Text -- Judges 21:22 (NET)

21:22 When their fathers or brothers come and protest to us, we’ll say to them, “Do us a favor and let them be, for we could not get each one a wife through battle. Don’t worry about breaking your oath! You would only be guilty if you had voluntarily given them wives.’”

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

JFB: Jdg 21:21-22

The dance was anciently a part of the religious observance. It was done on festive occasions, as it is still in the East, not in town, but in the open air, in some adjoining field, the women being by themselves. The young women being alone indulging their light and buoyant spirits, and apprehensive of no danger, facilitated the execution of the scheme of seizing them, which closely resembles the Sabine rape in Roman history. The elders undertook to reconcile the families to the forced abduction of their daughters. And thus the expression of their public sanction to this deed of violence afforded a new evidence of the evils and difficulties into which the unhappy precipitancy of the Israelites in this crisis had involved them.

Clarke: Jdg 21:22

Be favorable unto them - They promise to use their influence with the men of Shiloh to induce them to consent to a connection thus fraudulently obtained, and which the necessity of the case appeared to them to justify

Clarke: Jdg 21:22

We reserved not to each man his wife in the war - The reading of the Vulgate is very remarkable: Miseremini eorum, non enim rapuerunt eas jure bellantium atque victorum, sed rogantibus ut acciperent non dedistis, et a vestra parte peccatum est . - "Pardon them, for they have not taken them as victors take captives in war; but when they requested you to give them you did not; therefore the fault is your own."Here it is intimated that application had been made to the people of Shiloh to furnish these two hundred Benjamites with wives, and that they had refused; and it was this refusal that induced the Benjamites to seize and carry them off. Does not St. Jerome, the translator, refer to the history of the rape of the Sabine virgins? See below. Houbigant translates the Hebrew thus: Veniam quaeso illis date; non enim ad bellum duxerant suam quisque uxorem; et nisi eas illis nunc concedetis, delicti rei eritis . - "Pardon them, I beseech you, for they have not each taken his wife to the war; and unless you now give these to them, you will sin."This intimates that, as the Benjamites had not taken their wives with them to the war, where some, if not all, of them might have escaped; and the Israelites found them in the cities, and put them all to the sword; therefore the people of Shiloh should give up those two hundred young women to them for wives; and if they did not, it would be a sin, the circumstances of the case being considered

Our translation seems to give as a reason to the men of Shiloh why they should pardon this rape, that as they had not permitted the women to live in their war with Benjamin, therefore these men are now destitute; and the concession which they wish them to make may be considered as more of an obligation to the Israelites than to the Benjamites. It is an obscure sentence; and the reader, if not pleased with what is laid down, may endeavor to satisfy himself with others which he may find in different versions and commentators. The Vulgate gives a good sense to the passage; but probably Houbigant comes nearest to the meaning.

TSK: Jdg 21:22

Be favourable unto them : or, Gratify us in them, Phm 1:9-12

each man : Jdg 21:14; Gen 1:27, Gen 7:13; Mar 10:6-8; 1Co 7:2

give unto : Jdg 21:1, Jdg 21:7, Jdg 21:18; Pro 20:25

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Jdg 21:22

Ye did not give ... - i. e., they had not broken the oath mentioned in Jdg 21:1, so as to be guilty of taking the Lord’ s name in vain. They did not give their daughters to Benjamin: the Benjamites had taken them by force. Such casuistry as this condemns the system of oaths, and illustrates the wisdom of our Lord’ s precept Mat 5:33-37.

Poole: Jdg 21:22

Be favourable unto them pass by their offence, if not for their sakes, whom necessity forced to this course; yet for our sakes, and indeed for your own sakes; for both you and we have done them a great injury in prosecuting them with so much fury, as to endanger the utter extinction of the whole tribe; and therefore this is the least we can do by way of reparation.

In the war either, first, In the war with Jabesh-gilead, wherein they should have taken care to reserve a sufficient number, which they might have done, by sparing either so many of the married women as were necessary, who, their former husbands being slain, might have been married to those Benjamites; or as many of the younger virgins, who, within a little time, might have been married to them, whom many suppose that they slew. Or, secondly, In the war with the Benjamites, in which they acknowledge their cruelty in destroying the women with such fury, as not to leave a competent number for the men which were left. See Jud 20:48 . Ye

did not give unto them at this time, that ye should be guilty

Quest. Whether this did really discharge them from their oath?

Answ First, It seems to excuse those parents of these virgins who were not acquainted with the plot, and did neither directly nor indirectly give their daughters to them, but they were taken away by force, without their knowledge and consent. If it be said those parents might and should have retaken their daughters from them; it may be replied, that they could not do so before they were corrupted, and the rulers of Israel would not assist them with their power to recover them. And it is a maxim, That many things which ought not to be done, when once they are done, should not be undone. And for those parents who were conscious of the design, it is probable they kept their daughters at home to avoid this. Secondly, Either the oath was made with an exception of the case of the total extirpation of a tribe, or it was a rash oath to do what was out of their power, or what they could not lawfully do, to wit, utterly to destroy a tribe out of Israel, which therefore they here speak of with horror, Jud 21:3,6 ; and if so, as they sinned in making it, so they were not obliged to keep it; it being an acknowledged truth, that rash and sinful oaths are better broken than kept. Thirdly. Yet they cannot be wholly excused from sin in this matter; for as it was folly to take such an oath as it is expressed, so the manner of freeing themselves from their own snare is fraudulent and injurious to the parents, in disposing of their children without their consent.

Haydock: Jdg 21:22

Part. Hebrew is variously translated; but the Septuagint and Arabic agree with the Vulgate. By your refusal, and by your oath, you have constrained them to take what you would not, (Calmet) or could not grant. Protestants, "Be favourable to them for our sakes, because we reserved not to each man his wife, in the war; for ye did not give unto them, at that time, that ye should be guilty." (Haydock) ---

You have not to answer for the infraction of the oath, since you did not give your daughters. (Calmet) ---

They had not objections to the Benjamites on any other head, and the young women were not very reluctant. (Tirinus) ---

It is wonderful that the high priest, Phinees, appears so little on this occasion. If he had spoken in the name of God, the rest would have been under no perplexity.

Gill: Jdg 21:22

And it shall be, when their fathers or their brethren come unto us to complain,.... Of this rape of their daughters or sisters, or to bring an action against them, and desire they might be summoned before them, the elders of the people, and be tried and judged according to law for what they had done; or to put them upon going to war with them again for such treatment of them:

that we will say unto them, be favourable unto them for our sakes; for the sake of the elders, who advised them to do what they did; or for the sake of us Israelites, your sake and ours, who were too severe upon them, and prosecuted the war with too much vigour, which made what they have done necessary, or otherwise a tribe must have been lost in Israel:

because we reserved not to each man his wife in the war; either in the war with Benjamin, which they carried on with such wrath and fury as to destroy all the women, so that there were no wives left for the men that remained, which they now repented of; or in the war with Jabeshgilead, they did not reserve enough of the women taken, only four hundred virgins, whereas there were six hundred men: but the first seems best:

for ye did not give unto them at this time, that you should be guilty; the meaning is, that if they had any uneasiness upon their minds about the oath which they had taken, not to give any of their daughters in marriage to Benjamin, they need not be disturbed at that, since they did not "give" them to them, but these "took" them by force; which was the scheme these elders contrived to secure from the violation of the oath. This they proposed to say to quiet them, and make them easy, to which other things might have been added as that these were their brethren, and not strangers they were married to, and not to mean men, but to men of large estates, having the whole inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin devolved upon them; and their daughters would be the original mothers of the posterity of that tribe in succeeding ages.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Jdg 21:22

¹ tc The (original) LXX and Vulgate read “to you.”

² tn The words “and let them be” are supplied in the translation for clarification.

³ tn Heb “for we did not take each his wife in battle.”

sn Through battle. This probably refers to the battle against Jabesh Gilead, which only produced four hundred of the six hundred wives needed.

⁴ tn This sentence is not in the Hebrew text. It is supplied in the translation to clarify the logic of the statement.

⁵ tc Heb “You did not give to them, now you are guilty.” The MT as it stands makes little sense. It is preferable to emend לֹא (lo’, “not”) to לוּא (lu’, “if”). This particle introduces a purely hypothetical condition, “If you had given to them [but you didn’t].” See G. F. Moore, Judges (ICC), 453-54.

Geneva Bible: Jdg 21:22

And it shall be, ^{( i )} when their fathers or their brethren come unto us to complain, that we will say unto them, Be favourable unto them for our sakes: because we reserved not to each man his wife in the war: for ye did not give unto them at this time, [that] ye should be guilty.

^{( i )} Though they attempted to convince man that they had kept their oath, before God it was broken.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Jdg 21:1-25

1 The people bewail the desolation of Benjamin.

8 By the destruction of Jabesh-gilead they provide them four hundred wives.

16 They advise the remainder to surprise the virgins that danced at Shiloh.

MHCC: Jdg 21:1-25

Israel lamented for the Benjamites, and were perplexed by the oath they had taken, not to give their daughters to them in marriage. Men are more zealous to support their own authority than that of God. They would have acted better if they had repented of their rash oaths, brought sin-offerings, and sought forgiveness in the appointed way, rather than attempt to avoid the guilt of perjury by actions quite as wrong. That men can advise others to acts of treachery or violence, out of a sense of duty, forms a strong proof of the blindness of the human mind when left to itself, and of the fatal effects of a conscience under ignorance and error.

Matthew Henry: Jdg 21:16-25

We have here the method that was taken to provide the 200 Benjamites that remained with wives. And, though the tribe was reduced to a small number, they were only in care to provide each man with one wife, not with more under pretence of multiplying them the faster. They may not bestow their daughters upon them, but to save their oath, and yet marry some of their daughters to them, they put them into a way of taking them by surprise, and marrying them, which should be ratified by their parents' consent, ex post facto - afterwards. The less consideration is used before the making of a vow, the more, commonly, there is need of afterwards for the keeping of it.

