The apostle Paul has two wonderful doxologies, glorifying God for what He has done for His redeemed in Christ:

“Now unto him that is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ….” (Rom. 16:25).

“Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that ask or think….” (Eph. 3:29).

But Jude surpasses even these transcendant expressions of faith:

“Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory….”

If Jude had written nothing but these words the New Testament would have been much the poorer with them.

There is a contrast here in the words for “keep”. In v. 21, “keep yourselves by means of the divine Love Feast” indicates a contribution which the believer can make towards his own spiritual well-being, by the simple act of presenting himself, though faulty, before the presence of the Glory of the Lord. But, once there, he is caused to stand faultless, guarded from falling away.

Prophets of the Lord, splendid men that they were, prostrated themselves before the heavenly Glory, overpowered by a sense of their own unworthiness. Yet Jesus had bidden his men “watch and pray always that ye may be accounted worthy to stand before the Son of Man” (Luke 21:36).

Such faultless standing may be the disciple’s status even now (yet what a contrast with the searing language of vv. 12,13), because he has a covering sacrifice of “a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:19). So Peter might well exhort to diligence “that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot and blameless” (2 Pet. 3:14). The Lord’s Righteous Servant justifies many, bearing their iniquities (Isa. 53:11), but only if they give diligence are they guarded from falling away, and so presented “blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:8; 2 Thes. 3:13). Yet, also, some are so set on achieving in the Last Day a credit balance of good marks over against bad marks that they fail to realise that, both then and now, there are only two conditions, either faultless or fallen.

The language of this amazing passage is that of the Day of Atonement. “Before the presence of his glory” pictures the High Priest in the Holy of Holies. “Faultless, without blemish” describes the sacrifice offered and accepted, hence the mention of the Glory. But whereas Israel, called to repeat this ceremony of atonement year after year, heard the commandment: “Ye shall afflict your souls” (Lev. 16:29,31), that is, go fasting all the day, this New Israel partakes of Bread and Wine “with exceeding joy”, thankful for a sacrifice without blemish offered once for all.

For all this, praise is given to “God our Saviour”, but only “through Jesus Christ our Lord”. The highest “glory, majesty, dominion and power” comes to Him through His glorious Son. Very strangely, the A.V. omits this most necessary clause about Christ (it has very strong manuscript support), and also “before all time” (literally: before the age) to link with “now and ever” — this is the Covenant Name Jehovah, “which is, and was, and is to come” (Rev. 1:8). Could Jude end on a better note?

1. The Inheritance of Israel (1:1-2:10)

An initial difficulty

The opening words of the Book of Judges present their reader with an awkward problem: “And it came to pass after the death of Joshua…” But the death and burial of that great leader are described in 2:8,9; and the opening section of the book up to that point includes hardly anything which is not to be found recorded already in the second half of the Book of Joshua. Every city whose capture is catalogued in Judges 1 is already recorded (in Joshua) as taken whilst that leader was alive. And indeed it would be hard to believe that the many incursions, by which the various tribes appropriated their inheritances, took place only after the life and rule of Joshua had come to an end — and he lived many years (40?) after the crossing of Jordan, dying at the age of 110.

One suggestion for coping with the difficulty is that through some scribal error the name of Joshua has replaced that of Moses in this opening phrase. Read: “And it came to pass after the death of Moses….” — and no problem remains, except that of evidence; for there is not a vestige of manuscript support for such a reading. However, that does not rule it out as completely impossible. The Massoretes were not as infallible as they are often made out to be.

A Remarkable Feature

There are other considerations of some interest which link this “preface” with the last five chapters of Judges. It is to be noted that:

1. 1:1-2:10 and ch. 17-21 are similar in their frequent allusions to Judah and Jerusalem, and to the twelve tribes acting together; these receive hardly any mention at all in the main part of the book.
2. these two sections have no references at all to judges ruling the people.
3. there are quite a number of key phrases in common.
4. inquiry of the Lord (by Urim and Thummim) comes in both, and not elsewhere in the book.
5. Judah has precedence in the fighting: 1:2; 20:18.

It does not seem possible to offer an explanation as to why there should be these dislocations (regarding ch. 1 and ch. 17-21). The problem exists also in other prophetic and historical books (e.g., the text of Jeremiah; the last few chapters of 2 Samuel), but no one seems to know why.

With the main concerted opposition now broken, a directive was sought from the Lord as to which tribe should make the first move to appropriate its inheritance. Here was a people still with vivid memories of the recent disaster when, following their own wisdom, they attempted an easy-going capture of Ai. The Hebrew expression for “asked the Lord” is unusual, and occurs elsewhere only in the later chapters (18:5; 20:18,23).

Judah and Simeon

The answer by Urim and Thummim (Num. 27:21) selected Judah to make the first attack. This was in harmony with Jacob’s prophecy: “Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies” (Gen. 49:8). Judah promptly sought the co-operation of Simeon. This, too, was right, for these two were sons of Leah and the inheritance of Simeon was already designated, not as a separate distinct territory, but as a number of towns dotted about within the southern part of the portion assigned to Judah (Josh. 19:1-9). This too was in accordance with Jacob’s pronouncement concerning the tribe: “I will divide them (Simeon and Levi) in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel” (Gen. 49:7). These Simeonites, although a depleted tribe, were a fierce lot. A passage at the end of 1 Chronicles 4 shows that their character and reputation lasted through the centuries.

Led by Caleb (Josh. 14:6), who although of Gentile origin was the prince of Judah, these tribal brothers went up from Gilgal and began a long series of military successes, against Canaanites (Gen. 9:25) in the lowlands, against the Perizzites living in the unwalled villages (so the name implies), and against the handful of strong cities dotted through the area.

An early outstanding victory was against Bezek, halfway between Jerusalem and the coast. The king of this place, Adoni-bezek, lorded it over the sheiks of no less than seventy villages and towns in that area. These, their subject status cruelly emphasized by the cutting off of thumbs and big toes (so that they could neither fight nor flee), gleaned their food under the feasting table of this “Lord of Lightning”. At least, that was the way he boasted about his power, but perhaps it was only a purple way of describing figuratively the strength of his tyranny. The men of Israel now chased him out of his stronghold, hunted him across the countryside, captured him, and meted out to him the identical treatment he had proudly decreed for others. Then they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died, perhaps as a result of wounds received in the fighting.

Adoni-Bezek and Christ

In itself it is a typical picture of a hard pitiless era. Yet how it takes on greater fulness of meaning when illuminated by one phrase from the lips of Jesus. He had sent out an augmented team of preachers in twos, seventy of them, and had given them not only a matchless message, but also powers to match the message. In due time they returned bubbling over with excitement at the success that had attended both their preaching and their working of miracles: “Lord, even the demons are subject unto us in thy name!” The Lord’s immediate response was: “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” What was the connection?

Adoni-bezek, the Lord of Lightning, with 70 princes in thrall, was an apt figure of human sin and ignorance holding dominion over all the nations of the world (70 of them are listed in Genesis 10; 12 wells and 70 palm trees at Rephidim; 70 bullocks offered in sacrifice at the Feast of Tabernacles). As Jesus sent out his 70 in twos, so also a typical two, Judah and Simeon, had laboured together to break the power of the tyrant. They routed him in the place of his strength, hunted him down, and he came to his end at Jerusalem! Then is it absurd to think of Jesus seeing his 70 engaged in a corresponding campaign over a more tyrannous Lord of Lightning?

Jerusalem

Jerusalem also was captured, burnt, and left desolate by the men of Judah. The appointed boundary between Judah and Benjamin passed through Jerusalem. The former did not seem greatly anxious to make the most of their capture (a strange irony, this, in view of the city’s later history!), so the Benjamites took it over, but in such inadequate strength that they could not hold it against the original Jebusites who gradually came back to their old homes. Eventually at some time during the period of the judges, they were able to expel the Israelites and re-assert complete control there until the days of David (1:8,21; 19:10-12; 2 Sam. 5:6).

Caleb’s inheritance

Next, Caleb turned towards the locality which had been designated by Moses as his inheritance (Deut. 1:36). Kirjath-Arba, which became Hebron, was inhabited by the sons of Anak, survivors of a race of giant stature. But Caleb, vigorous as ever (Josh. 14:11), and with the same strong faith and undaunted spirit which had held firmly on to God’s promises in the day of discouragement (Num. 13,14), was confident that God would prosper his enterprise. And He did.

Half-way between Hebron and Beersheba was a place called Kiriath-sepher. Evidently too pre-occupied in other directions to make this a personal target, Caleb called for volunteers against it, offering his own daughter in marriage as an added incentive. Othniel, his own nephew, responded to the challenge. At a blow he won a home and a wife. Achsah, with something of the go-getting spirit of her father, goaded Othniel to ask him to add a suitable area of cultivable land nearby. When her new husband was loth to press this further request, she did so herself, and was granted the upper and nether springs (fourteen of them, in two main groups) in the fertile hollow towards Hebron which would normally have been included in the territory of that place.

It seems very likely that the two unexpected verses about Jabez, cropping up in the middle of the Chronicles genealogies (1 Chron. 4:9,10), refer to Othniel. For the genealogy there is that of Judah, Othniel’s tribe, and Jabez calls on “the God of Israel” precisely as Caleb also does (Josh. 14:14), a thing to be expected since they were both of Gentile origin, being Kenizzites (v. 13 here). The phrase: “more honourable than his brethren”, may allude to the fact that other members of the family did not share his union with Israel; or it commemorates his fine work as saviour and judge of Israel (3:8-11). His request: “Oh that thou wouldest….enlarge my border” is matched in Judges by Othniel’s tactful incitement of his wife to ask for springs of water as an addition to her dowry — what Jabez very appropriately calls “a blessing” (1 Chron. 4:10 Jud. 1:15). And “God granted him that which he requested.” Evidently whilst Achsah was asking her father, Othniel was asking his Father.

This Kirjath-sepher (Book Town!), Othniel’s inheritance, was also known as Kiriath-sannah (Josh. 15:49), which might possibly mean Instruction Town. Its name became Debir, which is basically the Hebrew for Word. Thus all three names suggest literary pursuits. So it is not unreasonable to see here the existence of a primitive university. There is a hint of a possibility that in time it was taken over by the men of Simeon. This would perhaps account for the rabbinic tradition that it was from Simeon that the scribes of Israel originated.

Yet further south, beyond Beersheba, Hormah was devastated, and the Kenites (the Midianite tribe of smiths to which Moses’ father-in-law had belonged) moved in and appropriated the area for the Bedouin life they normally followed. Many years later they had to be warned off by Saul at the time of his campaign against the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:6).

Stronger opposition

Success dried up when Judah turned towards the sea. Here they encountered the cities of the Philistines who, only recently, had come across the sea from Crete and settled on the coastal plain. They had chariots of iron, possibly supplied or bought from Egypt (LXX: for Rechab — Egypt — prevented them). This gave them a telling advantage in pitched battles, and the faith of the Israelites in the prospering providence of God wilted under the strain. The Judges record (1:18) reads as though the Philistine cities were captured, but the next verse and the Septuagint version encourage the belief that a “not” has somehow dropped out of the text here. In the LXX it is there six times over. In fact, not until the time of David and Solomon was Israelite supremacy asserted over that region. Thus Dan also had to go without part of his inheritance. It was this deprivation which led to the Danite migration to the north not long afterwards (see Jud. 18).

Another collaboration in conquest was between Ephraim and Manasseh — the house of Joseph. Their portions fell in the central area, side by side. First, they blockaded Bethel-Luz, a border city of Ephraim and Benjamin (Josh. 18:13,22). It may be inferred that Luz was so-called by its Hittite inhabitants, whereas Bethel was the name given by Jacob and his descendants to the sanctuary of Jehovah just on the outskirts of the city (Gen. 13:3; 28:11,19,22; 35:7,8).

From a native of the place who was captured they learned, by trading the man’s life for the secret, how best to force the defences. At Beth-haccerem archaeologists found a one-man escape hole neatly hidden away (cp. 2 Kgs. 25:4). Presumably something of this kind was made known to the men of Israel, so that they were able to take Luz from within. In accordance with Deut. 20:16,17 the populace were destroyed; but since the man had been promised his life, the condition was insisted on that he cleared out, back to the Hittite land in the far north.

This proved to be Ephraim’s only big success. Was it lack of faith, resolution or armaments which led to such modest progress? Traditional fortresses still held by the Egyptians, like Beth-sh’an, Taanach, and Megiddo, stood out comfortably against the lightly-armed Israelites.

Israel and the Canaanites

In due time the tribes grew stronger. Yet even when their power preponderated they tolerated the Canaanites among them and did not sweep the Land clean of their evil religions and practices as Moses had insisted (Deut. 20:10-18). This happened with practically all the twelve tribes, but especially so in the north. The sequence of phrases is interesting:

This rather spineless disposition to tolerate the continuation of evil pagan religions in their midst, brought on Israel a sweeping censure: “the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim”, and there he reminded the assembly of all the people of their duty to the Lord who had so faithfully fulfilled His covenant to give them the Land. Then let them fulfil their side of the covenant, or they would soon find themselves paying with bitter experience for their indifference and flagging loyalty.

A rebuking angel

Who was this “angel” of the Lord? Was it the angel of the covenant who had given guidance to Joshua (e.g., Josh. 5:13)? Was it Eleazer or Phinehas the high priest (see Mal. 2:7)? Was it some unnamed prophet (cp. Mal. 3:6)? Or was it Joshua himself, and this remonstration a condensed version of the exhortation he addressed to the elders of Israel at Shechem (Joshua 24)? In favour of this idea is the fact that Judges 1 summarises much in the second half of the Book of Joshua, and then 2:1-10 would correspond with the end of that book. There is a good deal of similarity between the final exhortations of Joshua (in ch. 23,24) and this warning in Judges, so that the latter may readily be taken as a condensed version of the former. There is also the continuation in v. 6: “And when Joshua had sent the people away….”, as though defining here who the “messenger” was (cp. Josh. 1:28).

But in that case, why “the angel of the Lord”? Surely because Joshua was deliberately echoing the warning given to Israel by Moses about the Angel of the Covenant in their midst. This is readily perceptible in Exodus 23:20,23,24,32.

Then, where was Bochim, the place of Israel’s weeping, for Bochim was an eponym added because of this special occasion?

One would naturally assume Shiloh, the place of the sanctuary of the Lord (cp. Josh. 18:1). LXX adds “Bethel”, but this would not necessarily rule out Shiloh, for it was in truth the House of God. But on other occasions not long after this Bethel was a centre of assembly, sacrifice, and repentant weeping (20:18; 21:2,4 — Shiloh being ruled out, here, as being too remote). Also, there at Bethel was the altar of Abraham and Jacob, and close by it “the oak of weeping” (Gen. 12:3,4; 28:11,22; 35:7,8).

This section concludes with a repetition of the account given in Joshua of the death and burial of the great leader, who shares with Moses, David and the Messiah the high title of “Servant of the Lord”. They buried him in his own inheritance in Timnath-serah, within sight of the location of his mighty victory on the day when the sun stood still. In Judges 2:9 the name is given as Timnath-heres (the sun!). Is this just a textual corruption, or was the name changed to remind the people of that day of outstanding triumph?

