Gooding, David: 11 - Gideon in Decline

This afternoon session, gentlemen, normally runs from half past three till four forty five. Then there is a ten-minute break, and a third shorter lecture follows from four forty five to five forty. With your permission, I should like to divide the time available this afternoon a little bit differently, to have a shorter first lecture, shorter than it presently is, giving a little longer to the second one, because before our evening supper, we should perhaps aim at dealing not only with Gideon, but with the judge that followed him, namely Abimelech. Now, this morning we were considering Gideon and the tremendous victory he secured for the people of God, delivering them from Midian. And Gideon is understandably one of the most loved heroes of the Old Testament in many people's estimation. It seems to me, I must confess, that the second half of his career, as depicted in Holy Scripture, is not maybe so bright as one could have wished it to be. I shall be, I need, I realize to be careful how I speak, because others may look at this very differently from myself, and I may meet Gideon one of these days home in glory, and he ha- might have words to say to me if I have wrongly interpret his behavior. But to put on the screen at once what it seems to me is the fact. Gideon not only stands in the middle of the book, but his career is in two parts and is pivot- pivotal in the thought flow of the book. Gideon fought the Midianites. We've learned of his stand against idolatry in his father's house and among his kinsmen, and then he, how he fought the enemy with tactics dictated to him by God. But in the second half of c- of his career, we shall read how he fought his fellow Israelites. And then we shall see what appears to be a beginnings of a lapse into idolatry. I repeat, I may well be mistaken in this judgment, and there will certainly be times when you can put my wrong assessments right, if they thus need correction. But here are some details of the second half of his career. First, there is what is surely commendable. At the beginning of chapter eight, after his notable victory, the men of Ephraim said unto him, Why hast thou served us thus, that thou callest us not when thou wentest to fight with Midian? And they did chide with him sharply. People like to be on the s- uh, and involved in what is successful, and sometimes they wait until the success has been demonstrated, and then they rebuke you for not asking them to be joined with it earlier, you'll see. They didn't show necessarily any keenness to join in it with it from the start, but only when it's been successful, and then they get offended that they weren't invited to share the success. However, that was when they chided him sharply because he didn't call them into the fight along with himself. He replied with admirable diplomacy, didn't he? What have I now done in comparison of you? Is not the gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abi Ezer? You'll see. Even the small things of Ephraim, Ephraim was a very large tribe, of course. Even the small things, the gleaning of the grapes, better than the whole vintage of Abiezer. God hath delivered into your hand the princes of Midian, Oreb and Zeib, and what was I able to do in comparison of you? Then their anger was abated toward him when he had said that. He gets my full marks. It doesn't really matter at all to him, but, uh, uh, that that seems to me to be a very gracious, uh, uh, reply, and stopped any further, uh, contests and and uh division caused by incipient jealousy. Then we read that, uh, he came to Jordan and passed over, he and the three hundred men that were with him, faint yet pursuing. He said unto the men of Succoth, Give, I pray you, loaves of bread unto the people that follow me, for they be faint, and I am pursuing after Zeba and Zalmanah, the kings of Midian. And the princes of Saqot said, are the hands of Zebah and Zalmanah now in thine hand, that we should give bread unto thine army? They presumably felt there was a risk. Perhaps Gideon wouldn't be finally successful, and they didn't want to get involved with him now at this interim stage, lest it would bring disaster upon them. And Gideon said, therefore, when the Lord has delivered Zeba and Zalmanah into mine hand, then I will tear your flesh with the thorns of the wilderness and with briers. That seems to me somewhat savage. It could be said, of course, that these men, the princes of Succoth, ought to have been standing with him valiantly for him and his army on the side of Israel and not sitting on the fence. And perhaps you may hold they deserved to be treated as he proposed to treat them. But it seems to me, until you say otherwise, that it could have been somewhat savage. And he went up thence to Penuel and spake unto them in like manner. And the men of Penuel answered to him as the men of Sakkot had answered. He spake also unto the men of Penuel, saying, When I come again in peace, I will break down your tower. Well, again, they were sitting on the fence, weren't they? But what real purpose it would have f- served to break down their defenses, break down their tower? When, of course, they were men of Israel. Puzzles me to find an explanation. It seems like the revenge of a tired man at the end of his tether. Who knows, you may disagree. Now Zeba and Zalmunna were in Karkot, and their hosts were with them about fifteen thousand men, all that were left of