indefinitely. We are all called and gifted in different ways, just as different body parts provide different functions to the body, and in this way God is honored in his community. Further, no one should be jealous of another’s calling. Rejoice in the calling you have, do it to the best of your ability, and do it to the glory of God.
Yet, there is a spiritual level by which we can discuss this parable. Jesus equates the idea of fruit to one’s spiritual characteristics, thus we judge a tree by its fruit (Matthew 12:33). Similarly, Paul speaks of fruit as the result of our good works (Colossians 1:10) and of the “Fruit of the Spirit” as a reflection of the character of a believer (Galatians 5:22-23). Thus, if you are asked to do something or given an “opportunity” to do something that might bring you personal gain, but would cause you to lose your fruit — that is, your spiritual fruit — then you must not do so. To do so would be to destroy both your walk with God and your Christian testimony in this world. That does not mean that God does not or cannot forgive, but why would you wish to bring that kind of heartache and grief into your life for a short-term, worldly gain?
Yet, how short-sighted we can be sometimes, which is why God has gifted us in the church with faithful Elders who are called to be overseers of our souls. How important it is, indeed, that we learn to listen to their wisdom, submit to their counsel, and rise to God’s calling as is affirmed by them. That’s not easy for us as Americans, but for us as Christians it is part of living faithfully.
The Olive Tree
“The trees surely went to anoint a king over them. And they said to the olive tree, “You must surely reign over us!”
(Judges 9:8)
And we enter into the lawsuit of Jotham, which he offers in the form of a parable. Remember, the purpose of parables is that those who are spiritually blind will remain spiritually blind and those whom the Holy Spirit has begun his work upon may see (Matthew 13:10-17). Abimelek will not repent and will continue his rampage until God destroys his life in judgment; how sad a condition that he will find himself within. Yet, notice even here (as we alluded to earlier in Gideon’s life), the people would much rather have a human king than a divine one. Again, how sad…but how common. How often people in church would far rather lead the church in their way rather than to follow the instructions for the church that God has given us in the Bible.
But what of this parable of trees? Obviously the trees represent those who might rule over the people; what is telling is how Jotham designates them and in terms of which tree the Israelites will choose. Yet, the first of the trees is the Olive, which is the most appropriate of the trees to which the Israelites should look.
Historically, the Olive Tree is a symbol of national Israel (Jeremiah 11:6; Romans 11:17) as well as being a symbol for the Messiah (Zechariah 4:11-14). Not only does the tree grow well in the climate of Israel, but it provided one of the staple foods for the people as well as oil for lamps and for cooking. It seems that the trees have gone to the rightful leader first…God’s anointed tree (Gideon).
Yet, Gideon refused. His calling is not to be king, but simply to be a redeemer on behalf of the people of Israel. Had the people stopped with Gideon, all would have been well and they would never would have been given the circumstance where a parable such as this would have been necessary. Yet, with the refusal of this first tree — the rightful tree — the people began looking elsewhere, and hence the problem.
Again, while we may snub our noses a bit at the people of this day for their impudence, we are guilty of doing the same in much the same way. Christ is king over his church, that principle ought to be debated by no one. Yet, how rarely the church sincerely submits to His rule. How often the church makes decisions based on pragmatism rather than upon plain Biblical teachings. How often the people brought into leadership are people we like rather than people who meet (or who strive to meet) the qualifications found in scripture for leadership as an Elder of as a Deacon. How often Christians talk about service, but never do service. How often, rather than by Christ through a body of elected Elders and Deacons, the churches are run by pastors — those who once again are not the legitimate tree to assume this role — one which belongs to Christ alone.
A Covenant Lawsuit
“And when it was announced to Jotham, he went and stood on the top of Mount Gerizim and lifted his voice, calling out, saying to them, ‘Listen to me leaders of Shekem and God will listen to you.’”
(Judges 9:7)
Before Jotham goes into hiding, God sends him as a prophet to speak condemnation against the people of Shekem and against Abimelek. The significance of his choice of Mount Gerizim ought not be missed. When the people entered into the promised land, half of the tribes were to stand on Mount Ebal and half on Mount Gerizim with the Ark of the Covenant in between. On Mount Ebal there was to be an altar established with the Law of God in plaster beside it. From Mount Ebal the priests would declare curses on the people for covenant disobedience. Then from Mount Gerizim, the priests would declare blessings on the people for covenant obedience (see Deuteronomy 27-28 and Joshua 8:30-35). In this way, the covenant was renewed.