Notes

Judges 1

1.	The real beginning of Judges is in 2:8.
	Asked the Lord; cp. 20:18. From Josh. 7:16-18 and into 1,2 Samuel allusions to this means of divine guidance are fairly frequent. See “Samuel, Saul, and David”, Appendix 1.
	Go up, from Gilgal (in the early days of Joshua)? or just an idiom for assault? The order of the tribes in this ch. is roughly the same as in Josh. 15-19, but with Issachar omitted (why?).
2.	Judah first, because of Gen. 49:8?
	Delivered the land into his hand. Either (a) Judah’s success to be a token of the rest; or (b) “I have begun to deliver….”.
3.	Judah, Simeon. God often sends His men in twos: Mark 6:7; Luke 10:1; Acts 8:14.
5.	Adoni-bezek should probably be Adoni-barak, Lord of lightning. In Hebrew BZK is readily confused with BRK, as in Ezek. 1:13,14, and here especially because of the town Bezek in the same verse.
7.	So God hath requited me. Philistines also acknowledged the power of the God of Israel: 1 Sam. 4:7,8; 6:5.
8.	Set on fire; s.w. 20:48.
9.	Valley: Shephelah, the coastal plain.
10.	Canaanites. Here, Anakim: Josh. 15:13-19; 11:21, a conquest certainly in Joshua’s lifetime. Anak means “chain”, a symbol of authority? 8:26.
	Ahiman means “brother of the god of good luck”; cp. Isa. 65:11 RV. Contrast the tone of Num. 13:22,33.
12.	Achsah probably means “the girl with bangles”.
13.	Othniel, forefather of one of David’s captains; 1 Chron. 27:15.
14.	What wilt thou? Caleb didn’t wait for her to ask.
16.	Arad, the Eder of Josh. 15:21 (an easy error there).
	The people. Amalek? 1 Sam. 15:6.
17.	Zephath. This in accordance with Num. 21:3. Hormah means “given to divine destruction”. Cp. Josh. 19:4; 15:4 — hence Simeon here.
18.	Accepting the LXX negatives, v. 17,18 give an ABAB formation. Note Deut. 7:22; 11:24.
19.	Chariots of iron. The Iron Age was just coming in. In this Egypt would be ahead of the Canaanite nations. Later: 1 Sam. 13:19,20.
21.	Jebus means “dry”. So also does Zion.
28.	Put the Canaanites to tribute. A policy put in force once again in the time of Solomon: 1 Kgs. 4:12; 9:20-22. These surviving Canaanite settlements became running sores of moral infection: 2:12.
29.	Gezer kept its independence until taken by an Egyptian army and given to Solomon as a wedding present! 1 Kgs. 9:16.
30.	Zebulun….the Canaanites….became tributaries. With Issachar it may have been the other way round: Gen. 49:14,15. Would this explain the omission of Issachar from this chapter?
31.	Acco, probably the Crusader city Acre.
35.	Aijalon. The scene of Israel’s mightiest victory now back in enemy hands! Josh. 10:12.
	Joseph prevailed. Apparently after a while the border places which Dan was too weak to capture were taken by Ephraim.
36.	Amorites, an easy corruption of Edomites (LXX); and now the allusions to Sela (Petra) and Akrabbim fall easily into place.

Chapter 2

1.	An angel of the Lord. Similar exhortations from a prophet come in 6:8ff; 10:11ff.
	I will never break my covenant with you. But God cannot keep His covenant with a people who are set on disowning it; contrast Zech. 11:10.
2.	Cp. also Deut. 7:2,5.
3.	“You would not, therefore I will not”; cp. Rom. 1:28.
	In your sides. The italics show AV in difficulties. The slightest possible emendation (of a very common textual slip) gives “your enemies”, cp. RVm.
9.	Timnath-heres might also hint at faith in resurrection: Psa. 19:6.

An initial difficulty

The opening words of the Book of Judges present their reader with an awkward problem: “And it came to pass after the death of Joshua…” But the death and burial of that great leader are described in 2:8,9; and the opening section of the book up to that point includes hardly anything which is not to be found recorded already in the second half of the Book of Joshua. Every city whose capture is catalogued in Judges 1 is already recorded (in Joshua) as taken whilst that leader was alive. And indeed it would be hard to believe that the many incursions, by which the various tribes appropriated their inheritances, took place only after the life and rule of Joshua had come to an end — and he lived many years (40?) after the crossing of Jordan, dying at the age of 110.

One suggestion for coping with the difficulty is that through some scribal error the name of Joshua has replaced that of Moses in this opening phrase. Read: “And it came to pass after the death of Moses….” — and no problem remains, except that of evidence; for there is not a vestige of manuscript support for such a reading. However, that does not rule it out as completely impossible. The Massoretes were not as infallible as they are often made out to be.

A Remarkable Feature

There are other considerations of some interest which link this “preface” with the last five chapters of Judges. It is to be noted that:

1. 1:1-2:10 and ch. 17-21 are similar in their frequent allusions to Judah and Jerusalem, and to the twelve tribes acting together; these receive hardly any mention at all in the main part of the book.
2. these two sections have no references at all to judges ruling the people.
3. there are quite a number of key phrases in common.
4. inquiry of the Lord (by Urim and Thummim) comes in both, and not elsewhere in the book.
5. Judah has precedence in the fighting: 1:2; 20:18.

It does not seem possible to offer an explanation as to why there should be these dislocations (regarding ch. 1 and ch. 17-21). The problem exists also in other prophetic and historical books (e.g., the text of Jeremiah; the last few chapters of 2 Samuel), but no one seems to know why.

With the main concerted opposition now broken, a directive was sought from the Lord as to which tribe should make the first move to appropriate its inheritance. Here was a people still with vivid memories of the recent disaster when, following their own wisdom, they attempted an easy-going capture of Ai. The Hebrew expression for “asked the Lord” is unusual, and occurs elsewhere only in the later chapters (18:5; 20:18,23).

Judah and Simeon

The answer by Urim and Thummim (Num. 27:21) selected Judah to make the first attack. This was in harmony with Jacob’s prophecy: “Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies” (Gen. 49:8). Judah promptly sought the co-operation of Simeon. This, too, was right, for these two were sons of Leah and the inheritance of Simeon was already designated, not as a separate distinct territory, but as a number of towns dotted about within the southern part of the portion assigned to Judah (Josh. 19:1-9). This too was in accordance with Jacob’s pronouncement concerning the tribe: “I will divide them (Simeon and Levi) in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel” (Gen. 49:7). These Simeonites, although a depleted tribe, were a fierce lot. A passage at the end of 1 Chronicles 4 shows that their character and reputation lasted through the centuries.

Led by Caleb (Josh. 14:6), who although of Gentile origin was the prince of Judah, these tribal brothers went up from Gilgal and began a long series of military successes, against Canaanites (Gen. 9:25) in the lowlands, against the Perizzites living in the unwalled villages (so the name implies), and against the handful of strong cities dotted through the area.

An early outstanding victory was against Bezek, halfway between Jerusalem and the coast. The king of this place, Adoni-bezek, lorded it over the sheiks of no less than seventy villages and towns in that area. These, their subject status cruelly emphasized by the cutting off of thumbs and big toes (so that they could neither fight nor flee), gleaned their food under the feasting table of this “Lord of Lightning”. At least, that was the way he boasted about his power, but perhaps it was only a purple way of describing figuratively the strength of his tyranny. The men of Israel now chased him out of his stronghold, hunted him across the countryside, captured him, and meted out to him the identical treatment he had proudly decreed for others. Then they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died, perhaps as a result of wounds received in the fighting.

Adoni-Bezek and Christ

In itself it is a typical picture of a hard pitiless era. Yet how it takes on greater fulness of meaning when illuminated by one phrase from the lips of Jesus. He had sent out an augmented team of preachers in twos, seventy of them, and had given them not only a matchless message, but also powers to match the message. In due time they returned bubbling over with excitement at the success that had attended both their preaching and their working of miracles: “Lord, even the demons are subject unto us in thy name!” The Lord’s immediate response was: “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” What was the connection?

Adoni-bezek, the Lord of Lightning, with 70 princes in thrall, was an apt figure of human sin and ignorance holding dominion over all the nations of the world (70 of them are listed in Genesis 10; 12 wells and 70 palm trees at Rephidim; 70 bullocks offered in sacrifice at the Feast of Tabernacles). As Jesus sent out his 70 in twos, so also a typical two, Judah and Simeon, had laboured together to break the power of the tyrant. They routed him in the place of his strength, hunted him down, and he came to his end at Jerusalem! Then is it absurd to think of Jesus seeing his 70 engaged in a corresponding campaign over a more tyrannous Lord of Lightning?

Jerusalem

Jerusalem also was captured, burnt, and left desolate by the men of Judah. The appointed boundary between Judah and Benjamin passed through Jerusalem. The former did not seem greatly anxious to make the most of their capture (a strange irony, this, in view of the city’s later history!), so the Benjamites took it over, but in such inadequate strength that they could not hold it against the original Jebusites who gradually came back to their old homes. Eventually at some time during the period of the judges, they were able to expel the Israelites and re-assert complete control there until the days of David (1:8,21; 19:10-12; 2 Sam. 5:6).

Caleb’s inheritance

Next, Caleb turned towards the locality which had been designated by Moses as his inheritance (Deut. 1:36). Kirjath-Arba, which became Hebron, was inhabited by the sons of Anak, survivors of a race of giant stature. But Caleb, vigorous as ever (Josh. 14:11), and with the same strong faith and undaunted spirit which had held firmly on to God’s promises in the day of discouragement (Num. 13,14), was confident that God would prosper his enterprise. And He did.

Half-way between Hebron and Beersheba was a place called Kiriath-sepher. Evidently too pre-occupied in other directions to make this a personal target, Caleb called for volunteers against it, offering his own daughter in marriage as an added incentive. Othniel, his own nephew, responded to the challenge. At a blow he won a home and a wife. Achsah, with something of the go-getting spirit of her father, goaded Othniel to ask him to add a suitable area of cultivable land nearby. When her new husband was loth to press this further request, she did so herself, and was granted the upper and nether springs (fourteen of them, in two main groups) in the fertile hollow towards Hebron which would normally have been included in the territory of that place.

It seems very likely that the two unexpected verses about Jabez, cropping up in the middle of the Chronicles genealogies (1 Chron. 4:9,10), refer to Othniel. For the genealogy there is that of Judah, Othniel’s tribe, and Jabez calls on “the God of Israel” precisely as Caleb also does (Josh. 14:14), a thing to be expected since they were both of Gentile origin, being Kenizzites (v. 13 here). The phrase: “more honourable than his brethren”, may allude to the fact that other members of the family did not share his union with Israel; or it commemorates his fine work as saviour and judge of Israel (3:8-11). His request: “Oh that thou wouldest….enlarge my border” is matched in Judges by Othniel’s tactful incitement of his wife to ask for springs of water as an addition to her dowry — what Jabez very appropriately calls “a blessing” (1 Chron. 4:10 Jud. 1:15). And “God granted him that which he requested.” Evidently whilst Achsah was asking her father, Othniel was asking his Father.

This Kirjath-sepher (Book Town!), Othniel’s inheritance, was also known as Kiriath-sannah (Josh. 15:49), which might possibly mean Instruction Town. Its name became Debir, which is basically the Hebrew for Word. Thus all three names suggest literary pursuits. So it is not unreasonable to see here the existence of a primitive university. There is a hint of a possibility that in time it was taken over by the men of Simeon. This would perhaps account for the rabbinic tradition that it was from Simeon that the scribes of Israel originated.

Yet further south, beyond Beersheba, Hormah was devastated, and the Kenites (the Midianite tribe of smiths to which Moses’ father-in-law had belonged) moved in and appropriated the area for the Bedouin life they normally followed. Many years later they had to be warned off by Saul at the time of his campaign against the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15:6).

Stronger opposition

Success dried up when Judah turned towards the sea. Here they encountered the cities of the Philistines who, only recently, had come across the sea from Crete and settled on the coastal plain. They had chariots of iron, possibly supplied or bought from Egypt (LXX: for Rechab — Egypt — prevented them). This gave them a telling advantage in pitched battles, and the faith of the Israelites in the prospering providence of God wilted under the strain. The Judges record (1:18) reads as though the Philistine cities were captured, but the next verse and the Septuagint version encourage the belief that a “not” has somehow dropped out of the text here. In the LXX it is there six times over. In fact, not until the time of David and Solomon was Israelite supremacy asserted over that region. Thus Dan also had to go without part of his inheritance. It was this deprivation which led to the Danite migration to the north not long afterwards (see Jud. 18).

Another collaboration in conquest was between Ephraim and Manasseh — the house of Joseph. Their portions fell in the central area, side by side. First, they blockaded Bethel-Luz, a border city of Ephraim and Benjamin (Josh. 18:13,22). It may be inferred that Luz was so-called by its Hittite inhabitants, whereas Bethel was the name given by Jacob and his descendants to the sanctuary of Jehovah just on the outskirts of the city (Gen. 13:3; 28:11,19,22; 35:7,8).

From a native of the place who was captured they learned, by trading the man’s life for the secret, how best to force the defences. At Beth-haccerem archaeologists found a one-man escape hole neatly hidden away (cp. 2 Kgs. 25:4). Presumably something of this kind was made known to the men of Israel, so that they were able to take Luz from within. In accordance with Deut. 20:16,17 the populace were destroyed; but since the man had been promised his life, the condition was insisted on that he cleared out, back to the Hittite land in the far north.

This proved to be Ephraim’s only big success. Was it lack of faith, resolution or armaments which led to such modest progress? Traditional fortresses still held by the Egyptians, like Beth-sh’an, Taanach, and Megiddo, stood out comfortably against the lightly-armed Israelites.

Israel and the Canaanites

In due time the tribes grew stronger. Yet even when their power preponderated they tolerated the Canaanites among them and did not sweep the Land clean of their evil religions and practices as Moses had insisted (Deut. 20:10-18). This happened with practically all the twelve tribes, but especially so in the north. The sequence of phrases is interesting:

This rather spineless disposition to tolerate the continuation of evil pagan religions in their midst, brought on Israel a sweeping censure: “the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim”, and there he reminded the assembly of all the people of their duty to the Lord who had so faithfully fulfilled His covenant to give them the Land. Then let them fulfil their side of the covenant, or they would soon find themselves paying with bitter experience for their indifference and flagging loyalty.

A rebuking angel

Who was this “angel” of the Lord? Was it the angel of the covenant who had given guidance to Joshua (e.g., Josh. 5:13)? Was it Eleazer or Phinehas the high priest (see Mal. 2:7)? Was it some unnamed prophet (cp. Mal. 3:6)? Or was it Joshua himself, and this remonstration a condensed version of the exhortation he addressed to the elders of Israel at Shechem (Joshua 24)? In favour of this idea is the fact that Judges 1 summarises much in the second half of the Book of Joshua, and then 2:1-10 would correspond with the end of that book. There is a good deal of similarity between the final exhortations of Joshua (in ch. 23,24) and this warning in Judges, so that the latter may readily be taken as a condensed version of the former. There is also the continuation in v. 6: “And when Joshua had sent the people away….”, as though defining here who the “messenger” was (cp. Josh. 1:28).

