Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us.
The verse is Jotham's fable of the trees holding an election for a king, spoken from Mount Gerizim to the Shechemites as they celebrated Abimelech as ruler. The useful olive, fig-tree, and vine had refused to leave their fruitful service to reign, while the worthless and grasping bramble readily took the kingship on condition that the trees trust in its shadow or be devoured by fire from the bramble. It exposes the folly and injustice of choosing Abimelech, who had the sons of Gideon slain and seized honor by treachery to destroy those better than himself. It is an invented scene in which lifeless trees are given personality, reason, and speech to convey truth in a striking way, and their impossible speaking and reigning show it was meant to impress a moral and not to teach that trees can speak or reign. As with blood, the sea, stones, and the dead made to speak and act as though alive, such speech in a parable does not prove the speaker is conscious or living, so the speech of the dead in the parable of Dives and Lazarus does not prove consciousness in hades. Those doing the most valuable work do not seek rule over their fellows, and ambition to be exalted shows a person is unfit to rule.
Parable Setting and Story
Judges 9:14 belongs to Jotham's parable, fable, and apologue of the trees holding an election to choose a king. In that invented scene all the trees invite the bramble to reign over them, and the bramble accepts. It was spoken by Jotham from Mount Gerizim to the Shechemites while they were celebrating Abimelech as ruler.
The olive, the fig-tree, and the vine had refused the kingship in order to continue giving oil, fruit, and wine. The worthless, grasping bramble, by contrast, readily appropriated it. At once it stated its conditions: the trees must put trust in its shadow, or else fire would come out of the bramble and devour the cedars of Lebanon. The parable exposes the folly and injustice of the men of Shechem in choosing Abimelech. He had arranged the murder of Gideon's sons, gathered worthless followers, seized honor through treachery, and destroyed those better than himself.
Abimelech was the son of Gideon's maid, who caused Gideon's sons to be slain in order to become ruler of Israel. He utterly destroyed Shechem, a very ancient place where Jacob had stopped when he returned from Padan-aram to Canaan. The episode belongs to a fearfully checkered time in Israel's history, when the family of Gideon degenerated by trusting in things which are seen instead of the unseen power. The olive, fig-tree, and vine represent unselfish, unambitious conduct such as that of Gideon and his sons. They stand likewise for noble leaders such as Moses and Joshua who served others without seeking rank or power, in contrast to Abimelech as the fitting symbol of the bramble.
Literary Form and Meaning
The verse belongs to an apologue, fable and parable in which trees speak and choose a king, an imagined, fictitious and invented scene used to convey truth in a striking way. Like the fictitious parable about a king in Ezekiel 17:2-8, it uses an invented story about trees choosing a ruler to represent the work of kings and real events. Their impossible actions of speaking, acting as people do, and reigning signal that the story is meant to impress a moral truth, not to teach that trees or brambles can speak or reign.
It works by personification, in which inanimate and lifeless trees and a bramble are represented as living beings with personality, reason, sentiments, language and power of speech. They are shown holding an election, making speeches, inviting the bramble to reign over them, and acting as people do. Their speech does not mean trees possess consciousness or can literally speak, but illustrates a moral point through figures that need not be understood as literally conscious.
The trees' speech is literally untrue and did not actually happen, for the scene is figurative and imaginary rather than an actual event. Yet the unqualified account is not false, because hearers could recognize the story as a parable in which invented characters may be given powers and actions they do not have in nature. As Jotham's satirical invective in Judges 9:7-21, it is a master specimen of oration and eloquence, showing the intrinsic value of Hebrew literature and the richness of the Old Testament in variety and style of writing. It is a vivid word picture about trees seeking a king with the bramble accepting their invitation to reign, used to represent real events in order to reprove those who chose Abimelech as king.
Doctrine and Moral Application
The invitation of all the trees to the bramble to come and reign over them is a parable in which trees speak and ask the bramble to rule them, though trees do not actually speak or possess consciousness. Their speech is personification used to illustrate a moral point, with inanimate and lifeless trees holding an election, making speeches, and addressing the bramble as if they were rational beings. Because speaking figures in such a parable need not be understood as literally conscious, the figurative speech does not prove that trees are conscious or can literally speak. So too the speech assigned to dead people in the parable of Dives and Lazarus does not prove that the dead are conscious in hades or have knowledge, but only that Scripture can represent the dead as speaking without teaching that the dead are conscious. It is the same figure of personification used when blood, depths, sea, stones, beams, wages, and the dead are made to speak and act as though alive, giving them the sentiments, actions, and language of rational beings, which proves that such speech does not mean the speaker is conscious or living.
The parable exposes the folly of the men of Shechem in choosing Abimelech, who had arranged the murder of his brothers and gathered worthless followers in order to seize rule. It teaches that those doing the most valuable work in the Lord's cause do not seek rule over their fellow workers. Ambition to be exalted over others shows a person is unfit to rule. By the contrast between the vine and olive and the brier and thorny plants, churches should contend over which bears the best fruit, not compete to be most unprofitable, which is the difference between fruitful rivalry and useless rivalry.