I. That which gave an opportunity for the doing of this was a public ball at Shiloh, in the fields, at which all the young ladies of that city and the parts adjacent that were so disposed met to dance, in honour of a feast of the Lord then observed, probably the feast of tabernacles (Jdg 21:19), for that feast (bishop Patrick says) was the only season wherein the Jewish virgins were allowed to dance, and that not so much for their own recreation as to express their holy joy, as David when he danced before the ark, otherwise the present melancholy posture of public affairs would have made dancing unseasonable, as Isa 22:12, Isa 22:13. The dancing was very modest and chaste. It was not mixed dancing; no men danced with these daughters of Shiloh, nor did any married women so far forget their gravity as to join with them. However their dancing thus in public made them an easy prey to those that had a design upon them, whence bishop Hall observes that the ambushes of evil spirits carry away many souls from dancing to a fearful desolation.

II. The elders of Israel gave authority to the Benjamites to do this, to lie in wait in the vineyards which surrounded the green they used to dance on, and, when they were in the midst of their sport, to come upon them, and catch every man a wife for himself, and carry them straight away to their own country, Jdg 21:20, Jdg 21:21. They knew that none of their own daughters would be there, so that the parents of these virgins could not be said to give them, for they knew nothing of the matter. A sorry salvo is better than none, to save the breaking of an oath: it were much better to be cautious in making vows, that there be not occasion afterwards, as there was here, to say before the angel that it was an error. Here was a very preposterous way of match-making, when both the mutual affection of the young people and the consent of the parents must be presumed to come after; the case was extraordinary, and may by no means be drawn into a precedent. Over hasty marriages often occasion a leisurely repentance; and what comfort can be expected from a match made either by force or fraud? The virgins of Jabesh-Gilead were taken out of the midst of blood and slaughter, but these of Shiloh out of the midst of mirth and joy; the former had reason to be thankful that they had their lives for a prey, and the latter, it is to be hoped, had no cause to complain, after a while, when they found themselves matched, not to men of broken and desperate fortunes, as they seemed to be, who were lately fetched out of a cave, but to men of the best and largest estates in the nation, as they must needs be when the lot of the whole tribe of Benjamin, which consisted of 45,600 men (Num 26:41), came to be divided again among 600, who had all by survivorship.

III. They undertook to pacify the fathers of these young women. As to the infringement of their paternal authority, they would easily forgive it when they considered to what fair estates their daughters were matched and what mothers in Israel they were likely to be; but the oath they were bound by, not to give their daughters to Benjamites, might perhaps stick with some of them, whose consciences were tender, yet, as to that, this might satisfy them: - 1. That the necessity was urgent (Jdg 21:22): We reserved not to each man his wife, owning now that they did ill to destroy all the women, and desiring to atone for their too rigorous construction of their vow to destroy them by the most favourable construction of their vow not to match with them. "And therefore for our sakes, who were too severe, let them keep what they have got."For, 2. In strictness it was not a breach of their vow; they had sworn not to give them their daughters, but they had not sworn to fetch them back if they were forcibly taken, so that if there was any fault the elders must be responsible, not the parents. And Quod fieri non debuit, factum valet - That which ought not to have been done is yet valid when it is done. The thing was done, and is ratified only by connivance, according to the law, Num 30:4.

Lastly, In the close of all we have, 1. The settling of the tribe of Benjamin again. The few that remained returned to the inheritance of that tribe, Jdg 21:23. And soon after from among them sprang Ehud, who was famous in his generation, the second judge of Israel, Jdg 3:15. 2. The disbanding and dispersing of the army of Israel, Jdg 21:24. They did not set up for a standing army, nor pretend to make any alterations or establishments in the government; but when the affair was over for which they were called together, they quietly departed in God's peace, every man to his family. Public services must not make us think ourselves above our own private affairs and the duty of providing for our own house. 3. A repetition of the cause of these confusions, Jdg 21:25. Though God was their King, every man would be his own master, as if there was no king. Blessed be God for magistracy.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jdg 21:22

" And when the fathers or brethren of the virgins carried off, come to us to chide with us, we (the elders) will say to them (in your name), Present them to us ( אותם as in Jdg 21:12); for we did not receive every one his wife through the war (with Jabesh); for ye have not given them to them; how would ye be guilty ."The words "Present them to us,"etc., are to be understood as spoken in the name of the Benjaminites, who were accused of the raid, to the relatives of the virgins who brought the complaint. This explains the use of the pronoun in the first person in חנּוּנוּ and לקחנוּ , which must not be altered therefore into the third person.

(Note: One circumstance which is decisive against this alteration of the text, is, that the Seventy had the Masoretic text before them, and founded their translation upon it ( ἐλεήσατε ἡμῖν αυτάς, ὅτι οὐκ ἐλάβομεν ἀνὴρ γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ ). The different rendering of Jerome given in the Vulgate - miseremini eorum! non enim rapuerunt eas jure bellantium atque victorum - is nothing but an unfortunate and unsuccessful attempt to get rid of the difficulties connected with the readings in the text.)

The two clauses commencing with כּי are co-ordinate, and contain two points serving to enforce the request, "Present them,"etc. The first is pleaded in the name of the Benjaminites; the second is adduced, as a general ground on the part of the elders of the congregation, to pacify the fathers and brothers making the complaint, on account of the oath which the Israelites had taken, that none of them would give their daughters as wives to the Benjaminites. The meaning is the following: Ye may have your daughters with the Benjaminites who have taken them by force, for ye have not given them voluntarily, so as to have broken your oath by so doing. In the last clause כּעת has an unusual meaning: "at the time"(or now ), i.e., in that case , ye would have been guilty, viz., if ye had given them voluntarily.

Constable: Jdg 17:1--21:25

III. THE RESULTS OF ISRAEL'S APOSTASY chs. 17--21

The following two extended incidents (ch. 17-21) differ from the records of the judges just completed (chs. 3-16). They are not accounts of the activities of any of Israel's judges. They are the record of events that took place during the period of the judges that throw light on conditions in Israel during this era. The purpose behind their inclusion seems to have been to illustrate even more clearly ". . . the low moral standards, . . . the debased religious conceptions and . . . the disordered social structure" in Israel.³⁰⁵

"As was the case in the earlier chapters of the Book of Judges [1:1-3:6], these chapters deal with the subject of spiritual apostasy and its effects upon the nation of Israel."³⁰⁶

Whereas chapters 3-16 record Israel's struggles with her external enemies, chapters 17-21 document the internal conditions of the nation that made her so weak. In chapters 17-18 we see Israel abandoning God, and in chapters 19-21 we see her destroying herself.

The town of Bethlehem features in each of three stories. These stories are Micah and the Danites (chs. 17-18), the Levite and the Benjamites (chs. 19-21), and the story of Ruth in the Book of Ruth. Therefore some scholars refer to this section of Scripture as the "Bethlehem trilogy." These stories also share other themes and motifs.

"They concern individuals in more or less private settings whose identities and activities are nevertheless inseparable from and crucial to a full understanding of the Davidic monarchy which followed them. Accounts of actual events that transpired in the days of the judges, they are included in the sacred record for the purpose of tracing the roots of the Davidic dynasty and justifying its existence in opposition to Saul."³⁰⁷

The first incident (chs. 17-18) describes the fate of the Danites, and the second (chs. 19-21) the fate of the Benjamites. Both tribes received land in Israel's heartland, between Judah and Ephraim, the tribes that would, after the monarchy divided, lead the Southern and Northern Kingdoms respectively. By selecting incidents from these tribes, the narrator showed that the degenerating tendency in Israel was not just a problem in the fringe territories. Canaanite influence had infected the heart of the nation.

Both Dan and Benjamin found themselves in dire straits but for different reasons. The Danites could not settle into their allotted inheritance because of Canaanite influence, and the Benjamites could not remain in theirs because of their hostile Israelite brethren. In both instances a nameless Levite with Bethlehem-Judah (17:7-8; 19:1-2) and Mt. Ephraim (17:1; 19:1) connections precipitated the crisis. Both accounts include priestly characters inquiring of God concerning the outcome of a proposed course of action (18:5-6; 20:27-28), and both conclude with a reference to Shiloh (18:31; 21:19-24). In both accounts military contingents of 800 men play a crucial role (18:11, 16, 25; 20:47; 21:7, 12, 14, 16-17, 23), and both contain references to the absence of a king in Israel (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). These parallel phenomena have the effect of making the reader conclude that the Canaanization of Israel had become complete.³⁰⁸

Constable: Jdg 19:1--21:25

B. The Immorality of Gibeah and the Benjamites chs. 19-21

Chapter 19 records an event that provoked civil war in Israel. The account of that war follows in chapter 20. Then the consequences of the war unfold in chapter 21. This section of the book is the climactic and supreme demonstration of the Canaanization of Israel during the pre-monarchic period of her history.

Chapters 19-21 teach us how to survive in a society without spiritual and moral standards. Chapter 19 is a story of love and hate. It is so contemporary that with a few minor changes we might read it on the front page of our newspaper any day.

The first verse introduces a new story. The events of chapters 19-21 are not a continuation of those in chapters 17-18. "Those days" were the days of the amphictyony. The reference to Phinehas (20:28) suggests that they took place in the years fairly soon after Joshua's death. The writer of Chronicles did not record that any other descendant of Aaron bore the name Phinehas except the godly son of Eleazar (1 Chron. 6:1-15) and the ungodly son of Eli (1 Sam. 4:4). This series of events (chs. 19-21) evidently transpired during the lifetime of Aaron's grandson, and the previous events (chs. 17-18) did during the lifetime of Moses' grandson. The reference to Israel's lack of a king (v. 1) points to the Israelites' practical denial of Yahweh's lordship over them as well as the absence of an Israelite monarch. This refrain occurs four times in chapters 17-21 (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). It brackets the story in chapters 19-21 and provides the key to its interpretation. This incident shows what happens when God's people fail to acknowledge Yahweh's sovereign authority over their lives. In chapters 17-18 the result was religious apostasy (idolatry), and in chapters 19-21 it was moral degeneracy (immorality), political disintegration (anarchy), and social chaos (injustice).

