Ehud (Judges 3:12-30)

No doubt there will be some who wonder why this gruesome account is in the Bible. They may ask why the author was not led by the Holy Spirit to give a brief description as he does with regard to the next judge he mentions, Shamgar, whose life is detailed in one verse. In this regard I am reminded of Oliver Cromwell, another leader that God raised up, although far away from Israel with regard to time and place, and who commanded the artist painting his portrait to do so ‘warts and all’. He realised that it was possible to brush out the physical defects, of which he had several, and he did not want that to happen.  

We should also remind ourselves that Ehud is not the only biblical leader to do something that we would find unappealing in our times. Samuel flayed Agag, the leader of the Amalekites whom Saul had spared. Elijah slew all the prophets of Baal at Carmel. Jehu tossed the body of Jezebel to the dogs. 

I suppose one criticism of Ehud’s behaviour is the suggestion that he was not willing to show love to his enemies. Jesus made it clear in the Sermon on the Mount that his disciples should love those who abuse them. Yet there is a difference between acting as a disciple and as a leader of a nation. Ehud was engaged in war with the enemies of his people, so we have to bear this in mind as we read his story. 

It may also be the case that here we have the first action of Ehud as a leader of his people. If that is the case, then we should remind ourselves that future leaders sometimes say or do things that are inappropriate. After all, it was the later apostle of love, John, who along with his brother wanted to call down fire from heaven on some Samaritans who had refused to show kindness to Jesus and his disciples.   

This account of Ehud has something to say about the writing of biographies of God’s people. It is well known, for example, that Calvin and Luther and Zwingli made mistakes, at least from our point of view. George Wishart, as he went around preaching, was protected by a man carrying a sword, and for a while the swordbearer was John Knox. Something similar could be said about several of the Scottish Covenanters. One of the dangers in biographies is that of hagiography in which all defects are removed, and we are not told about details that could disturb us. The story of Ehud reminds us, even if his was not such an example, that God’s leaders can have dark moments. 

Moreover, the only human who knew what happened in the private room was Ehud, which means that he reported the event just as it occurred. In other words, he was a truthful man, and surely this is a quality essential in a person whom God will use. This is the case whether that individual is doing something great or something small for God, and telling the truth is basic if a person wants to be a leader of God’s people. 

With regard to Ehud we can say another two things about him before we look a bit more into this account. One is that he is one of the judges who gave Israel rest for a long time (eighty years), which gives him authenticity, and the other is that he was given by God in answer to earnest prayer, which means he was a divinely-provided deliverer. In this regard, we have to remember that Paul tells us that what was written in the Old Testament was written for our learning (2 Tim. 3:16). 

There is one more aspect that I would like us to recall as we think about this incident. It is that we can so focus on the obvious that we miss what is important. This is a story of deliverance arranged by God. He, and not Ehud, is the real Deliverer. 

The situation Ehud faced 

There had been a period of deliberate departure from God’s ways by the people of Israel. The departure was shared by the people, so it can be described as national in extent. What does the phrase ‘sight of the Lord’ in verse indicate? It could refer to what they did every day because we know that God knows everything that we do. If that is what is meant, it means that the Israelites were living very sinful lives. It is also possible that the author is more specific when he refers to the sight of the Lord. The writer could be referring to what took occurred in places where God revealed himself in a special way, and if that is what the author is referring to, then the sin of which they were guilty was idolatry with all its accompanying practices. Moreover the departure from God was rapid, moving quickly away from the days of blessing under Othniel to days of judgement. 

The Lord responded to their departure by helping their opponents. There is something ironic in that the Israelites felt the strength of God’s power, except that it was arranged against them rather than for them. How did God help their enemies? He enabled them to become united whereas before they would not have been. Sometimes we regard the coalitions that form against the church as being only Satanic. In the case of Israel, the coalition was the outcome of divine judgement expressed through his providence. 

Can God use evil people to further his own designs? The answer is yes, because here he used Eglon to punish Israel for their sins. Yet there is something else to note, which is that becoming like the nations did not make Israel popular with them. On this occasion, the nations did not suggest that Israel should join them in a campaign against another group. Instead they remained as hostile as ever towards the people of God, even although they were backsliding from him. This is a reminder that becoming like the world does not mean that a true Christian will be welcomed by them. 

The author then mentions a significant consequence of the defeat when he says that the enemy captured the city of palm trees. The city of palm trees was Jericho, the place where the Lord had previously given a great victory to his people when they began their campaign to conquer the Promised Land. Could the children of Israel boast about Jericho now that it was under the control of the king of Moab? We see something similar when we observe institutions and locations where God was served in the past now under the control of the enemy. 

