Читать книгу Judges - Abraham Kuruvilla - Страница 7

Theology, Goals, Prolegomena

“Let those who love Him be like the rising of the sun in its strength.”

Judges 5:31b

The goal of preaching is to bring to bear divine guidelines for life from the biblical text upon the situation of the congregation, to align the community of God to the will of God for the glory of God. This is the preacher’s burden—the translation from the then of the ancient text to the now of modern listeners, with authority and relevance. This commentary is part of a larger endeavor to help the preacher make this move from text to praxis.1

THEOLOGY

Elsewhere it was proposed that the critical component of the ancient text to be borne into the lives of the modern audience was the theology of the pericope, what the author is doing with what he is saying in the text.2 This is what moves the people of God to valid application, for pericopal theology is the ideological vehicle through which divine priorities, principles, and practices are propounded for appropriation by readers.3 The goal of any homiletical transaction, thus, is the gradual alignment of the church, week by week, to the theology of the biblical pericopes preached. Pericope by pericope, the various aspects of Christian life, individual as well as corporate, are progressively brought into accord with God’s design for his creation: faith nourished, hope animated, confidence made steadfast, good habits confirmed, dispositions created, character molded, Christlikeness established.4

All such discrete units of pericopal theology together compose a holistic understanding of God and his relationship to his people, with each individual quantum of pericopal theology forming the weekly ground of transformation of the lives of God’s people into Christlikeness. In a sense, this week-by-week and sermon-by-sermon alignment to the call of each pericope is an imitation of Christ. This is at the core of the theological hermeneutic followed in this commentary, a christiconic hermeneutic specifically geared for preaching.5 Because the children of God are called to conform to the image of Christ, preachers everywhere are, in turn, called to discern the theology of the pericope—i.e., the facet of Christlikeness depicted therein—and apply it to the widely diverse situations of believers across the globe, across millennia, and across cultures, to enable them to emulate the perfect Man, their Lord Jesus Christ.6 In other words, while pericopal theology describes what Christ looks like, sermon applications based on pericopal theology tell us how we can begin to look more like him in our own particular circumstances. Unfortunately, the importance of the pericope and its theology—what the author is doing with what he is saying—and its employment in sermons for the edification of God’s people, have generally been neglected by Bible scholars. This work seeks to correct that misdirection.

GOALS

This commentary is part of a long-term endeavor to rectify the neglect of the pericope and its theology. Its goal is essentially this: to develop the theology of each pericope of Judges for preachers so that they may be able to proceed from this crucial intermediary to a sermon that provides valid application (i.e., application that is both authoritative and relevant). There is, thus, a twofold aspect to the homiletical transaction: the exposition of the theology of the pericope, and the delineation of how the latter may be applied in real life.

The first move, from text to (pericopal) theology, draws meaning from the biblical text with authority; the second, from theology to praxis, directs meaning to the situations of listeners with relevance. The advantage of employing pericopal theology as the intermediary between text and application is that its specificity for the chosen text makes possible a weekly movement from pericope to pericope, without the tedium of repetition of themes, but with a clear progression and development of distinct theological ideas as one preaches through a book. In sum, the theology of the pericope (a crystallization of which is labeled “Theological Focus” in this commentary) functions as the bridge between text and praxis, enabling the move from the then to the now for valid application. The resulting transformation of lives reflects a gradual and increasing alignment to the values of God’s kingdom and thus an increasing approximation of Christlikeness, as pericopes are sequentially preached. So, a pericope, as a quantum of the biblical text, is more than informing; it is transforming. Sermon by sermon and pericope by pericope, God’s people are being conformed into the image of Christ by the power of God’s Spirit (Rom 8:4, 29)—a christiconic hermeneutic.