Constable: Jdg 21:1-25

3. The preservation of Benjamin ch. 21

In chapter 20 Israel tried desperately to destroy the tribe of Benjamin.³⁶⁷ In chapter 21 she tried just as hard to deliver this tribe from the extinction that her own excessive vengeance threatened to accomplish. The anarchy of God's people complicated the problems that her apostasy had initiated. The moral degeneracy of chapter 19 proceeded from political disorganization in chapter 20 to social disintegration in chapter 21.

"Interpreting biblical narrative can be like trying to figure out someone who has a dry sense of humor. The person may give no visible indication that he intends humor, so that you have to divine it as best you can. Judges 21 is noncommittal like that. The writer reports but hardly critiques, so that we are left asking how we are to take the story."³⁶⁸

The way to determine the rightness or wrongness of Israel's actions is to compare them with God's revealed will in the Mosaic Law.

Constable: Jdg 21:16-24

Israel's second sufficient solution: a technical loophole 21:16-24

The writer constructed this section parallel to the previous one (vv. 5-15) to highlight the dilemma Israel continued to face.³⁷⁰ About 200 Benjamites still needed wives. Verses 16-18 repeat the dilemma that the Israelites' "wife oath" had created (v. 1).

The elders of Israel proposed a second plan (v. 19; cf. vv. 8-9). It would give the Benjamites wives without causing the Israelites to break the letter of their "wife vow," though it violated a more basic law. The problem with this plan was that it required the forcible kidnapping and raping of 200 women from Shiloh. Undoubtedly if the elders had sought the Lord's counsel He would have given them a better plan. There is no evidence in the text that they did so.

The annual feast of Yahweh was probably the Passover ". . . as the dances of the daughters of Shiloh was apparently an imitation of the dances of the Israelitish women at the Red Sea under the superintendency of Miriam (Ex. xv. 20)."³⁷¹ Another possibility is that this was the Feast of Tabernacles ". . . in the time of the vintage-harvest."³⁷² A third option is that it was a festival of the Israelites' own making.³⁷³

Verses 20-22 record the Israelites' command to the assailants (cf. vv. 10-11). The fathers and brothers of the women would complain because of the treatment these women would receive and because these men would not receive doweries from their sons-in-law as was customary. The Israelites also expected these fathers and brothers to find some consolation in the fact that they had not technically broken the "wife oath."

This second provision of wives proved to be sufficient for the Benjamites (v. 23; cf. vv. 12-14) even though the plan involved the violation of basic human rights.

With this resolution of the problem the Israelites returned to their homes (v. 24; cf. v. 15).

"There is a certain rightness and a certain wrongness about what Israel does. They justifiably requite Jabesh-gilead with unjustifiable severity (vv. 5, 10). They stand consistently upon their wife-oath (vv. 7, 16-18) but trample happily upon the rights of the Shiloh girls and their families (vv. 19-22). It is a mix of consistency and confusion. . . .

"The ambivalence pervading chapter 21 simply fits the pattern of incongruities throughout the story from the beginning of chapter 19."³⁷⁴

"Through Moses Yahweh had warned that if the Israelites stoop to behaving like Canaanites, then they can expect the same fate (Deut 8:19-20). The narrator never declares so outrightly, but the present account, coming as it does at the end of the book affirms the total Canaanization of the tribe of Benjamin and the Israelites' falsely based sympathy for their brothers."³⁷⁵

Guzik: Jdg 21:1-25

Judges 21 - Wives for the Remnant of Benjamin

A. A foolish oath.

1. (1) At Mizpah, a curse is laid on anyone who gives their daughter as wives for the tribe of Benjamin.

Now the men of Israel had sworn an oath at Mizpah, saying, "None of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin as a wife."

a. None of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin: Considering their anger against Benjamin, this probably seemed like the right thing to do. But this foolish oath had unforeseen consequences. Justice not only brings punishment to evildoers, but it also guards against punishment that is too harsh.

2. (2-3) Israel realizes that a whole tribe is in danger of extinction.

Then the people came to the house of God, and remained there before God till evening. They lifted up their voices and wept bitterly, and said, "O LORD God of Israel, why has this come to pass in Israel, that today there should be one tribe missing in Israel?"

a. Why has this come to pass in Israel, that today there should be one tribe missing in Israel? They cried out to God, almost as if it was His responsibility that the tribe of Benjamin was on the edge of extinction. The question, "Why has this come to pass?" was easily answered: Because of the excessive vengeance of the tribes of Israel against the tribe of Benjamin.

b. One tribe missing: Down to almost only 400 men - and those unable to marry - the tribe of Benjamin was almost extinct.

B. Solutions to the problem of the foolish oath.

1. (4-15) Destroying the city of Jabesh Gilead and taking their young women.

So it was, on the next morning, that the people rose early and built an altar there, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. The children of Israel said, "Who is there among all the tribes of Israel who did not come up with the assembly to the LORD?" For they had made a great oath concerning anyone who had not come up to the LORD at Mizpah, saying, "He shall surely be put to death." And the children of Israel grieved for Benjamin their brother, and said, "One tribe is cut off from Israel today. What shall we do for wives for those who remain, seeing we have sworn by the LORD that we will not give them our daughters as wives?" And they said, "What one is there from the tribes of Israel who did not come up to Mizpah to the LORD?" And, in fact, no one had come to the camp from Jabesh Gilead to the assembly. For when the people were counted, indeed, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead was there. So the congregation sent out there twelve thousand of their most valiant men, and commanded them, saying, "Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead with the edge of the sword, including the women and children. And this is the thing that you shall do: You shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman who has known a man intimately." So they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead four hundred young virgins who had not known a man intimately; and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. Then the whole congregation sent word to the children of Benjamin who were at the rock of Rimmon, and announced peace to them. So Benjamin came back at that time, and they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh Gilead; and yet they had not found enough for them. And the people grieved for Benjamin, because the LORD had made a void in the tribes of Israel.

a. Who is there among all the tribes of Israel who did not come up with the assembly to the LORD? . . . He shall surely be put to death: Here again Israel did something that seemed right at the time, but was actually a horror. They decided to slaughter a whole city of Israel, a city that refused to join with Israel in the fight against Benjamin.

i. This is doing one bad thing to make up for another. Israel instead should have repented of their foolish oath made at Mizpah, and they should have agreed to give their daughters as wives to the men of the tribe of Benjamin, renouncing the foolish vow of Judges 21:1.

b. They found among the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead four hundred young virgins: In the slaughter of Jabesh Gilead, they killed all but 400 young virgins. Still, this was not enough: yet they had not found enough for them.

2. (16-24) A ploy to give the Benjaminites an opportunity to take wives.

Then the elders of the congregation said, "What shall we do for wives for those who remain, since the women of Benjamin have been destroyed?" And they said, "There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe may not be destroyed from Israel. However, we cannot give them wives from our daughters, for the children of Israel have sworn an oath, saying, 'Cursed be the one who gives a wife to Benjamin.'" Then they said, "In fact, there is a yearly feast of the LORD in Shiloh, which is north of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah." Therefore they instructed the children of Benjamin, saying, "Go, lie in wait in the vineyards, and watch; and just when the daughters of Shiloh come out to perform their dances, then come out from the vineyards, and every man catch a wife for himself from the daughters of Shiloh; then go to the land of Benjamin. Then it shall be, when their fathers or their brothers come to us to complain, that we will say to them, 'Be kind to them for our sakes, because we did not take a wife for any of them in the war; for it is not as though you have given the women to them at this time, making yourselves guilty of your oath.'" And the children of Benjamin did so; they took enough wives for their number from those who danced, whom they caught. Then they went and returned to their inheritance, and they rebuilt the cities and dwelt in them. So the children of Israel departed from there at that time, every man to his tribe and family; they went out from there, every man to his inheritance.

a. Every man catch a wife for himself from the daughters of Shiloh: They answered the problem of wives for the remaining Benjaminites by creating a little drama where the Benjaminites were allowed to "kidnap" women (who were not doubt willing), so that the marriages could be arranged without "official" approval.

b. Rather than go through this charade, they should have simply confessed their sin of making a foolish oath and done the right thing instead of trying to make two wrongs equal a right.

c. Then they went and returned to their inheritance, and they rebuilt the cities and dwelt in them: In this, the tribe of Benjamin was sufficiently restored to provide Israel with its first king (Saul).

3. (25) The summary observation of the times of Israel.

In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

a. There was no king in Israel: This kind of moral, political, social, and spiritual chaos could only happen where there was no recognized king over Israel - and where people forgot about God as their King.

b. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes: Generally, the 400-year period of the Judges was marked by this radical individualism. They rejected the standard of God's word and accepted the individual standard of what was right in their own eyes.

i. This is certainly the spirit of our age. We can think of this reflected in advertising slogans from our generation, within recent memory: Nothing is taboo . . . Break all the rules . . . To know no boundaries . . . Relax: No rules here . . . Peel off inhibitions. Find your own road . . . We are all hedonists and want to do what feels good. That's what makes us human . . . Living without boundaries . . . Just do it. The message is the same: "You make your own rules. You answer to no one. You are the one that matters. Your universe revolves around you."

ii. But the way of right in his own eyes ends in ruin. Proverbs 14:12 says it like this: There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death. When man follows his own instincts and inclinations, it leads to ruin. We must follow God's way, not our own.