But in that case, why “the angel of the Lord”? Surely because Joshua was deliberately echoing the warning given to Israel by Moses about the Angel of the Covenant in their midst. This is readily perceptible in Exodus 23:20,23,24,32.

Then, where was Bochim, the place of Israel’s weeping, for Bochim was an eponym added because of this special occasion?

One would naturally assume Shiloh, the place of the sanctuary of the Lord (cp. Josh. 18:1). LXX adds “Bethel”, but this would not necessarily rule out Shiloh, for it was in truth the House of God. But on other occasions not long after this Bethel was a centre of assembly, sacrifice, and repentant weeping (20:18; 21:2,4 — Shiloh being ruled out, here, as being too remote). Also, there at Bethel was the altar of Abraham and Jacob, and close by it “the oak of weeping” (Gen. 12:3,4; 28:11,22; 35:7,8).

This section concludes with a repetition of the account given in Joshua of the death and burial of the great leader, who shares with Moses, David and the Messiah the high title of “Servant of the Lord”. They buried him in his own inheritance in Timnath-serah, within sight of the location of his mighty victory on the day when the sun stood still. In Judges 2:9 the name is given as Timnath-heres (the sun!). Is this just a textual corruption, or was the name changed to remind the people of that day of outstanding triumph?

Notes

Judges 1

1.	The real beginning of Judges is in 2:8.
	Asked the Lord; cp. 20:18. From Josh. 7:16-18 and into 1,2 Samuel allusions to this means of divine guidance are fairly frequent. See “Samuel, Saul, and David”, Appendix 1.
	Go up, from Gilgal (in the early days of Joshua)? or just an idiom for assault? The order of the tribes in this ch. is roughly the same as in Josh. 15-19, but with Issachar omitted (why?).
2.	Judah first, because of Gen. 49:8?
	Delivered the land into his hand. Either (a) Judah’s success to be a token of the rest; or (b) “I have begun to deliver….”.
3.	Judah, Simeon. God often sends His men in twos: Mark 6:7; Luke 10:1; Acts 8:14.
5.	Adoni-bezek should probably be Adoni-barak, Lord of lightning. In Hebrew BZK is readily confused with BRK, as in Ezek. 1:13,14, and here especially because of the town Bezek in the same verse.
7.	So God hath requited me. Philistines also acknowledged the power of the God of Israel: 1 Sam. 4:7,8; 6:5.
8.	Set on fire; s.w. 20:48.
9.	Valley: Shephelah, the coastal plain.
10.	Canaanites. Here, Anakim: Josh. 15:13-19; 11:21, a conquest certainly in Joshua’s lifetime. Anak means “chain”, a symbol of authority? 8:26.
	Ahiman means “brother of the god of good luck”; cp. Isa. 65:11 RV. Contrast the tone of Num. 13:22,33.
12.	Achsah probably means “the girl with bangles”.
13.	Othniel, forefather of one of David’s captains; 1 Chron. 27:15.
14.	What wilt thou? Caleb didn’t wait for her to ask.
16.	Arad, the Eder of Josh. 15:21 (an easy error there).
	The people. Amalek? 1 Sam. 15:6.
17.	Zephath. This in accordance with Num. 21:3. Hormah means “given to divine destruction”. Cp. Josh. 19:4; 15:4 — hence Simeon here.
18.	Accepting the LXX negatives, v. 17,18 give an ABAB formation. Note Deut. 7:22; 11:24.
19.	Chariots of iron. The Iron Age was just coming in. In this Egypt would be ahead of the Canaanite nations. Later: 1 Sam. 13:19,20.
21.	Jebus means “dry”. So also does Zion.
28.	Put the Canaanites to tribute. A policy put in force once again in the time of Solomon: 1 Kgs. 4:12; 9:20-22. These surviving Canaanite settlements became running sores of moral infection: 2:12.
29.	Gezer kept its independence until taken by an Egyptian army and given to Solomon as a wedding present! 1 Kgs. 9:16.
30.	Zebulun….the Canaanites….became tributaries. With Issachar it may have been the other way round: Gen. 49:14,15. Would this explain the omission of Issachar from this chapter?
31.	Acco, probably the Crusader city Acre.
35.	Aijalon. The scene of Israel’s mightiest victory now back in enemy hands! Josh. 10:12.
	Joseph prevailed. Apparently after a while the border places which Dan was too weak to capture were taken by Ephraim.
36.	Amorites, an easy corruption of Edomites (LXX); and now the allusions to Sela (Petra) and Akrabbim fall easily into place.

Chapter 2

1.	An angel of the Lord. Similar exhortations from a prophet come in 6:8ff; 10:11ff.
	I will never break my covenant with you. But God cannot keep His covenant with a people who are set on disowning it; contrast Zech. 11:10.
2.	Cp. also Deut. 7:2,5.
3.	“You would not, therefore I will not”; cp. Rom. 1:28.
	In your sides. The italics show AV in difficulties. The slightest possible emendation (of a very common textual slip) gives “your enemies”, cp. RVm.
9.	Timnath-heres might also hint at faith in resurrection: Psa. 19:6.

Israel’s decline

The second preface, or should one say the true preface, to the Book of Judges (2:11—3:6), presents a clear summary of its theme. The recurring cycle — apostasy, retribution, repentance, and appeal to God, then the raising up of a judge to bring a breath-taking deliverance — is a pattern which every reader of Judges is impressed by. Here, at the outset, it is expounded in simple unambiguous fashion.

Living among the Canaanitish peoples, instead of expelling them, the people of Israel were soon infected with their evil outlook and way of life. Instead of these pagans marvelling at the religion of Israel — “What nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them?” — they were constrained instead to wonder at Israel’s amazing penchant for assimilating every other idolatry they came in contact with.

Paganism welcomed

“They served Baal and Ashtaroth.” The names are given as samples of the male and female deities Israel became prone to reverence — Baal (Lord, Master) an equivalent of Adonai, also means Husband, and thus the name served to emphasise the sexual character of the rites practised. Properly understood, the name could be used significantly of the God of Israel (e.g., Jer. 31:32). Yet the time came when this use of it was proscribed because of its evil associations (Hos. 2:16,17).

Ashtaroth is the plural (or, rather, dual) form of the name Ishtar, Venus, with reference to the appearances of that bright shining planet as both morning and evening star. The fuller title Ashtaroth-Karnaim (of the two horns) suggests that even without telescopes they knew of the crescent appearance of Venus. This name Ashtaroth is not to be confused with the Asherah (plural: Asheroth), commonly translated “the groves”. These were phallic symbols of the kind which have survived as a feature of eastern architecture. The name means The Way to Happiness. It serves to illustrate that the modern glorification of sex is only a revival in more sophisticated form of the old nature religions, which rotted the nation life of Israel. When the records say that Israel “went a-whoring after other gods”, this is more than a mere figure of speech. “Ships sink not by being in the water, but by the water getting into them,” writes Fausset trenchantly. God “of our pleasant vices makes instruments to scourge us.”

No wonder, then, the “the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel.” So he let loose upon them the cathartic influence of oppression from their enemies. For many centuries all the nations of that region would regard Israel as an upstart people who, coming in from nowhere, had ruthlessly thrust themselves into Canaan. Therefore they were considered fair game by any of an aggressive disposition. “The Lord delivered them into the hands of spoilers that spoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies round about.” They suffered not only from seasonal marauders such as the Bedouin Arabs coming in from the desert, but also from longer-lasting oppressions inflicted by more powerful neighbours.

God’s discipline

All this was precisely in accordance with the curse Moses had pronounced beforehand, should Israel prove disloyal to their God: “Ye shall have no power to stand before your enemies.” Psalm 106:34-46 is a long and eloquent commentary on this phase of Israel’s history. Its climactic allusions to the Covenant Name of God (verses 45-48) teach a simple lesson which Israel was astonishingly slow to learn.

Yet, such was the long-suffering and compassion of the Lord, He could not leave the people entirely to their own devices, but sought to save them from both spiritual and political disaster by raising up judges to deliver and to reform them: “For it repented the Lord, because of their groanings, by reason of them that oppressed them and vexed them.”

These judges, whose exploits are set out in greater or less detail in the Book of Judges, differed from the kings who followed them in that they could not command the loyalty of the people, they could only appeal for it. And whereas every king who reigned in Jerusalem had the blood of David in his veins, the office of judge never passed from father to son.

A sequence of judges

There are only five judges about whom much detail is given: Ehud (of the tribe of Benjamin), Barak (Naphtali), Gideon (Manasseh), Jephthah (Gilead, that is, eastern Manasseh), and Samson (Dan). Seven “minor” judges make up the twelve: Othniel (Judah), Shamgar (Dan?), Tola (Issachar), Jair (Gilead), Ibzan (Judah), Elon (Zebulun), Abdon (Ephraim). There is also one usurper: Abimelech. In these twelve true men of God, and the one false leader, some see a certain typical significance.

The record calls them “saviours” — this Hebrew word meaning “deliverer” comes no less than 19 times, in noun and verb form. The judge, reinforced by the prestige which accrued from his exploits, was usually able to keep the people loyal to the God who raised him up. But when he was dead there seemed to be no one else, not even a high priest, with the authority, zeal and personality to stave off another wave of apostasy. Thus the cycle started all over again. If ever history repeated itself it did so in the days of the judges. The pendulum never ceased to swing. Only, some oscillations were more violent than others.

Jehovah’s changed attitude

One consequence of this unfaithful spirit was a dramatic change concerning the conquest of the Land. In the days of Moses and Joshua there had been repeated, very emphatic promises of a complete and speedy overwhelming of all opposition: “The Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed” (Deut. 7:23; and 9:3; 31:3). But now, through some prophet or priest, came a minatory revocation: “I will not henceforth drive out any from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died” (2:21). Old Testament history is dotted with numerous instances of this “change of mind” by the Almighty. They pose a much-neglected problem.

These residual peoples would have presented few difficulties if only Israel had been faithful to their God, for then their wholesome way of life and the ensuing abundance of divine blessing would have brought inevitable conversion of the remaining pagans to the faith of Israel.

Canaanite opponents

Instead, with some there were long-continuing hostilities. Until the time of David, Philistine militarism hung as a dark cloud over the security of the southern tribes. The king of Hamath was often a threat in the north. The people of Tyre and Zidon were never displaced. And even the Hivites and others who were in some degree subjugated had the satisfaction of conquering Israel with their crude idolatries. Left to “prove” Israel (3:1), they proved over and over again what a wayward, feckless, disloyal people Israel was. “Children in whom is no faith.”

Notes

Chapter 2

13.	Forsook the Lord. The root cause: a neglect of Deut. 4:9.
14.	The anger of the Lord. Psa. 106:34-39 is followed by v. 40-42. Cp. v. 20 here and also 3:8.
15.	Against them for evil, as the Lord had said. Lev. 26:37, and contrast Josh. 1:9.
18.	It repented the Lord. The words mean this. It will not do to read “the Lord pitied them”
20.	This people. A phrase common in O.T. as a term of contempt and reprobation; e.g., Exod. 32:9. More so here because the usual ‘amim is replaced by goi, as though Israel had become Gentile.
21.	I will not henceforth drive out any. Contrast Deut. 31:3; 7:23; 9:3; Josh. 23:16.

Chapter 3

1,2.	A double reason: to prove Israel and to teach them war. In what sense the latter? — to afflict them by the horrors of war, or to make them warlike?
3.	Lords. The Hebrew has the correct technical term here, and always, with reference to the rulers of the five Philistine cities. Strictly it means ‘axles’, as in 1 Kgs. 7:30, with reference to their chariots. Everywhere else the sense is as here.
5.	Why no Girgashites? Josh. 3:10. Because the east side of Galilee (Matt. 8:28) was not settled as yet?
6.	A flagrant infringement of Deut. 7:3. Verses 6-8 present seven steps in a downward progression.

The Book of Judges tells the story of seven separate oppressions and of seven deliverers (3:8,12; 4:1; 6:1; 8:33; 10:6,13; 13:1). There are also seven instances of dramatic help by weak or unimpressive instruments — a man’s left hand (3:21), an ox-goad (?) (3:31), a woman (4:4), a tent-peg (4:21), pitcher and trumpet (7:20), a piece of millstone (9:53), the jaw-bone of an ass (15:16). Apart from anything else, there is a lesson in such a list: “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2:4).

Cushan and Aram-naharaim (Edom?)

The first period of tribulation was provoked, as in all the later instances, by Israel’s declension. Forgetting the God of their fathers and His mighty works on their behalf, they vied with their Canaanitish neighbours in the worship of Baalim — not just one Baal, but every variation on this evil theme which a sex-obsessed imagination could frame. So the wrath of the Lord clothed itself with the tyranny of “Cushan-rishathaim, king of Mesopotamia”, and Israel became slaves to “a slave of slaves” (Gen. 9:25).

There is a considerable problem here, for Aram-naharaim (Mesopotamia) is the remote north-easterly part of Syria, and there is little evidence of any possible political interference from there with southern Palestine at this period. Naharaim means “the two rivers”, so if these, instead of being equated with Euphrates and Tigris, are taken to be Abana and Pharpar, the region round Damascus (southern Syria) becomes more likely. But the only other occurrence of the name Cushan suggests a different identification: “I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction: the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble” (Hab. 3:7). This is almost certainly a parallelism, for a glance at Genesis 25:2 shows a fondness for -an as a name-ending in the Midianite families. In line with this, Aram could be read as Edom (the two names are very easily confused in Hebrew script.) Edomite and Midianite territory overlapped. But then the problem of the two rivers remains unsolved. Even so, the fact that Othniel in southern Judah (Jud. 1:12,13) became the deliverer points to this as the most likely solution.

Cushan’s cognomen: “Rishathaim” means “double villainy” and is almost certainly a nickname assigned by the Israelites who suffered under him. Perhaps his oppression was “doubly wicked” because it came from Midian, the tribe which provided Moses with his wife.

Othniel

How the deliverance was wrought by Othniel, Caleb’s nephew, is not told. The help was given, as on each succeeding occasion, only when “the children of Israel cried unto the Lord.” Thereupon, the Spirit of the Lord came on Othniel, as in due course on other saviours (6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6,19; 1 Sam. 11:6; 16:13; Matt. 3:16; John 3:34), imparting courage and military prowess for the task before him. The faith and intrepid spirit which had earlier brought him success at Kiriath-sepher (1:12,13) now overthrew Cushan. More than that, it turned the tables, giving the men of Judah the upper hand with those who had just now been their oppressors. This is the meaning of the phrase: “his hand prevailed against Cushan” (see 1:35; 6:2).

Thereafter the land was blessed with God-given peace for forty years. But again declension and apostasy set it, and again there came retribution from the Covenant God of Israel (1 Sam. 12:9), this time through the instrumentality of the Moabites, who were the more difficult to resist because helped by their kinsfolk, the Ammonites, and by some of the wandering families of Amalek from the desert.

