| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Judges Chapter
Four
Judges 4
Chapter Contents
Israel again revolts, and is oppressed by Jabin. (1-3)
Deborah concerts their deliverance with Barak. (4-9) Sisera defeated. (10-16)
Sisera put to death by Jael. (17-24)
Commentary on Judges 4:1-3.
(Read Judges 4:1-3.)
The land had rest for eighty years, which should have
confirmed them in their religion; but it made them secure, and indulge their
lusts. Thus the prosperity of fools destroys them. Jabin and his general
Sisera, mightily oppressed Israel. This enemy was nearer than any of the
former. Israel cried unto the Lord, when distress drove them to him, and they
saw no other way of relief. Those who slight God in prosperity, will find
themselves under a necessity of seeking him in trouble.
Commentary on Judges 4:4-9
(Read Judges 4:4-9)
Deborah was a prophetess; one instructed in Divine
knowledge by the inspiration of the Spirit of God. She judged Israel as God's
mouth to them; correcting abuses, and redressing grievances. By God's
direction, she ordered Barak to raise an army, and engage Jabin's forces. Barak
insisted much upon her presence. Deborah promised to go with him. She would not
send him where she would not go herself. Those who in God's name call others to
their duty, should be ready to assist them in it. Barak values the satisfaction
of his mind, and the good success of his enterprise, more than mere honour.
Commentary on Judges 4:10-16.
(Read Judges 4:10-16.)
Siser's confidence was chiefly in his chariots. But if we
have ground to hope that God goes before us, we may go on with courage and
cheerfulness. Be not dismayed at the difficulties thou meetest with in
resisting Satan, in serving God, or suffering for him; for is not the Lord gone
before thee? Follow him then fully. Barak went down, though upon the plain the
iron chariots would have advantage against him: he quitted the mountain in
dependence on the Divine power; for in the Lord alone is the salvation of his
people, Jeremiah 3:23. He was not deceived in his
confidence. When God goes before us in our spiritual conflicts, we must bestir
ourselves; and when, by his grace, he gives us some success against the enemies
of our souls, we must improve it by watchfulness and resolution.
Commentary on Judges 4:17-24
(Read Judges 4:17-24)
Sisera's chariots had been his pride and his confidence.
Thus are those disappointed who rest on the creature; like a broken reed, it
not only breaks under them, but pierces them with many sorrows. The idol may
quickly become a burden, Isaiah 46:1; what we were sick for, God can make
us sick of. It is probable that Jael really intended kindness to Sisera; but by
a Divine impulse she was afterwards led to consider him as the determined enemy
of the Lord and of his people, and to destroy him. All our connexions with
God's enemies must be broken off, if we would have the Lord for our God, and
his people for our people. He that had thought to have destroyed Israel with
his many iron chariots, is himself destroyed with one iron nail. Thus the weak
things of the world confound the mighty. The Israelites would have prevented
much mischief, if they had sooner destroyed the Canaanites, as God commanded
and enabled them: but better be wise late, and buy wisdom by experience, than
never be wise.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Judges》
Judges 4
Verse 2
[2] And
the LORD sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, that reigned in
Hazor; the captain of whose host was Sisera, which dwelt in Harosheth of the
Gentiles.
Of Canaan —
That is, of the land where most of the Canaanites, strictly so called, now
dwelt, which seems to be in the northern part of Canaan. This seems to be of
the posterity of that Jabin, whom Joshua slew, Joshua 11:11, who watched all opportunities to
recover his ancient possessions, and to revenge his own and his father's
quarrel.
In Hazor — In
the territory or the kingdom of Hazor, which might now be restored to its
former largeness and power.
Of the Gentiles — So
called, because it was much frequented and inhabited by the Gentiles; either by
the Canaanites, who being beaten out of their former possessions, seated
themselves in those northern parts; or by other nations coming there for
traffick, whence Galilee, where this was, is called Galilee of the Gentiles.
Verse 3
[3] And the children of Israel cried unto the LORD: for he had nine hundred
chariots of iron; and twenty years he mightily oppressed the children of
Israel.
Mightily oppressed —
More than former tyrants; from his malice and hatred against the Israelites;
and from God's just judgment, the growing punishment being suitable to their
aggravated wickedness.
Verse 4
[4] And
Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.
A prophetess — As
there were men-prophets, so there were also women-prophetesses, as Miriam, Exodus 15:20. Huldah, 2 Kings 22:14, and divers others; but the word
prophets or prophetesses is ambiguous, sometimes being used of persons
extraordinarily inspired by God, and endowed with the power of working
miracles, and foretelling things to come; and sometimes of persons endowed with
special gifts or graces, for the better understanding and discoursing about the
word and mind of God. Of this sort were the sons of the prophets, or such as
were bred in the schools of the prophets. who are often called prophets, as 1 Samuel 10:5,10. And because we read nothing of
Deborah's miraculous actions, perhaps she was only a woman of eminent holiness,
and knowledge of the holy scriptures, by which she was singularly qualified for
judging the people according to the laws of God.
Judged Israel —
That is, determined causes and controversies arising among the Israelites, as
is implied, verse 5. And this Jabin might suffer to be done,
especially by a woman. Yet the frequent discharge of this part of the judge's
office, whereby she gained great power and authority with the people, did
notably (though not observed by the tyrant) prepare the way for her sliding
into the other part of her office, which was to defend and rescue the people
from their enemies.
Verse 5
[5] And
she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount
Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment.
And she dwelt —
Or, she sat: she had her judgment-seat in the open air, under the shadow of
that tree; which was an emblem of the justice she administered there: thriving
and growing against opposition, as the palm-tree does under pressures.
Came to her — To
have their suits and causes determined by her sentence.
Verse 6
[6] And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedeshnaphtali,
and said unto him, Hath not the LORD God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and
draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of
Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun?
Called Barak — By
virtue of that power which God had given her, and the people owned in her.
Kedesh Naphtali — So
called, to distinguish it from other places of that name, one in Judah, and
another in Issachar.
Hath not the Lord, … — That is, assuredly God hath commanded thee; this is not the fancy of a
weak woman, which peradventure thou mayst despise; but the command of the great
God by my mouth.
Mount Tabor — A
place most fit for his purpose, as being in the borders of divers tribes, and
having a large plain at the top of it, where he might conveniently marshal and
discipline his army.
Naphtali and Zebulun — These she names because they were nearest and best known to Barak, and
therefore soonest brought together, because they were nearest to the enemy, and
therefore might speedily be assembled, whilst the other tribes, being at a
distance, had better opportunity of gathering forces for their succour; and
because these had most smarted under this oppressor, who was in the heart of
their country; but these are not named exclusively, as appears by the
concurrence of some other tribes.
Verse 7
[7] And
I will draw unto thee to the river Kishon Sisera, the captain of Jabin's army,
with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into thine hand.
Draw to Thee — By
my secret and powerful providence, ordering and over-ruling his inclinations
that way. In fixing the very place, she gave him a sign, which might confirm
his faith, when he came to engage.
Verse 8
[8] And
Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt
not go with me, then I will not go.
I will not go —
His offer to go with her, shews the truth of his faith, for which he is
praised, Hebrews 11:32, but his refusal to go without
her, shews the weakness of his faith, that he could not trust God's bare word,
as he ought to have done, without the pledge of the presence of his prophetess.
Verse 10
[10] And
Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh; and he went up with ten thousand
men at his feet: and Deborah went up with him.
Ten thousand at his feet — That is, who followed him; possibly he intimates that they were all
foot-men; and so this is emphatically added, to signify by what contemptible
means God overthrew Sisera's great host.
Verse 11
[11] Now
Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of
Moses, had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the
plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh.
Heber —
The husband of Jael.
Of Hobab —
Called also Jethro.
The Kenites —
From the rest of his brethren, who lived in the wilderness of Judah.
His tent —
That is, his dwelling, which probably was in tents, as shepherds used.