© 2003 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Judges (Book Introduction)

JUDGES is the title given to the next book, from its containing the history of those non-regal rulers who governed the Hebrews from the time of Joshua to that of Eli, and whose functions in time of peace consisted chiefly in the administration of justice, although they occasionally led the people in their wars against their public enemies. The date and authorship of this book are not precisely known. It is certain, however, that it preceded the Second Book of Samuel (compare Jdg 9:35 with 2Sa 11:21), as well as the conquest of Jerusalem by David (compare Jdg 1:21 with 2Sa 5:6). Its author was in all probability Samuel, the last of the judges (see Jdg 19:1; Jdg 21:25), and the date of the first part of it is fixed in the reign of Saul, while the five chapters at the close might not have been written till after David's establishment as king in Israel (see Jdg 18:31). It is a fragmentary history, being a collection of important facts and signal deliverances at different times and in various parts of the land, during the intermediate period of three hundred years between Joshua and the establishment of the monarchy. The inspired character of this book is confirmed by allusions to it in many passages of Scripture (compare Jdg 4:2; Jdg 6:14 with 1Sa 12:9-12; Jdg 9:53 with 2Sa 11:21; Jdg 7:25 with Psa 83:11; compare Jdg 5:4-5 with Psa 7:5; Jdg 13:5; Jdg 16:17 with Mat 2:13-23; Act 13:20; Heb 11:32).

JFB: Judges (Outline)

• THE ACTS OF JUDAH AND SIMEON. (Jdg 1:1-3)
• ADONI-BEZEK JUSTLY REQUITED. (Jdg. 1:4-21)
• SOME CANAANITES LEFT. (Jdg 1:22-26)
• AN ANGEL SENT TO REBUKE THE PEOPLE AT BOCHIM. (Jdg 2:1-10)
• WICKEDNESS OF THE NEW GENERATION AFTER JOSHUA. (Jdg 2:11-19)
• NATIONS LEFT TO PROVE ISRAEL. (Jdg 3:1-4)
• BY COMMUNION WITH THESE THE ISRAELITES COMMIT IDOLATRY. (Jdg 3:5-7)
• OTHNIEL DELIVERS ISRAEL. (Jdg 3:8-11)
• EHUD SLAYS EGLON. (Jdg. 3:12-30)
• DEBORAH AND BARAK DELIVER ISRAEL FROM JABIN AND SISERA. (Jdg. 4:1-17)
• DEBORAH AND BARAK'S SONG OF THANKSGIVING. (Jdg. 5:1-31)
• THE ISRAELITES, FOR THEIR SINS, OPPRESSED BY MIDIAN. (Jdg 6:1-6)
• A PROPHET REBUKES THEM. (Jdg 6:7-10)
• AN ANGEL SENDS GIDEON TO DELIVER THEM. (Jdg 6:11-16)
• GIDEON'S PRESENT CONSUMED BY FIRE. (Jdg. 6:17-32)
• THE SIGNS. (Jdg 6:33-39)
• GIDEON'S ARMY. (Jdg 7:1-8)
• HE IS ENCOURAGED BY THE DREAM AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BARLEY CAKE. (Jdg 7:9-15)
• HIS STRATAGEM AGAINST MIDIAN. (Jdg 7:16-24)
• THE EPHRAIMITES OFFENDED, BUT PACIFIED. (Jdg 8:1-9)
• ZEBAH AND ZALMUNNA TAKEN. (Jdg. 8:10-27)
• MIDIAN SUBDUED. (Jdg 8:28)
• ABIMELECH IS MADE KING BY THE SHECHEMITES. (Jdg 9:1-6)
• JOTHAM BY A PARABLE REPROACHES THEM. (Jdg 9:7-21)
• GAAL'S CONSPIRACY. (Jdg. 9:22-49)
• ABIMELECH SLAIN. (Jdg 9:50-57)
• TOLA JUDGES ISRAEL IN SHAMIR. (Jdg 10:1-5)
• ISRAEL OPPRESSED BY THE PHILISTINES AND AMMONITES. (Jdg 10:6-9)
• THEY CRY TO GOD. (Jdg 10:10-15)
• THEY REPENT; GOD PITIES THEM. (Jdg 10:16-18)
• JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 11:1-3)
• THE GILEADITES COVENANT WITH JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 11:4-11)
• HIS VOW. (Jdg 11:29-31)
• HE OVERCOMES THE AMMONITES. (Jdg 11:32-33)
• THE EPHRAIMITES QUARRELLING WITH JEPHTHAH. (Jdg 12:1-3)
• DISCERNED BY THE WORD SIBBOLETH, ARE SLAIN BY THE GILEADITES. (Jdg 12:4-15)
• ISRAEL SERVES THE PHILISTINES FORTY YEARS. (Jdg 13:1)
• AN ANGEL APPEARS TO MANOAH'S WIFE. (Jdg 13:2-10)
• THE ANGEL APPEARS TO MANOAH. (Jdg 13:11-14)
• MANOAH'S SACRIFICE. (Jdg 13:15-23)
• SAMSON BORN. (Jdg 13:24-25)
• SAMSON DESIRES A WIFE OF THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 14:1-5)
• HE KILLS A LION. (Jdg 14:5-9)
• HIS MARRIAGE FEAST. (Jdg 14:10-11)
• HIS RIDDLE. (Jdg 14:12-18)
• HE SLAYS THIRTY PHILISTINES. (Jdg 14:19-20)
• SAMSON IS DENIED HIS WIFE. (Jdg 15:1-2)
• HE BURNS THE PHILISTINES' CORN. (Jdg 15:3-8)
• HE IS BOUND BY THE MEN OF JUDAH, AND DELIVERED TO THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 15:9-13)
• SAMSON CARRIES AWAY THE GATES OF GAZA. (Jdg 16:1-3)
• DELILAH CORRUPTED BY THE PHILISTINES. (Jdg 16:4-14)
• HE IS OVERCOME. (Jdg 16:15-20)
• THE PHILISTINES TOOK HIM AND PUT OUT HIS EYES. (Jdg 16:21-22)
• THEIR FEAST TO DAGON. (Jdg 16:23-25)
• HIS DEATH. (Jdg 16:26-31)
• MICAH RESTORING THE STOLEN MONEY TO HIS MOTHER, SHE MAKES IMAGES. (Jdg 17:1-4)
• THE DANITES SEEK OUT AN INHERITANCE. (Jdg. 18:1-26)
• THEY WIN LAISH. (Jdg 18:27-29)
• THEY SET UP IDOLATRY. (Jdg 18:30-31)
• A LEVITE GOING TO BETHLEHEM TO FETCH HIS WIFE. (Jdg 19:1-15)
• AN OLD MAN ENTERTAINS HIM AT GIBEAH. (Jdg 19:16-21)
• THE GIBEAHITES ABUSE HIS CONCUBINE TO DEATH. (Jdg 19:22-28)
• THE LEVITE, IN A GENERAL ASSEMBLY, DECLARES HIS WRONG. (Jdg 20:1-7)
• THEIR DECREE. (Jdg 20:8-17)
• THE PEOPLE BEWAIL THE DESOLATION OF ISRAEL. (Jdg 21:1-15)
• THE ELDERS CONSULT HOW TO FIND WIVES FOR THOSE THAT WERE LEFT. (Jdg 21:16-21)

TSK: Judges (Book Introduction)

The book of Judges forms an important link in the history of the Israelites. It furnishes us with a lively description of a fluctuating and unsettled nation; a striking picture of the disorders and dangers which prevailed in a republic without magistracy; when " the high-ways were unoccupied, and the travellers walked through by-ways" (Jdg 5:6), when few prophets were appointed to control the people, and " every one did that which was right in his own eyes" (Jdg 17:6). It exhibits the contest of true religion with superstition; and displays the beneficial effects that flow from the former, and the miseries and evil consequences of impiety. It is a most remarkable history of the long-suffering of God towards the Israelites, in which we see the most signal instances of his justice and mercy alternately displayed. the people sinned, and were punished; they repented, and found mercy. These things are written for our warning. none should presume, for God is just; none need despair, for God is merciful. Independently of the internal evidence of the authenticity of this sacred book, the transactions it records are not only cited or alluded to by other inspired writers, but are further confirmed by the traditions current among heathen nations.

TSK: Judges 21 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Jdg 21:1, The people bewail the desolation of Benjamin; Jdg 21:8, By the destruction of Jabesh-gilead they provide them four hundred wives; Jdg 21:16, They advise the remainder to surprise the virgins that danced at Shiloh.

Poole: Judges (Book Introduction)

BOOK OF JUDGES

THE ARGUMENT

THE author of this book is not certainly known, whether it was Samuel, or Ezra, or some other prophet; nor is it material to know.

1. It matters not who was the king’ s secretary, or with what pen it was written, if it be once known that it was. the king who made the order or decree: it is sufficient that unto the Jews were committed to the oracles of God , Rom 3:2 , i.e. the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament, one part of which this was, by confession of all; and that the Jews did not falsify their trust therein, but kept those holy books themselves, and delivered them to the world, entire, without addition or diminution; for neither Christ nor his apostles, who severely rebuke them for their mistakes and misunderstandings of some passages of Scripture, ever charge them with any perfidiousness about the canon or books of the Scripture. This book is called the Book of Judges , because it treats of the judges, or of the state of the commonwealth of Israel under all the judges, except Eli and Samuel, who being the last of the judges, and the occasions or instruments of the change of this government, are omitted in this book. The judges were a sort of magistrates inferior to kings, and could neither make new laws, nor impose any tributes, but were the supreme executors of God’ s laws and commands, and the generals of their armies.

Poole: Judges 21 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 21

The people bewail the desolation of Benjamin, Jud 21:1-7 . The inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead, for not coming up to this battle, are all destroyed, excepting four hundred damsels, whom the Israelites bestow for wives on the remaining Benjamites, Jud 21:8-15 . They advise the rest to seize on the dancing maidens at the feast in Shiloh; and to carry away as many as they had need of Jud 21:16-21 . The answer wherewith they should pacify their relations, Jud 21:22 .

MHCC: Judges (Book Introduction)

The book of Judges is the history of Israel during the government of the Judges, who were occasional deliverers, raised up by God to rescue Israel from their oppressors, to reform the state of religion, and to administer justice to the people. The state of God's people does not appear in this book so prosperous, nor their character so religious, as might have been expected; but there were many believers among them, and the tabernacle service was attended to. The history exemplifies the frequent warnings and predictions of Moses, and should have close attention. The whole is full of important instruction.