Eglon, king of Moab

Reuben, the immediate neighbour of Moab, was overrun. Jordan was crossed, and all the desirable fertile territory round Jericho appropriated. At this time the evil events leading up to the decimation of the tribe of Benjamin, described in Judges 20,21 as taking place in the time of Phinehas the high priest, had already happened. So the invasion and domination of that corner of the country, Benjamite territory, was the more easy. Benjamin simply did not have the man-power to make effective resistance.

The capture of the city of Jericho was specially easy, for since Israel’s crossing of Jordan there was no city, only palm-trees (Josh. 6:16,26). It was also relatively easy for king Eglon to get the place rebuilt, for materials and slave labour were ready to hand; and what did he care that there was supposed to be a curse on the place? Thus, even at the cost, most mysteriously, of the lives of his sons, Jericho became the capital of his Benjamite colony.

Again, when the people recognised the evil of their ways and pleaded with God for aid, He promptly gave it. As with the Prodigal even the element of self-pity in this repentance did not hinder God’s ready response. Such is His grace.

Ehud

Appropriately enough, this deliverance was wrought by the hand of a man of Benjamin. Ehud belonged to a family which, according to the somewhat obscure and dislocated details of 1 Chronicles 8:1-9RV, had special connections with Moab either in the time of Eglon’s oppression or when the pendulum had swung through Ehud’s deliverance (v. 30).

Since Eglon, the fat tyrant of Moab, was overlord of this part of the tribes of Israel for eighteen years, it may safely be surmised that the sending of “a present”, that is, the paying of tribute, was a regular thing. If Ehud got himself included in the deputation several times, this would enable him to become familiar with the details of the Moabite court. Then he made his plans.

Good weapons were not readily come by in those days among the people of Israel (Jud. 5:8; 1 Sam. 13:19,22), but Ehud got him a dagger short enough to be strapped at his side without it being noticeable under his garment. And since he was left-handed, after the manner of so many of the warriors of Benjamin (Jud. 20:16; 1 Chron. 12:2), he was able to carry it on his right thigh, all unsuspected by those deputed to frisk these Hebrew subjects before allowing them access to the king.

The deputation, with Ehud in it, duly presented the tribute before the king. This must have been at Beth-Jeshimoth or some other Moabite centre on the east of Jordan. The geographical details (v. 19 especially) do not allow of this taking place at Jericho. The men of Benjamin then returned — under escort, of course — across the Jordan until they came to Gilgal, just west of Jericho.

Ehud’s stratagem

The AV reading: “the quarries that were by Gilgal”, is inaccurate. A very attractive alternative, that these were the standing stones set up by Joshua at the crossing of Jordan (Josh. 4:8) must also be disallowed in face of the undeniable fact that the normal meaning is “graven images” (Deut. 7:25; Isa. 21:9; Jer. 8:19). Since this was still Moabite-controlled territory, these images were probably there by direction of Eglon. They represented his religion planted in the conquered country.

It seems very likely, then, that before these images Ehud bade his fellow-Benjamites go on without him. He wanted to be left with complete freedom of action. Then he pretended to go into a trance and to receive a revelation from the deity located there. The king’s guards, impressed by the sight, would the more readily conduct him back to the royal presence. His message was taken in to Eglon: “I have a hidden word for thee, O king.” Was there a sardonic ambiguity about this? “I have something hidden for thee, O king” — the dagger!

The king’s response: “Keep silence”, may have been an instruction to his courtiers, or could have been addressed to Ehud (so LXX), bidding him not say a word until they were alone.

There, in the cool upper chamber Ehud portentously declared: “I have a message from God unto thee.” The story told by Eglon’s men had already prepared the king’s mind for this, and he stood as in the presence of an oracle. Forthwith Ehud, making as though to withdraw a scroll from inside his garment, instead delivered a different kind of message — a violent thrust into the fat body of Eglon who was too heavy and slow to be able to evade the keen-edged blade.

Ehud made no attempt to retrieve his weapon, but left it there, buried up to the hilt. Instead, he kept a fierce grip on the king’s wind-pipe lest any sound of his last agonies be heart outside. Then he went out, very coolly using the key which locked them in, to lock the door from the outside. He passed through the guards on duty, probably telling them that the king did not wish to be disturbed, and so go away.

Josephus tells the story rather quaintly thus: “The guards were not strictly on their watch, both because of the heat and because they were gone to dinner.”

In fact, the king’s ministers awaited the signal for their return to the royal presence, but it never came. Time passed, and they became more and more anxious: “they tarried till they were ashamed” — the Hebrew word means: “they were in travail”. When at last they made entry into the summer parlour, they were too excited and disorganized (LXX: making a tumult) to organize immediate pursuit. So Ehud, moving briskly, was well out of danger: “he crossed (the border into Benjamin) at the graven images, and escaped into Seirath.” There is no place known with this name, so that the student is left speculating whether perhaps there is here a corruption of the phrase: “safe to his own city”.

The outcome

Without any delay he set about rallying men of Israel for an immediate revolt against the Moabites. His own tribe were far too few at this time to furnish adequate numbers (20:43-48), so he addressed his appeal to nearby Ephraim. With their help all the fords of Jordan were secured. Thus Moabite retreat was cut off. So also were reinforcements from the east bank. Thereafter, even though there were many stalwart Moabites still in the territory of Israel it was only a matter of time before they were all dealt with, so that the Moabites themselves now became subjugated.

Ehud and Paul — men of action

Thus through Ehud there came a long peace of eighty years. Those with an eye to the remarkable ways in which Old Testament history has been shaped by divine providence to foreshadow greater things in His Purpose may like to consider the remarkable parallel between the exploit of Ehud and the apostle Paul’s deliverance of the early church from the burden of the Law of Moses. Some of the details are very impressive. Here are suggestions:

Paul, a man of Benjamin, a man of God’s right hand, but from the standpoint of the Judaists very much a left-handed man, is one in whom “I will be glorified” (the meaning of Ehud).

Just as the Moabites were not true children (Gen. 19:37), neither were these Jewish teachers who nevertheless took such pride in their connection with Moses; verse 17 LXX has the word which describes Moses in Acts 7:20 (cp. also Deut. 32:15); and the word for “offer” (v. 18) normally means “to offer in sacrifice”. To those who were the true children they were powerful and oppressive as a bull-calf (= Eglon).

Ehud’s association with those paying tribute can be readily compared with Paul’s policy: “To them under the Law, (I am) as under the Law” (1 Cor. 9:20). The apostle brought a new revelation of divine truth, which came to him especially from the revered O.T. (cp. the graven images). Courageously he struck the blow which meant the end of Judaist domination, and escaped their vengeance and their tumult (v. 20 LXX = Acts 21:34), to organize in active fellowship those who were now glad to be rid of the burden which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear.

The tables were turned completely, and those who had exercised spiritual power and authority shrank into a status of inferiority.

Shamgar

Judges 3 adds brief mention of Shamgar-ben-Anath, who delivered Israel from a Philistine oppression, slaying six hundred men with an ox-goad. There is mention in contemporary Egyptian inscriptions of a Shamgar who is described as being a Syrian sea-captain who married a daughter of Rameses II. Since his name means “Name of a stranger”, it may be that, like Caleb, he was a proselyte to the faith of Israel. It has been surmised that “Ox-Goad” was the name of his ship (with reference to its sharp prow?). If so, there is here perhaps the very first use in history of the mobility which sea-power can give to make a small attacking force extremely effective. If Shamgar put landing parties on shore to make lightning attacks on Philistine cities, he would be able to do much to ease Philistine pressure on Dan and Judah. One is left wishing for more details.

It would seem, from the reference in the Song of Deborah (5:6) that Shamgar’s deliverance fell in the period of Deborah and Barak, but in a different part of the country.

Notes

Judges 3

11.	Rest forty years. It is difficult to be sure whether this includes the period of the oppression: cp. 3:30; 5:31; 8:28.
12.	In the sight of the Lord. A possible implication of perversion of true worship.
13.	Ammonites. Possibly the name Chephar-Ha’ammoni (Josh. 18:24) may indicate an Ammonite garrison, west of Jordan, during the period of this oppression.
	Possessed. Remarkably, LXX has “inherited”. Was this the old political game of fabricating a long-standing claim to possession, based maybe on Lot having been at Bethel with Abraham? (Gen. 13:1,2).
14.	Eighteen years. Luke 13:16 mentions another oppression of 18 years. But what connections, if any?
15.	The Lord raised him up. Contrast v. 12.
17.	Fat. Psa. 17:10,14??
	Eglon means “bull calf”, possibly with reference to the familiar idea of ‘cherubim’; in other words, a claim to be divine?
19.	Keep silence. Could this Hebrew (Moabite) word be the origin of our “Hush!”?
21.	Cp. the death of Amasa: 2 Sam. 20:9,10; and of Abner: 3:27.
29.	All lusty; s.w. as in v. 17.
30.	LXX adds: and Ehud judged them till he died.

“And the children of Israel again did evil in the sight of the Lord, when Ehud was dead. 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” (Jud. 4:1,2).

Canaanite oppression

This familiar apostasy of Israel soon brought upon itself due retribution, appropriately enough, from an enemy who had been defeated earlier. Joshua 11 recounts the destruction at the waters of Merom of a Canaanitish confederacy headed by a Jabin, king of Hazor. Modernists speculate that this narrative in Judges is a more detailed account of the same victory, but apart from the mention of Jabin there is no similarity at all.

One generation saw the power of Germany twice rise from the ashes within a few years. So there is no need to marvel that the city destroyed by Joshua (11:11) should become strong enough once again within two or three generations to turn the tables on these Israelitish invaders. Doubtless this oppression by Jabin and Sisera had a strong element of revenge about it.

The coincidence of names presents little difficulty. Jabin means “The Intelligent”, and may be taken to be a dynastic title comparable with Pharaoh, Abimelech, Hiram, and Benhadad.

Again, it has seemed incredible to some that Jabin should be king of the whole of Canaan, but evidently (as in Joshua 11) he was the leader of a confederacy of Canaanitish tribes. This is suggested in Deborah’s Song: “The kings came and fought, then fought the kings of Canaan in Taanach.”

Sisera — the name is said to be Hittite in form — was evidently a leading administrative official in this oppression, comparable to Sennacherib’s Rabshakeh in later days.

This oppression was of cruel intensity, backed by considerable military force, for Sisera “had 900 chariots of iron”. The oppression seems to have taken two forms. Firstly, the organisation of slave labour on a large scale in “Harosheth of the Gentiles” — the name means ‘workmanship’ (s.w. Exod. 31:5), and the place is situated in the middle of what was a great timber district. Apparently, too, press gangs operated, for “in the days of Jael, the highways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways.”

Deliverance by women — why?

But more serious still are the indications that the brunt of this oppression fell upon the women. Only here in all the Old Testament is deliverance wrought by the hand of women — Deborah, “a mother in Israel” (5:7); and Jael, in her own tent. Other details are significant: “Blessed of women shall the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be by women in the tent” (5:24RVm); and the words of Sisera’s mother as she speculates on the reason for the long delay in the return of her son from the battle: “Have they not sped? have they not divided the prey? to every man a damsel or two” (5:30). Most significantly, the word “damsel” here is literally “womb”!

The resolution and venom with which Jael destroyed Sisera would thus be readily accounted for; but there is more to it, even, than that, as will be seen by and by.

Appropriately, then God raised up Deborah of the tribe of Ephraim — or maybe, Issachar (4:5; 5:15). For a time she exercised authority over the people in the remote hill-country of Ephraim where the domination of those chariots of iron was not so readily imposed.

Then began the patient organisation of all save the southernmost tribes, for a concerted rebellion that would free them all, both the men and the women from this grievous yoke of bondage.

Barak

The first step was to call Barak of Kedesh-naphtali to rally the tribes of the north whilst Deborah worked through other willing agents in the central region.

Barak’s reaction on being thus commissioned throws an interesting light on his character: “If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go” (4:8).

Here is good and sufficient reason for Barak’s inclusion in the list of heroes in Hebrews 11 who wrought “by faith”. By these, his only recorded words (in 5:1 the verb is feminine singular; so the song was Deborah’s in the first instance), he demonstrates his possession of the first of all necessary characteristics of the child of God — utter lack of confidence in himself, but implicit confidence in the leader appointed by God, however ill-judged such a leader might be by the world.

Perhaps if his faith had been stronger he would have led the rebellion without the help of Deborah, secure in the knowledge that since the inspired prophetess had blessed his mission it was bound to prosper.

This would explain the form of Deborah’s reply: “And she said, 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.”

God’s weaponry

The prophecy is, of course, of Jael’s grim deed, and not of Deborah’s part in the promised deliverance. Shamgar’s ox-goad, and Gideon’s three hundred, and Samson’s jawbone, and David’s pebble, and Paul, the Lord’s earthen vessel (2 Cor. 4:7) whose bodily presence (they said) was weak and speech contemptible — all these were to be matched by an unlooked-for act of emancipation through a poor weak woman threatened with something worse than death.

And Barak was content. He did not seek his own glory.

Careless reading of the narrative is apt to give the impression that this uprising was conceived and executed in a day or two. Yet attention to the details of Deborah’s song, difficult though they may be, reveals a picture of patient organisation of an underground resistance movement, the perfecting of which must have been the work of months. How was it accomplished?

First, “they chose new gods”, i.e., new leaders (e.g., Exod. 21:6; 22:8; 23:20,21; 1 Sam. 2:25; Psa. 82:1,66; John 10:34; etc.). “My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people” (5:8,9). Quietly and patiently the minds of the people were prepared for the day of action: “Tell of it, ye that ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgement, and walk by the way.”

A review of military resources showed a complete lack of the sinews of war: “Was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel?” The men of Sisera had seen to that! Only the traditional weapons of primitive peoples were left to them. Nevertheless, patiently and surreptitiously the will of the people was prepared for the day when a blow must be struck for freedom. Small groups of people would gather for earnest talk by the wells and in the market-places and at the gates of the towns. There would be constant quiet but impassioned emphasis on the deliverance wrought by God through Ehud the bold, and on themarvels achieved under the leadership of Joshua. Were those glorious days gone for ever? “Because of the voice of the archers in the place of the drawing of water, there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the Lord, even the righteous acts of his rule in Israel.”

Then came D-day. The call went out for concerted action: “Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Ahinoam. The people of the Lord came down for me against the mighty” (5:12,13, using RV and RVm).

Mustering of the tribes

A geographical detail calls for examination here. “Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh” (4:10). If this is the Kedesh usually marked on the maps as Kedesh-naphtali, several difficulties arise. For it means that Barak chose as his rallying place a spot only four miles from Jabin’s capital and quite 40 miles from Mt. Tabor, the centre appointed him by Deborah. The attempt to organise thousands of fighting men so close to the enemy and so far from the centre of action would have been both impossible, and sheer idiocy, if it had been possible.

To all this there is a simple solution. The name Kedesh (= holy place) is one of the commonest in Palestine. At least four others of the same name are known, one of these also being in Naphtali, as the narrative requires (4:6). It is situated on high ground immediately to the southwest of the sea of Galilee, and thus answers also far more appropriately to the name “Kedesh in Galilee in mount Naphtali” (Josh. 20:7) than the other which is fully 20 miles from Galilee. The identification is due to Conder who in his day probably knew the topography of ancient Palestine in greater detail than any of modern times. The maps are almost all of them wrong in making Kedesh-naphtali away to the north; and thereby many a student has been misled. Yet the only reason for the more commonly accepted identification is a heap of ruins in a valley, with the Arabic name Kades. On the other hand, the site proposed by Conder is within a few miles of Mount Tabor and would be eminently suitable as a rendezvous for the northern tribes.