This commentary, as with the others in this series, adopts a synchronic approach that deals with the final form of the text as we have it, construing it as a meaningful, coherent, canonical unit of theological worth. I take it that a biblical author writes purposefully, creating a text with intention, each part of it contributing to the overall theological agenda of the book. Each of the narratives in Judges “has a literary integrity apart from circumstances relating to the compositional process, the historical reality behind the story, or the interpretive agenda of the reader” and that privileging the pericope and its literary features will reveal its thrust, the theology of the pericope.7 This, of course, is not to deny the relationship between the pericope and the larger narrative it is part of. As with pearls and the necklace they make up—pearls are carefully chosen by color, grade, shape, and size to create the necklace—pericopes, too, are diligently selected and linked to create the larger account. Pericopes, thus, are interpreted by the arc of the broader text they create and, in turn, the trajectory of the overall text is determined by the theological thrusts of the individual pericopes it comprises. It is a “both . . . and . . . ” situation, a dual polarity true of any interpretive endeavor: the parts determine the whole and the whole determines the parts.

This work does not intend to lead preachers all the way to a fully developed sermon on each pericope; rather, it seeks to take them through the first move—from text to (pericopal) theology: the hermeneutical aspect of sermon preparation. Though that is the primary focus, the commentary does provide two “Possible Preaching Outlines” for each pericope, to advance preachers a few more steps closer to a sermon. However, they are left to work out the second move from theology to sermon/application (the rhetorical aspect of sermon preparation) on their own, providing appropriate moves-to-relevance, specific application, illustrations, etc., all of which can only be done by the shepherd who knows the flock well. Beyond a few general guidelines, it is impossible for a third party to determine what exactly specific application looks like for a particular audience. That is a task between the preacher, the Holy Spirit, and the congregation. Therefore, this is not a “preaching” commentary, in the usual sense. Rather it is a “theology-for-preaching” commentary, i.e., a work that seeks to undertake an extremely focused interpretation of the text, one that moves the preacher from text to pericopal theology, en route to a sermon. In that sense, this is a “theological” commentary.

Commentaries were described by Ernest Best as “the backbone of all serious studies of scripture.”8 Therefore, it is hoped that not only preachers, but all interested laypersons, Sunday School teachers, and others who teach Scripture will find this commentary—a small vertebra in that spinal column—helpful. For that matter, if application is the ultimate goal of Bible study of any kind and at any level, a work such as this promises to be useful even for those making their own way through Judges. Which brings me to another point: while a working knowledge of Hebrew will be very handy for the reader, Hebrew terms and phrases (and the rare Greek ones), wherever referred to in the commentary, have been both transliterated and translated, in order to enable those not as facile with the original language to use this work efficiently.9

Needless to say, in all sermonic enterprises, quality and depth and intensity of preaching go only so far towards accomplishing the spiritual formation of listeners. Augustine (De doctrina christiana 4.27.59) noted wisely: “But whatever may be the majesty of the style [of the preaching], the life of the speaker will count for more in securing the hearer’s compliance,” not to mention the divine work of the Spirit in the hearts of listeners. Therefore, this commentary is submitted with the prayer that preachers, the leaders of God’s people, will pay attention to their own lives first and foremost, as they work through Judges, seeking to align themselves to God’s call in each pericope of the book, thus becoming, in the power of the Spirit, a leader more Christlike.

PROLEGOMENA

The judges too, each when he was called,

all men whose hearts were never disloyal,

who never turned their backs on the Lord—

may their memory be blessed!

May their bones flower again from the tomb,

and may the names of those glorious men live again in their sons.

(Sir 46:11–12)

For all his enthusiasm, Jesus Ben Sira never mentions the name of a single judge, though he is keen to present other “glorious men” of Israel by name in preceding chapters (44:1—45:26). Perhaps that tells us something.