Verse 12
[12] And
they shewed Sisera that Barak the son of Abinoam was gone up to mount Tabor.
They —
That is, this people dwelling there, or his spies.
Verse 14
[14] And
Deborah said unto Barak, Up; for this is the day in which the LORD hath
delivered Sisera into thine hand: is not the LORD gone out before thee? So
Barak went down from mount Tabor, and ten thousand men after him.
Up — Heb. arise, delay
not. If we have ground to believe, that God goes before us, we may well go on
with courage and cheerfulness.
Gone before thee —
Namely, as general of thine army, to fight for thee.
Went down — He
doth not make use of the advantage which he had of the hill, where he might
have been out of the reach of his iron chariots, but boldly marcheth down into
the valley, to give Sisera the opportunity of using all his horses and
chariots, that so the victory might he more glorious.
Verse 15
[15] And
the LORD discomfited Sisera, and all his chariots, and all his host, with the
edge of the sword before Barak; so that Sisera lighted down off his chariot,
and fled away on his feet.
Discomfited —
With great terror and noise, as the word signifies, probably with thunder and
lightning, and hail-stones, poured upon them from heaven, as is implied, chap. 5:20.
Edge of the sword —
That is, by the sword of Barak and his army, whose ministry God used; but so,
that they had little else to do, but to kill those whom God by more powerful
arms had put to flight.
On his feet —
That he might flee away more secretly in the quality of a common soldier,
whereas his chariot would have exposed him to more observation.
Verse 16
[16] But
Barak pursued after the chariots, and after the host, unto Harosheth of the
Gentiles: and all the host of Sisera fell upon the edge of the sword; and there
was not a man left.
Left — In
the field; for there were some who fled away, as Sisera did.
Verse 17
[17]
Howbeit Sisera fled away on his feet to the tent of Jael the wife of Heber the
Kenite: for there was peace between Jabin the king of Hazor and the house of
Heber the Kenite.
The tent of Jael —
For women had their tents apart from their husbands. And here he thought to
lurk more securely than in her husband's tent.
Peace —
Not a covenant of friendship, which they were forbidden to make with that
cursed people, but only a cessation of hostilities, which he afforded them
because they were peaceable people, abhorring war, and wholly minding pasturage,
and were not Israelites, with whom his principal quarrel was; and especially by
God's over-ruling disposal of his heart to favour them who were careful to keep
themselves uncorrupted with Israel's sins, and therefore preserved from their
plagues.
Verse 18
[18] And
Jael went out to meet Sisera, and said unto him, Turn in, my lord, turn in to
me; fear not. And when he had turned in unto her into the tent, she covered him
with a mantle.
Fear not —
This was a promise of security, and therefore she cannot be excused from
dissimulation and treachery.
Verse 19
[19] And
he said unto her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water to drink; for I am
thirsty. And she opened a bottle of milk, and gave him drink, and covered him.
A bottle of milk — As
a signification of greater respect.
Covered him —
Upon pretence of hiding him.
Verse 21
[21] Then
Jael Heber's wife took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand, and
went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples, and fastened it into
the ground: for he was fast asleep and weary. So he died.
A nail of the tent —
Wherewith they used to fasten the tent, which consequently was long and sharp.
This might seem a very bold attempt, but it must be considered, that she was
encouraged to it, by observing that the heavens and all the elements conspired
against him, as one devoted to destruction. In the following son, Deborah doth
not commend Jael's words, verse 18. Turn in my Lord, fear not; but only her
action: touching which, this one consideration may abundantly suffice to stop
the mouths of objectors. It cannot be denied, that every discourse which is
recorded in scripture, is not divinely inspired, because some of them were
uttered by the devil, and others by holy men, but mistaken. This being so, the
worst that any can infer from this place is, that this song, tho' indited by a
good woman, was not divinely inspired, but only composed by a person
transported with joy for the deliverance of God's people, but subject to
mistake; who therefore, out of zeal to commend the instrument of so great a
deliverance, might overlook the indirectness of the means, and commend that
which should have been disliked, And if they farther object, that it was composed
by a prophetess, and therefore must be divinely inspired; it may be replied,
that every expression of a true prophet was not divinely inspired; as is
evident from Samuel's mistake concerning Eliab, whom he thought to be the
Lord's anointed, 1 Samuel 16:6. This is said upon supposition
that Jael acted deceitfully in this affair; but if we suppose, which is much
more likely, that Jael fully intended to afford Sisera the shelter and protection
which he sought of her, but was afterwards by the immediate direction of heaven
ordered to kill him, the whole difficulty vanishes, and the character both of
Jael and of Deborah remains unimpeached.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on Judges》
04 Chapter 4
Verses 1-3
Israel again did evil . . . the Lord sold
them into the hand of Jabin.
Reappearance of vanquished foes
Their ancient foe, whom they had conquered, rose gradually from
his prostration. He rebuilt his castle; he repossessed the lands; he multiplied
his armies. At length he defied and “mightily oppressed” the chosen people. How
has this history been re-enacted a thousand times in the experience both of individual
believers and of Christian Churches! How many there are who answer to the
description (1 Peter 2:20). The Canaanite was
slain, but he reappears and resumes his ancient tyranny. Exploded errors
revive. Slain heresies live again, and triumph on the very spot where they
received what was deemed their death-blow. The subjugation and prostration of
the Church may not be as complete as was the twenty years’ slavery of Israel
under the second Jabin, yet is not the fortress of Hazor being rebuilt in this
land? Are not the furnaces of Harosheth being rekindled? And are not the Papal
workmen busy fabricating chariots of iron wherewith anew to scour the plains
which valiant Protestants of old won in the name of the Lord and of His truth?
(L. H. Wiseman, M. A.)
Deborah, a prophetess . . . Judged Israel.
Deborah: woman’s attribute
1. Amongst the women of the Bible Deborah stands out in great
prominence, though we know but little of her character. She is one of those who
show forth a distinctive characteristic of women--the power of contrivance and
design carried out to such an extent as to make some doubt whether her acts
were within the limits of religion and morality.
2. Deborah seems to have been a kind of oracle in the unsettled state
of things that existed among the Jewish tribes; her advice was attended to and
her voice followed by leaders and by armies with the most implicit devotion.
Her parallels are many, both in Scripture and history. We are irresistibly
reminded of one whose spirit once bore up the flagging energies of France in
the annals of the latter, of Judith in those of the former. One circumstance
strikes us as highly significant. Starting up close beside her was the kindred
spirit of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite. Though not strictly answerable
for the act of Jael, she nevertheless celebrated that act as one of her objects
of gratulation in her magnificent hymn.
3. We must view her in two lights. She was of course under a heavenly
inspiration, as well as under the guidance of a strong natural character. In
the former capacity she is simply to be viewed as one of those instances in
which God chooses to show forth His power through the weak things of this
world, and to bring about great national crises through the instrumentality of
the weaker sex. But placing this view of the subject aside, I will consider her
in reference to her natural character and ordinary position, as a woman in the
midst of vast and depressing circumstances rousing by the vigour, boldness, and
freshness of her character, the flagging energies of men. We see this in many
instances of life, public as well as private. How remarkable and almost
miraculous it is that the wife, who shares the anxious cares of the husband, be
he labourer or mechanic, is able to keep up her spirit and to hope to the end!