Whilst Barak was mustering his men at a point on the northern edge of the plain of Jezreel, Deborah’s other associates were similarly gathering the central tribes to a point near Megiddo (5:19) on the southern edge of the plain. Evidently the plan was to attempt a pincer movement on the armoured forces of Sisera in the level country (5:19).

The response to the appeals for combined action varied enormously. Ephraim, Zebulun, Naphtali and Issachar were wholehearted in their support. Benjamin, too, influenced doubtless by the inspired and inspiring presence of Deborah on the very borders of his territory, also rallied to the cause.

But what of the others? “Asher sat still at the haven of the sea, and abode by his creeks”, cut off from the rest by the strongholds of the enemy.

Reuben hesitated, and did nothing: “By the watercourses of Reuben there were great resolves of heart. Why satest thou among the sheepfolds?…to hear the pipings for the flocks? By the watercourses of Reuben there were great searchings of heart.” There was probably good reason for this hesitance too. For on Reuben’s borders were Moab and Ammon, rapacious, relentless foes, ever eager for cattle-rustling and raiding of villages. How could Reuben leave his territory wide open to the enemy! It was faith that was lacking. “He that observeth the wind shall not sow; and he that regardeth the clouds shall not reap.”

Ephraim had equal cause for doubt, for in their very midst were ancient implacable Amorite foes. Nevertheless, “out of Ephraim came down they whose root is in Amalek” (cp. 12:15). The Ephraimites mustered manfully for the only occasion in all the nation’s history in which they appear in a good light.

“Gilead abode beyond Jordan.” The Manassites there would surely come to the aid of their fellow-tribesmen. But no! The deep cleft of Jordan made the distance seem great, and so whilst there was doubtless much sympathy, there was no practical help.

“And Dan, why did he remain in ships?” There was little excuse here, surely, for the coastal plain gave Dan easy access to the centre of operations. Yet maybe the growing strength of the Philistines coming in from Crete was sufficient deterrent to the furnishing of active support. Once again it was faith that was lacking. “He that is not for us is against us.”

However, in spite of these discouragements through internal weakness, the faithful tribes mustered — ten thousand with Barak and Deborah, moving south to Tabor, and thirty thousand near Megiddo, led by “the princes of Issachar”.

Heber — friend or secret agent?

But there is another figure, separate and distinct from all the rest, near that excited gathering in Kedesh. The Kenites from the time of Moses had been in close alliance with Israel. They were a race of wanderers, rarely settling anywhere for long. Very probably they were the tool and weapon makers of their time, for the name Kenite means “smith”, and is to be linked with Tubal-cain (Gen. 4:22,24) the first Krupp.

Heber the Kenite had travelled far afield beyond the terrain usually frequented by his tribe, either because of or with a view to alliance with Jabin and his henchmen. The narrative is emphatic that not only was their peace between Jabin and Heber (4:17), but also an intimate friendship existed with Sisera. The details of Sisera’s flight require such a conclusion, for “Sisera fled away…to the tent of Jael”, as though he sought sanctuary there of set purpose and not be accident. Further, Jael recognised him immediately and spoke as one not unknown by him. “Turn in, my lord, turn in to me”, and this he was glad to do without hesitation.

The strange rapprochement between this Kenite and Israel’s hated oppressor calls for explanation. It may be that he was being employed by Sisera in the manufacture of weapons and of armour for his chariots. But the juxtaposition of two verses suggests something further. Immediately after the mention of Heber come the words: “And they told Sisera that Barak the son of Abinoam was gone up to mount Tabor.” It seems to hint that the news of Barak’s uprising came to Sisera from Heber. In other words, Heber may have been acting as spy and fifth columnist for Sisera whilst outwardly maintaining the traditional friendship with Israel.

Theophany

So the battle was joined. As Sisera’s army with its hundreds of chariots came along the plain of Jezreel, Deborah gave the word for advance against them. Barak’s reason for requiring Deborah to accompany him was this: “For I know not the day in which the Lord prospers the angel with me” (LXX). The words of Deborah seem to make reference to this: “Up, for this is the day in which the Lord hath delivered Sisera into thine hand: is not the Lord gone out before thee?” This last phrase might mean “Do not I know that the Lord has gone out before thee?” but far more likely it signifies: “Canst thou not see that the Lord has gone out before thee?”, as though appealing to some visible sign that there was no mistaking.

What the sign was can be inferred from the details in Deborah’s song. “Lord, when thou wentest out of Seir, when thou marchest out of the field of Edom, and the heavens dropped, the clouds also dropped water” (5:4); i.e., the crossing of Jordan had been marked by earthquake and storm. The presence of the Lord, then, had been signified by these phenomena of nature. There could be little point in alluding to the fact, except to draw attention to similar happenings during Barak’s triumph. Such theophany through storm and tempest is not infrequent in Scripture. It was the same at the Red Sea (Exod. 15:8,10 and Psa. 77:15-20, especially v. 18) and in the conquest of Canaan (Deut. 9:3); it was the same more than once in David’s experience (2 Sam. 5:20; Psa. 18:6-15); it was the same also when the angel of the Lord went forth and smote Sennacherib’s army (Isa. 30:30-33); and it will be the same yet again when the Lord for the last time brings deliverance to Zion (Zech. 14:3; Psa. 83:13-15; Matt. 24:30).

Consequently Deborah’s words would, in effect, mean this: ‘See the black storm clouds gathering over the plain. Now is your opportunity. Here is a clear sign that the angel of the Lord is delivering the enemy into your hand.’ “They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera” (5:20).

The battle

Thus there came about a mighty victory in the plain of Megiddo, which has not been without its parallels in later history, the most recent being when, in 1917, General Allenby gained a great victory over the Turks in somewhat similar circumstances.

The storm apparently turned the whole plain into a morass, so that the fear-inspired chariots of iron became only a military liability. Hopelessly bogged down, they became worse than useless against the determined, lightly-armed footmen under Barak. “Then did the horse hoofs stamp by reason of the pransings, the pransings of their strong ones.” The words call up a vivid picture of horses plunging and struggling, of drivers using the whip furiously as they cursed in their impotence.

Yet it should not be assumed that it was merely the good fortune of the natural circumstances which brought Barak victory. That this storm came by Divine Providence cannot be doubted. But in addition to that, there is the plain statement: “The Lord discomfited Sisera, and all his chariots, and all his host, with the edge of the sword before Barak.” Sisera had a considerable army besides his chariots, and without the angel of the Lord Israel could still have been overcome.

The Canaanitish forces were caught between the two armies of Israelites “in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo”. Completely routed there, the mass of fugitives fled in hopeless disorder back towards their headquarters at Harosheth. In all other directions were hostile Israelites. Near Harosheth is the main ford of the river Kishon at a point where it passes through a gap between the northern hills and the mount Carmel massif. The crossing of this ford — normally a trivial matter — was made formidable almost to the point of impossibility by the swollen state of the Kishon, now a roaring torrent after the storm. “The river Kishon swept them away.”

The flight of Sisera

Meantime Sisera had become cut off from the main body of his forces. Abandoning his useless chariot stuck in the mud, he took to his heels and fled for safety to the high ground to the south.

To imagine Sisera as fleeing on foot to the tents of Heber pitched at Kadesh near Galilee is to introduce an interpretation in the last degree improbable. Would a man fleeing for sanctuary from his enemies in battle decide on a place twenty or more miles away, and in a direction that would take him right into the arms of one of the enemy contingents?

It is far more likely that when Barak’s army mustered and moved south, Heber also struck his tents and moved in the same direction. If he were not only Sisera’s friend but also his spy, this would be the obvious thing to do. So there is nothing intrinsically improbable about Heber’s tents being now pitched only a mile or two from the scene of battle.

Sisera’s flight took him through or hard by a hamlet called Meroz, the inhabitants of which recognised him as one of the foe but who through fear or indifference did nothing to impede or capture him. “Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty” (5:23).

That curse was no histrionic gesture but a terribly grim reality, for Meroz is now unidentifiable. Nor is there other mention of it in Scripture. It has been blotted out of the Book of Life.

By contrast, “blessed of women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be.” Sisera drew near, caked with sweat and mud, aching and weary from fight and flight. Heber was away from his encampment, probably watching the battle. But Jael recognised Sisera as a one-time honoured guest and hence as one to whom help and hospitality were now due. “Turn in, my lord, turn in to me; fear not.” There was no hypocrisy in the invitation. And Sisera gladly accepted.

Jael in danger

He threw himself down on the floor of the tent and rested. By and by Jael covered him with a rug, and would have gone. But the woman in her loneliness and comeliness attracted him and he made excuse to detain her. “He asked for water, and she gave him milk; she brought forth butter in a lordly dish.”

Again she covered him with the rug, but still he detained her with another excuse: “Stand in the door of the tent, and it shall be, when any man doth come and inquire of thee, and say, Is there any man here? that thou shalt say, No” (4:20).

But this was only the beginning of the attention. Very soon Jael realised the precarious nature of her plight, undefended in the presence of this villain. All at once it was evident that he was set on taking advantage of her loneliness. So, frantically wrenching herself free from his clutches, she snatched up a hammer — one of her husband’s tools — and swung it wildly as he came at her. The blow went home and he tottered drunkenly, then crumpled up and lay still. “At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay down: at her feet he bowed, he fell: where he bowed, there he fell down dead” (5:27).

Those acquainted with Bible idiom will observe the literal translation in the margin: ‘between her feet’, and will recall the significance that this has in other places. The savage resentment and apparently barbarous ferocity behind Jael’s next action are thus more readily understood. Sisera was only stunned. At any moment he might come round. In frenzy and panic she took an iron tent-peg, and drove it with desperate force through his temple (see Notes on this). So distraught was she, that long after his brain was pierced she went on hammering, hammering, and only came to herself when the tent-peg was driven well into the hard ground beneath. “So he died!”

Recovering somewhat her composure Jael was about the leave the tent when she heard approaching footsteps. She recognised Barak at a glance. “Come, and I will show thee the man whom thou seekest.”

Thus the Lord “sold Sisera into the hand of a woman”.

Differences in the record

It is an exciting story whichever way it is read. The foregoing reconstruction of the death of Sisera calls for further comment. Its justification is the double narrative of Judges 4 and 5. Chapter 4 sets out only a very brief factual account of that momentous day. Deborah’s song in ch. 5 covers the same ground in poetic form, giving in more detail certain aspects of the struggle for freedom.

The two accounts of the death of Sisera are not easily harmonised.

The view commonly held and based entirely on the narrative of ch. 4 (AV) is that Jael first lulled Sisera into a heavy sleep by means of the draught of buttermilk (is buttermilk really narcotic?); then she approached on tiptoe and drove the tent-peg through his head as he lay on the ground.

There are difficulties galore about this view of the story. In the first place what man (not to say, what woman) could achieve the degree of success with hammer and tent-peg which Jael had? For the first, all-important blow would have to be delivered with the nail held in mid-air and not resting firmly and securely on the place it was to enter.

Then, too, what is to be done with such details in ch. 5 as these?” “At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay: at her feet he bowed, he fell”; and “with the hammer she smote Sisera”, as well as the details mentioned earlier which led generations of Jewish scholars to infer that Jael was provoked to this violence by the violence that was attempted against her.

This Jewish interpretation, confidently accepted here, is certainly far more in keeping with woman’s nature than the alternative which represents Jael as cold-bloodedly inviting Sisera into her tent with the express intention of hammering a nail through his temples.

Many of those who have sought to maintain the usual interpretation have been driven by this difficulty into supposing that Jael’s blood-curdling deed was the direct result of divine inspiration and direction. But this is pure invention. The narrative shows no sign whatever of this.

On the other hand, if the RV of 4:21 be accepted, there is nothing which conflicts with the reconstruction just offered: “She went softly unto him, and smote the pin into his temples, and it pierced through into the ground; for he was in a deep sleep; so he swooned and died.” If the “deep sleep” be taken to be the unconsciousness after the first blow from the hammer (cp. “so he swooned”), the accounts are harmonised.

The only alternatives are either to agree that the two chapters are inconsistent (which God forbid), or to write off the song of Deborah as being so poetic that it has no sense in it.

Notes

1.	When Ehud was dead. It is a tribute to his character that declension came in again only after his death: 2:18,19.
2.	Sold them, as though they were unprofitable servants.
	Sisera, Marosheth. It is distinctly remarkable, and mysterious, that these names come together in Ezra 2:52,53.
3.	Nine hundred chariots. This seems to be a very big number, but in an inscription about a victory at Megiddo (B.C. 1468) over an Asiatic coalition, Thothmes III claims to have taken 924 chariots as part of the plunder.
4.	Deborah….prophetess: This name means: ‘the woman of the Word’. The mistaken meaning “bee” derives from the idea of an insect which talks as it goes.
7.	I will draw unto thee; i.e., the Lord (v. 6) would do this.
10.	Ten thousand in the northern army, and 30,000 in the southern army; 5:8.
17.	To the tent. So he knew where it was, although lately moved from Zaanaim (v. 11).
19.	Milk. Was the Rechabite tradition already established among the Kenites?
21.	Tent-pin (RV), of iron, says Josephus. His correct inference, no doubt, from Heber being a Kenite smith.
	Softly. The Hebrew text has an asterisk against the word, implying that there is something strange about it. A change of one letter (which does not alter the pronunciation) turns it into: “on fire” or “in a frenzy”.
	For he was fast asleep and weary. This is a translation dictated by the translator’s mental concept of what actually happened. Instead: he was cast into a deep sleep (s.w. Dan. 8:18; 10:9; Psa. 76:6), and he fainted (s.w. 8:15; Isa. 40:28-31; LXX: was darkened, i.e., knocked unconscious), and he died. This reading now fits all the other details.
22.	Lay dead. Literally: fallen, dead; LXX: cast down (i.e., not lying down when he was first smitten).

What is Really Important

In Psalm 19, David says:

“May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, O Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer” (v 14, NIV).

And in Psalm 51, he says to the Lord:

“You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (vv 16,17).

Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that:

“A time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain [Samaria] nor in Jerusalem… A time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:21,23,24).

There are other Bible passages that could be quoted to the same effect, but these are sufficient to make an important point. The Psalms passages tell us that our heavenly Father is interested in what we say and what we think. He is interested in our spirits (our minds) and our hearts, and with what attitude we approach Him — much more, it would seem, than in the small, extraneous details of the actual services or sacrifices that we offer to Him.

And the verses in John tell us that the Lord God expects our worship of Him to be not so much about precise place and procedure, but much more about “spirit and truth”. Or, to put it another way, our worship must be, as we might read that last phrase, about “spiritual truth”, and/or “a true spirit”.

We might conclude from this that it is more important to have a proper attitude than to stand or sit at exactly the right time, or to say exactly the right words, or to follow exactly the right format or procedure.