[T]he judges described in [the book of Judges] are anything but stirring, patriotic heroes. Rather, they represent almost caricatures of what a hero and leader should be, and they lead Israel from a unified nation cementing its covenant relationship with God, as in Josh 24, to a nation becoming an independent group of jealous tribes who compete with one another, steal priests from one another, and eventually decimate one whole tribe of their people and have to resort to a desperate measure to repopulate the tribe.10

As one traverses the book, it is not only the judges who become increasingly misguided, but the Israelites themselves become progressively more culpable. With Othniel, there is no mention of any unilateral tribal action—a perfect situation with the whole nation operating as one unit. With Ehud, the Ephraimites are mustered for war (Jdg 3:27), with no obvious input from Yahweh. With Barak, Zebulun and Naphtali are called in (4:10), but an entire chapter is given over to excoriate non-participating tribes (Judges 5). With Gideon, the Abiezrites, Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun, and Napthali are summoned (6:34–35), but the throng is culled by Yahweh to just a few hundred (7:4–8); a second rallying of troops, primarily of Ephraim (7:24) turns out to create a brouhaha, with this tribe protesting their late call into battle (8:1–3), though Gideon negotiates his way out of trouble. Not so with Jephthah: he gathers troops from Gilead and Manasseh (11:29), and later from Ephraim (12:1). This time also the Ephraimites are unhappy, but Jephthah shows no hint of diplomacy; instead, he slaughters them (12:2–6). With Samson, there is almost no national or tribal action (resembling the story of the first judge, Othniel) with one unfortunate exception: the Judahites turn Samson over to the Philistines (14:10–13)! And after the judges have passed from the scene, the Israelites plunge into an immoral cauldron of idolatry and brutality, and slaughter an entire tribe in a civil war (Judges 19–21). This book is, thus, quite negative: it begins bleakly, continues darkly, and ends horribly.

While it is easy to assume that the term “judges” deals with judicial functionaries, the verb “to judge” (jpv, shpt) does not always indicate such a responsibility. The legal and forensic functioning of “judges” in the OT is seen in their non-military activities depicted in Exod 18:13, 22, 26; Deut 16:18; 17:9, 12; 19:17–18; 21:2; 25:1–2; 1 Sam 4:18; 7:6, 15–17; 2 Sam 15:4; 1 Kgs 3:9, 28; 2 Kgs 15:5.11 In Judges, the function of these God-raised leaders is best as seen as military judge-deliverers, as indicated in 2:16–17: “And Yahweh raised up judges who delivered them from the hands of those who plundered them.”12 Block therefore suggests that the “judging” by these deliverers—the “major judges” of the book—is more likely that of “leading” or “governing,” especially in a militaristic fashion to overcome the primary problem facing their people: enemy oppression.13

Structure

The Body of the book of Judges (Jdg 3:7—16:31) is flanked by Prologues I and II (Jdg 1:1—2:5 and 2:6—3:6) and Epilogues I and II (17:1—18:31 and 19:1—21:25) 14:

The account of the judges in the Body is carefully structured, with twelve judges that directly or indirectly represent the twelve tribes of Israel. The order of the judges more or less follows a south-to-north sequence of tribes: Othniel (Judah), Ehud (Benjamin), Shamgar (perhaps Simeon, from his southern center of operations against the Philistines), Barak (Napthtali, but Deborah operated in Ephraim, 4:5), Gideon (half tribe of Manasseh), Tola (Issachar), Jair and Jephthah (Gilead, representing Gad and Reuben, and perhaps the other half tribe of Manasseh east of the Jordan, too), Ibzan and Elon (the latter was from Zebulun, so the former, from Bethlehem in the north, was likely to have hailed from Asher). Then we see Abdon, the Ephraimite, at a textual location where one might have expected Barak, the Naphtalite. Thus it appears that Barak and Abdon have effectively swapped seats, serving the narrator’s theological agenda, with Deborah’s presence in the Barak story lending it a quasi-Ephraimite flavor.15 After Abdon comes the last judge, Samson (Dan). “[T]his hypothesis becomes even more compelling when one considers how the arrangement of the twelve judges [in the Body] seems to reflect the same south-to-north geographic trajectory introduced in the prologue of the book in Judges 1.”16

Each of the judge stories follows a paradigmatic structure described in Pericope 2 (Jdg 2:6—3:11), in 2:11–19. It comprises Israel’s evildoing, punishment, groaning, Yahweh’s raising up of a deliverer, and his support for that individual, Israel’s deliverance, the land’s rest, and the judge’s demise (see below).17 But things begin to fall apart quite rapidly. Except for the consistent evildoing of the Israelites at the beginning of each account of the major judges, the shape of the paradigm governing the judge stories progressively disintegrates. Other than Othniel’s story—he was the model judge—the rest of the stories do not strictly adhere to the pattern. The deviations are important clues to the theologies of the individual pericopes.