How often would the man, who has had to contend with the waves of constant
trouble, succumb to increasing difficulties; and how many a crisis of
difficulty, in connection with illness, accidents, or the like, in the domestic
circle, calls forth the presence of mind of the mother, when the father would
shrink from the difficulty, and lend no hand to help. Nor is it only this power
that is felt so beneficially in the cottage as well as in richer homes. The eye
that sees a brighter day and that pierces the fast rolling clouds of present
adversity, perceiving the glow of a brighter morning when “the tyranny will be
overpast,” is especially the eye of woman. One other attribute of woman which
comes out in Deborah’s story is the deep impression that her mission was
Divine, and that the instincts of nature were the gifts of inspiration. There
is that spirit in the weaker sex which, in the moment of high crisis and
difficulty, would often justify the impression; but this spirit is the gift of
God for a special purpose, and is a substitute for those bolder and more persevering
qualities which belong to the stronger sex. There are many periods, both in
private and in public life, which need rather light shed by a ready and present
mind than the steady beam of the more enduring fire. From the lack of it we may
miss the object of our life’s search. It is the want felt in such conjunctures
as these that woman supplies; she bears the lamp of the midnight; and sometimes
when with weary watching other lamps have gone out, hers is trimmed.
4. Such is woman’s prerogative, such her peculiar characteristic. For
though Deborah may be an exaggeration in a remarkable crisis of the
characteristics of her sex, they nevertheless exist in more or less force in
every representative of it. It is seemingly paradoxical, but no less true, that
women should have the power of meeting imminent danger with a calmness and
perseverance often denied to man. Let them view these gifts as the direct
ordering of Heaven, and, while they glory in them as their heritage, let them
cultivate and improve them as the talents committed to their trust. (E.
Monro, M. A.)
Lessons from an old story
1. In an age and a season of perpetual unrest, how refreshing is it
to the spirit to have before us the example, albeit in a remote past, of one
judge who could dwell under the palm-tree between Rama and Bethel, and to whom
the children of Israel could go up for judgment. If the right kind of men, a
few of them, could be set free to think, to advise, to originate, to counsel,
what a gain would this be to a people laden with care, full of intellectual and
spiritual perplexities, and feeling themselves terribly alone in their
difficult and embarrassing way. For lack of this many lives go utterly astray,
and many minds are wrecked on shoals and sandbanks of doubting. It might be said
that the two offices of action and thought are only kept distinct in the
present state of things, and that those who want counsel have no lack of help
from an innumerable crowd of writers. Unhappily the thinkers are too often too
much isolated from action, so that they run into vain and profitless
speculation, having neither help for this life nor hope in that which is to
come. It is the combination which helps: the judge sitting under the palm-tree,
but Israel coming up to him for judgment. The moral of it all is, busy men,
snatch moments for reflection! let no day be quite without it!
2. We see the true place and dignity of woman here in the positive
and in the negative. Deborah was a prophetess. God spoke to her. She saw within
and beneath the appearance of things. She did not allow the visible to crush
out the invisible. She was not appalled by the nine hundred chariots of iron.
She knew that there was still a God in Israel who rules in the kingdom of men,
and though He bears long with evil, and sometimes sets up over nations the
basest of men, He can yet be called on by prayer, and in the long run will make
it to be well with the righteous. In a great emergency she became an influence;
she called Barak to her, set him his task, assured him of his commission, and
even consented at his request to accompany him on his march. This was heroic,
but it was also feminine. Deborah did not assume the command of the army; she
was the influence, she was the inspiration, but she left the leadership and the
generalship to another. Not for nothing have we the record of another woman on
the same page with that of Deborah. We shrink instinctively from the
bloodstained hand of Jael. She has overstepped the line between the feminine
and the masculine--nay, between the enthusiast and the fanatic. The excitement
of victory might draw forth the
impassioned cry even from one of the male sex, even from one of
God’s utterers, “Blessed above women”; but that cry has never found even an
echo in evangelical hearts; that cry has given trouble and pain to champions of
revelation. We cannot receive it as the voice of God’s Spirit, except in some
modified and softened-down form, in which it hails, and justly hails, the
victory as a victory of the cause of the monotheistic idea as against the
polytheistic; as a victory of the cause of progress, of the cause of
development, and therefore in some sense the cause of mankind and of the world.
3. One last thought occurs, and it might seem at first hearing to
conflict with the foregoing; but it is not so. Deborah says to Barak, “Hath not
the Lord God of Israel commanded?” And he replies to her--a woman--“If thou
wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will
not go.” She rejoined yet again, “I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding
the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall
sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” We are not concerned with the last
phrase--“God shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” Scripture readers see
the hand of God every-where--go so far as to say, “Shall there be evil in the
city, and the Lord hath not done it?” We ask what was the point, what was the
characteristic, the differentia in the faith of Barak, that the Epistle to the
Hebrews should single him out for mention? And we find it here in the
self-forgetfulness of Barak in doing God’s work. What if one woman set him on
it, and another woman is to finish it? What if the journey he took was not to
be for his own honour? Shall that stop him? What will the troops say if they
see a woman marching by his side; see him consult her about his tactics; hear
him confess that she is his monitress and his inspirer? Shall that thought
deter him? No. He has God’s cause in hand; God’s honour, not his, is the thing to
aim at. Here is faith forgetting itself in the cause. It is a grand heroism;
for lack of it much good work is spoilt and much forborne. There is a phrase
which more often disguises than precludes the self-glorifying. Humble
instruments all call themselves; yet the same modest disclaimer asserts the
instrumentality. Propose to omit the name from the subscription list or the
list of patrons, where will the humble instrument be then? “The journey which
thou takest shall not be for thine honour.” No, for one woman suggested it and
another woman shall complete it. What then? Faith is willing to have it so; for
faith is the sight of the invisible, and this arrangement will show the
Invisible, the Doer. (Dean Vaughan.)
The duty of woman to women
It is a suggestive and on the whole perhaps a creditable
fact that heroic women are not so interesting to women as to men. We read about
that German prophetess who roused her people against the invaders from Rome, or
about Joan of Arc, who, simple peasant girl that she was, communing with
mysterious angels’ voices (as the legend runs), kindled the French nation
against the English dominion when princes and statesmen had well-nigh given up
the cause; or we read about Deborah, like St. Louis under the oak at Vincennes,
sitting under a Judaean palm, not with downcast eyes and folded hands and
extinguished hopes, but all on fire with faith and energy, with the soul of
courage and the voice of command, and we are constrained to pay homage to her
daring and her fearlessness, to her strong will and her unshrinking purpose.
But if I were to ask any young girl whether she were ambitious of such a
career, there is not one in a score who would say so. A woman’s idea of
happiness and usefulness ordinarily centres in a home. We have been accustomed
to hear the constantly reiterated assertion that “woman’s sphere is the home.”
I confess for one that in view of the actual facts of society, as they exist
around us, there is often in such words a sound of cruel irony. Do not you and
I know, that there are thousands of women to whom a home is as impossible a
thing as a castle in Spain? Do we not know that there are thousands of young
girls who have no human being but themselves to depend upon, and who must
somehow make their way and earn their own bread in life? Will you tell me how a
home or anything else than a room and a hard, stern struggle for life is
possible to these? We have now reached a point in the social progress of this
age when it is necessary that we should every one of us recognise the crisis
that is upon us. A much larger number of women must hereafter support
themselves than have ever done so before. There are some callings from which,
as it seems to me, women must for ever remain shut out. Any calling which
requires conspicuous publicity, masculine activities, and out-door leadership
is not, I venture to submit, for a woman. For one, I should not care to see her
hanging from a yard-arm, driving a steam-engine, digging in a coal-mine, or
vociferating in congress. But when we have eliminated from the question those
occupations from which healthy self-respect would restrain any really womanly
woman, there remain a vast range of employments on which women have not yet
entered, but for which, nevertheless, they have singular and supreme
qualifications. Already women have acquired the science of telegraphy, and they
are, of course, more expert in it than men can possibly be. Women are already
training themselves to be phonographic reporters. And here again their peculiar
aptitudes are a pre-eminent qualification. Why should they not oftener provide
for them an honourable maintenance? It is a curious and scarcely known fact
that in the middle ages, the daughters as well as the sons in a family often
inherited and carried on the family art or handicraft. When one goes to
Nuremberg, or Prague, or Heidelberg, he will find bits of wood carving,
artistic work in metal or stone, which no modern hand can pretend to rival. How
are we to explain this earlier perfection? Simply on this wise: the calling of
the father was the calling of the children. Exquisite workmanship was a
hereditary trait. “Among goldsmiths the daughters executed chasing, among
furniture-makers carving, among stone-masons sculpture, among engravers drawing
and graving.” Could there be more pleasing or wholesome employment of one’s
best aptitudes? It is time that every woman among us, and especially every
young girl with culture and influence and social power, should awaken to the
needs of her own sex. What Deborah was under the palm-tree at Mount Ephraim
every brave and true-hearted woman is called to be in the service of as holy a
cause and as precious interests. We call Deborah a prophetess, and so she was.