MHCC: Judges 21 (Chapter Introduction)

The Israelites lament for the Benjamites.

Matthew Henry: Judges (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of Judges

This is called the Hebrew Shepher Shophtim , the Book of Judges, which the Syriac and Arabic versions enlarge upon, and call it, The Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel; the judgments of that nation being peculiar, so were their judges, whose office differed vastly from that of the judges of other nations. The Septuagint entitles it only Kritai , Judges. It is the history of the commonwealth of Israel, during the government of the judges from Othniel to Eli, so much of it as God saw fit to transmit to us. It contains the history (according to Dr. Lightfoot's computation) of 299 years, reckoning to Othniel of Judah forty years, to Ehud of Benjamin eighty years, to Barak of Naphtali forty years, to Gideon of Manasseh forty years, to Abimelech his son three years, to Tola of Issachar twenty-three, to Jair of Manasseh twenty-two, to Jephtha of Manasseh six, to Ibzan of Judah seven, to Elon of Zebulun ten, to Abdon of Ephriam eight, to Samson of Dan twenty, in all 299. As for the years of their servitude, as were Eglon is said to oppress them eighteen years and Jabin twenty years, and so some others, those must be reckoned to fall in with some or other of the years of the judges. The judges here appear to have been of eight several tribes; that honour was thus diffused, until at last it centred in Judah. Eli and Samuel, the two judges that fall not within this book, were of Levi. It seems, there was no judge of Reuben or Simeon, Gad or Asher. The history of these judges in their order we have in this book to the end of ch. 16. And then in the last five chapters we have an account of some particular memorable events which happened, as the story of Ruth did (Rth 1:1) in the days when the judges ruled, but it is not certain in which judge's days; but they are put together at the end of the book, that the thread of the general history might not be interrupted. Now as to the state of the commonwealth of Israel during this period, I. They do not appear here either so great or so good as one might have expected the character of such a peculiar people would be, that were governed by such laws and enriched by such promises. We find them wretchedly corrupted, and wretchedly oppressed by their neighbours about them, and nowhere in all the book, either in war or council, do they make any figure proportionable to their glorious entry into Canaan. What shall we say to it? God would hereby show us the lamentable imperfection of all persons and things under the sun, that we may look for complete holiness and happiness in the other world, and not in this. Yet, II. We may hope that though the historian in this book enlarges most upon their provocations and grievances, yet there was a face of religion upon the land; and, however there were those among them that were drawn aside to idolatry, yet the tabernacle-service, according to the law of Moses, was kept up, and there were many that attended it. Historians record not the common course of justice and commerce in a nation, taking that for granted, but only the wars and disturbances that happen; but the reader must consider the other, to balance the blackness of them. III. It should seem that in these times each tribe had very much its government in ordinary within itself, and acted separately, without one common head, or council, which occasioned many differences among themselves, and kept them from being or doing any thing considerable. IV. The government of the judges was not constant, but occasional; when it is said that after Ehud's victory the land rested eighty years, and after Barak's forty , it is not certain that they lived, much less that they governed, so long; but they and the rest were raised up and animated by the Spirit of God to do particular service to the public when there was occasion, to avenge Israel of their enemies, and to purge Israel of their idolatries, which are the two things principally meant by their judging Israel. Yet Deborah, as a prophetess, was attended for judgment by all Israel, before there was occasion for her agency in war, Jdg 4:4. V. During the government of the judges, God was in a more especial manner Israel's king; so Samuel tells them when they were resolved to throw off this form of government, 1Sa 12:12. God would try what his own law and the constitutions of that would do to keep them in order, and it proved that when there was no king in Israel every man did that which was right in his own eyes; he therefore, towards the latter end of this time, made the government of the judges more constant and universal that it was at first, and at length gave them David, a king after his own heart; then, and not till then, Israel began to flourish, which should make us very thankful for magistrates both supreme and subordinate, for they are ministers of God unto us for good. Four of the judges of Israel are canonized (Heb 11:32), Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephtha. The Learned bishop Patrick thinks the prophet Samuel was the penman of this Book.

Matthew Henry: Judges 21 (Chapter Introduction)

The ruins of the tribe of Benjamin we read of in the foregoing chapter; now here we have, I. The lamentation which Israel made over these ruins (Jdg 21:1-4, Jdg 21:6, Jdg 21:15). II. The provision they made for the repair of them out of the 600 men that escaped, for whom they procured wives, 1. Of the virgins of Jabesh-Gilead, when they destroyed that city for not sending its forces to the general rendezvous (Jdg 21:5, Jdg 21:7-14). 2. Of the daughters of Shiloh (Jdg 21:16-25). And so this melancholy story concludes.

Constable: Judges (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The English title, Judges, comes to us from the Latin translation (Vulgate) that the Greek translation (Septuagint) influenced. In all three languages the title means "judges." This title is somewhat misleading, however, because most English-speaking people associate the modern concept of a judge with Israel's judges. As we shall see, judges then were very different from judges now. The Hebrew title is also Judges (Shophetim). The book received its name from its principle characters, as the Book of Joshua did.

The judge in Israel was not a new office during the period of history that this book records. Moses ordered the people to appoint judges in every Israelite town to settle civil disputes (Deut. 16:18). In addition, there was to be a chief justice at the tabernacle who would, with the high priest, help settle cases too difficult for the local judges (Deut. 17:9). Evidently there were several judges at the tabernacle who served as a supreme court (Deut. 19:17).

When Joshua died God did not appoint a man to succeed him as the military leader of the entire nation of Israel. Instead each tribe was to proceed to conquer and occupy its allotted territory. As the need arose God raised up several different individuals who were judges in various parts of Israel at various times to lead segments of the Israelites against local enemies. These judges were similar to modern mayors of towns. God endowed them with certain qualities and identified them in various ways as being those He had chosen to lead His people. This leadership sometimes involved military command. As God had raised up Moses and Joshua, and as he would raise up David (1 Sam. 16:13), so He also raised up the judges. The writer also described Yahweh as a judge in Judges (11:27). This points out the fact that the judges were God's agents in Israel who judged under Him at this period in the nation's history.

"Though the judge enjoyed great prestige, he was in no sense a king. His authority was neither absolute, nor permanent, nor in any case hereditary; it rested solely in those personal qualities (the charisma) that gave evidence that he was the man of Yahweh's spirit. It was a type of authority perfectly expressive of the faith and constitution of early Israel: the God-King's direct leadership of his people through his spirit-designated representative. . . .

"The judges were by no means men of identical character. Some (e.g., Gideon) rose to their task at the behest of a profound experience of divine vocation; one (Jephthah) was no better than a bandit who knew how to strike a canny bargain; one (Samson) was an engaging rogue whose fabulous strength and bawdy pranks became legendary. None, so far as we know, ever led a united Israel into battle. All, however, seem to have had this in common: they were men who, stepping to the fore in times of danger, by virtue only of those personal qualities (charisma) which gave evidence to their fellows that Yahweh's spirit was upon them, rallied the clans against the foe."¹

Judges is the second book of the Former Prophets section of the Hebrew Old Testament. As I pointed out in the notes on Joshua, the fact that the Hebrews placed the book in this section of their canon is significant. It demonstrates that they recognized it as God's selective history of the period designed to teach spiritual lessons more than simply to record historical facts. God revealed Himself through the events of life and history as well as through the sermons of the prophets.

Date and Writer

Internal references help us locate the approximate date of composition of this book. The clause, "In those days there was no king in Israel," (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25) suggests that someone wrote Judges during the monarchical period that followed the period of rule by judges (amphictyony). Someone probably wrote it after 1051 B.C. when Saul became king. However at the time of writing Jerusalem was still in the hands of the Jebusites (1:21). David captured Jerusalem about 1004 B.C. Therefore the writing of Judges seems to date between 1051 and 1004 B.C.

Jewish tradition suggests that Samuel wrote Judges.² This was the opinion of the writers of the Talmud, the collection of Jewish writings that grew up around revealed Scripture beginning very early in Israel's history. Samuel is a likely writer because of his role in Israel when someone wrote Judges. Samuel's ministry began about 1090 B.C. and apparently ended a few years before Saul's death (ca. 1021 B.C.). If Samuel wrote Judges, he probably did so between 1051 and about 1021 B.C.

Scope

In contrast to Joshua, which spans only about 35 years, Judges covers a much longer period of Israel's history.

The book opens shortly after the death of Joshua (1:1). God did not give us sufficient information to enable us to fix the date of Joshua's death. Leon Wood figured that he died about 1390 B.C.³ Eugene Merrill calculated his death at about 1366 B.C.⁴ The latest event the writer of Judges recorded is probably the death of Samson (16:30-31). Wood believed Samson died about 1055 B.C.⁵ Merrill wrote that he died near 1084 B.C.⁶ Consequently the Book of Judges records about 300 years of Israel's history (cf. 11:26).⁷ The period of rule by the judges, however, extended beyond the events the Book of Judges records to Saul's coronation in 1050 or 1051 B.C.⁸ According to Wood's chronology this was five years beyond the end of Judges and according to Merrill's it was 33 years beyond.

The judgeships of some of the individual judges apparently overlapped. Some ruled in one area of Israel while one or more others ruled elsewhere in some cases.⁹

The Book of Judges does not record the ministries of all Israel's judges. Eli and Samuel were also judges whose work the writer of 1 Samuel recorded. Only the judges whom the divine Author selected for inclusion appear in this book.

Purpose

Arthur Cundall suggested that one of the purposes of Judges may have been to provide apologetic justification for Israel's monarchy.¹⁰ William Dumbrell believed its purpose was primarily to show the sovereign grace of God in preserving Israel in spite of Israel.¹¹ Leon Wood wrote that its primary purpose was to show why Israel did not experience God's promised blessings.¹² Herbert Wolf believed the primary purpose was to show that Israel's spiritual condition determined its political and material situation.¹³ Daniel Block argued that it was to reveal the Canaanization of Israel in the premonarchic period of Israel's history.¹⁴ All these explanations seem to me to be in harmony with what the book records.