So, here we find Jotham choosing to return to the location of the covenant renewal for the purpose of proclaiming a curse on the wicked Abimelek and his followers. It perhaps seems odd that he would choose to stand on Gerizim rather than Ebal, given that he is speaking curses on the people. On the other hand, one may argue that while Abimelek is finding his strength in the hands of wicked men and is being enthroned by the sacred oak at Shekem, Jotham is finding his hope and strength in the promises of God — promises that are symbolized by Mount Gerizim. Like we so often see in Biblical history, this has the makings of a showdown between the God of Israel and the pagan gods of the people.
The last phrase sounds a little bit odd to our ears until we realize the structure of the parable to follow. Jotham is saying, “You listen to me and God will listen to you.” This is language structured like a covenant lawsuit with Jotham as the prosecuting attorney and Abimelek and the leaders of Shekem being in the dock. Thus, Jotham is declaring the charges and the people must answer to the charges before God who is the judge. If you think of his language much like this, you will notice similarities found within the various Old Testament prophetic authors who utter similar lawsuits against God’s rebellious and unfaithful people.
What is our take-away from these events? We may go into the contrast between the mighty strength of God’s promises (symbolized by Mount Gerizim) and the feeble promises of men and pagan gods (symbolized by a big tree in Shekem), but perhaps what is even more significant is the question as to where we stand in terms of faithfulness to God’s covenant…a covenant we all confirm when we enter into membership in Christ’s church. When honestly looking at our church’s faithfulness, where do we fall? And if we fall closer to Ebal than to Gerizim, will we repent?
The Execution of Abimelech’s Brothers
“And he entered his father’s house at Ophrah and executed his brothers, the sons of Jeruba’al, seventy men upon a single stone. Yet, Jotham, the youngest son of Jeruba’al, remained because he was hidden. And so he gathered all the leaders of Shekem and all of the house of Millo and they went and enthroned Abimelek king. At the oak which was standing in Shekem.”
(Judges 9:5-6)
Isn’t it sad just how quickly reforms that are made go away? Here, Abimelek’s father had torn down the Asherah (a cultic totem pole of sorts) in his hometown to rid them of the evil of the idolatry and here we have a coronation that takes place…yes, it is of a usurper, we will get to that…but it is under a sacred oak of sorts that happens to be in the town of Shekem. The hearts of men are wicked indeed, but how quickly they flee back to paganism even after being delivered by the one true God.
Now for the attack. It seems that the sons of Gideon were meeting at his home at a predicted time when Abimelek and his “unprincipled and reckless men” laid siege on the house. The language here implies that the thugs were used by Abimelek to capture the brothers, not to slay them. These men were all slain on a single stone by Abimelek, execution style. If you remember in chapter 8, when Gideon had captured Zebah and Zalmunna, he instructed his eldest son, Jether, to slay execute these kings (Judges 8:20-21), here Abimelek is gladly doing what his brother proved unwilling to do.
Recognizing that this is taking place at an oak in Shekem and recognizing the presence of idolatry and the emphasis that is placed on this “single stone,” there is also an implication here that these executions may have been done as a kind of pagan sacrifice. Just as Gideon had sacrificed to the Lord prior to his taking on the role of leadership, one can make the argument that Abimelek is doing the same…just instead of sacrificing to the Lord, he was sacrificing to his pagan gods. Again, how far we have fallen.
The one glimmer of hope is in the news that one of the sons of Gideon escaped slaughter because he had hidden. Notice that the verb, חבא (chaba — “to hide”) is in the “niphal” or passive tense. While this verb is most commonly found in the passive tense, it leaves open the question as to whether Jotham might have been hidden by one of his brothers (to preserve the youngest’s life) or whether he might have been hidden by God himself (who superintends all things). This we do not know for sure, but it is not out of reach of the text. So, whether Jotham skillfully hid himself, whether one of his brothers nobly sacrificed himself to keep Jotham hidden, whether God supernaturally kept the thugs blind to where Jotham was hidden, or whether it was a combination of all of the above, God had determined that one in the line of Gideon — a remnant — would survive not only to tell the tale and to lay a curse of judgment upon Abimelek and his followers. While the wicked rarely fear the curse of a godly man; they almost always regret what follows.