the host of the children of the east, that is the Midianites, for there fell one hundred and twenty thousand men that drew the sword. And Gideon went up by the way of them that dwelt in tents on the east of Nobar and Jogbeha, and smote the host, for the host was, in the old English term, secure. That was, that is without worry, not necessarily in our modern sense secure, but without a care and not too worried, and therefore not taking steps to defend themselves. And Zeba and Zalmunna fled, and he pursued after them, and he took the two kings of Midian, Zeba and Zalmunna, and discomforted all the host. And Gideon, the son of Joash, returned from the battle, from the ascent of Heres. And he caught a young man of the men of Sakkot and inquired of him, and he described for him the princes of Sakkot and the elders thereof, seven, seventy and seven men. He came unto the men of Sakkoth and said, Behold, Zeba and Zalmana, concerning whom you did taunt me, saying, Are the hands of Zeba and Zalmunna now in thy hand, that we should give bread unto thy men that are weary? And he took the elders of the city and thorns of the wilderness and briers, and with them he taught the men of Succoth. I leave it to your imagination to think what he did with them. Then he break down the tower of Penuel and slew the men of the city, but they were Israelites. Did he do it because to refuse to help him was to give the impression that really they were secret helpers of the Midianites, or what? How it helped to break down a tower among the people of Israel, again I say, I'm not sure. Then he said unto Zebah and Zalmonah, what manner of men were they whom you slew at Tabor? And they answered, as thou art, so were they. Each one resembled the children of a king. And he, that is Gideon, said, they were my brethren, the sons of my mother. As the law- as the Lord liveth, if you had saved them alive, I would not slay you. And he said unto Jether, his firstborn, up and slay them. But the youth drew not his sword, for he feared because he was yet a youth. Then Zebah and Zalmunna said, rise thou and fall upon us, for as a man is, so is his strength. And Gideon arose and slew Zebah and Zalmunna. All right, they were the princes of the enemy. And took the crescents that were on their camels' necks. Anyway, then the men of Israel said unto Gideon, Rule thou over us, both thou and thy son, and thy son's son also, for thou hast saved us out of the hand of Midian. Gideon said unto them, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you. The Lord shall rule over you. And we should pause there, because this relates to the principle of Israel's government at that time. Israel was by conviction, and not out of carelessness, was by conviction a theocracy. They had no national head. They had the tabernacle in Shiloh. There they had the high priest, of course, but they had no political head. They didn't even have a Joshua or a Moses. There were the individual tribes with their elders. They had the law of God as given, uh, on the table of stone and housed in the ark. But for any central government, yes, in one sense they had the all-tribal assembly, which they could call together to settle matters that couldn't be settled by individual tribes, such as, for instance, the guaranteeing of security for travelers, respect for the sanctities of life and of marriage and so forth among the traveling public between the tribes and the general behavior of the tribes themselves. But that was a all-tribal assembly that people could appeal to. It wasn't a central government. Israel was a theocracy and remained a theocracy until, as First Samuel tells us, Israel demanded to have a king as a central government. At this time, however, it was still a matter of conviction that they were a theocracy ruled by God. And Gideon, as you see, honors that conviction. And when they invite him to be their ruler, he says, no, uh, I shall not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you. In other words, I shall not start a dynasty among you. Uh, for, and the reason he gives, the Lord shall rule over you. So far, so good then. The words, neither shall my son rule over you, are ironic indeed, when we realize what happened in the very next chapter. Then the men of Israel said, then Gideon, sorry, said unto them, I would desire a request of you, that you would give me every man the earrings of his spoil. For they had golden earrings because they were Ishmaelites. And of course, it wasn't just for decoration. It was customary for some ancient people to carry their superfluous wealth on them, on their persons, because there were no such things as banks in those days. And they answered, we will willingly give them. And they spread a garment and did cast therein every man the earrings of his spoil. The weight of the golden earrings that he requested was a thousand and seven hundred shekels of gold, beside the crescents and the pendants and the purple raiment that was on the kings of Midian, and beside the chains that were about their camels' necks. And Gideon made an ephod thereof and put it in his city, even in Ophrah. Offra. But. At. All Israel went a whoring after it there, and it became a snare unto Gideon and to his house. Now you may well argue that that wasn't Mi- uh, Gideon's fault. He had a right to the spoil and to do with it what he would. He couldn't help it if the nation as a whole, or his tribe as a whole, did what superstitious people love