Message¹⁵

Joshua reveals that victory, success, and progress result when God's people trust and obey Him consistently. Judges shows that defeat, failure, and retrogression follow when they fail to trust and obey consistently. In this respect Joshua and Judges are like two sides of one coin. The former is a positive lesson and the latter a negative one.

Judges portrays the deterioration of the nation of Israel: what caused it, the course it followed, and the chaos that resulted.

Israel failed because her heart turned from Yahweh, and then her head forsook His covenant. Keil and Delitzsch wrote, "The writer writes throughout from a prophet's point of view. He applies the standard of the law to the spirit of the age by which the nation was influenced as a whole, and pronounces a stern and severe sentence upon all deviations from the path of rectitude set before it in the law."¹⁶

We could visualize the structure of the book as a descending spiral. Israel departed from God, fell under His discipline, repented, experienced deliverance from her oppressors, dedicated herself anew to Yahweh, experienced His blessing, and then apostatized again. In each cycle Israel seems to have sunk lower than she had been previously even though each cycle included a spiritual revival.

Judges reveals the course and process by which Israel deteriorated as a nation. The same process takes place on the personal level as well as on the national level, but it is easier to observe on the national level in Judges.

The root cause of Israel's deterioration was religious apostasy. The Israelites turned from God. They did not drive out the Canaanites as God had commanded (1:21, 27-33). Instead they made covenants with them (2:1-2). Rather than destroying the pagan altars, the Israelites served idols and forsook the Lord (2:11-12, 17, 19).

Their apostasy began with toleration of things that God had condemned and prohibited. In time the Israelites began to admire these things. Finally they conformed to them.

The story of Micah and the Danites (chs. 17-18) is a short illustration of the religious apostasy in Israel at this time. Chapters 17-21 are an appendix to the book.

Religious apostasy led to political disorganization in Israel. Shortly after Israel departed from God it began to come apart as a nation. The people stopped working together toward their God-given goal of possessing the entire land and began fighting with one another instead. At the beginning of the amphictyony the tribes were fairly united, but by the end of this period of Israel's history anarchy prevailed (21:25).

The government in Israel deteriorated from theocracy (rule by God) to anarchy (no rule or government). Israel became fragmented, weak, and unable to withstand her enemies. This is ironic because after Joshua died Israel was in position to begin to enjoy the benefits of the theocracy in the land for the first time. Until Judges opens, God was preparing Israel to enjoy the theocracy in the land.

There are several examples of tribal jealousies in Judges (e.g., 8:1-3; 12:1-6), but the worst example of political disorganization is the vignette that concludes the book. This is the civil war in which 11 of the tribes almost annihilated the twelfth, Benjamin (chs. 20-21). Instead of destroying the Canaanites, God's people allowed them to live among them while the Israelites proceeded to destroy one another.

Another evidence of Israel's deterioration as a nation was social chaos.

Three characteristics marked the social chaos in Israel during the period of the judges. Lawlessness characterized national life. People were afraid to go out in public and traveled the byways rather than the highways of the land (5:6). People committed violent crimes without fear of punishment (ch. 19). Blindness also characterized the people. They were blind to what was happening in their midst, namely, God using discipline after apostasy to bring them to repentance and deliverance. They were also blind to God's dealings with their ancestors in their history. Third, immorality marked Israel's social life. Even Samson, one of the judges, was a victim of this cancer.

The story of the Levite and his concubine who visited the town of Gibeah (ch. 19) is a slice of life out of the period of the judges that shows the immorality that characterized Israel's social life. The behavior demonstrated in this story was the fruit of departure from God. The sin that had previously characterized the Canaanites of Sodom (Gen. 19) now marked God's people. Chapter 19 is a third part of the appendix to the book.

God revealed this process of deterioration to warn all people. Spiritual apostasy leads to political disorganization and social chaos. Social and governmental evils rise out of spiritual conditions. When the Israelites repented and rededicated themselves to God, God brought political deliverance and restored social order.

Judges not only reveals what causes deterioration, but it also clarifies the steps to restoration. Israel's history during this period resembles a downward spiral. The general trend was downward. Nevertheless there were six revivals of the peoples' faith in God and commitment to him too. These revivals cycled in Israel's history at this time.

Israel began from a privileged position of divine blessing.

In time the people apostatized by turning away from God and His covenant to the gods and practices of the Canaanites.

To bring them back to Himself God disciplined His people by allowing them to fall under the control and domination of their enemies. Israel chose to bow down to idols, so God allowed the idolaters to bend her over in bondage. The Israelites tolerated the Canaanites, but God made the Canaanites intolerant of them. The people with the birthright to the land had to hide in caves and among the rocks fearing to show themselves (6:2). God disciplined them severely for their apostasy. In Joshua God dealt with sin primarily among the Canaanites, but in Judges He dealt with it primarily among the Israelites. However, God's discipline was always remedial. God designed it to bring the Israelites back to a consciousness of sin and their need for God.

When the Israelites cried out to Yahweh in repentance, God heard their cry and delivered them mercifully. I mean "repentance" in the general sense of turning to God, not in the specific sense of cleaning up the life. God did not give deliverance as a reward the people had earned, but as grace in response to their helpless cry, as the text makes clear.

When they truly repented, He delivered them by raising up a judge. In each case, deliverance came at the right moment. It always came by the right instrument. God raised up the right person in each case. In almost every case God used one person, either a man or a woman. Judges reveals how God remarkably works through all types of different individuals to accomplish His purposes. He raised up the judge whom He had prepared for the needs of his time and place. Each judge was just right for his mission. In almost every case God used one single individual to change the whole course of history in Israel. E. M. Bounds wrote, "The Holy Spirit does not flow through methods, but through man. He does not come on machinery, but on men. He does not anoint plans, but people--people of prayer."

As a result of this deliverance the people rededicated themselves anew to Yahweh. Spiritual revival was the result of God's physical deliverance.

The people then began to enjoy God's blessing again. God gave them rest from the oppression of their enemies. Arthur Cundall labeled these stages "sin, servitude, supplication, and salvation."¹⁷

God's methods are the same today as they were in the days of the judges.

The fact that the writer repeated this cycle of events six times in Judges points to its timeless quality and its universality. Charles Feinberg wrote, "If ever there were history with a purpose it is here."¹⁸

I would state the message of the Book of Judges therefore as follows. Apostasy leads to disorganization and chaos, but repentance results in deliverance and blessing. This is true nationally and personally.

Constable: Judges (Outline)

Outline

I. The reason for Israel's apostasy 1:1-3:6

A. Hostilities between the Israelites and the Canaanites after Joshua's death 1:1-2:5

1. Initial successes and failures ch. 1

2. The announcement of God's discipline 2:1-5

B. Israel's conduct toward Yahweh and Yahweh's treatment of Israel in the period of the judges 2:6-3:6

1. Review of Joshua's era 2:6-10

2. The pattern of history during the judges' era 2:11-23

3. God's purposes with Israel 3:1-6

II. The record of Israel's apostasy 3:7-16:31

A. The first apostasy 3:7-11

B. The second apostasy 3:12-31

1. Oppression under the Moabites and deliverance through Ehud 3:12-30

2. Oppression under the Philistines and deliverance through Shamgar 3:31

C. The third apostasy chs. 4-5

1. The victory over Jabin and Sisera ch. 4

2. Deborah's song of victory ch. 5

D. The fourth apostasy 6:1-10:5

1. The story of Gideon 6:1-8:32

2. Israel's departure from Yahweh 8:33-35

3. The story of Abimelech ch. 9

4. The judgeships of Tola and Jair 10:1-5

E. The fifth apostasy 10:6-12:15

1. Renewed oppression 10:6-7

2. Oppression under the Ammonites 10:8-18

3. Deliverance through Jephthah 10:1-12:7

4. The judgeships of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon 12:8-15

F. The sixth apostasy chs. 13-16

1. Samson's birth ch. 13

2. Samson's intended marriage to the Timnite ch. 14

3. Samson's vengeance on the Philistines ch. 15

4. Samson's final fatal victory ch. 16

III. The results of Israel's apostasy ch. 17-21

A. The idolatry of Micah and the Danites ch. 17-18

1. The idolatry of Micah ch. 17

2. The apostasy of the Danites ch. 18

B. The immorality of Gibeah and the Benjamites chs. 19-21

1. The atrocity in Gibeah ch. 19

2. The civil war in Israel ch. 20

3. The preservation of Benjamin ch. 21

Constable: Judges

Judges

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan. Land of the Bible. Phildelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969.

Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Poetry. New York: Basic Books, 1985.

Amit, Yairah. "Judges 4: Its Contents and Form." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 39 (October 1987):89-111.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Armerding, Carl. "Samson." Interest 49:3 (October 1983):4-7.

Auld, A. G. "Judges I and History: A Reconsideration." Vetus Testamentum 25 (1975):261-85.

"Avraham Biran--Twenty Years of Digging at Tell Dan." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:4 (July-August 1987):12-25.

Barré, Michael L. "The Meaning of prsdn in Judges III 22." Vetus Testamentum 41:1 (1991):1-11.

Bienkowski, Piotr. "The Role of Hazor in the Late Bronze Age." Palestinian Exploration Quarterly 119:1 (January-June 1987):50-61.

Block, Daniel I. "Gideon: A Rough Vessel." The Standard 77:2 (February 1987):25-27.

_____. Judges, Ruth. The New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999.

_____. "The Period of the Judges: Religious Disintegration under Tribal Rule." In Israel's Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison, pp. 39-58. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

_____. "The Role of Language in Ancient Israelite Perception of National Identity." Journal of Biblical Literature 103:3 (September 1984):321-340.