We regard her as somehow separated by her rare natural endowments and her exceptional
inspiration from the other women of her time, and so she was. But in a very
real and a very living and lofty sense every woman is a prophetess, with a
prophet’s gifts and a prophet’s calling. For what are prophets’ gifts but that
Divine insight, that swift and heaven-born intuition, which is your rarest
gift, your loftiest endowment? Shall I be opening an old wound if I say that it
was a woman’s voice and pen that, more than any other, roused this land to the
evils and the cruelties of slavery? and as truly I believe they must be women’s
voices that must waken us men to the cruelties of that other servitude in which
too often and too widely the weak of your sex are to-day oppressed. Do not,
then, be afraid to lift your voice in any good cause that aims to elevate women
to equal chance and equal respect and equal emolument with men in the great
struggle of life. Be, each one of you, a Deborah to cry to some slumberous and
sluggish Barak, “Up and do the Master’s Work, in the spirit of the Master’s example!”
(Bp. H. C. Potter.)
If thou wilt go with me,
then I will go.
Self-reliance
It was very natural that Barak should desire the presence
of Deborah. She was a woman of natural influence, possessed of sagacity, able
to read the signs of the times. As it has been said the best definition of a
fool is a man who is wise too late, so the best definition of wisdom is wisdom
at the right moment; and she possessed that wisdom, and understood what was the
proper occasion when it was desirable to strike the blow for freedom. Her
intellectual powers had made her influence great among the people; difficult
cases were brought to her; her knowledge and her sagacity had won its way and
established its influence in Israel. But it was not only natural; there was a
certain appearance of piety in the profession. Deborah was not merely one of
those persons whose gifts give them a high dominating influence over their
fellow-beings, but she was believed by the people to be inspired by the breath
of the Spirit of God. And, therefore, there was in their view a certain
sanction of the Divine power which came, as it were, from her lips. Was it not,
then, because he regarded her as the Divine representative that he said, “If
thou wilt go with me I will go”? May we not argue further, and say precisely,
because she was the one person in Israel at that time in whose words you could
trace the meanings of the Divine Spirit, therefore was it not an attitude of
the spirit of piety which would say, “I Cannot undertake this expedition alone;
I must be assured of the presence of the prophetess of the Lord”? Is there not
piety in the resolution, “If thou wilt go with me, then I will go”? And yet, it
is necessary for us to try and understand the motive before we declare whether
it is good or bad. “If thou wilt come with me, then I will go.” In what strain
ought a man to face the obvious duties of life? Is it true that we are always
to wait for the assistance of others, or are we bound to do what lies before
us, regardless of the sympathy we may receive? The message sent by Deborah was
an emphatic message, “Go there with ten thousand men, and I,” says the voice of
the Lord, “will draw thy adversaries to the river Kishon.” There is not the
slightest hint or any suggestion of condition; it is a plain, simple, and
absolute order. The hour is come; the blow is to be struck; it is your duty to
do it; here are your instructions. You know the class of persons who are never
able to do any duty without the assistance of others; you know the schoolboy
who always does his work when he can get his sister to stand beside him; you
know the class of man who is always reluctant to quit with company and
undertake any irksome duty by himself. He is not the character which impresses
us as possessing strong, marked, or admirable lines. You want some one more
determined and self-relying. If a duty has to be done, in the name of that
duty, and in the name of your God who gives you that duty, do it like a man,
and do not stop to make conditions which betray your weakness, and say, “If
this condition be fulfilled, if I am assisted by the presence of another, then
I think I can do my duty, but I do not think I can face the frowning face of
duty alone.” I say this is a character which does not possess the highest order
of self-reliance. It is also an answer which betrays slackness and feebleness
of life. By the very law by which Israel was then governed, by the law of that
very religious sentiment which had been operating in the minds of the chosen
people, one thought was predominant in all their minds, “The Lord is the God of
Israel.” It is the realisation of the Divine presence, and that alone, which
marks the higher range of faith; the power to say, “I will go in His strength
because He sends me, and I ask not Deborah to go with me to jeopardise
her life; she has her work to do and I have mine to do, and the God who
inspired her can make my hand strong.” But what was the result? As a fact the
victory was won; but you know how truly the scorn of Deborah burst forth when
she received the conditions of Barak, “If thou wilt go with me.” “Then let it
be known that the laurels of this victory are not for thy brow. If thou hast
thought that only with a woman at thy side thou canst face the crowning hour of
battle, those honours which you would boast are reserved for a woman. The Lord
shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” Barak sinks down into the second
place in the story, and the opportunity which might have been his was snatched
from his hand, as in the hour when he was tested he betrayed weakness. What,
then, should we gather from this? The enormous and measureless importance of
self-reliance in every affair of life. Life is a constant movement from
companionship into isolation. As I pass through the road of life I have to determine
certain questions, and I must determine them by the law of my own existence and
my own conscience as in the sight of God. Over and over again we are bound to
have that experience. We think we have others to help us in certain matters,
but the final decision rests with us. Does it not mean that in the purposes of
God we are to be
taught self-reliance? Sometimes we are told that Christianity is deficient in
the virile virtues. That is only because we have misunderstood the story. What
is the story of the Redeemer? Is it the story of one who relied so completely
upon others that by a dexterous adjustment of His teaching to the wants of the
day He was able so to establish His ascendancy over others as to be able to
bring forward a community willing to be called by His name? That is the very
reverse of the genesis of Christianity. (Bp. Boyd Carpenter.)
Influence
Every human being has influence, which is a part of himself, and
helps to make up his personal being. And as long as he lives it goes out from
him to others, for weal or for woe. Nay, more; it is not limited to time. Once
having lived, it never dies. For the individual may go down to the tomb and
perish; but his influence shall go on evermore.
I. We are
accountable for our influence. This is evident from the very nature of
influence. What is it? It is power; the power of one will over another. This
power and authority go forth from us to others in various ways--in speech, by
action, by the glance of the eye, by the expression of feeling, by the show of
passion, by the play of the countenance, by the motion of the hand, by our
dress, our habits, our style of living, and our conduct. And now I ask--if I
cause a man to do an act, am I not responsible, i.e., so far forth as I
lead him to do it? Of course I am not to bear the entire burden of his conduct,
for he is a man as well as I, and he is bound to think and judge for himself.
But if I am the stronger, more controlling character, and use my influence to
guide him astray, and start him on his way to ruin, surely I am responsible for
what I do. But it is manifest that this principle is not one that is local,
partial, or limited. It is a broad, general, universal principle; pertaining to
souls under all circumstances. And see how it reaches our fellow-creatures on
every side, with awful significance and tremendous power. I am responsible for
my influence; I am held accountable by the Almighty for the way in which I
affect and prompt the souls of my fellow-men. Then I am responsible for my
influence upon you. Then you are responsible for your influence upon me; and
each and every one of us is responsible for the influence we exert upon our
neighbours. Then we are responsible for the channels by which our influence
goes forth from us to others. And we are responsible for their outflowings; and
though the influence of a man differs somewhat, in kind, from his specific
acts, yet the law of Divine justice comes in here, with the same force and
authority as in any outward deed.