On the other hand, the accounts of the minor judges do not follow this standard cyclical scheme set forth in 2:11–19; besides, their reports are abbreviated, without much narrative development.18 Yet there seems to be a “minor judge paradigm” unique for those accounts, comprising: tribe/clan/family lineage, years of service (in rounded numbers), evidence of peacefulness (amidst times of turmoil/transition), and the death and burial of the judge.19 All in all, it seems that the minor judges have been added to bring the total number of major and minor judges to twelve. Even if each does not unambiguously represent one of the twelve tribes of Israel, the numerical symbolism points to the fact that all of Israel was affected by the crises of that age. And thus all of God’s people of all time are being addressed in this book.

Williams’s arrangement of the twelve judges in a twelve-segmented circle with four quadrants is intriguing20:

The twin sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh are opposite each other, as also are Reuben and Benjamin, the oldest and youngest of Jacob’s sons—each is the middle item in its quadrant. With two exceptions, every major judge is opposite a minor judge. With the Ehud-Jephthah exception, one might note that Jephthah’s account in 10:6—12:7 is sandwiched by minor judge accounts on either side, 10:1–5 and 12:8–15. Besides, with Jephthah’s years of service and death and burial details provided in 12:7, resembling the format of the minor judges around him, Jephthah almost becomes a minor judge himself.21

Another indication of careful structuring is that the Spirit of Yahweh comes upon one judge in each quadrant: Othniel, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson (Samson, the summation of the series, receives the operations of the Spirit four times: 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14). Of note, the land finds rest only after each major judge in quadrants 1 and 2: Othniel (3:11), Ehud (3:30), Barak (5:31), and Gideon (8:28). It also appears that the role of women seems to be going from Yahwistic to anti-Yahwistic as one proceeds through the book. Quadrant 1 (by extrapolation) has Achsah, Othniel’s wife (she is actually found in 1:12–15), eagerly seeking land promised by Yahweh. Quadrant 2 has Deborah, Jael, and the woman who killed Abimelech—heroines of their day, all of them. Quadrant 3, however, has a passive daughter of Jephthah who becomes a victim of her father’s vile oath and his tendency to manipulate Yahweh. Finally, Quadrant 4 has Delilah who betrays a judge to the Philistines for filthy lucre.22

The first three of the major judges, Othniel, Ehud, and Barak, come from acceptable backgrounds. The last three major judges, however, have a less-than-stellar pedigree: Gideon’s father was a Baal worshiper (6:25); Jephthah was the son of a harlot (11:1); and Samson hailed from the apostate tribe of Dan (13:2). These three show failures and character flaws that are far more significant than what their predecessors exhibited: Gideon, in his hubris, spurs the nation to idolatry, Jephthah performs a human sacrifice in an attempt to manipulate Yahweh, and Samson, enslaved to his sensual passions, abandons the calling of Yahweh entirely. The activities of this final trio are also marked by brutal vengeance: Gideon against the Succothites and Penuelites (8:4–9, 13–17); Jephthah against the Ephraimites (12:1–6); and Samson, rather randomly, against the Philistines (15:3, 7–8; etc.). Gideon’s and Jephthah’s actions against their own fellow-Israelites, and the Judahites betrayal of Samson to the Philistines (15:9–13) bespeak an internal fracturing that, not surprisingly, culminates in the bloody civil war of Epilogue II (Pericopes 13 and 14: Jdg 19:1–30 and 20:1—21:25).23