_____. "Will the Real Gideon Please Stand Up? Narrative Style and Intention in Judges 6-9." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):353-66.

Boling, Robert G. Judges. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975.

Bright, John. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Bruce, F. F. "Judges." In The New Bible Commentary: Revised, pp. 252-276. Edited by D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970.

Bush, George. Notes on Judges. New York: Newman & Ivison, 1852; reprint ed., Minneapolis: James & Klock Publishing, 1976.

Cassel, Samuel H. "Strong Man: A Scripture Study of the Weaknesses in Strength." Foundations 2 (1959):264-68.

Childe, V. Gordon. New Light on the Most Ancient East. New York: Norton, 1969.

Constable, Thomas L. "A Theology of Joshua, Judges, and Ruth." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 89-113. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Cottrell, Leonard. The Anvil of Civilization. New York: New American Library, 1957.

Craigie, Peter C. "A Reconsideration of Shamgar ben Anath (Judg. 3:31 and 5:6)." Journal of Biblical Literature 91.2 (June 1971):239-40.

_____. Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Creason, James Frederick, Jr. "A Biblical Theology of Judges." Biblical Viewpoint 19:2 (November 1985):73-77.

Culver, Robert D. "Did Jephthah Really Slay His Daughter and Offer Her Body as a Burnt Offering?" Evangelical Christian 55:2 (February 1959):69-70.

Cundall, Arthur E. "Judges." In Judges and Ruth by Arthur E. Cundall and Leon Morris. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1968.

_____. "Judges--An Apology for the Monarchy." Expository Times 81 (October 1969-September 1970):178-81.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Daube, D. "Gideon's Few." Journal of Jewish Studies 7 (1956):155-61.

Davis, Dale Ralph. "Comic Literature--Tragic Theology: A Study of Judges 17-18." Westminster Theological Journal 46 (1984):156-63.

_____. Such a Great Salvation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990.

Davis, John J. "Conquest and Crisis." In A History of Israel by John J. Davis and John C. Whitcomb. N.p., 1970; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Day, John. "Asherah in the Hebrew Bible and Northwest Semitic Literature." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):385-408.

Dothan, Trude. "What We Know About the Philistines." Biblical Archaeology Review 8:4 (July-August 1982):20-44.

Dumbrell, William J. "In Those Days There Was No King in Israel; Every Man Did What Was Right in His Own Eyes.' The Purpose of the Book of Judges Reconsidered." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. 25 (1983):23-33.

Dyer, Charles H., and Eugene H Merrill. The Old Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing, 2001.

Emmrich, Martin. "The Symbolism of the Lion and the Bees: Another Ironic Twist in the Samson Cycle." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001):

Exum, J. Cheryl. "Aspects of Symmetry and Balance in the Samson Saga." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 19 (1981):3-29.

_____. "The Centre Cannot Hold: Thematic and Textual Instabilities in Judges." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52 (July 1990):410-31.

_____. "The Theological Dimension of the Samson Saga." Vetus Testamentum 33:1 (1983):30-45.

Exum, J. Cheryl, and J. William Whedbee. "Isaac, Samson, and Saul: Reflections on the Comic and Tragic Visions." Semeia 32 (1984):5-40.

Feinberg, Charles L. "Notes on the Book of Judges." Unpublished class notes, Dallas Theological Seminary, n.d.

Ferguson, Robert U., Jr. "The Danger of Playing Games with God." Pulpit Digest 64:468 (July-August 1984):31-34.

Fritz, Volkmar. "Conquest or Settlement? The Early Iron Age in Palestine." Biblical Archaeologist 50:2 (June 1987):84-100.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Garstang, John. Joshua, Judges. The Foundations of Bible History series. New York: Richard R. Smith, 1931.

Gooding, D. W. "The Composition of the Book of Judges." Eretz Israel 16 (1982):70-79.

Gordon, Cyrus. The Ancient Near East. New York: W. W. Horton, 1965.

Gottlieb, Freema. "Three Mothers." Judaism 30 (Spring 1981):194-203.

Gray, G. Buchanan. The Forms of Hebrew Poetry. Library of Biblical Studies series. Revised ed. New York: Ktav Publishing Co., 1972.

Gray, John. Joshua, Judges and Ruth. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1967.

Greenspahn, Frederick E. "An Egyptian Parallel to Judg 17:6 and 21:25." Journal of Biblical Literature 101:1 (1982):129-35.

_____. "The Theology of the Framework of Judges." Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):385-96.

Gunn, D. M. "Narrative Patterns and Oral Tradition in Judges and Samuel." Vetus Testamentum 24:3 (July 1974):286-317.

Halpern, Baruch. "The Rise of Abimelek Ben-Jerubbaal." Hebrew Annual Review 2 (1978):79-100.

Hawkes, Jacquetta. The First Great Civilizations. New York: Knopf, 1973.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. 6 vols. New York: Revell, n.d.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Inrig, Gary. Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1939 ed. S.v. "Judges, Book of," by A. S. Geden, 3:1772-75.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kallai, Z. "The Conquest of Northern Palestine in Joshua and Judges." Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol I. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1969.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 3 From Joshua to Solomon." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 61 (1971):5-14.

Klein, L. R. The Triumph of Irony in the Book of Judges. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement 68. Sheffield, England: Almond Press, 1987.

Lasine, Stuart. "Guest and Host in Judges 19: Lot's Hospitality in an Inverted World." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 29 (1984):37-59.

Laughlin, John C. H. "Dan." Biblical Illustrator 9:4 (Summer 1983):40-46.

Lawhead, Alvin S. "Grace in the Book of Judges." Preacher's Magazine 58:3 (March-May 1983):25-27.

Lewis, Arthur H. Judges and Ruth. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

Lindars, Barnabas. "Deborah's Song: Women in the Old Testament." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 65:2 (Spring 1983):158-75.

Lindsey, F. Duane. "Judges." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 373-414. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

MacIntosh, A. A. "The Meaning of MKLYM in Judges XVIII 7." Vetus Testamentum 35:1 (January 1985):68-76.

Malamat, A. "The Danite Migration and the Pan-Israelite Exodus-Conquest: A Biblical Narrative Pattern." Biblica 51 (1970):1-16.

Manor, Dale W. "The Topography and Geography of the Jezreel Valley as they Contribute to the Battles of Deborah and Gideon." Near Eastern Archaeology Society Bulletin NS28 (Winter 1987):25-32.

Margalith, Othniel. "The Legends of Samson/Heracles." Vetus Testamentum 37:1 (January 1987):63-70.

_____. "More Samson Legends." Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):397-405.

_____. "Samson's Foxes." Vetus Testamentum 35:2 (April 1985):224-29.

_____. "Samson's Riddle and Samson's Magic Locks." Vetus Testamentum 36:2 (April 1986):225-34.

Matthews, Victor H. "Hospitality and Hostility in Judges 4." Biblical Theology Bulletin 21 (Spring 1991):13-21.

Mazar, Amihai. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000-586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday, 1990.

_____. "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite High place' From the Time of the Judges." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):34-40.

_____. "On Cult Places and Early Israelites: A Response to Michael Coogan." Biblical Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):45.

_____ "A Philistine Temple at Tell Qasile." Biblical Archaeologist 36 (1973):43-48.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "Paul's Use of About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.

Mitchell, T. Crichton. "Abimelech--The Bramble King." Preacher's Magazine 58:3 (March-May 1983):16-19, 61.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the Author, P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Mosca, Paul G. "Who Seduced Whom? A Note on Joshua 15:18// Judges 1:14." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 (1984):18-22.

Mullen, E. Theodore, Jr. "The Minor Judges': Some Literary and Historical Considerations." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44 (April 1982):185-201.

Nel, Philip. "The Riddle of Samson (Judg. 14, 14.18)." Biblica 66:4 (1985):534-45.

The New Bible Dictionary. 2nd ed. S.v. "Judges," by G. T. Manley and D. J. Wiseman.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Mesopotamia," by D. J. Wiseman.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Mill, Millstone," by A. R. Millard.

_____. 2nd ed. S.v. "Number," by R. A. H. Gunner.

Niditch, Susan. "The Sodomite' Theme in Judges 19-20: Family, Community, and Social Disintegration." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 44:3 (July 1982):365-78.

Noth, Martin. The History of Israel. 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1960.

O'Connell, R. H. The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges. Vetus Testamentum Supplement 63. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1996.

O'Connor, M. "The Women in the Book of Judges." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):277-93.

The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. Second ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Paterson, John H. "The Touchy Tribe." Toward the Mark 16:6 (November-December 1987):110-13.

Peet, J. H. John. "The Chronology of the Judges--Some Thoughts." Journal of Christian Reconstruction 9:1-2 (1982-83):161-81.

Pfeiffer, Robert H. Introduction to the Old Testament. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1941.

Rediger, G. Lloyd. "The Samson Syndrome." Church Management--The Clergy Journal 60:7 (May-June 1984):78-79.

Rendall, Ted S. "The Samson Syndrome." Prairie Overcomer 27:7 (July-August 1984):4-19.

Revell, E. J. "The Battle with Benjamin (Judges xx 29-48) and Hebrew Narrative Techniques." Vetus Testamentum 35:4 (October 1985):417-33.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Scott, Walter. Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. London: Pickering and Inglis Ltd., n.d.

Shanks, Hershel. "Two Early Cult Sites Now Questioned." Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-February 1988):48-52.

Soggin, J. A. Judges: A Commentary. Translated by J. S. Bowden. Old Testament Library series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981.

Stek, John H. "The Bee and the Mountain Goat: A Literary Reading of Judges 4." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 53-86. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Tanner, J. Paul. "The Gideon Narrative as the Focal Point of Judges." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:594 (April-June 1992):146-61.

Torcszyner, Harry. "The Riddle in the Bible," Hebrew Union College Annual 1 (1924):125-49.