---

It is important that we consider, one by one, the primary parts of our Memorial Service, not just to examine how we worship God, but also especially the spirit, the understanding, and the state of mind with which we come into His presence.

In Psalm 19, David says:

"May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, O Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer" (v 14, NIV).

And in Psalm 51, he says to the Lord:

"You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise" (vv 16,17).

Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that:

"A time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain [Samaria] nor in Jerusalem… A time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth" (John 4:21,23,24).

There are other Bible passages that could be quoted to the same effect, but these are sufficient to make an important point. The Psalms passages tell us that our heavenly Father is interested in what we say and what we think. He is interested in our spirits (our minds) and our hearts, and with what attitude we approach Him — much more, it would seem, than in the small, extraneous details of the actual services or sacrifices that we offer to Him.

And the verses in John tell us that the Lord God expects our worship of Him to be not so much about precise place and procedure, but much more about "spirit and truth". Or, to put it another way, our worship must be, as we might read that last phrase, about "spiritual truth", and/or "a true spirit".

We might conclude from this that it is more important to have a proper attitude than to stand or sit at exactly the right time, or to say exactly the right words, or to follow exactly the right format or procedure.

---

It is important that we consider, one by one, the primary parts of our Memorial Service, not just to examine how we worship God, but also especially the spirit, the understanding, and the state of mind with which we come into His presence.

Before the Meeting, and the Start of the Meeting

It is useful to consider Habakkuk 2:20:

"The Lord is in his holy temple; let all the earth be silent before him."

It may be helpful for the pianist or organist to play, as the final part of his or her prelude, Hymn 168 (the hymn based on Habakkuk 2:20) as a non-verbal reminder of this mental preparation.

In keeping with this verse, we should enter the meeting room and take our seats, as much as possible, in a spirit of quietness and meditation. (This is a good time to leave behind, turn off, or at least silence all cell phones and other electronic devices.) Now is the time for serious thought, preparation and self-examination. Despite the ordinary surroundings, we ought to remember that we are coming into the "temple of the Lord", into the very presence of God.

There are some usual objections to this point:

(1) 'But this is the only time of the week we can visit with one another.'

The solution to this is: Arrive a bit earlier than the absolutely last minute, and you'll probably have plenty of time to visit. Or stay a few minutes longer after the meeting. Or both.

(2) The next objection is: 'But I can't arrive 15 minutes earlier — I don't get up soon enough.'

The solution? Try getting up 15 minutes earlier. Most of us who go to work, or to school, probably get up earlier on at least five days a week than we do on Sunday. Why is that? Because Sunday is traditionally a day to sleep in?

William Law was a very devout Christian preacher and writer who lived in 18th century England. He wrote several books that contain practical advice, among them A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. There he said:

"I take it for granted that every Christian in good health is up early in the morning. He who chooses to indulge in more sleep rather than be early at worship is choosing the poorest refreshment of the body, instead of the noblest employment of the spirit and mind — he is choosing the condition of animals, rather than the service which is the glory of angels."

An interesting thing to note about this is that Law seems to assume that one would get up early every morning, not just on Sunday morning — and that one would arise early, every morning, specifically for the purpose of worship!

My guess is that William Law had a tendency to annoy people because he was so uncompromising. But he did give fair warning at the very beginning of his book, when he entitled it: A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life!

---

There are, for all of us, times when being late is simply unavoidable, and we should not judge one another in this matter, any more than we do in others. So the words which follow are only for times when being late is avoidable.

Being late to meeting is not just wrong because we may disturb or distract our brothers and sisters, but also because we are thereby making ourselves late for an appointment with God. Is this important? In the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Matt 25:1-13), Jesus says that the foolish virgins did not make preparations ahead of time. So, when they came late to the marriage feast, they found the door closed. I venture to suggest there is a lesson there for all of us.

Arriving on time — or much better, arriving ahead of time — is especially important when we have some duty to perform. Being late, or arriving at the very last minute, can cause a real problem for others. The presiding brother wonders when, or even if, the exhorting brother is coming — and if he will arrive with a prepared exhortation. The recording brother wonders if the serving brother knows that he is on the list for the day, or is even planning to come. Being late for your duty, or coming in at absolutely the last moment, will probably distract other brothers and sisters from their times of quiet and meditation — times which help them to get the most from the meeting.

General Appearance and Dress

In this, as in many areas of our life in the Truth, no hard-and-fast rules can (or should) be imposed. But surely we can be governed by intelligence and common sense. How would we dress for a special occasion such as meeting some important human dignitary? How would we behave at such a meeting? Let us answer such questions for ourselves, and then realize, with wonder and awe, that on Sundays we are going to meet the Lord of the Universe and His Son!

The Bible does have general advice. As one example:

"Everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way ['decently and in order': KJV]" (1Cor 14:40).

Other general advice: The apostle Paul writes:

"I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God" (1Tim 2:9,10).

We note that Paul doesn't hand down rules as to the kind of garments, or length of skirts, or other details. We also note that "not… but" in these verses is a figure of speech commonly found in the Bible: When Paul uses 'not… but', he does not literally mean: 'never the one… but always the other.' Instead, I would paraphrase it this way: 'not only the first (if you choose), but especially and always the second.'

In other words, Paul is certainly not saying: 'Women, don't ever braid your hair or wear any jewelry or anything expensive.' Instead, he is saying: 'Don't be concerned with how stylish you are, but do be concerned with your conduct, modesty and attitude.'

This leads to another point: For all of us, brothers and sisters, this simple statement is true. Say it to yourself from time to time:

'The Sunday meeting is not about me; it's about Christ!'

This is very simple, but very useful. Paul writes: "No one may boast before [God]" (1Cor 1:29). Or, as the KJV, "No flesh should glory in [God's] presence." Therefore, our goal should be this:

'I don't want to call attention to myself. I am one part of the Body of Christ. I don't need to stand out, and I don't want to stand out. I just want to belong.'

This is useful as a guideline. Perhaps we don't need rules about dress at all. We just need to think of a couple of things:

• If what I wear, or how I act, causes me to stand out from everyone else, that is wrong.
• If I make myself stand out, then I may be taking others' attention from Christ, and turning it toward myself.
• Therefore I should avoid "dressing up" so much that others notice me.
• Likewise, I should avoid "dressing down" so much that others notice me.
• If I'm not sure what to do, I can always ask myself, as a sister: 'What are the other sisters wearing?' Or as a brother, 'What are the other brothers wearing?'

Like I said, simple, common-sense, easy-to-remember "rules" that really aren't rules at all.

Brothers' Duties in General

We will now think about some of the duties that brothers are expected to perform.

First of all, some general introductory exhortations for the brothers:

1. There is never an excuse for not knowing, ahead of time, when you are scheduled for any of your duties. There is a schedule of duties, probably for months in advance, available for everyone. There are the Sunday morning announcements for the upcoming week. There may even be an email that goes out during the week, with the same information.

2. There are very small ecclesias, let us say, an ecclesia with only three or four, or half a dozen, brothers. In such an ecclesia it is very helpful to everyone if practically every brother takes a turn presiding and reading and praying, and perhaps also exhorting, unless he feels that he is truly unable to do so. But for a larger ecclesia, with 25 or 30 brothers, I have this suggestion: There is really no great reason why any brother should feel that he absolutely must fulfill any and every possible duty. If Bro. X feels that he is past the age where he is comfortable presiding, or has difficulty reading in public, then he should simply ask that his name be left off the duty list. If Bro. Y feels that he can't do justice to his duty to exhort, then he can do the same: simply request that he be left off the next list.

3. One more general matter: Young brothers should never feel that they are being rushed into performing any duties (presiding, exhorting, praying, serving, etc.). But if they wish to do so, and if they are put on the duty lists, then they also have the duty, as young brothers or novices:

• to learn exactly what is required of them,
• to pay special attention to what the more experienced brothers do,
• to ask questions if they are unsure of something, and
• to ask the older brothers for help and advice.

You should always be able to find a more experienced brother (or sister) who is willing to look over your written exhortation or notes ahead of time, and offer helpful comments or constructive criticism.

The Presiding Brother

Presiding is perhaps the most important duty of all, more important to the memorial meeting as a whole than exhorting. The presiding brother's voice is the first one to be heard. It is his duty to set and maintain the tone of the meeting. By his presence, attitude, and words he brings unity and continuity to the whole service. His duty is also to introduce the central feature of the whole worship service, that is, the emblems or symbols of the body and blood of Christ. This should require preparation (and prayer) at home, even before coming to the meeting.

Words of advice for the presiding brother:

• Take your time; there is absolutely no need to rush. Your objective is not to finish quickly, but to give every feature of the meeting its proper sense and meaning.
• Make your assignments for Bible readings and prayers well ahead of time. Rushing around just before the meeting starts to line up brothers is not helpful to achieving the right tone. Either appoint brothers the day before, or as soon as you can before the meeting starts.
• There should be standard presiding forms available from someone, possibly the recording brother. Get one and use it. Or better yet, keep a supply for yourself. There is no need to reinvent the program each week, or ever to have to guess what is supposed to come next.
• Prepare a few very brief comments ahead of time to open the meeting. Examples: a psalm of praise to the Lord, or perhaps Isaiah 53, or a few of the first verses of Psalm 22. There are many good introductory passages, if you keep in mind the purpose of the memorial meeting.
• Then have other comments to introduce the Breaking of Bread at the appropriate time. If possible, try to make this introduction start up just where the exhorting brother left off, by calling special attention to the emblems themselves.
• When the exhorting brother has done his job in this regard, by reminding us of this central purpose of the meeting, then you don't need to do much more. Simply read a few of the verses by which the bread and wine are introduced in the Scriptures (Matt 26:26-29; Luke 22:19,20; or 1Cor 11:23-26). But read them slowly and carefully. Three verses read slowly and with reverence is much, much better than six verses rushed through!
• A suggestion: While the memorial hymn is being sung, just before the Breaking of Bread, take a moment to remove the cover from the Bread and the Wine. This means you can move slowly and carefully, and avoid knocking a cup over. It also means that, as soon as the hymn is finished, the emblems are on display for everyone — which also helps everyone to focus on the right things.
• Before and after the taking of the Bread, and the taking of the Wine, pause (perhaps sit down for just a moment). This also gives everyone, including yourself, another brief moment for reflection and meditation on why we are here and what we are doing.

We remember that first Memorial Meeting in the upper room in Jerusalem. As the host, Jesus was the first presiding brother, conveying a pervasive calm and confidence to his brethren. By this means he demonstrated to them God's presence and God's love. The presiding brother can do nothing more important than this: to help everyone in the meeting to shut out the thoughts and worries of the ever-present world, and to focus on the eternal spiritual truths — the only things that really matter.

Music and Singing

This can be difficult in some meetings, when those who play and those who sing may be all too aware of their inadequacies. It is also true that very few of us have professional qualifications in music. We need to remind ourselves that our hymns are not important as a display of technical skill, but only for the spiritual quality of the worship itself. It is entirely possible to sing (and play) with an attitude which Jesus condemned:

"Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men' [Isa 29:13]" (Matt 15:7-9).

It is "the Lamb" to whom "all praise and honor and glory" should be given (Rev 5:12). We should never seek praise and honor for ourselves because of any talents or achievements we may have, whether playing a musical instrument or singing — or speaking or teaching, as far as it goes. Everything we ever do in the service of the Lord is for his honor and glory!

Again, as in other matters: When we play music, or sing, we must remember that 'Whatever we do, we must do as if it were for the Lord' (cf Col 3:23). In other words, we must keep reminding ourselves: 'Remember: it's not about me!'

The words of the hymns, and their message, should be the guiding principle by which we select hymns, and play and sing them. Sometimes the hymns are selected by the pianist, and sometimes by the presiding brother or the exhorting brother.

Words of advice regarding the hymns:

• The pianist, like any other brother or sister who has duties on a Sunday, should know when he or she is scheduled, prepare ahead of time, and arrive early.
• If the hymns can be selected to fit the Bible readings and/or the subject of the exhortation, then they can support and reinforce the rest of the meeting.
• For both the pianist and the presiding brother: If there has been a recent loss of a member, you might want to consider whether or not it will be helpful to play certain hymns, i.e., those about suffering and death. Will such a hymn help or hurt at this time?
• If the exhorting brother has a hymn or two which he would like to use one Sunday, he should consult with the pianist ahead of time, during the week if possible. It's not helpful to surprise the musician with a new piece of music just before she (or he) starts to play. Some like to know in advance so they can practice before the meeting starts. "How will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes?… If the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready?" (1Cor 14:7,8).
• Hymns have different "feels" about them, as well as different meanings. Some are plainly intended to be somber, or almost mournful, while others are just as plainly intended to be joyful or triumphant. When we recognize this, then we should play — and sing — to suit the mood of the hymn.
• The pianist should begin playing, softly, a few minutes before meeting is scheduled to start. This provides a gentle hint: 'If you haven't settled down in preparation for the meeting, you need to do so now.'
• When the presiding brother announces the hymn, he usually reads a few lines or a whole stanza. This should be read slowly, distinctly, and with some sense of reverence. Such a reading will help those who sing begin to think about what they are singing, and why. ("Music becomes worship only when conscious thought directs it to that end": Harry Tennant.)
• After the closing prayer, the pianist will play a final piece of music. This should be chosen to enhance or reinforce the just-concluded service, not merely because it is popular or the pianist enjoys playing it.

Bible Readings

The crucial point to recognize here, as in every Bible reading or Bible class, is that God is speaking to us:

"This is what the Lord says: 'Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where is the house you will build for me? Where will my resting place be? Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?' declares the Lord. 'This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word' " (Isa 66:1,2).

As with prayers, there should be no unnecessary movements, no interruptions, and no noise. Whether we speak to God (in prayers and hymns) or God speaks to us (in Bible readings), we are dealing with divine communication. This is no trivial matter.

Words of advice for the presiding brother:

(a) Make sure the readings you have selected do not have any embarrassing words or phrases. There are a couple of words found in the KJV which were apparently acceptable several hundred years ago, but are now considered crude and objectionable. You'll find some examples in 1 Samuel 25:22; 25:34 and 2 Kings 18:27. (Be aware that this list is not complete.) If chapters like this must be read anyway, make sure that the reader you have chosen is aware of that, and can substitute something more appropriate at that point — perhaps from another translation (or perhaps he can just use common sense to select an alternative).

(b) The subject matter of certain chapters, especially in the law (e.g., Lev 15 and 18) and the prophets (e.g., Ezek 16 and 23), is simply not suitable by most people's standards for memorial meeting. (These are only examples; there are other such chapters.) When such chapters are read, they may turn our thoughts away from the real purposes of the meeting. Reviewing ahead of time and, again, using some common sense will tell us which chapters should be avoided — even when they come up in the normal daily readings schedule.

(c) Very long chapters, with genealogical lists or numerous repetitions, also have their place in the Bible, but may not be the best for reading on Sunday morning. We understand that a telephone directory can be a very useful book — for a specialized purpose. But we don't have to read pages and pages from it to get the benefit we need.