to do. They have to lo- they love some relic, and if the Pope touched a mug, they want a clinging to the Pope for the rest of their lives, so to speak. And come great men as they have it, they like to keep a memento of him and this, that, and the other. Okay. But there comes a point where that kind of attitude slips over into idolatry and is therefore dangerous. Which would prompt me to say, as an aside, it is a dangerous thing when people go beyond respecting and valuing a servant of God and start to idolize him. It can have unfortunate results for the servant himself, and we've had cases of it in my home country. Anyway, Midian was subdued before the children of Israel, and they lifted up their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years in the days of Gideon, good old Gideon. And Jerubbaal, the son of Joash, went and dwelt in his own house. And Gideon had threescore and ten sons of his body begotten, for he had many wives. And his concubine that was in Shechem also bare him a son, and he called his name Abimelech. Sounds very odd. I will not rule over you, said he, nor shall my son rule over you. But he named his son Avimelech. My father is king. Curious name, granted Gideon's professed conviction. Gideon, the son of Joash, died in a good old age and was buried in the sepulcher of Joash's father in Ophrah of the Abiezerites. And it came to pass as soon as Gideon was dead that the children of Israel turned again and went ahoring after the Baalim and made, uh, Baal Berit their god. The children of Israel remembered not the Lord their God, who had delivered them out of the hand of all their enemies on every side. Neither showed they kindness to the house of Jerubbaal, who is Gideon, according to all the goodness which he had shown unto Israel. For my part, as you see, I think that was a questionable thing to do if it was Gideon that did it, to call his son, my father is king, because the next chapter is going to s- tell us of that son Abimelech's efforts to make himself virtually a sole despot and king in his tribe. But that is all for now as far as I'm concerned. So let me hand it over to you, and you tell me what your opinion is and how you evaluate the closing years of Gideon. So what about, uh, starting there at chapter eight, Gideon's answer to Ephraim? Do you approve of it and say he was a gracious, gracious, humble man, and a soft answer turned away wrath? Or would you say that was a bit of a weakling's answer, and he should have rebuked them fir- firmly? Now, how do you, do you approve of it or you disapprove of it? Approve it. You approve it. Anybody else approves it? You approve it. You approve it, all fo- folks approve it. Anybody disapprove of it? Disapprove of his action? Pardon? Disapprove of his action? Uh, his, his answer simply at the, uh, first verses of chapter eight, Where he softened and stopped the anger of the Ephraimites. Hm? We shall ca- have in the case of Jephthah, when we come to Jephthah, when the Ephraimites did that kind of thing with him, he took the fords of Jordan and slaughtered them. So anyway, majority opinion, you approve of Gideon's answer. Right. Tell me what you say now to his response to the men of Succoth and to the men of Penuel. Was he right? To warn them and then carry out his warning and chastise them with the thorns of the desert? Because they were potential fifth columnists or traitors, supporters of the enemy also? Or was this an excess of, uh, uh, revenge against them? Was he right to break down the tower in Penuel? However poor their men's conduct had been, did it help to destroy such a fortification in Israel itself? Do any good? Was it a well-earned act of destruction? Tell me how you read. The scripture does say that they were comfortable in their situation, so breaking down the tower would make them uncomfortable. Mm-hmm. Would make them uncomfortable. Yes, I'm sure it did. Mm-hmm. It does seem rather, um, sort of you talk about a transition in his life, and it's, it's not the parks that were here, he's making an ephod, uh, with a collection of jewels, but there's this transition where it's something that's not necessarily wise. We can't say it's evil and wrong because obviously there was, you know, something wrong on the enemy's part, but just a real lack of wisdom. You don't see that godly character, uh, that wisdom that we see in men of God, where we said that was a wise thing to do. Uh, but there's just something about, as you said, well, what's, what's the point, um, viciously the Lord desired his tribe to stay together, uh, to be a people that, that, that shine as a light in the world, the world that see the God met in their midst. Where's that character in this action? Mm-hmm. Yes, I think I, I, I'd agree with you, sir. Perhaps we're not meant to pass judgment. Perhaps we ought to leave it to the Lord and say, well, this is what he did. Fancy that. Wouldn't have done it myself, or I would have done. Perhaps we're not meant to pass judgment, but it's there in the text. Uh, sir, you? Yeah, well, a good example of that is where there's no faith, there's no action in the aspect of negative negativity. But the Lord says if you're right in offense, he will even himself spew you out. There's a judgment. Yes. On no action. Oh, I see. You feel that if they took no action, that was a dereliction of their duty towards the nation. Right. And they ought to be, uh, uh, suitably dealt with because of their failure to act