II. The measure of
our responsibility is proportioned to our influence. Herein lies our
stewardship. We are stewards of God in the particular item of influence. A
little girl is beloved by her schoolmate; and so great power has she over her,
that that schoolmate will do anything she wants her to do, good or bad. She is
responsible for her control over that child’s soul, and to God. They are both
responsible for the power they possess, the one over the other. Here is a man
in a community, of such commanding power, whether through wealth, talent, or
character, that everybody quotes him as authority, and aims to follow in his
track. As sure as God liveth, He will hold him responsible for his popularity
and his power.
III. Influence is an
awful, a perilous thing when it assumes the form and proportions of mastery and
control. And this is often the case. The mass of men, the world over, are
governed by opinion and example. Imitation, too, is a most powerful agent in
deciding the convictions and habits of men. No doubt it is God’s will that
certain prominent men should have authoritative influence; that is their
calling; to that they are elected by the Almighty Himself, to the end that they
may help to quicken inferior wills, and to decide human destinies. Thus in the
family relation the words of a father or mother go with children to mature
manhood, and may descend to children’s children. How in our school-days our hearts have become
knit “as with hooks of steel” to companions whom we have loved as Jonathan
loved David, with a “love passing the love of women.” I have myself seen men
moving about through a nation, after whom millions of men flowed as with the
mighty current of a torrent; and when they spoke, momentous questions were
settled, as though decisive utterances had come forth from an oracle or a god.
But the illustrations of this controlling influence of men is as common in the
lowlier spheres of life as in the higher. Sometimes a grand, noble parent
serves his generation and blesses it, and then sends down the crystal purity of
his honour and the odour of his sanctity to children’s children. Sometimes it
is the reverse, and the alcoholic blood and the alcoholic breath of a drunkard
triumphs over the dominion of the grave, and reaches over a whole generation of
men to his descendants, poisoning the atmosphere and polluting society by the
sottishness of sons and grandsons. (A. Crummell.)
Is not the Lord gone out
before thee?--
A sermon for the new year
Wherever we may be called upon to go, our Lord has gone before us.
I. We are entering
into darkness. God is light. What does it matter what we see, or whether we see
at all, if He has seen and known that the way is safe?
II. We are entering
upon uncertainty. But all things are fixed and ordered by God’s power, and from
knowledge.
III. We are entering
upon difficulty. God is almighty in power.
IV. We are to meet
with pain and death. God cannot die. Learn:
1. To distrust all human help and consolation.
2. To trust in Him who is so well able to do for us, and to be to us
all we need.
3. To implicitly follow and confidently resign ourselves to His
leadership. (Homilist.)
Verses 18-24
Jael went out to meet Sisera.
Life’s crises
Emphatically are we reminded that life continually brings us to
sudden moments in which we must act without time for careful reflection, the
spirit of our past flashing out in some quick deed or word of fate. Sisera’s
past drove him in panic over the hills to Zaanaim. Jael’s past came with her to
the door of the tent; and the two as they looked at each other in that tragic
moment were at one, without warning, in a crisis for which every thought and
passion of years had made a way. Here the self-pampering of a vain man had its
issue. Here the woman, undisciplined, impetuous, catching sight of the means to
do a deed, moves to the fatal stroke like one possessed. It is the sort of
thing we often call madness, and yet such insanity is but the expression of
what men and women choose to be capable of. The casual allowance of an impulse
here, a craving there, seems to mean little until the occasion comes when their
accumulated force is sharply or terribly revealed. The laxity of the past thus
declares itself; and on the other hand there is often a gathering of good to a
moment of revelation. The soul that has for long years fortified itself in
pious courage, in patient welt-doing, in high and noble thought, leaps one day,
to its own surprise, to the height of generous daring or heroic truth. We
determine the issue of crises which we cannot foresee. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
Jael and Sisera
“What then!” might we, upon the first cursory perusal of this
narrative, be inclined to exclaim. “Has the all pure and all holy Jehovah
belied His unspeakable attributes, has He laid aside His thunder, and renounced
those direful visitations which, by the mouth of His servant Moses, He had
threatened against the wilful shedder of man’s blood? Why are the rights of
hospitality, so jealously hedged in, in the Mosaic law, and so sacredly
observed in many previous instances (as in the preservation of his guest by the
besieged Lot and the sparing of the Gibeonites by the deceived yet forbearing
Joshua), why are these rights, here first, with impunity violated?”
I. The whole of
the Canaanitish nations had long since by their idolatrous iniquities and
abounding profligacy and wickedness, merited the condemnation and fiery wrath
of Jehovah, which had indeed been denounced against them unambiguously by the
mouth of Moses on the other side of Jordan in the wilderness. No one who has
read the intimations of their guilt in the Book of Leviticus can question for
one moment the justice of the Almighty in blotting them from the face of the
earth. Jabin, king of Canaan, trusted in the number and weight of his iron
chariots, and in the almost countless host of his armed men. The God of Israel
designed, therefore, to humble him to the dust by scattering his forces before
the resolute assault of but a few ill-equipped Israelites, while He would sell the
mighty leader of all this armament into the hands of a weak and unarmed woman.
Thus would He teach the rebellious nations to “put not their strength in
horses, nor in the sons of men,” but to fear and reverence the one true and
only God, the Lord of lords, and King of kings--the fearful God of Sabaoth.
II. The Scripture
narrative simply details the progress of these wonderful events for our warning
and exhortation, but not necessarily for our example. It would be as reasonable
to assert that, because in the book of God’s revealed truth we read of the
cruelty of Saul and the transgression of David, that therefore we are to
imitate them in their wickedness, as to infer from this history of the
slaughter of Sisera that hence treachery is allowable. Jael’s conduct, like
that of the unjust steward in the parable, is commended to our notice--not for
imitation, but for warning. (F. F. Statham, B. A.)
The defence and example of Jael
If Jael received Sisera into her tent with the intention of
murdering him, she must be left to the execrations of posterity. But there are,
we think, plain and straightforward reasons from which to infer that Jael had
no design of killing Sisera--that she acted, therefore, with perfect honesty,
and not with atrocious duplicity, when she offered him shelter. What likelihood
is there that Jael proposed to murder Sisera? He was not her enemy, for there
was peace between her husband’s family and the Canaanites. She had nothing to
gain by his death; and if she had, she needed only to refuse him a shelter. The
enemy was in pursuit, and would quickly have overtaken the fugitive. Had she
wished his death ever so much, she had nothing more to do than to leave him to
his fate. He was a doomed man, and there was no necessity that she should endanger
herself to ensure his destruction; for let it be well observed that the killing
of Sisera was a most dangerous undertaking for a lonely woman. Whatever account
may be given of her subsequent conduct, the only candid construction to be put
on this part of the narrative is that Jael was thoroughly sincere in offering
an asylum to Sisera--that it was not with the language of deceit, nor in order
to cloak a bloody purpose, but simply in truthfulness of heart, and with the
earnest desire of succouring a distressed man, that she invited the fugitive
into her tent, covered him with a mantle, and refreshed him with milk.