(d) The same point applies to certain chapters in Proverbs (Prov 10-22 or so), in which each individual verse is a self-contained unit. These can be difficult because there is no context for each verse. A suggestion: If the exhorting brother wants to speak on one or two such proverbs, then he should request that only those verses be read. There is no need to read a whole chapter simply for those few verses.

(e) Appoint the readers as soon as you can, so they can look at or read the portion ahead of time.

Words of advice for the reader:

• Look at the advice for the presiding brother above; in case he hasn't read this advice, you might want to be on the lookout for the same problems.
• As soon as you have your assignment, take a moment to find the chapter and read it over carefully.
• Remind yourself to read slowly, and pause at obvious points, such as the beginning of a paragraph. If you are not sure where the obvious pauses are, then you haven't looked over the chapter carefully.
• Be sure there are no words that you have trouble pronouncing. Pay special attention to names and unusual words.
• If you aren't sure how to pronounce a proper name, pick one option and stick with it. No one really cares whether you say "HAB-akkuk" or "Ha-BAKK-uk", or whether you say "Phi-LEE-mon" or "PHIL-emon". Just don't dither around about it. 'How long will you halt [i.e., jump back and forth] between two opinions?'

General advice when reading in public, or with a group:

• When it comes up in the Bible reading, nearly all Christadelphians replace the KJV's "Holy Ghost" with the much better alternative "Holy Spirit".
• My opinion, again: When you read publicly, don't try to substitute Hebrew or Greek words for the English. You might think it is impressive, but I suggest it's better to save that sort of detail for exposition when it will really help.
• Particularly avoid changes like "Yahweh" for "the Lord", or "ecclesia" for "church". Such changes may distract or confuse more listeners than they help. Also, brothers who attempt this may make real mistakes when they guess wrongly. To change the Word of God is essentially to take from or add to its actual text (Deut 4:2; 12:32; Prov 30:6; Rev 22:18,19) — which is also equivalent to what Paul calls "distorting the word of God" (2Cor 4:2), or "handling the word of God deceitfully" (KJV).
• If you have trouble reading archaic words like "thee" and "thou", and "wist" and "wast" and "shalt", you might want to find another Bible version to read, at least in public.

Public Prayers

Public prayers should be relevant. This means they should be related to the immediate purpose, whether an opening prayer, prayer on behalf of others, thanks for bread or wine, etc.

For example, there is a time to pray for those who are sick, or those who are traveling, but the thanks for the bread or wine is not really the time.

Praying in the presence of others may be quite difficult at first for some brothers. There is no problem in a young or inexperienced brother having one or more written prayers with him (suitable to the subject of the prayer), ready to be used if he is called upon to pray.

Prayers should not be repetitious. There is no need to recount all the key points of the exhortation that preceded the prayer. However, it may be useful to take one point and emphasize that in your prayer.

There is no need to pray through the whole plan of salvation just because you can. Keep in mind that young children, never mind their parents, as well as older folks may have problems with long prayers — either with standing still or concentrating for more than a minute or two.

Prayers should be fresh and spontaneous, if possible. In my opinion, prayers are best when offered in common, everyday language — not old, artificial 'Sunday only' speech. Some brothers are well practiced at using KJV language, and that's fine for them. But young brothers might want to think about praying in the same language they use for common speech. At least it will sound natural and not forced.

Public prayers should be short, and to the point. The writer of Ecclesiastes has some useful advice:

"Guard your steps when you go to the house of God… Do not be quick with your mouth, do not be hasty in your heart to utter anything before God. God is in heaven and you are on earth, so let your words be few" (Eccl 5:1,2).

Jesus criticized the Pharisees because their prayers were crafted to sound pleasing to men, and to enhance their own reputations. Here is what Jesus said:

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men… And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matt 6:5,7,8).

---

Bro. C.C. Walker, a former editor of The Christadelphian, had this to say about what he called "indecorous prayers", that is, inappropriate or unacceptable prayers.

The disciples felt their inability so much that they asked the Lord to teach them to pray. And he taught them "the Lord's Prayer". In English it takes only about sixty words. "God is in heaven and thou upon earth; therefore let thy words be few" [Eccl 5:2]. So said Solomon; and the "Greater than Solomon" upholds it. His own examples are marvels of chaste brevity and simplicity.

All acceptable prayer is based upon faith and obedience, coupled with brevity, simplicity and suitability.

Thanks for the bread and wine should be carefully confined to the subject. A closing prayer should not epitomize a lecture or exhortation. Prayers that God "will make us" thus and so, without our honest endeavor, are hypocrisy. "The Lord make us truly thankful" is an indecorous prayer. "Father, we thank Thee" is the Christ model.

---

One final point about prayer:

It is more than a tradition for prayers to end with "Amen". It has a very real purpose. The "Amen" should not just be spoken by the brother praying; it should be echoed by everyone in the audience.

Why is that?

"Amen" is the Hebrew word for "truth". In other words, an "Amen" in a prayer is a way of saying: 'I agree with this prayer. The prayer offered by the brother on my behalf is my prayer too. By saying, Amen, I am saying: Yes, Lord, this is my prayer too. We are all praying together for what this brother has spoken aloud for us all.'

Say the "Amen" at the end of the prayers, and say it like you mean it. If you are not sure that you can say "Amen" at the end, it may mean that you weren't listening as you should have. And that's a cause for another sort of self-examination: Why weren't you listening?

The Collection

Although we were not redeemed by perishable things such as silver and gold (1Pet 1:18), we cannot escape from their use in the service of God. It is our privilege to dedicate our material blessings to the service of the One who gave them to us.

In these days, we need money and resources in God's service. There is the rent or purchase of a meeting room or hall. There are the poor, the elderly, the children and young people to whom we have special responsibility. We must advertise and preach the gospel. We must provide study and worship resources. We must sometimes collect funds for special causes and special needs.

How do we give? How much do we give? We should give willingly, as though giving were — which it is — a service to Christ personally:

"I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me" (Matt 25:45).

How much should we give? That depends upon the giver. Two factors govern how much we give:

• our ability to give (our income, or available resources), and
• our spirit, whether generous or otherwise.

Typically, Christadelphians downplay this aspect of worship. But our own low-key system should not be an excuse for minimum contributions. Our financial contribution is the means of showing our heavenly Father how much we value His love. We must never think that we can buy God's love — but in our giving we can certainly show how much we appreciate it!

The Bread and the Wine

This brings us to the central feature, the most important part, of the Memorial Meeting: the preparation for, and the partaking of, the Bread and the Wine.

Our Sunday service is properly a memorial. It is not a sacrifice, but it memorializes a sacrifice. It is one way in which we remember the act that conferred grace upon us:

"Do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me" (1Cor 11:25).

The memorials primarily help us to remember the sacrifice itself:

"When this priest [that is, Christ, in contrast to the Levitical priests] had offered (a) for all time (b) one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God… By (b) one sacrifice he has made (c) perfect forever those who (d) are being made holy" (Heb 10:12-14).

In this brief passage the writer to the Hebrews emphasizes that:

• Christ's sacrifice is absolutely effective for all time, as well as for all people who believe in him.
• Christ's sacrifice occurred only once; it cannot be repeated, and does not need to be repeated.
• We are made "perfect" (i.e., complete) in holiness "forever" by this one sacrifice.
• However, this "perfection" is not achieved all at once. It is an ongoing process, in which we work together with God and His Son. By this partnership of effort we "are being made holy".

This final point stresses how important it is to meet together and take the bread and wine. It is the primary means by which we can work together with our heavenly Father and our Saviour to continue the process by which we are finally made both "perfect" and "holy". It is not optional; it is an absolute necessity — and it must be repeated time after time. This is why the same writer, in the same chapter, adds:

"Let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another — and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Heb 10:22-25).

If we are to live up to the New Testament pattern, we must be a family gathered around a table, partaking of a meal and in so doing remembering an absent member. It is an uncomplicated act, an act of loving companionship. It is an act of warmth and familiarity, not of pomp and ceremony.

We do not break bread and drink wine in order to assert any superiority over one another or outsiders. We do not break bread and drink wine as a substitute for the rigorous discipline of service to God in its many features, to which the Truth calls us.

We certainly do not break bread and drink wine in order to encourage personal feelings of self-righteousness or complacency. We may be tempted, when we break bread, to pray to ourselves: 'Lord, I thank you that I am not like other men… and certainly not like the other miserable sinners I see in the world around me…' But if we are tempted to do this, then we must stop, take a hard look at ourselves in the mirror of our conscience, and remind ourselves that we are "sinners" too, who would never be able to save ourselves without the constant love and mercy and oversight from our God and our Saviour.

We break bread often to help us remember these really important matters. But In doing this as often as we do, we ought to be careful, because frequent repetition can turn the memorial service into a formality, and this can encourage self-congratulation. We may pat ourselves on the back, and whisper, 'We must be better than others: Just look at our dedicated service!' — but this would be very, very wrong.

Also, frequent repetition of this memorial service can encourage forgetfulness of the important principles, along with too much concentration on the external details.

Purely and simply, we partake of these emblems in order to remember: first, God's love; second, Christ's sacrifice; and third, our duty.

There are two absolutely essential aspects of worship: baptism and the memorial supper. Baptism is the process by which the believer is "born" into his new, spiritual family. And the Breaking of Bread is the perpetuation of that family life which began at baptism, by the repeated affirmation of the believer's membership in the marvelous family of God.

Why are there two different emblems? The obvious answer is that the bread represents Christ's body and the wine his blood. But that answer seems somewhat inadequate since either one alone might symbolize, almost as well as both together, his sacrificial death. Is there some further distinction?

In part it is this: The bread represents the strength of our Lord's life, a life totally dedicated to the will of the Father. The wine more aptly represents his death, the blood willingly poured out as a climax to his life's work.

The bread was broken and passed to each disciple. Each disciple drank a portion from the cup. But we must not suppose that this dividing up of the emblems implies, in any sense, that Christ can be divided among us, or that we in any sense partake of only a portion of the blessings involved. All the blessings belong to every individual among us. The bread must be broken in order that many can share it; there is just no other way to accomplish the practical object of providing each brother and sister a portion to eat. But the body which the bread represents, Christ's spiritual "body" of believers, cannot be broken. It is one:

"Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body" (1Cor 10:17).

And the body is united, "held together" or "supported" (knit together": KJV) in love with the Head, who is Christ himself (Col 2:2,19). As the natural body is held together by ligaments and sinews, and nurtured together through a single circulatory system, so the spiritual body is bound together and supported by love, especially Christ's love.

The Spirit of the Occasion

In "proclaiming the Lord's death until he comes" (1Cor 11:26), our Memorial Meeting is like a funeral. In attending a funeral we are showing respect for the dead, and for the occasion. We are also recognizing, for ourselves as well, the solemnity of both life and death, and how, in our daily lives, we come in contact with eternal things. "Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee." Surely, if we grasp this fact, we need not worry that we will forget to examine ourselves.

Of course, this is a quite extraordinary funeral, for the one who was dead is now alive, gloriously and eternally alive! The natural seriousness of the occasion will be offset by the joy of this: The one who died for each of us is alive forevermore! What a promise there is in our Lord's words:

"I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom" (Matt 26:29).

Every memorial meeting helps us to remember, and reaffirm to ourselves and our brothers and sisters:

• that Christ is our Head;
• that he died for each one of us;
• that we all belong to him;
• and consequently, that we also belong to one another;
• that we all are honor-bound to love one another and care for one another, no matter how difficult that may sometimes be;
• that we must forgive one another even as we are forgiven by God;
• that this life is not an end in itself, but a preparation for the age to come; and
• that our Saviour, Jesus Christ, is coming again.

I believe that, if this is our spirit and our attitude on such occasions, then we will show forth his death, and his love, until he comes again.

The Doorkeeper

This is a role similar to that of the serving brothers, which we will consider also. In many ecclesias, the doorkeeping brother will welcome visitors to the meeting, answer questions, give directions and instructions, and if necessary report the names and home ecclesia of visiting brothers and sisters to the recording brother for announcements.

It may seem mundane, but the doorkeeper should be aware of distracting noises, and keep doors closed if necessary to reduce such noise.

In any group of people, there are times when someone must leave and/or return during certain parts of the meeting. This should be avoided if at all possible, but sometimes it is not possible. Then it is the doorkeeper's duty, by taking care of the door, to keep these disruptions and noises to a minimum. It is his gift to all those who are seeking to get everything possible from the meeting itself, and it can be very important.

The Serving Brothers

The serving brothers at a memorial meeting ought to remember that they are not just 'waiting tables'. They are more like pallbearers at a funeral, because they carry the objects which represent the body and blood of a Saviour who died for them and us.

More than this, serving brothers are also like best men at a wedding. They are the companions of the bridegroom. They are the friends of the one who has promised to come again in power and glory, to ascend the throne of God in His Kingdom, and to call all his followers to the great wedding of the Lamb and his Bride. So, in a small way even now, the serving brothers have the joyful duty of being heralds who announce Christ's return and his coming kingdom.

How you stand, and how you walk down the aisle, can convey either that you truly care about what you are doing — or perhaps that you are only fulfilling one more duty, and can scarcely wait until you are finished. Your attitude, the way you handle yourself — what is now called 'body language' — can help to remind others of how important this service is, and why we are doing it.

As for everyone else: If you sit on an aisle, be sure that there are no books or feet or other items that might obstruct the serving brother, or cause him to stumble, as he moves from row to row.

Under this heading, we can also mention the "serving sisters" who prepare the memorial table ahead of time. The seriousness and care with which they do this should be similar to that with which the brothers carry out their serving duties. In each case, they are handling the body and the blood of our Lord. Of course, the bread isn't the literal body of Christ, and the wine isn't the literal blood. But you are handling what is spiritually the body and blood of Christ, and — as we've said earlier — the spiritual truth is the most important reality!

In each case, the serving sisters, as well as the serving brothers, are performing a small but essential role in the greatest drama ever acted out in this world.

The sisters (or brothers) who prepare the emblems on Sunday should regularly check the condition of the plates, cups and cloths, and keep them clean. They should also check regularly to be sure that there is enough wine and bread.

Sometimes I think of these things as I pass the bread and wine up and down the rows of our meeting hall. There is something about this duty which is so serious, so solemn, that it is like standing at the crossroads of life and death and looking both ways.

But also, there is also something else about this part of our service which should fill us with joy: We the serving brothers (or the serving sisters) are holding and sharing and remembering together the One who will come to set us all free, to wipe away all tears, to swallow up death in victory, and to bring everlasting joy to a troubled world. There is an old hymn — I wish we sang it. One verse goes like this:

My life flows on in endless song. Above earth's lamentation I hear the sweet though far-off hymn That hails a new creation: Through all the tumult and the strife I hear the music ringing; It finds an echo in my soul — How can I keep from singing?

A funeral, and a king coming in royal glory. We must try to put these two ideas together, and hold both at the same time. If we can do that, then we are close to understanding what we do. When we prepare or serve the emblems, or partake of them, we are seeing the terrible death of a perfect man. But at the same time we can rejoice, because before our very eyes a new creation is dawning in his resurrection and his promise: "I will come again."

Conclusion and Dismissal

After a final hymn and prayer, most meetings have a brief musical interlude to close. This is not a convenient background to cover the noise of shuffling feet, packing up of belongings, or whispers about lunch plans. Rather, it is a final quiet moment to gather together the threads of thoughts from the worship, and to prepare to face the rest of the day and the week to follow — being sure that Christ is going with us as we leave the meeting.