Unprincipled Men
“And they gave to him seventy pieces of silver from the house of Ba’al Beryth and Abimelek hired for himself unprincipled and reckless men, and they followed after him.”
(Judges 9:4)
Thugs, hoodlums, criminals…these are the men that Abimelek will attract to himself. The Apostle Paul cites the wisdom of the Greek poet, Menander, when he reminds the Corinthian church that “bad company ruins good morals’ (1 Corinthians 15:33). But if bad company ruins good morals and “the companion of fools will suffer harm” (Proverbs 13:20), what happens when the wicked attracts more wicked into their service? Nothing good, that can be for certain.
The reality is that whenever you see the phrase, “worthless fellows” or something similar to that, you can be sure that there is nothing good that can come out of it (cf. Judges 11:3; 2 Samuel 6:20; 2 Chronicles 13:7). The term in question is the Hebrew word רֵ׳ק (reyq), which literally means “empty.” These men which Abimelek is attracting to his side are empty. They are empty of morals, empty of principles, empty of virtue, and empty of God. And now we see that money is being used to gain these men’s allegiance. Again, nothing good can or will come from an arrangement such as this.
Can it be said that the church never acts this way? We may be tempted to say that the church does not murder the people they don’t like…though that has certainly taken place in history — the name Thomas Becket comes to mind as just one example. But need we murder a man to be guilty of murder? Certainly not. How often has slander ruined a person’s reputation or even a person’s career. How rarely have we really acted on the idea that people are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by two or there witnesses? How often has the church practiced passive-aggressive behavior toward one they do not like…or even toward their pastor? All of this is empty, unprincipled, behavior…wicked to the core. And God brings every deed into judgment (Ecclesiastes 12:14).
Back to Shechem
“And Abimelek, the son of Jeruba’al, went to Shekem, to the brothers of his mother. And he said to them and to the whole clan of the house of his father and mother, saying, ‘Please speak into the ears of all the leaders of Shekem, ‘Which is better for you to rule over you? Seventy men who are all sons of Jeruba’al to rule over you or one man? Remember that I am your bone and your flesh.’ And his mother’s brothers spoke in the ears of all of the leaders of Shekem all of these words. And they bowed their hearts to follow Abimelek because they said, ‘He is our brother.’
(Judges 9:1-3)
As we return to the life of ancient Israel after the death of Gideon (aka Jeruba’al), the scheming of sinful hearts clearly is seen to abound. Of course, one might say, “What do you expect when you have seventy-one sons from numerous wives and a concubine!” How David and Solomon should have learned from the foolish practice of Gideon and his polygamy.
In this case, the sons of Gideon’s wives formed a kind of Council of Seventy to lead the people of Israel. Abimelek, the son of his concubine who grew up in Shekem. What is particularly interesting about growing up in this location is that Shekem (or Shechem as is transliterated in many of our Bibles) is one of the cities of refuge established by Joshua (Joshua 20:7), a place where those guilty of un-premeditated murder may flee for refuge and thus avert the death sentence (Numbers 35:9-15). It would likely have been a place where many thugs and criminal types would have abounded…and these were Abimelek’s kin. It helps us to get a picture of why Abimelek sought to do what he would do next.
There is a great debate as to whether nature or nurture influences us more profoundly. Certainly we must recognize that nature is a significant part of the equation…we are born in sin as a result of the fall. But sinners raising sinners; well, we just compound the problem. Oh, the wicked web we weave when we pursue the lusts of our heart.
The sanctuary cities were to be controlled by the Levites (Numbers 35:6). The principle behind this should have been obvious — use the leaders in the church to guide the refugees toward a life of faith. Yet, Levites are sinners too and thus what this city of refuge has become is more or less a prison and the levites guards on the prison wall. Again, the evil of sinful man begets nothing good in our world. What is even sadder is that, knowing the lessons of history, often the church acts no differently than the pagan world, plotting and conspiring to gain power and influence rather than living submissively according to God’s law…even in the church of Jesus Christ.