“Nevertheless,” you will say, “she killed Sisera; whether premeditated or not,
the murder was committed. What is to be urged in extenuation of so barbarous a
deed? “ This brings us to examine by what motives Jael was instigated, or on
what principles she acted in putting to death her slumbering guest. We reckon
it a satisfactory explanation of her conduct, and one which removes every
difficulty, that she was led by a Divine impulse, or in obedience to a Divine
command, to take away Sisera’s life. She had probably acted from her natural
feeling when offering shelter to the fugitive and giving most hospitable
entertainment. We only think it a kindly part that she should go out to meet
Sisera in his distress, and endeavour to shield him from further injury; but
when the deep slumber was on him there came an intimation to Jael, I cannot
tell you how conveyed--but certainly in such a manner as that there could be no
doubt of its origin--an intimation from God that her guest must die, and that,
too, by her hand. And if such were the case, again we remind you that nothing
but a Divine command will explain a Divine approval. If such were the case, we
challenge you to find in all the annals of Scripture a mightier display of the
power of faith than was exhibited by Jael. What if Sisera should awake just in
time to discover and defeat the murderous design! It was likely. He seemed
indeed in deep sleep, but fresh as he was from battle, his brain must have been
full of confused imagery, and the least noise must startle him as though his
foes were at the door; and she having but a woman’s hand and a woman’s
strength--shall she dare to attempt the nailing the sleeping warrior to the
earth? Will not her courage fail her at the most critical moment, when there is
enough done to arouse Sisera, but not to overcome? Besides, why must she be the
executioner? There was little probability that Sisera could escape; in a short time
the pursuers would arrive, and then the fate of Sisera could be sealed without
her interference, We will believe that thoughts such as these crowded into
Jael’s mind; we can believe that it was a moment of terrible perplexity when
she felt that she had received a commission from God, and considered the
fearfulness and the peril of its execution. There must have been the natural
shrinking from the shedding of blood; there must have come the cutting
reflection that Sisera was her guest, and that she was pledged to his defence;
there must have been dread of his revenge if she should betray her cause in its
execution; but the faith of this woman triumphed over all that is most
calculated to confound and dismay her. There is yet another question, which will,
perhaps, suggest itself to your minds as full of great importance as those
already considered. You may, perhaps, now be disposed to allow the great
probability, if not the certainty, that Jael acted on a Divine command,
conveyed to her after Sisera had been admitted into the tent, and you may on
this account acquit her of any charge of treachery or cruelty. Then you will
ask, how it could be consistent with the character of God to issue such a
command? Since murder is a crime which is expressly forbidden, with what
propriety could He enjoin its perpetration? Now, just think! No one would have
felt any surprise had Sisera perished in the battle. He was the oppressor of
the Lord’s people: what marvel, then, that he should be overtaken by vengeance?
Thus also with the Canaanites; their wickedness marked them out for
extermination, just as did that of the unbelief of the world before the flood
came; so that if in place of employing the sword of the Israelites, God had
employed a deluge, or a pestilence, we should not have had a word to say, but
must have admitted the justice of His ridding the land of those by whom it was
profaned. And could either Jael or the Israelites be charged with murder in
performing by Divine command a just though severe action? They were only the
executioners of a righteous sentence: could they on that account contract
guiltiness? Why, when the law
of the land has condemned a man to death, who thinks of charging the
executioner with murder, because he is instrumental in executing the penalties
of that law? Indeed, he has not actually invaded and rifled the sanctuary of
life, as a midnight assassin who steals on his victim, and leaves him weltering
in his blood; but because a competent authority has directed him to inflict
death, he is no murderer, but only an obedient servant of the State when he
takes the life of a fellow-man. And now having vindicated Jael, we shall not
hesitate to go further, and hold her forth as an example which it should be
your endeavour to imitate. We do not merely mean that having displayed strong
faith, and obeyed the law, when obedience was beyond measure difficult,
she has left a pattern to be followed by all who are summoned to special
difficulties and sacrifices in the service of God; over and above this, the case
of Jael and Sisera has a peculiar similarity to many--yea, even all--amongst
yourselves, who are required by God to inflict death where they have offered
hospitality. Yea, if it be the Scriptural demand that we “crucify”--“crucify
the flesh with its affections and lusts”--oh, then, there is vast similarity
between our own ease and that of Jael. We too must put to death the enemy whom
we have cherished and received. We too must determine that we will act the
executioner where we have been the patron and the host. We too must be ready to
strike down that which we have embraced, and pierce that which we have admitted
not only into the tent, but into the heart. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
Jael, a type of the unscrupulous helpers of a good cause
Long has the error prevailed that religion can be helped by
using the world’s weapons, by acting in the temper and spirit of the world. Of
that mischievous falsehood have been born all the pride and vainglory, the rivalries and
persecutions that darken the past of Christendom, surviving in strange and
pitiful forms to the present day. If we shudder at the treachery in the deed of
Jael, what shall we say of that which through many a year sent victims to
inquisition, dungeons, and to the stake in the name of Christ? And what shall
we say now of that moral assassination which in one tent and another is thought
no sin against humanity, but a service of God? Among us are too many who suffer
wounds keen and festering that have been given in the house of their friends,
yea, in the name of the one Lord and Master. The battle of truth is a frank and
honourable fight, served at no point by what is false or proud or low. To an
enemy a Christian should be chivalrous, and surely no less to a brother.
Granting that a man is in error, he needs a physician, not an executioner; he
needs an example, not a dagger. How much farther do we get by the methods of
opprobrium and cruelty, the innuendo and the whisper of suspicion? Besides, it
is not the Siseras to-day who are dealt with after this manner. It is the
“schismatic” within the camp on whom some Jael falls with a hammer and a nail.
If a Church cannot stand by itself, approved to the consciences of men, it
certainly will not be helped by a return to the temper of barbarism and the
craft of the world (2 Corinthians 10:4). (R. A.
Watson, M. A.)
Sin slain
If the story of the world’s sufferings under different tyrants
could all be written, there would be no man found who would be capable of
reading it. I believe that even the despots themselves, who have committed the
atrocities to which I refer, would not be sufficiently cold-blooded to sit down
and read the account of the agonies which their own victims have endured. I
have been struck in passing through many lands with the horrible sufferings
which in the olden times were endured by the poor at the hands of the rich
kings and lords who were their oppressors. In almost every town in which you
enter, you either have shown to you the rack, the dark dungeon, the
thumb-screw, or the infernal machine, or instruments too horrible to
describe--that make one’s blood run chill at the very thought and sight of them. Sin
has brought more plagues upon this earth than all the earth’s tyrants.
I. First let us
try to picture The sinner growing uneasy under the yoke of his sins, and
planning a revolt against his oppressors. It is said that when a man is born a
slave, slavery is not near so irksome as when he has once been free. You will
have found it, perhaps, in birds and such animals that we keep under our
control. If they have never known what it is to fly to and fro in the air from
tree to tree, they are happy in the cage; but if, after having once seen the
world, and floated in the clear air, they are condemned to live in slavery,
they are far less content. This is the case with man--he is born a slave. Until the
Spirit of God comes into the heart--so strange is the use of nature--we live
contented in our chains; we walk up and down our dungeon, and think we are at
large. It is one of the first marks of Divine life when we grow discontented
and begin to fight against sin.
II. And now we have
the second picture--the sinner having gone to war with his own sins has, to a
great extent, by God’s grace, overcome them; but he feels when this is done,
that it is not enough, that external morality will not save the soul. Like
Barak, he has conquered Sisera; but, not content with seeing him flee away on
his feet, he wants to have his dead body before him. Rest not content till the
blood of thine enemy stain the ground, until he be crushed, and dead, and
slain. Oh, sinner, I beseech thee never be content until grace reign in thy
heart, and sin be altogether subdued. Indeed, this is what every renewed soul longs
for, and must long for, nor will it rest satisfied until all this shall be
accomplished.
