Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 14-16.

The thing which always strikes me about Samson is his absolutely terrible judgement when it came to women.  I could spend some time considering why Samson was enamored of Philistine women, but I want to look closer at the fact that God used it to further His ends.  I am not sure what led Samson to propose his riddle to the Philistine young men who were chosen as his companions for his wedding, but we often forget just how expensive a set of clothing was before the Industrial Revolution.  Some time ago someone calculated the labor that would go in to making just a shirt in Medieval times and concluded that it would cost about $3,000.  So, 30 sets of clothing would have been rather expensive.  Even one set of clothing from each of Samson’s companions would have cost each of them a large sum of money.  Nevertheless, they accepted Samson’s bet, probably thinking that this Israelite hick could not be bright enough to have a riddle which they could not solve.

As is often the case, I kind of got lost in the weeds on that last paragraph.  We can really learn lessons from both sides of the stories about Samson.  First, Samson sought acceptance among those who looked down on him because of his background.  The Philistines looked down on him because he was an Israelite.  Note: this was not the equivalent of modern Antisemitism.  It is much more like the contempt which the elites in modern society have for the working class (and those who remain faithful to Christ). The Philistines thought they could take advantage of Samson because he was an unsophisticated rube.  When they failed, they used their social position to do so.  Samson suffered for his desire to be accepted, but the Philistines suffered more.

So, two lessons: Don’t allow your desire for social acceptance cause you to compromise your beliefs (Samson revealed that cutting his hair would end his vow to someone he knew did not respect it).  Do not take advantage of a social outcast’s desire for acceptance in order to ridicule them.  Both will end badly.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 11-13.

I was going to focus on comparing Jephthah to Abimelek, but I realized that I do that most years, if not every year. So, today I am going to spend a little time on the birth and conception of Samson.  The first thing we see is a precursor of the angel’s announcement to Mary that she would give birth to Jesus.  In a way, the story of Samson gives us evidence of how unique Jesus is.  Samson was dedicated to God from the moment of his conception, as was Jesus.  Samson’s parents raised him according to the vows of the Nazirite laid out in the Law of Moses.  I like to compare and contrast Samson to Samuel.  Both were dedicated to God by their mothers from the moment of conception. Both led Israel to victory over their enemies.  Both illustrate the powerful influence a mother can have over her sons.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 9-10.

I really want to comment on the parable about the king of trees which Jotham told when the people of Schechem crowned Abimelek king, but I don’t see quite see how it connects to Abimelek.  I guess the connection comes from the fact that Gideon, the father of both Jotham and Abimelek, had refused to be king when the Israelites asked him to take that role.  Which brings me to what I see as the point of Jotham’s parable.  I see two possible points to this parable, and possibly both were intended.  First, those who have demonstrated their ability are more valuable to society doing what they are already doing than in ruling over others.  Second, generally, those who are willing to take the job of ruler, let alone those who seek it, should not be allowed to have it.  The reason for this is that, if they have the talent to be a good ruler they will recognize that using that talent for something else will be more valuable to society than using it to rule over others.  Once more this passage reinforces my thought that Israel in the years before King Saul was a nation which functioned according to libertarian ideals.

Ultimately, here, and throughout the Book of Judges, we are shown that a libertarian government only works when the people it governs are godly.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 7-8.

We normally read this passage as representing Gideon’s first, and essentially only, battle against the Midianites.  However, when I read this passage where it talks about Gideon spying on the Midianite camp I realized that he had clearly already developed a reputation among the Midianites.  This lends even more significance to God’s instruction to Gideon that his army was too large.  Gideon clearly had won numerous smaller battles against the Midianites, such that he had a reputation among the Midianites.  We need to recognize that Gideon did not just defeat the Midianites in a few days, or even just a few months.  His campaign against them likely went on for several years before God gave him his great victory.  We need to remember that bringing about positive change does not happen overnight.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 4-6.

As I mentioned yesterday, early Israel was governed much the way in which libertarians imagine that government should work.  Today’s passage illustrates this.  For all intents and purposes, Deborah was the ruler over Israel at this time, but she did not command any troops.  She ruled by virtue of the fact that the people of Israel trusted her decisions and came to her to settle disputes among them.  She was someone blessed by God with the ability to make good decisions.  The passage does not tell us how she knew to do so, but in God’s name she ordered Barak to take men from Zebulun and Napthali and confront Sisera, who was commanding the army oppressing the Israelites at the time.  Barak was unwilling to do so unless she went with him.  Deborah’s response suggests that if Barak had not insisted on her going with him, he would have been on this list as one of the judges, instead of merely as a war commander.  This tells us two things.  First, that Deborah was probably not unique in being a woman who led the Israelites.  In the cases of the other women, there was either no major battle fought while they led the nation, or the war commander they called upon to act did so without asking them to go to war with them.  Second, if Barak had been willing to take Deborah’s instruction and go to war without her, he would likely have become the leader of Israel after the defeat of Sisera.

We often miss an important aspect of the story of Gideon.  The passage almost glosses over it, but before it introduces us to Gideon it tells us that a prophet arose among the Israelites.  The prophet called upon the people to repent of their sin and return to worshiping God.  Gideon did not act in a vacuum.  There was already a revival occurring in Israel when God spoke to Gideon.  If you look at the history of great changes in history, almost always there had been a revival before the point typically identified as the beginning of the change.  Perhaps the prophet mentioned here was to Gideon as Deborah was to Barak, except that Gideon was willing to lead without leaning on him as a crutch (it is worth noting that this prophet, who was almost certainly a man, appears to have had the role which Deborah would have had if Barak had been willing to go to war without her).

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Judges 1-3.

The passage tells us that the tribes of Manasseh, Ephraim, Zebulun, Asher, Napthali, and Dan failed to drive the Canaanites out of their territory.  It then tells us why they had been unable to do so, because they had not destroyed the altars of the Canaanites in the land which they did conquer.  These two things provide the setup for the rest of this Book.  Despite being unfaithful in destroying the altars of the people they conquered, the generation which Joshua had led into the land served God.  However, when they passed away their children began worshiping these other gods.  As a result God allowed them to fall into the hands of various oppressors.  When things got bad, the Israelites remembered God and cried out to Him.  He sent them a judge who led them back to following God’s law and freed them from their oppressors.

We often think of this early Israel as being a theocracy, but the description makes it sound more like the libertarian ideal.  Even when judges rose up and ruled over Israel, their only authority came from the willingness of the people to follow them.  Each person was free to do as he chose.  When the majority served God, things went well for Israel.  When the majority fell into the worship of other gods Israel fell under the sway of an oppressor.  Which should warn us that libertarianism only works when people seek to serve the Lord.  I will note that this is true of any form of government: if the people serve the Lord, things will go well for them, if they rebel against God, things will go badly.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.