Another disturbing aspect of the situation is the length of time it took for the Israelites to come to their senses – eighteen years. Maybe their defeat had been deflating and they now read providence in a way that suggested all was lost. Whatever the cause, the writer gives the impression that they did nothing for almost two decades. At the same time they were learning that it is a bitter thing to rebel against the Lord. Yet we can see that something changed their perspective and they began to pray. 

The Saviour God Provided 

It is a good sign when people want to pray and it is a sign of spiritual calamity when they do not. Here, the presence of spiritual revival showed itself by a combined interest and participation in prayer for national deliverance. This spontaneous and widespread desire to pray in the year nineteen of their bondage did not come about merely because things were getting worse. Instead the desire came from heaven, from the covenant God who remembers his promises about his people. 

The author does not say how long this focus on prayer lasted. All we are told that the Lord raised up a deliverer for them. We can assume that the Lord had been preparing Ehud for this role because he was ready when the moment came. What we can deduce from the circumstances is that we need to pray until God answers us.

Ehud was a surprising choice because, as the author notes, he was left-handed. What is the significance of this detail? Later in Israel’s history the use of the left hand became a feature of fighters from the tribe of Benjamin, so perhaps they imitated Ehud. There may be other deductions from the fact that he was left-handed, but two appealed to me.  

First, some commentators mention that Ehud could not use his right hand. Yet he did not let his deficiency prevent him getting involved in the battle for the kingdom. He could have used his inability in this area as a reason for doing nothing. Instead he gave what could be used in the Lord’s service. Ehud challenges those of us who only focus on our weaknesses and use them as excuses for not taking part. 

The other deduction is that this feature indicated that he would fight differently from how others did it. We can even see this detail in the way that he hid his sword. Right-handed swordsmen would have the sword hidden on the left side so that they could grab it quickly. So the guards of Eglon would not expect someone to have a sword hidden on an intruder’s right side. Even this little detail shows that God knew how to get rid of his enemies easily. Ehud challenges those of us who imagine that things cannot be done different from how others do them. 

The Strategy Ehud Adopted 

Leaving aside the fact that he put Eglon to death – Ehud was a judge, after all, and Eglon was a criminal even if he was a ruler, there are some important lessons that we can deduce from the author’s description of the event.  

First, Ehud used the door that divine providence opened up for him, even although it looked like the opposite of what he wanted. His desire was to deliver Israel and here he was chosen to present the sign that they were enslaved – a tribute that subjected people had to pay. Surely his situation tells us that there is not a circumstance that cannot be used for serving God. 

Second, Ehud spoke to Eglon about God. The message was that the God who had secretly opened the door for Eglon to prosper had decided to close it. Whatever else we can say about Ehud, he firmly believed that the Lord was far more powerful than the strongest human ruler in the area.  

Third, Ehud was prepared to take real risks for the sake of God’s kingdom. It looks as if he had told no one about what he planned to do. If he had, they would have tried to stop him. Imagine him sitting at his breakfast. ‘What are you going to do today, Ehud?’ ‘I intend to deal with the most powerful enemy of God’s people, and if I fail, at least I will fail trying.’ That response would have produced a set of headless chickens! 

Fourth, Ehud was confident of further victories over the enemy. His faith was not of the kind that becomes stationary after one success. What made his faith so strong? His confidence was in the promises of God. We are not told how Ehud knew the victory would be certain. Perhaps a prophet had told him, although I think it is more likely that he knew the promises of restoration that God had given concerning the benefits of returning to him. In whatever way he knew, we can say that he had no wish not to keep going, which is what a leader should be like. 

Fifth, Ehud was willing to let others share the victory. He could have confined the triumph to his own tribe Benjamin, but instead he wanted the victory to express the unity of the people of God. The reward for his commitment to unity was not only a complete victory over immediate foes but also a state of peace and rest that lasted for eighty years. 

Two lessons to learn 

The first application is the effectiveness of prayer. How will we know that our prayers are effective? The answer is when God gives us what we are asking him for. A feature of effective prayer is earnest petitions. The Israelites prayed because they were desperate. Their prayers were a combination of information and urgency. They tell us that we should offer desperate prayers to the God who is strengthening our enemies because of our departure from him. 

The second application is that each of God’s people have to live up to their name, whether they are leaders or otherwise. We noticed in the previous study that Othniel lived up to his name and behaved like a lion used by God. The name Ehud means ‘praise’ – we can see how close it is to the name Judah which means ‘praise the Lord’. Ehud lived a life that brought eighty years of praise among the people of God. We should look forward to the day when Ehud will hear Jesus say to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant!’ And we can look forward to Ehud participating in the praise and living up to his name forever.