III. I stand at the
door to-day, not of a tent, but of a tomb, and as I stand here I say to the
sinner who is anxious to know how his sins may be killed, how his corruption
may be slain, “Come, and I will show thee the man whom thou seekest, and when
you shall come in, you shall see your sins lying dead, and the nails in their
temples.” Sinner, the sin thou dreariest is forgiven, thou hast wept sore
before God, and thou hast cast thyself on Christ and on Christ alone. In the
name of Him who is the Eternal God I assure thee that thy sins are all
forgiven. Further--dost thou ask where thy sin is? I tell thee thy sin is gone,
so that it never can be recalled. Thou art so forgiven that thy sins can never
have a resurrection. The nail is not driven through the hands of thy sins, but
through their temples. The spear that pierced the Saviour’s heart pierced the
heart of thine iniquity; the grave in which He was buried was the tomb of all
thy sins; and His resurrection was the resurrection of thy spirit to light and
joy unspeakable. God forbid we should ever glory in sin, but it is a theme for
joy to a Christian when he can look upon his sins drowned in the blood of
Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Jael’s deed
When Jael received him, she did so no doubt in good faith, nor had
she heard of his overwhelming disaster. She would be only too ready to afford
shelter to the proudest warrior of those regions. It is not unlikely that while
he was sleeping she began to reflect upon the strangeness of his being in a
condition to need such succour, and that from fugitives and others passing by
she learned the story of that eventful day. She found that it was no longer a
victor, but a baffled and helpless fugitive, who lay in her tent. She probably
had a dim idea also of his character, as an enemy of the God of heaven whom the
Israelites worshipped. A sudden impulse seized her; she would despatch him as
he lay. Was he not the worst of oppressors? Did he deserve to live? Besides,
the cries of the pursuers already echo through the mountains, and their weapons
flash amid the foliage. The wretched Sisera is too exhausted to offer a
dangerous resistance. She enters the apartment and strikes him. He staggers up;
then in a swoon he falls at her feet. An iron tent pin, to which the cords of
the tent were fastened, is in her hand, and a mallet. She drives the iron pin
through his temples into the earth, with a blow given in the superhuman
strength of frenzied excitement. Then voices are heard in the forest. The
pursuers have come up; it is Barak himself (Judges 4:22). The whole story appears
perfectly natural; nor is there any need for the supposition of Jael acting
under a Divine impulse or a special Divine commission. Her act was dictated as
much by self-interest as by any other motive. It was a moment of wild
excitement, and cannot be judged by the rules of our peaceable and decorous time.
If in the great Indian mutiny we had heard of Nana Sahib having been entrapped
and killed by some wild woman of a wandering tribe, the public opinion of
England would not have scrutinised too closely the morality of the action, in
its joy at being rid of the most infamous of murderers. It is, in fact, the
eulogy pronounced by Deborah which has constituted the difficulty. And a
difficulty it must always remain to those who believe that every word uttered
by those who of old had the name and rank of prophets is a direct utterance of
the Divine will. The difficulty, however, disappears if we view the splendid
ode of Deborah as being included by the guidance of the Spirit of God among the
records of His ancient Church, and as expressing the feelings of an Israelite
patriot of that day. The holiest and most devout of the Church of that age
would respond to Deborah’s language. Whether such sentiments would be
appropriate in our own day is not in question: we believe in the doctrine and
in the fact of progressive light. (L. H. Wiseman, M. A.)
Verse 20
Thou shalt say, No.
Thou shalt say, No
A human being has his destiny, in some measure, in his own
hands, depending on his own voluntary determinations. We cannot define exactly
the limits of the province of free-will, but that it has a province, and an
important one, all consciousness attests. It is true that man, like the animals
and the vegetables, is subject to those laws of his being which he had no
choice in enacting, and to the outside influences which he does not invite, and
they must needs go far towards deciding his character. But not exclusively. He
can enact laws for himself, impose actions upon himself, and, what it is our business
to consider now, he possesses a certain qualified, but real veto-power. He can,
to a large extent, not suppress, but repress and hold in check, some of the
laws and tendencies and demands of his own nature. And he can, in a degree,
reject outside influences and solicitations, push them aside, defy them, avert
them. He can veto them, can say “No” to them. And according as he says it, and
says it on right occasions, says it promptly, decisively, he maintains the
splendid self-sovereignty of manhood. A brave, frequent, and absolute exercise
of the veto-power with which he is endowed, is one of the fixed conditions of
success and honour in the world, of self-respect and dignity of character, of
harmony with God and the happiness of life.
I. The exercise of
this supreme power in reference to the tendencies and inclinations within one’s
self. There are tendencies and appetites in every man which, if allowed a free
course and full swing, would drag him in the mire and hurry him to his ruin.
The meanest of them has slain its thousands. So mean and paltry an appetite as
that for stimulating drink counts its victims by millions, and our nature is
largely made up of such dangerous proclivities, some inborn and some acquired.
There is in man, also, a certain inscrutable, central authority, the mysterious
Ego, the indefinable “I myself,” whose office is to watch over these necessary
but dangerous members of the internal commonwealth, and keep them to their
limits, and say, “No” to each and all their demands for undue power and
over-indulgence. No man can live at all without exerting this power at some
points; and no man can live nobly, and to the highest purposes of his being,
without exerting it constantly, at all points, and with absolute supremacy. In
the biographies of all persons eminent for character and achievement, you will
notice how they have striven to acquire perfectly this form of self-mastery.
What ingenious devices and shrewd practices they have resorted to, to this end.
In some ages, what fasts and penances and seclusions and all forms of
asceticisms, and in all ages what vigorous efforts, what watchfulness, and what
contrivances and habits of self-discipline, whereby they might be able with
promptitude and effect to say “No” to any tendency that is getting too strong,
and any desire that is too clamorous! And success in that is their salvation,
the open secret of their success in their high aims, and the glory of their
lives.
II. The
circumstances and events around us. These are very powerful, seemingly
irresistible often. They claim to take full possession of a man, to carry him
whither they will, and make of him what they will. They seem to say to him, “We
are a part of the irresistible order of nature; we move according to the
eternal laws; we represent the forces of the universe; we come backed by the
omnipotence of the Creator. What can you, poor, puny mortal, do in resistance
to our overwhelming might? A pitiful speck of being as you are, an evanescent
bubble on this vast sea of matter and force, what is there for you but to drift
whithersoever we may carry you, and sink where we drop you?” But not so, thou
majestic universe, bearing upon man as you do with all your infinite might in
the events and circumstances around us--not so! The soul in man, that
mysterious essence, whose very existence you bring into question, is in its
rightful province a match for you, can resist you, set you aside, say “No” to
you, and in the ethereal, Godlike power it is endowed with, and with the
humility of a little child, make good its audacious defiance. The brave but
wary seaman knows the tremendous power of an adverse wind, a power that nothing
can withstand, knows it and respects it, yet he is master of the situation. He
can anchor in the roadstead, and look the very hurricane in the face, and let
it blow. He will not budge. He can wait. That force will be spent before his
will be. He will yet lay his course right along the pathway of the storm, and
he does, and makes his voyage triumphantly. Or in another ease he refuses to
drift with it. He will move right on against the opposing force, and never stop
a moment, nor furl his sails; he must beat, go zigzag, tediously, but he gets
on against it, and if need be, he will make the entire Atlantic voyage without
one favourable breeze, with hard struggles but no yielding, delayed but not
defeated. So in all human life. The power of circumstances must be respected,
and dealt with valiantly but warily. The true man will accommodate himself to
them, and yet refuse to drift with them; nay, will circumvent them, outwatch
them, and make them serve his purpose. They may delay him, but not turn him
back; discourage him, but not pluck heart of hope out of him. They may change
his direction, but not stop his progress. They may change the form of his duty,
but cannot hinder doing. They may combine to tempt and assail his integrity or
purity, but if he say in God’s name, “No!” they cannot touch it.
III. It is most
practical to consider the exercise of this veto-power in refusing the requests
of other persons. There are always about us those who ask us or propose to us
to do things that we ought not or had better not do. And such is the strength
of the social tie, and so potent the influence of another’s desire, that there
is always a disposition to comply, and an amiable disposition it is in itself.