on behalf of the nation. That's right. Yes? Uh, and therefore what Jo- uh, uh, Gideon did to them would have been a warning to others that when the nation was in peril, they, they couldn't be allowed to sit on the fence. They must, um, uh, join in with the nation. Yes, somebody over here, hand up. Uh, you had pointed out earlier, uh, in chapter six thirteen where it says, oh my Lord, if the Lord is with us, and emphasized the fact that he was identifying with them. It seems as though he's moving in the other direction, and my mind seems to travel toward a man named Saul, who did well at one point, but then immediately after seemed to get quite harsh in his, uh, dealing with this kind of a situation, and we know what Saul Yes, that is true. Yes, sir. Well, I recall Gideon was from Manasseh. Yes. He had no authority over the men of Ephraim. He was not the king, as you pointed out. Mm-hmm. And exceeded any authority he did have. Also, it certainly would not be the way we, uh, handle things today. Uh, a couple of the brothers and I were talking during the break about the shepherds who, uh, lead the sheep and others who drive them, whereas we're called to lead. So, yes, I find fault with Gideon's behavior. Yes. Seems to me when he, he actually, they taunted him because the princes Z- Zibirim Zamona were not yet in his hand, and perhaps they were afraid that, uh, Gideon would fail and himself be executed, and the wrath of these two Midianite princes would come upon them. Perhaps they were afraid of that. But when he went and secured the princes and said, look, they're in my hand. Well, he'd won, hadn't he? And he'd beaten the Midianites. What good did it do to take revenge on these men of Succoth? Yes? I think we see a pretty clear and stark omission of the Lord during this, this chapter as well, or before, and he's receiving instruction from the Lord, we don't see any of that and him seeking that during this period. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yes. Two hands over here. I have to wonder about him calling the other people into the battle in the first place. The Lord narrowed them down to three hundred. Yes, he did. I'm giving them into your hands of these hundred. Mm. Gideon turns around and says, hey, you guys, come here, you know, come into the battle and help us finish them off. Mm-hmm. You wonder about his trust in the Lord at that time. Yes, you wonder, wouldn't you? And somebody else got a hand up beyond the hair somewhere? I have another question. There's a similarity between David, um, and Nabal refusing to give sustenance to him, which is exactly what happened here. You notice that, um, I believe it was, correct me if I'm wrong, it wasn't Abigail, um, uh, the woman that he later took for his wife, she was wise and basically said, leave it to the Lord. As his name is, so is he. He's a fool. And the Lord sort of, you know, vengeance is mine to the Lord, the Lord took care of him. Yeah, that's right, sir. Interesting parallel. Yes, indeed. I, I agree. It does seem that Gideon went above and beyond what he probably should have done in disciplining his, his, uh, his fellow, uh, um, countrymen. But where does, where does the line of discipline fall in there? I mean, do you ignore the fact that they would not support him in his efforts and just... You know, I, I look at it as an assembly during the church today for those who aren't, aren't willing to, to work or to do the work or to be obedient to some of the things the Lord has asked to do. Do you ignore them and continue on? I mean, the Lord chastens those he loves, so where, where's the balance? Well, you tell me. I am not an elder and have never been an elder, so let me ask the elders to say what they do in such cases. Our brothers already pointed out that they weren't under, there's a difference. Was, was, were these groups under their, their leader, under his leadership as one in the assembly might be under the shepherding of the elder? No. Well, looks like where the explanations on the question in the beginning there, chapter eight, he's calling... different, uh, tribes are saying, well, why didn't you call on us to help you fight? Mm-hmm. And then they're chastising him or criticizing him because he didn't ask him to fight. That was his faith in doing what the Lord asked him to do with the three hundred men. Yes. But over here in, uh, verses, uh, 5 and six, Mm-hmm. All he's doing is asking those people to feed his troops, not to fight. That's right, yes. But to feed them. Yes. Contribute and give them aid and and and food in in that respect, but not to fight. That's right. But because of that, then disobeying the gift that they could have, uh, uh, assured to them at that time, there has to be a chastisement or a judgment. In other words, you're saying that the troops that came back tired had risked their very lives Yeah. to defeat the Midians, and therefore, uh, the Midianites, and therefore to help secure the s- the safety of the men of Sukkot and elsewhere, the least they could have done is to fed them, and not to feed, uh, men in that c- condition was a serious offense. Mm-hmm. Well, that's what Gideon was asking them to do. That's right, yes. Yes, there's a man, a hand up right at the back somewhere. To have bread and withhold it, to have what will support the testimony and withhold it is wrong. Mm-hmm. As Henry reminded us yesterday, to be do right and not do it is sin. Mm-hmm. Now, to go a little