Remember, our service can be beautiful and holy even without the external trappings of an expensive building and a large congregation. Christ on a mountainside, or in a secluded room with a few friends, could lead the most holy of services. And so it may still be with us:

"For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them" (Matt 18:20).

A Word Study

"Exhort" is the Greek word "parakaleo" (verb): literally, to call alongside; thus to invite, to summon, to beseech, to comfort, to encourage. This Greek word occurs over 100 times in the New Testament.

The noun form "exhortation" is "paraklesis", meaning: consolation, comfort, encouragement. This word occurs about 30 times in the New Testament.

Some examples of "parakaleo" and "paraklesis" from the Gospels:

• "Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted" (Matt 5:4).
• The old man Simeon "waited for the consolation of Israel", which was realized when Mary and Joseph brought the baby Jesus into the Temple.
• When the older brother became angry [at the special treatment given his younger brother, the "prodigal son"], then "his father went out and pleaded with him" (Luke 15:28) to come in the house and share the meal of joy and fellowship with his brother.

Otherwise, "parakaleo" in the Gospels mainly consists of those who are sick or in need "pleading" with or "begging" Jesus to stay with them, care for them, teach them, and heal them. These passages are not directly spiritual in their instruction. However, they do teach us something: The word "parakaleo" is not about commanding or demanding, nor about 'laying down the law'. Instead it is about asking and even begging, politely and patiently.

Some examples of "parakaleo" and "paraklesis" from Acts and the Letters:

• This "encouragement", or exhortation, was common in the synagogue after the Scripture readings (Acts 13:15).
• Paul and Barnabas "encouraged [the believers] to remain true to the faith: "We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22).
• After being released from prison in Philippi, Paul and Silas "encouraged… the brethren" (Acts 16:39).
• "Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God — this is your spiritual act of worship" (Rom 12:1).
• "If [his gift is for] encouraging, then let him encourage" (Rom 12:8).
• By "encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom 15:4).
• 'May the God of encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus' (Rom 15:5).
• "I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought" (1Cor 1:10).
• "When we are slandered, we answer kindly" (1Cor 4:13).
• "I urge you to imitate me" (1Cor 4:16).
• 'Everyone who prophesies [teaches] should speak to men for their strengthening [upbuilding], encouragement and comfort' (1Cor 14:3).
• "Praise… the God of all comfort, who comforts us in our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort they have received from God… [This comfort] produces… patient endurance [bearing up under burdens]… As you share in our sufferings, so you may share in our comfort" (2Cor 1:3-7).
• "Forgive and comfort him [i.e., the repentant sinner], so that he not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him" (2Cor 2:7,8).
• "We urge you not to receive God's grace in vain" (2Cor 6:1).
• "God comforts the downcast" (2Cor 7:6).
• Paul urges the brothers to visit the Corinthians and finish the arrangements for the generous gift to be given to the poor (2Cor 9:5).
• "I appeal to you… by the meekness and gentleness of Christ" (2Cor 10:1).
• "Aim for perfection, listen to my appeal, be of one mind, live in peace. And the God of love and peace will be with you" (2Cor 13:11).
• "I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received" (Eph 4:1; cf 1Thes 2:12).
• "I plead with Euodia and I plead with Syntyche to agree with each other in the Lord" (Phil 4:2).
• Paul encourages the brethren "in heart [to be] united in love." This, he says, will lead them to "have the full riches of complete understanding" (Col 2:2).
• "If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness or compassion… then be like-minded, and show the same love, being one in spirit. Do nothing because of selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility look to help others" (Phil 2:1-4).
• "In all our distress and persecution we were [nevertheless] encouraged about you because of your faith" (1Thes 3:7).
• "We urge you, brothers, to… love all the brethren throughout Macedonia" (1Thes 4:10).
• "Encourage one another and build each other up" (1Thes 5:11).
• "We urge you, brothers, warn those who are idle, encourage the timid, help the weak, be patient with everyone" (1Thes 5:14).
• "May our Lord Jesus Christ… and God our Father, who loved us and by his grace gave us eternal encouragement and good hope", "encourage" one another "in every good deed and word" (2Thes 2:16,17).
• "Urge" the believers "to settle down and earn the bread they eat" (2Thes 3:12).
• Paul "urged Timothy to stay in Ephesus so that he might command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer" (1Tim 1:3).
• "I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone", especially for kings and those who are in authority (1Tim 2:1,2).
• "Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching ['paraklesis', 'exhortation' in KJV] and to teaching [instruction]" (1Tim 4:13).
• "Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father" (1Tim 5:1).
• "Encourage the young men to be self-controlled" (Titus 2:6).
• "Your love has given me great joy and encouragement, because you have refreshed the hearts of the saints" (Philemon 1:7).
• 'Do not forget "the word of encouragement, and do not lose heart when he chastens or rebukes you" (Heb 12:5).
• Peter "urges [the brethren] to abstain from sinful desires" (1Pet 2:11).
• Jude "urges [believers] to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 1:3).

A Summary of the Bible Evidence

Certain types of "exhortation" predominate in the New Testament. Some of the following exhortations are repeated four or five times:

• Comforting and visiting those who are sick, who are in distress and trouble, who are persecuted, and who mourn.
• Encouraging believers to read the Scriptures so that they might have hope.
• Encouraging believers to agree with one another, in a spirit of unity.
• Encouraging believers to welcome, accept, and join together with one another.
• Encouraging believers to acts of sacrifice, and giving, on behalf of others.
• Encouraging believers to love one another, and to forgive one another.
• Encouraging kindness toward others, even when slandered or mistreated.

Most of the following ones are mentioned two or three times:

• Encouraging believers to a spirit of joy, rejoicing and thanksgiving.
• Urging believers not to lose heart, or become discouraged, when tried or chastened.
• Urging believers not to take God's grace for granted.
• Encouraging believers to live lives worthy of Christ and the gospel.
• Encouraging and building up believers in the faith.
• Urging believers to pray for one another, and for all men, even leaders and rulers.
• Encouraging believers to tenderness and caring for others.
• Encouraging believers in every good deed and word.
• Encouraging believers to control their desires.

Only a few have a distinctly negative tone, and usually occur only once:

• Warning those who are idle, and encouraging them to work.
• Commanding certain ones not to teach false doctrines.
• Urging believers to abstain from sin.
• Urging believers to contend for the faith.

There is very little that is truly negative, harsh or critical in Biblical exhortation, but there is very much that is strengthening, encouraging, upbuilding, healing, uplifting and accepting.

Overall, there are about 20 positive and encouraging passages about exhortation for every negative and critical one. It is reasonable to conclude that our own ecclesial exhortations ought to follow the same rule:

For every single word of rebuke, there ought to be 20 words of comfort, kindness and love.

What the Exhortation Is

Bro. Harry Tennant says this about exhortation:

No exhortation, however cleverly composed, has served its true purpose if it has failed to enter into the feelings of the hearers by showing true sympathy and compassion.

The word of exhortation is no set speech, no display of oratory, no occasion for self-preening or exhibition of a good memory or a discerning taste for good English. The world has enough of that. Rather is it that "through comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope." Let the brother seek to follow Paul in his words when he "exhorted them all that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord": follow him in his true service for Christ when he comforted "the souls of the disciples and exhorted them to continue in the faith". Such is exhortation: not merely what is spoken but what it is hoped to achieve.

It is good to have in one's mind in preparing an exhortation certain basic ideas behind the very word "exhortation" itself: comfort, consolation, beseeching, urging others forward by encouragement.

Ye Servants of the Lord

Bro. F.W. Turner emphasizes the role of hope in the exhortation:

To our worship and our remembrance at the Memorial Service we add the word of exhortation. To be effective this must have some relation to the things concerning our hope; and so again we are brought into touch with the unseen and eternal things. Because they are related to our hope they must of necessity be unseen; for as Paul reminds us: "We are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth why doth he yet hope for?" (Rom 8:24). But although unseen, they are real, and like those faithful men and women of old, we are persuaded of them and have embraced them, and are absolutely convinced that they will be realized.

Meditations

Scriptural exhortation is positive; it is about looking toward the future in hope and encouraging one another to do the same.

Exhortation is kind and considerate. It asks, and even begs; it does not demand.

Exhortation never loses sight of the love of God, demonstrated by the mercy He shows toward us all.

Exhortation always reminds us that we stand in God's sight only because our sins are forgiven, and that we always need to forgive others.

Exhortation always seeks to build up, to encourage, to strengthen others — in their appreciation of spiritual things, and in their desire to help one another.

Exhortation is about positive, upbuilding and encouraging things. It is about encouraging your listeners to do something positive and constructive! Although the passage does not contain the words for "exhort" or "exhortation", the point of exhortation may be summed up in what Paul wrote to the Philippians:

"Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable — if anything is excellent or praiseworthy — think about such things. Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me — put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you" (Phil 4:8,9).

For good measure, we should also consider what Peter wrote to the believers:

"Make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Pet 1:5-8).

According to the apostles, exhortation should be about putting into practice what is true, noble, pure, lovely, admirable, and worthy of praise. It should be about putting into practice, effectively and productively, all the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22,23): goodness, self-control, perseverance, brotherly kindness, peace, joy, and love.

Finally, and foremost, exhortation is always about putting Christ forward, and showing his character and his life, and preparing those who hear to partake of the emblems that represent his sacrifice.

What the Exhortation Is Not

The exhortation is not a serious, in-depth Bible study, although it may contain elements of Bible study. (There are other places in ecclesial life for that sort of Bible study.)

The exhortation is not a word study in Hebrew or Greek, although it may contain elements of word study. (There are other places for serious word study.)

The exhortation is not about reviewing the Bible evidence for the first principles that we believe. (There are other places to do that.)

The exhortation is not just about feelings and emotions. It ought to encourage listeners to do something:

Bro. Harry Whittaker once told me that his wife, Sis. Phyllis, usually listened to or read his exhortations ahead of time. Quite often she would say, "Harry, that was good. But… what are you going to tell them to do?"

The exhortation is not about interpreting prophecy or predicting the future, although it may be about encouraging others generally, because of "the day that is approaching":

"Let us encourage ['parakaleo'] one another — and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Heb 10:25).

"The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed" (Rom 13:11).

Exhortation is not about taking advantage of the platform to push a particular idea of your own, nor to argue a point with another brother who can't answer back. (If that really needs to be done, it should be done privately, and altogether away from the public exhortation.)

Exhortation is not about showing off, or calling attention to ourselves and what we know (or think we know). When we stand up to exhort, it is never about us — it is always about Christ!

Preparing the Exhortation

• Most ecclesias publish programs showing well in advance who is exhorting and when. Start preparing your next exhortation a month or more in advance. Don't leave it to the last few days.
• Don't assume that using 10 Bible passages is better than using two or three. Choose the best Bible passages, think about them carefully, and make them count.
• It is good to use a story, or an illustration, or an analogy. But remember that the exhortation cannot be all about stories or illustrations. The tail should not wag the dog! Use the story to emphasize a key point, and help others to remember it. But the key point must be the most important thing — the Bible teaching!
• Talk from your own experiences, not from others' experiences. This will make your exhortation real. Remember: Jesus told wonderful stories with powerful lessons, but they were about what he knew personally — shepherds with their flocks, farmers sowing seed in their fields, men in the marketplace, and other everyday scenes of his world.
• Avoid detailed comments about politics and world affairs, or about political leaders and personalities. Such comments distract your listeners from the really important matters, such as the hope of the kingdom, God's love, and Christ's sacrifice. Besides, everyone already knows that the world is a wicked place.
• Avoid predictions and guesses about what will happen next in the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. (More often than not, such predictions have proven wrong as time passed.) Jesus has told us that no one knows the day or the hour when the Son of man will return (Matt 24:36; Acts 1:7). You, the exhorting brother, are no exception!
• If you must look to the future, let it be by focusing on the return of Christ, and the establishment of God's Kingdom. Your guesses about interim events are uncertain at best, while the coming kingdom is absolutely certain.
• Never use a word if you aren't sure what it means. There is absolutely no need to impress anyone with your vocabulary.
• Don't summarize what you've already said. If that needs to be done, the presiding brother will do it.

Delivering the Exhortation

• Remember: You can select a special reading that introduces or supports your exhortation. But don't ask for more to be read than you really need. There's no benefit in having extra-long Bible readings before the exhortation.
• Remember also: You can, within reason, select one or more hymns that supplement and reinforce what you want to say in your exhortation. "Within reason" means: Be sure the musician can play, and the congregation can sing, the hymn or hymns you are selecting. Don't think you need to select all the hymns.
• The night before you are exhorting, go to bed early and get a good night's rest.
• On the day you are exhorting, get up early. Be on time. Be ready. (In Hebrew, and probably for good reason, the word for "early" may also be translated "eager" or "eagerly"; those who start out on their tasks early in the morning are presumed to be eager!)
• Double-check any Bible references you plan to look up and read. Don't be caught wondering what verse you were really thinking about, and why you have this unfamiliar verse staring back at you from the Bible page! 'This isn't what I wanted!'
• If you plan to read certain passages (rather than having them written out already), then it is good to use sticky notes to help you find them in your Bible. Don't leave yourself wondering where Nahum, or Titus, went to — and how you could have misplaced them when you needed them most! Don't be forced to say, 'Sorry. I can't seem to find that verse!'
• Never begin with an apology or an excuse! Don't say, 'I'm sorry that I didn't have enough time to prepare.' (You've probably known for weeks or even months that you were scheduled. If it didn't mean enough to you to prepare well, why should it mean enough to everyone else to listen to what you have to say?)
• There is no need to hurry, that is, to speak or read your exhortation faster and faster. The exhortation is not a "race". Take your time to say what you need to say.
• It's okay to pause for a moment. It allows your listeners to absorb what you have said. Sometimes a pause helps your listeners to focus on what you are about to say.
• While it's fine to use a personal experience or anecdote as an illustration, keep in mind: 'The exhortation is not about me! It's about Christ.'
• How to conclude the exhortation? If possible (and it should be possible), call attention to the emblems — the bread and the wine — for three reasons:
• They are the next item on the program;
• The purpose of the exhortation is to prepare the brothers and sisters to partake of the emblems; and
• The bread and the wine point most directly to the Lord Jesus Christ and his life, death and resurrection. There is nothing more important that that.
• The last rule of exhorting, or any public speaking: When you finish, sit down! My father used to say: "Very few souls are saved after the first 30 minutes." To the same point, he also said, "The mind can absorb only as much as the backside can endure."

If you are tempted, when you finish, to congratulate yourself on your exhortation, on how well it was written or delivered, or what compliments you received afterward, then be warned! You may have forgotten the most important thing about your service: 'The exhortation — like everything in the service — is about Christ, and not about me!'

The story is told that, after one talk, Bro. Robert Roberts was approached immediately by a sister who said, "I want to be the first one to tell you what a wonderful exhortation that was." To this Bro. Roberts replied, "No, sister. You are the second one to tell me. The 'devil' has already whispered that in my ear!"