Forgetting and Neglecting
“And the Sons of Israel did not remember Yahweh their God who had saved them from the hand of all of their enemies which surrounded them and they did not show faithfulness to the Sons of Jeruba’al (Gideon) for all of the good things which he did for Israel.”
(Judges 8:34-35)
We have spoken before about the Biblical importance of memory. When the people remember the good works of God they remain faithful. But when the people forget, they fall into sin. And we see this pattern showing up over and over to us in the scriptures and in church history.
But remembering is not just the intellectual recognition that an event took place; remembering also reflects a life that has been influenced by those events that took place in the hopes that we not repeat the same errors that brought us to the condition we were in. Yet, how often we as a church are also near-sighted and forget God’s work amongst us to deliver us from the evil that lurks in our midst.
And, too, how often people forget the faithfulness of those who served them well. Gideon was far from perfect as a leader, but he was God’s chosen tool to deliver the people from their oppressors. In the same vein, pastors and church leaders, too, are not perfect. Yet, if they are faithful to God’s calling, they are deserving of the respect of those they serve — “double-honor” to use Paul’s language in 1 Timothy 5:17-19. Yet, how often have there been times when, for a single misstep, congregations have turned on their pastors like a pack of angry dogs. Such is the way of sin.
Unlike what we have seen with the previous judges, we do not shift immediately into the next cycle of leadership. Instead, we see a cycle within Gideon’s own house, where the sons will vie for position in Israel’s leadership (remember our earlier discussion of Gideon wanting to pass down his role to his sons). And sadly, it will be Abimelech who rises to the forefront…God’s punishment on Gideon’s household for their sin and arguably even God’s punishment on Israel for their forgetting…
Leaders Should be a Threat
“And he said to Zebach and to Tsalmunna, ‘Where are the men which you slew at Tabor?’ And they said, ‘They were just like you; each one resembled the son of the king.”
(Judges 8:18)
This little verse is filled with idioms that don’t translate well at least in literal word for word English. First is the use of “Where are the men…” Gideon is not so much as looking for the location of the bodies of his brothers who were slain, though this is likely what we would presume from the literal translation of the text. The word “where” can also refer to “what condition” or in “what state” were these men when you executed them. One might even ask, in more idiomatic English, “Why did you slay them?” This understanding makes more sense of the answer that the two kings offer…these men that they slew appeared to be kings — leaders of men, just like Gideon.
The second idiom that is awkward in English comes in the response of these two kings. Literally they respond: “Like you; like them.” This can be understood in connection of the language of the son of the king — another idiom that refers to one’s comportment or bearing — the confident air that one in leadership would embody. It was obvious to these kings that the men they slew were leaders amongst men, not followers.
The practical application to the church of this is how many church leaders really distinguish themselves as leaders…so much so that the pagans who are against Christianity see them as a threat? And here, I am not just talking about pastors…in fact, I am not primarily talking about pastors, but the leadership of the local church…the Elders, Deacons, and other leadership of the congregation. Sadly, I fear that it can be said of few of them that “like you; like them” or that they carry themselves as a son of the King in such a way that the enemy would be threatened by their work and character. People wonder why the church in America does not influence American life…a big part of it is because the leaders of the church do not live their lives in such a way as to influence American life.
May we Interrogate? Torture?
“He caught a young man from the men of Succoth and interrogated him. This he wrote down for him the princes of Succoth and the seventy-seven men who were elders.”
(Judges 8:14)
On the way back home, the two kings of Midian in tow, Gideon does not forget his threat to the men of the cities who opposed him. Thus, he captures a young man…perhaps one who had been working in the fields and demands to know the names of the Elders and Princes of the city. These are those whom will feel Gideon’s wrath.
The word lDaDv (sha’al) that is translated here as “interrogate” is arguably better translated as “demand.” It is often used in the context of a beggar demanding aggressively demanding money from someone on the street — intimidating the person if the person does not want to offer monies. Thus, this is not merely a matter of asking questions, but there is a sense that Gideon forcefully extracted information from this lad.
One might be tempted to ask the question about the morality of such actions. Does one have the right to interrogate with force to obtain information? Might one be permitted to use techniques of bodily harm to gain such information…things like torture? While there is no indication in the language that Gideon would have used any sort of torture device on this young man, the question rises from the text.