bit further, and I know I'm running in the face of some other things here, but Paul, he says to the Corinthians, when I come, I will not spare. Mm-hmm. And John speaks about diotrephes. Yes. Uh, what he would do in relation to him, and I think Gideon is on the right line here, that, that he's retributive, but it's of the Lord. Mm-hmm. Yes, that's a good man there somewhere. In the line of where Mike is going, it seems to me that what had been the means of victory and bringing the people of God to victory was keeping the food supply going. Mm-hmm. In a time of famine. Mm-hmm. And here at this juncture, in a sense, the victory over the Midianites is not yet finished, it's not yet complete. Mm-hmm. And we have the one who had up to this moment kept the food supply going, not now being the provider of the food, but himself now asking for food. Mm-hmm. And asking for food, not, it seems, in the dependence on God where with he was functioning before, but going to a people that were still themselves greatly impoverished. And in that impoverished, weak condition, asking them perhaps to give him what they still were not equipped to be able to provide. Mm-hmm. It's kind of like that child that, you know, it's tired, he's tired, he, uh, uh, uh, is very worn out at the end of the day, and as a parent, you still demand of him to perform a chore that he should have performed early in the day when perhaps he was in a condition to do so, which at that moment, even though it would be the right thing to do, and there's a difference between the right thing to do and the ability to do the right thing. Mm-hmm. You can ask someone Mm-hmm. to do what is right who is not in a condition to practically be able or have the strength to do what is right. Thank you very much. Oh, somebody come over here. Uh, just a thought that it's, it's very difficult to judge whether it was the right thing or the wrong thing, especially, uh, what really kind of, but as in analyzing and looking at his position in the story and the position in the book, it really makes me nervous, and I think it should be make all of us to realize that this sort of judgment, taking this judgment on ourselves, is a slippery slope. Amen. When you think about this is the pivotal point, this is the first time where this happens, and then now for the rest of the book, Israel is fighting and hurting themselves, and it just makes me think, boy, I mean that we could really, even if there is, if this would have been a good time for judgment, we should all have paused because you think about the mindset that gets into people when, when others are treated this way, and it could be, yeah, they got what they deserve. Mm. And then this whole mindset from the assembly begins to go the wrong way. Yes. Why I have invited all your comments, gentlemen, is partly because of this reason. And you have given me a good example of all the kind of thought that needs to go into situations before we jump to conclusions and exercise judgment and chastisement. Things have been said on both sides, haven't they? I come back to the particular punishment that was chosen. You'll see. What's part, part, part, oh, there's a good man here wants to say something. When he came back, um, after winning the battle. Yes. Okay. Could the people who were there that he wanted to tear apart, it doesn't say that they, that they asked for mercy. It doesn't say that they, they did anything wrong by not giving the bread. It doesn't say that they, um, were repentive of what, what they did or saw that it was wrong at all. Mm-hmm. And I was wondering if that had anything to do with, um, him carrying out the judgment of what he said he was going to do. Yes. In other words, he might have threatened them that in the beginning, and then when he went back after he won the battle, might have expected the, the people there to say, we were wrong. Mm-hmm. And he didn't do it. Mm-hmm. That might have infuriated him more. I don't know. I know that that happens with people, and uh, I'm not s- I don't agree with what he did. Uh, I can understand him threatening. Yes, yes. Uh, but what I also don't understand is why the people that were there didn't, uh, feel any need to repent, or it's not recorded that they repented, uh, from the action that they took. Yes, thank you very much for it. Yes. So, if I may, I'll draw this to a close and, and, and suggest we take ten minutes break because I want to use the next section to consider Abimelech, and we ought to do that before supper. So, yes, in it all, thank you for the discussion. Uh, I still wonder about the actual mode and severity of the punishment to take elders and lie them down and thrash them with the thorns of the desert, which would have stripped their flesh bare and their bones bare in some places, and could have s- scratched their eyes out and so forth. Whether that was in the end, worth doing in Israel's impoverished state, I don't know. And similarly, breaking down the tower, which would have left them, uh, uh, with loss of, of pro- of, of, uh, protection that they normally had. And whether chastisement, and that's signed, for instance, uh, that leaves an assembly weaker than it was before and more prey to the enemy is a wise move anyway, however much we may think it was deserved. But thank you for the discussion and for taking it seriously. I suggest now we take ten minutes break and then come back for the longer session on Gideon's successor, Abimelech.