The verse is Jotham's fable of the trees holding an election for a king, spoken from Mount Gerizim to the Shechemites as they celebrated Abimelech as ruler. The useful olive, fig-tree, and vine had refused to leave their fruitful service to reign, while the worthless and grasping bramble readily took the kingship on condition that the trees trust in its shadow or be devoured by fire from the bramble. It exposes the folly and injustice of choosing Abimelech, who had the sons of Gideon slain and seized honor by treachery to destroy those better than himself. It is an invented scene in which lifeless trees are given personality, reason, and speech to convey truth in a striking way, and their impossible speaking and reigning show it was meant to impress a moral and not to teach that trees can speak or reign. As with blood, the sea, stones, and the dead made to speak and act as though alive, such speech in a parable does not prove the speaker is conscious or living, so the speech of the dead in the parable of Dives and Lazarus does not prove consciousness in hades. Those doing the most valuable work do not seek rule over their fellows, and ambition to be exalted shows a person is unfit to rule.
Parable Setting and Story
Judges 9:14 belongs to Jotham's parable, fable, and apologue of the trees holding an election to choose a king. In that invented scene all the trees invite the bramble to reign over them, and the bramble accepts. It was spoken by Jotham from Mount Gerizim to the Shechemites while they were celebrating Abimelech as ruler.
The olive, the fig-tree, and the vine had refused the kingship in order to continue giving oil, fruit, and wine. The worthless, grasping bramble, by contrast, readily appropriated it. At once it stated its conditions: the trees must put trust in its shadow, or else fire would come out of the bramble and devour the cedars of Lebanon. The parable exposes the folly and injustice of the men of Shechem in choosing Abimelech. He had arranged the murder of Gideon's sons, gathered worthless followers, seized honor through treachery, and destroyed those better than himself.
Abimelech was the son of Gideon's maid, who caused Gideon's sons to be slain in order to become ruler of Israel. He utterly destroyed Shechem, a very ancient place where Jacob had stopped when he returned from Padan-aram to Canaan. The episode belongs to a fearfully checkered time in Israel's history, when the family of Gideon degenerated by trusting in things which are seen instead of the unseen power. The olive, fig-tree, and vine represent unselfish, unambitious conduct such as that of Gideon and his sons. They stand likewise for noble leaders such as Moses and Joshua who served others without seeking rank or power, in contrast to Abimelech as the fitting symbol of the bramble.
Literary Form and Meaning
The verse belongs to an apologue, fable and parable in which trees speak and choose a king, an imagined, fictitious and invented scene used to convey truth in a striking way. Like the fictitious parable about a king in Ezekiel 17:2-8, it uses an invented story about trees choosing a ruler to represent the work of kings and real events. Their impossible actions of speaking, acting as people do, and reigning signal that the story is meant to impress a moral truth, not to teach that trees or brambles can speak or reign.
It works by personification, in which inanimate and lifeless trees and a bramble are represented as living beings with personality, reason, sentiments, language and power of speech. They are shown holding an election, making speeches, inviting the bramble to reign over them, and acting as people do. Their speech does not mean trees possess consciousness or can literally speak, but illustrates a moral point through figures that need not be understood as literally conscious.
The trees' speech is literally untrue and did not actually happen, for the scene is figurative and imaginary rather than an actual event. Yet the unqualified account is not false, because hearers could recognize the story as a parable in which invented characters may be given powers and actions they do not have in nature. As Jotham's satirical invective in Judges 9:7-21, it is a master specimen of oration and eloquence, showing the intrinsic value of Hebrew literature and the richness of the Old Testament in variety and style of writing. It is a vivid word picture about trees seeking a king with the bramble accepting their invitation to reign, used to represent real events in order to reprove those who chose Abimelech as king.
Doctrine and Moral Application
The invitation of all the trees to the bramble to come and reign over them is a parable in which trees speak and ask the bramble to rule them, though trees do not actually speak or possess consciousness. Their speech is personification used to illustrate a moral point, with inanimate and lifeless trees holding an election, making speeches, and addressing the bramble as if they were rational beings. Because speaking figures in such a parable need not be understood as literally conscious, the figurative speech does not prove that trees are conscious or can literally speak. So too the speech assigned to dead people in the parable of Dives and Lazarus does not prove that the dead are conscious in hades or have knowledge, but only that Scripture can represent the dead as speaking without teaching that the dead are conscious. It is the same figure of personification used when blood, depths, sea, stones, beams, wages, and the dead are made to speak and act as though alive, giving them the sentiments, actions, and language of rational beings, which proves that such speech does not mean the speaker is conscious or living.
The parable exposes the folly of the men of Shechem in choosing Abimelech, who had arranged the murder of his brothers and gathered worthless followers in order to seize rule. It teaches that those doing the most valuable work in the Lord's cause do not seek rule over their fellow workers. Ambition to be exalted over others shows a person is unfit to rule. By the contrast between the vine and olive and the brier and thorny plants, churches should contend over which bears the best fruit, not compete to be most unprofitable, which is the difference between fruitful rivalry and useless rivalry.