The first thing that must be pointed out here, though, is that Gideon is acting with governmental authority, thus he is given the power of the sword (Romans 13:4). Thus, Gideon can act in ways that you or I do not have the authority to act. Yet, if we are going to extrapolate from the idea of the penalty suiting the crime (Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:19-20), then one can make the argument that extent to which the official presses for the information must suit the importance of the information to be gotten. This would make the question of how far one might intimidate a person, demanding information, a question that would have to be tackled on a case by case basis.
In any case, this young man has been caught by seasoned soldiers and brought back to Gideon. I doubt that it would have taken much prying to get this young man to open his mouth about who the leaders of Succoth were. Vengeance will follow.
To be Nice or Loving?
“And he said to them, ‘What have I done now? Compared with you? Are not the gleanings of Ephriam better than the vintage of Abiezer? Into your hands God has given the princes of Midian and Oreb and Ze’eb. What am I able to do compared to you?’ Then their spirit withered from being against him when he said these words.”
(Judges 8:2-3)
I have been told that discernment and timing are the key to negotiations. Sometimes one speaks softly and sometimes one speaks with an uncompromising authority. My grandfather spent many years negotiating with unions on behalf of King Instruments in the mid-Twentieth Century. One story he told was of a very tense negotiation over the fact that several of the parts King was using on their instruments were made overseas and the Union officials wanted them to be manufactured in America. The two men were at an impasse until my grandfather pulled out a cigarette and asked the Union negotiator for a light. The Union man pulled out the official Union lighter and handed it to my grandfather, who looked at it and slammed it back down on the table — the Union’s lighter had been made overseas. My grandfather had won the negotiation right then and there in that simple action.
Gideon was in a similar situation. The men of Ephriam complained. They were not excited about confronting the Midianites when things looked dark but now the Midianites were on the run and Ephriam wanted to share in more of the glory. They had effectively accused Gideon of hogging the spotlight.
Gideon’s response is masterful. He essentially says, “Oh my, but you did so much more than I could have done — your successes are much more glorious than mine. You captured these princes, but what has little old Gideon done?” One might accuse Gideon of a little flattery here, but if it is flattery, it is flattery joined with a touch of sarcasm. For what has Gideon done in compared to Ephriam? Gideon was God’s chosen servant in overthrowing not only the Midianites but also the idolatry in the land of Israel which had brought on the Midianite invasion in the first place. Surely the vintage of Gideon’s father is much better than the gleanings that the Ephriamites have been left. And all of this was God’s choosing.
It seems that the jab is not lost on the men of Ephriam. Most of our English translations speak of the anger of Ephriam abating as a result of Gideon’s statement. Literally the text reads that their “spirit withered” from being against him. The implication of the text is not so much that Gideon flattered these men, but that he spoke words that had an edge to them and put these men in their place — much as my grandfather had put the Union negotiator in his place. It is sure that these Ephriamites returned to their task humbled before Gideon’s words.
Unlike my grandfather, I do not enjoy confrontation and would make a lousy negotiator in high-stakes settings. We all have different gifts. At the same time, as we read the Bible, over and over there are times when God’s people are called to be confrontational and I have found, in cases where such is necessary, the Holy Spirit gives us the strength and the words to use.
One of my fears is that Christians have been taught in church and in society that we are not to be confrontational and we have confused non-confrontation with love. Non-confrontation may prove to be “nice” but it is certainly not loving. Further, most people who know me well, know that I do not much like the word “nice” when applied to Christians. Nice has its origins in the Latin word niscere, which means “unknowledgeable.” In Middle English it was used the way we would use the word, “stupid,” and Christians should be neither stupid nor unknowledgeable.
Unlike being nice, love is confrontational. Love confronts those things that bring harm to the one who is the object of one’s love. If a child is threatened, a loving parent becomes a fierce adversary of the one who is threatening to bring harm. That is just what love does. And love confronts sin because sin harms the person who is sinning and harms the relationships one has with others. It may be “nice” to let someone go about their way doing whatever they please, but it is not love. And Christians are called to be known by their love (John 13:34-35). Gideon’s response to the men of Ephriam was not nice by any stretch of the imagination, but it was loving because it shut their mouths to their sin…and isn’t that better?
The Preacher's Study 