But it is often very misleading, and sometimes fatal to honour and integrity,
to purity and peace and every sacred interest of life. Many a youth and many a
man, not depraved, but simply weak and unestablished, has thus been led to his
ruin, out of mere good-natured compliance and the difficulty of refusing a
solicitation. Balancing between good and evil, with the promise and possibility
of the best, he has gone to the bad, because he could not, or felt that he
could not, say, “No!” The dangerous tendencies that are in him, and that are in
everybody, acquire tenfold power when reinforced by the importunity of a
friendly companion to join him in giving way to them. That little off-hand
suit, “Come along,” coupled with the suggestion, “What’s the harm?” or “Who
will know it?” or “Just this once,” or “Don’t be a coward,” we cannot tell how
many it leads astray every day, initiates in the downward path, and that too
when every instinct of the conscience, every sentiment of honour, every
affection of their heart, and every hope of their lives, is breathing its
protest, and would hold them back. If all those hesitating consents could now
be recalled, that fatal compliance reversed, and it should be as if the
rightful refusals had been spoken in place of them, what blessed results should
we see. Oh, learn betimes to say, “No!” when you know you ought to say it. Fear
not the sneers of the evil-disposed, the corrupt, or the merely thoughtless,
but fear rather the anguish and tears of those who love you, the strings of
your conscience, and the displeasure of your God. Be prompt and strong to say,
“No!” when you ought, and your better nature bids you, and so march on through
your career in safety, honour, and peace. And it is not only to the
solicitations or the suggestions that would lead us in fatal directions, into
enslaving vices, or the outright sacrifice of truth, honour, and purity that we
need to exercise this great prerogative of downright refusal in the thick of
this our social city life, we have need to exercise it daily, and almost
hourly, in respect to requests and invitations that have no bad intent, but are
meant in courtesy and kindness, and that in other circumstances, and at other
times, might be complied with in all propriety. We need, on moral grounds, to
guard with some jealousy our personal independence, and let nobody unduly or
unreasonably invade it. We cannot afford to hold ourselves, our time,
faculties, thoughts, or even sympathies, entirely at the beck and call even of
the best people or of the kindest-meaning friends. That high independence which
never hesitates to say, “No” whenever and to whomsoever it should be said
commands respect. It is a chief element of all nobleness and strength of
character. It is essential to feminine dignity, and to the highest manhood. It
makes you worth seeking, and causes your refusals to be better taken than the
loose assents of those facile persons who from sheer weakness in the fibre and
the making up of their character can never say, “No!” or say it as if guilty of
an offence and fearful of your displeasure. (George Putnam.)
Thou shalt say, No
Here is one of the shortest words in our language; yet there is
none which persons of an easy and yielding disposition find it so difficult to
pronounce. To say it, however, is one of the first lessons which we have
occasion to learn, and one of the most frequent we are called upon to practise.
You can hardly mention a cause which has done more to lead men into embarrassment,
distress, and crime, than disregard of this caution. A young man just entering
into life is solicited by his gay companions to take part in their
dissipations. He feels that it would be wrong; that it can lead to nothing but
evil. And yet he cannot muster resolution enough to say, “No.” He consents,
goes on from step to step, and in the end is ruined. An affectionate mother is
besought by her children to grant them some improper indulgence. She feels that
it would be an improper indulgence; that it can only do them harm. And yet she
cannot find it in her heart to say, “No.”
I. In the first
place, then, Let us learn to respect our own judgment in what we do. If, on a
view of all the circumstances, we think we ought to say, “No,” let us have the
courage and firmness and independence to say it. A man who dares not act
according to his own convictions of what is right, for fear that after all he
may be mistaken--I will not say that he has no regard for conscience, but this
I will say: he has no confidence in conscience, which in practice amounts to
nearly the same thing. Besides, with respect to the construction which other
people may put on our motives, if we only take care that our motives are what
they should be, and that our whole conduct is in keeping, we need not entertain
any apprehensions but that in the long run ample justice will be done them by
all whose approbation is worth having. I have shown that it is but the part of
a manly independence to have the courage and firmness to say, “No,” when we are
convinced that this is the proper word.
II. I proceed to
show that it is no less a dictate of prudence, and practical wisdom. You can
hardly step your foot on the threshold of life without encountering seduction
in every possible shape; and unless you are prepared to resist it firmly, you
are a doomed man. What makes it still more dangerous is, that the first
solicitations of vice often come under such disguised forms, and relate to
things seemingly so trivial, as to give hardly any warning of the fatal
consequences, to which by slow and insensible gradations they are almost sure
to lead. As you value, then, your health and reputation, your peace of mind and
personal independence, learn to say, “No.” Inquire into the sources of human
misery, study the first beginnings of crime, and, meet with it where you may,
by tracing it back to its first cause you will find it to have been, in almost
every instance, merely because they could not say, “No,” to the tempter. Put
the question to one who has wasted his substance in riotous living. The burden
of their confession will be, that they owe every calamity which has befallen
them to their not having had firmness enough, at some turning-point of their
destiny, to say, “No.” As you would avoid their fate, let me then conjure you
to avoid its cause.
III. The same
conduct which I have shown to be necessary to a manly independence and to a
prudent regard to our own interest I shall next prove to be in no sense
inconsistent with a benevolent and truly generous disposition. One of the most
common mistakes on this subject is to confound an easy disposition with a
benevolent disposition: two things which in fact are as wide asunder as the
east from the west. A man of an easy disposition is so commonly merely because
he will not make the effort a more firm and steady conduct requires. And why
will he not make this effort? Because he will not take the trouble of making
it. But is this benevolence? Is it so much as an abuse of benevolence? Is it
not sheer selfishness?
IV. Having shown
that independence, prudence, and benevolence alike require the conduct I have
been recommending, it only remains for me to urge it upon you as a matter of
moral and religious duty. It is a great error, though a common one, not to
suppose that the principle of duty extends to almost all our actions; requiring
them or forbidding them, as being either right or wrong. We talk of actions as
being honourable or dishonourable, as being prudent or imprudent, as being
benevolent or otherwise, but what is honourable or prudent or benevolent is
also right. Everything, therefore, which has already been said to prove the
conduct in question a dictate of benevolence, prudence, and manly independence,
goes also to the same extent to prove it to be our duty, our imperative duty.
Besides, take the words as they stand. If, considering all the circumstances,
we ought to say, “No,” then it is our duty to say it, let the consequences be
what they may. Some men can never say, “No,” unless they are in a passion, and
are therefore driven to the mortifying necessity of working themselves up into
a passion before they can find the courage to do it. Again, there are others,
who will trust themselves to say, “No,” only as a matter of policy; and with
whom, therefore, the question is not, “What ought I to say?” but, “What will it
be for my interest to say?” There is also a third class that will say,
“No”--and say it often enough too, if that were all--from mere churlishness and
ill-humour; but I need not observe that this is very far from being the conduct
I am here recommending. Putting aside all such considerations, let us learn to
resist improper solicitations from a sense of duty. It should be enough to know
that it is our duty. Let us act on this principle, and we shall never refuse
except when duty requires it; but at such times our refusal will be much more
decided and effectual, while it will be made under circumstances of much
greater dignity on our part, and of much less irritation on the part of those
whom it may disappoint. Moreover, while we act from a sense of duty, we should
connect with this feeling a conviction that it is one of religious obligation.
God has required us to pursue a course of undeviating rectitude. Whoever,
therefore, would seduce us from this sets himself against God, and we must deny
one or the other. Whether in such a case we should deny God rather than man let
conscience judge. (James Walker.)
Verse 23
So God subdued on that day Jabin.
A great victory--but God’s
I. What he did:
“God subdued . . . Jabin the king.”
1. This is the normal issue of God’s activity. For God to act is for
Him to conquer. Where the victory tarries, it is only God waiting.
2. He subdued Jabin the king of Canaan. Who is able to stand against
Him?
3. Every oppressor of God’s people becomes His foe. He who molests
them virtually challenges God.
II. How he did it:
“So.”
1. By inspiring Deborah with a holy courage.
2. By arrangement. The plan of salvation is only one grand instance
of the Divine order,
III. When he did it:
“On that day.” God never miscalculates. The Eternal is never late.
1. It was as soon as they wanted it.
2. It was when they were most ready to receive it.
IV. Where he did
it: “Before the children of Israel.”
1. There are many things which God must do out of our sight.
2. There are instances when He works by signs which are visible--Red
Sea; Carmel. This victory was not only decided, but manifest. (E. M.
Mouchin.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》