Tsevat, Matitiahu. "Two Old Testament Stories [Gen. 32:23-32 and Judg. 10:1-5; 12:7-15] and their Hittite Analogues." Journal of the American Oriental Society 103:1 (January-March 1983):321-26.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. 1957 ed., S.v. "Philistines," by Merrill F. Unger, pp. 859-61.

Unterman, Jeremiah. "The Literary Influence of The Binding of Isaac' (Genesis 22) on The Outrage at Gibeah' (Judges 19)." Hebrew Annual Review 4 (1980):161-66.

van Wyk, W. C. "The Fable of Jotham in its Ancient Near Eastern Setting." In Studies in Wisdom Literature, pp. 89-95. Edited by W. C. van Wyk. OTWSA Series, nos. 15 & 16. N.p., n.d.

Vickery, John B. "In Strange Ways: The Story of Samson." In Images of Man and God: Old Testament Short Stories in Literary Focus. Edited by Burke O. Long. Sheffield, England: Almond Press, 1981.

Walvoord, John F. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

Washburn, David L. "The Chronology of Judges: Another Look." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:588 (October-December 1990):414-25.

Webb, Barry G." The Book of Judges: An Integrated Reading. JSOT Supplement Series 46. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987.

_____. The Theme of the Jephthah Story (Judges 10:6-12:7)." Reformed Theological Review 45:2 (May-August 1986):34-43.

Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language. College ed. Cleveland and New York: World Publishing Co., 1953.

Wilkinson, Elizabeth. "The Hapax Legomenon of Judges IV 18." Vetus Testamentum 33:4 (1983):512-13.

Williams, J. G. "The Structure of Judges 2:6-16:31." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 49 (1991):77-85.

Wolf, Herbert. "Judges." In Deuteronomy-2 Samuel. Vol. 3 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Wood, Leon. Distressing Days of the Judges. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

_____. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Wright, G. Ernest. Shechem, the Biography of a Biblical City. New York: McGraw Hill, 1965.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Judges (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

This Book is called Judges, because it contains the history of what passed under the government of the judges, who ruled Israel before they had kings. The writer of it, according to the more general opinion, was the prophet Samuel. (Challoner) --- Some are of opinion, that the judges might have each left records of their respective administration, (Menochius) which might be put in order by Samuel. The author of this book seems to have lived under the reign of Saul, before David had expelled the Jebusites, chap. xviii. 31. (Du Hamel) --- The captivity, which is mentioned [in] ver. 30, must be understood of that when the ark of God, as well as the idol Micha, and may of the people were taken by the Philistines. (Huet) --- Many passages of the Psalms, &c., are taken from this book, which shew its antiquity, Psalm lxvii. 8., and 2 Kings xi. 21. The divine Providence is here displayed in a very striking manner. (Du Hamel) --- The theocracy still subsisted and God generally chose these judges to be his ministers, and to deliver the people, on their repentance, from some dreadful calamity. (Haydock) --- They exercised a supreme power, yet without bearing the insignia of regal authority, or imposing taxes, or making any alteration in the established laws. The Suffetes, who were Carthaginian magistrates, seem to have taken their name from these Ssuptim. (Du Hamel) --- When God did not raise up judges, in an extraordinary manner, a kind of ananchy prevailed. (Haydock) --- Each of the tribes regarded only their own affairs, and the republic was dissolved. (Grotius) --- Prosperous and unfortunate days succeeded each other, in proportion as the people gave themselves up to repentance or to dissolution. Sicut se habebant peccata populi & misericordia Dei, alternaverunt prospera & adversa bellorum. (St. Augustine, City of God xviii. 23.) St. Jerome (ep. ad Eust. & ad Paulin.) exhorts us to penetrate the spiritual sense of the historical books, and he regards "the judges as so many figures" of the apostles, who established the church of Christ. Though some of them had been noted for their misconduct, they were reclaimed by the grace of God. Then all the judges, every one by name, whose heart was not corrupted, who turned not away from the Lord, that their memory might be blessed, &c., Ecclesiasticus xlvi. 13, 14. (Worthington) --- St. Paul mentions four of them, though the conduct of Jephte and of Samson might have been regarded as more exceptionable than that of Othoniel, who is said to have been filled with the spirit of the Lord, chap. iii. 10. Serarius doubts not but they are all in heaven. Salien (in the year of the world 2640,) supposes that the transactions recorded in the five last chapters, took place before this 40th year from the death of Josue, which was the last of Othoniel. With respect to the chronology of these times, there are many opinions. Houbigant endeavours to shew that the system of Usher is inadmissible, as well as that of Petau. Marsham maintains that many of the captivities, and of the Judges, related only to some tribes, so that the different years which are specified, must be referred to the same period of time. Thus while Jephte ruled over those on the east side of the Jordan, and fought against the Ammonites, other judges endeavoured to repel the armies of the Philistines on the west. See 3 Kings vi. 1., and Judges xi. 16. By this expedient, he finds no difficulty in shewing that 480 years elapsed from the departure out of Egypt till the building of the temple, and that the Israelites had occupied the country of the Ammonites during the space of 300 years. (Haydock) --- Houbigant seems to adopt this system in some respects, and he thinks that errors have crept into some of the numbers, so that Aod procured a peace of only 20 instead of 80 years, &c. He observes that the name of judge here designates, 1. A warrior, like Samson; 2. a person who passes sentence according to the law, which was the office of Heli; 3. one divinely commissioned to exercise the sovereign authority, as Samuel did, even after Saul had been elected king. (Proleg. Chronol.) Others have compared the power of these judges with that of the Roman Dictators, or the Archontes of Athens. (Serarius) --- They were properly God's lieutenants. Their revenue seems to have been very precarious, and their exterior deportment modest and unassuming. They were guided by the declarations of the high priests, when arrayed with the Urim and Thummim; and their business was to promote the observance of the true religion, and to defend the people of God. This book concludes with the history of Samson, describing the transactions of 317 years, (Calmet) according to the calculation of Usher, which has met with the approbation of many of the learned, and is therefore chiefly inserted in this edition, as it was in that which was published in 1791, at Dublin, by the care of the Rev. B. Mac Mahon, who seems to have made some alterations. It is not indeed free from many serious difficulties. But we have not leisure to examine them at present. See chap. iii. 11, 30. We shall only subjoin the chronological table of Houbigant, which is not very common, that the reader may perceive where they are chiefly at variance. Moses governed 40 years, Josue 20, the Ancients 20, king of Mesopotamia 8, Othoniel 40, Moabites 18, Aod 20, Samgar 0, the Chanaanites 20, Debora and Barac 40, Madianites 7, Gedeon 40, Abimelech 3, Thola 23, Ammonites 0, Jair 22, Jephte 6, Abesan 7, Ahialon 10, Abdon 8, Philistines 0, Samson 20, and with Heli 20, Heli and Samuel 25, Samuel and Saul 20, David 40, Solomon 3. In the 4th year of his reign the temple was begun, 480 years after the liberation from Egypt. Those to whom no years are assigned, lived at the same time with others whose years enter into the calculation. Thus Samgar gained a victory over the Philistines, while the Chanaanites held the Israelites in subjection, chap. iii. 31. For other particulars we must refer to the author. (Chron. sacra.) (Haydock)

Gill: Judges (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JUDGES

The title of this book in the Hebrew copies is Sepher Shophetim, the Book of Judges; but the Syriac and Arabic interpreters call it,

"the Book of the Judges of the Children of Israel;''

and the Septuagint only Judges; so called, not because it was written by them, though some think it was compiled out of annals and diaries kept by them; but it seems to be the work of one person only: the true reason of its name is, because it treats of the judges of Israel, gives an account of their lives and actions, and especially such as concerned their office; which office was different from that of kings, and seems only to have been occasional, and chiefly lay in delivering the people out of the hands of their enemies, when oppressed, distressed, or carried captive by them; in protecting them in the enjoyment of their country, rights, and liberties; in leading out their armies against their enemies when needful; and in settling differences, judging law suits, and administering justice. The government of the nation, during their time, was a theocracy. It is not certain who was the penman of this book; some ascribe it to King Hezekiah, others to Ezra; but the Jewish writers ^a are generally of opinion that it was written by Samuel, which is most likely, who was the last of the judges; and it seems plainly to be written before the times of David, us appears from a speech of Joab, 2Sa 11:21; and from some passages in Psa 68:8, which seem to refer or allude to Jdg 5:4; and from Jerusalem being called Jebus, which shows it to be inhabited by the Jebusites in the time of the writer of this book, whereas it was taken out of their hands by David; besides, Samuel himself refers to the annals of this book; 1Sa 12:9; and from whose testimonies, as well as from others in the New Testament, there is no doubt to be made of its being genuine and authentic, and written by divine inspiration; as is evident from the use the Apostle Paul, and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, have made of it, Act 13:20; it is useful as an history, and without which the history of the people of Israel would not be complete; it containing an account of all their judges, excepting the two last, Eli and Samuel, of whom an account is given in the following books, and of some facts incidental to those times, related in an appendix at the end of it, concerning the idol of Micah, and the war of Benjamin; and furnishes out many useful moral observations concerning God's displeasure at sin in his own people Israel, and his corrections for it; and about his providential care of them in raising up for them deliverers in their time of need, as well as points at various virtues and excellencies in great and good men, worthy of imitation. It contains, according to Piscator, Dr. Lightfoot, and others, an history of two hundred ninety and nine years.

Gill: Judges 21 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JUDGES 21

This chapter relates how that when the Israelites calmed down, and seriously to reflect on what had passed, they were sore grieved, and much lamented the case of Benjamin, and were particularly concerned what they should do for wives for those few men that remained, that the tribe might be built up again, Jdg 21:1 and for these they provided wives, partly out of Jabeshgilead, the inhabitants of which came not up to the convention at Mizpeh, and therefore they smote them, men, women, and children, only reserved four hundred virgins, whom they gave to the men of Benjamin, Jdg 21:8, and partly from among the daughters of Shiloh, taken at a yearly feast there, the taking of whom was connived at, the other number not being sufficient, Jdg 21:16-25.