Matthew Henry on Judges 19:1-15
The domestic affairs of this Levite would not have been related thus largely but to make way for the following story of the injuries done him, in which the whole nation interested themselves. Bishop Hall's first remark upon this story is, That there is no complain of a public ordered state but there is a Levite at one end of it, either as an agent or as a patient. In Micah's idolatry a Levite was active; in the wickedness of Gibeah a Levite was passive; no tribe shall sooner feel the want of government than that of Levi; and, in all the book of Judges, no mention is made of any of that tribe, but of these two. This Levite was of Mount Ephraim, Jdg 19:1. He married a wife of Bethlehem-Judah.…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on Judges 19:10
the man . . . departed, and came over against Jebus--The note, "which is Jerusalem," must have been inserted by Ezra or some later hand. Jebus being still, though not entirely (Jdg 1:8) in the possession of the old inhabitants, the Levite resisted the advice of his attendant to enter it and determined rather to press forward to pass the night in Gibeah, which he knew was occupied by Israelites. The distance from Beth-lehem to Jerusalem is about six miles. The event showed that it would have been better to have followed the advice of his attendant--to have trusted themselves among aliens than among their own countrymen.
John Gill on Judges 19:12
And his master said unto him, we will not turn aside hither into the city of a stranger,.... A city of the children of the Gentiles, as the Targum, as the Jebusites were, being one of the seven nations of the land of Canaan, who were to be dispossessed and destroyed; and which, one would think, he would not have so called, had it been inhabited, though but in part, by the children of Judah and Benjamin: by this it appears, that this Levite was a good man, and conscientious, and shunned all appearance of evil, and the company of wicked men, as became his character and profession: and it is added:
that is not of the children of Israel; which further confirms the above conjecture, that this ci…
Read the whole note in the console