Chronology

The timeframe of the book of Judges spans the death of Joshua and the transition to a monarchy in the time of Samuel. From the chronological notations given in 3:8 (8 years); 3:11 (40 years); 3:14 (18 years); 3:30 (80 years); 4:3 (20 years); 5:31 (40 years); 6:1 (7 years); 8:28 (40 years); 9:22 (3 years); 10:2 (23 years); 10:3 (22 years); 10:8 (18 years); 12:7 (6 years); 12:9 (7 years); 12:11 (10 years); 12:14 (8 years); 13:1 (40 years); and 15:20 (20 years), a total of 410 years is obtained for the days of the judges. Adding the wilderness wanderings, the conquest, the remaining years of Joshua, the judgeships of Eli and Samuel, and the careers of Saul and David, would yield an Exodus-to-Solomon span of over 600 years. This figure is dissonant with the 480 years between the Exodus and Solomon’s fourth reigning year (966 BCE) noted in 1 Kgs 6:1.24 Chisholm’s solution to this problem is based on a parallel structure that is observable in the Body of the book (Jdg 3:7—16:31):

The pattern is obvious in the two panels ABB and A'B'B', with BB and B'B' each noting the Israelites’ continued evildoing, signified by @sy, ysp. This verb “consistently indicates or implies temporal sequence when it is collocated with an infinitive construct in the Former Prophets,” and so its omission has implications for the chronological sequence of events in the book.25 So Chisholm speculates that ABB and A'B'B' are chronologically concurrent, thus permitting some consolidation of time to approximate the 480 years of 1 Kgs 6:1. He estimates the period of the Judges as running from 1336–1130 BCE.26

In any case, the preacher must remember that these are behind-the-text speculations. What is important for preaching—and that is the concern of this commentary—is the way things, people, and situations are depicted by the inspired narrator to portray a world in front of the text.27 While not concocting data out of thin air, the textual presentation of what happened is a narratological choice based on the theological agenda of the author—the thrust of the text, the theology of the pericope. It is this pericopal theology that must be discerned, preached, and applied.

In Judges, the Jebusites live with the sons of Benjamin in Jerusalem “to this day” (1:21); the city that the man from Bethel built is named Luz “to this day” (1:26); Gideon’s altar to Yahweh, named “Yahweh is Peace,” is still in Ophrah “to this day” (6:24); the thirty sons of Jair had thirty cities in Gilead called Havoth-jair even “to this day” (10:4); the hollow place in Lehi where Samson miraculously found water was named by him as Enhakkore, and it is still in Lehi “to this day” (15:19); and the place where the Danites camped at Kiriath-jearim is called Mahaneh-Dan “to this day” (18:12). Besides, 18:30 mentions the captivity of Israel (between 734–721 BCE; the unauthorized Danite shrine persisted until 734 BCE), and it is asserted that there was no king in Israel “in those days” of the judges (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). All of these notations indicate editorial work on the book at different times and periods. In addition, the reference to “king” in 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; and 21:25 may suggest that Judges achieved its final form after the monarchical period of Israel. Both Epilogues I and II (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31; and Pericope 13: Jdg 19:1–30 and Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25) have random, wandering, unemployed Levites. Webb thinks this places those events after the separation of the northern kingdom of Israel from the southern kingdom of Judah, either when Jeroboam I appointed non-Levites as priests (1 Kgs 12:31), or when Hezekiah’s reforms (or Josiah’s) involved the closure of a number of shrines (2 Kgs 19:1–4; 23:1–20).28 But “[t]he simple fact of the matter is that we are not in a position to reconstruct the history of the text’s literary evolution with any degree of confidence.”29

Provenance

The Prologues establish the Israelites’ God as Yahweh, the one with a relationship to the patriarchs (Jdg 2:1, 10, 12, 17, 20, 22; 3:4), the one who had delivered them from the bondage of Egypt (2:1, 12; also see 6:8, 13), the one who had made a covenant with them at Sinai (2:1, 20; 5:5). But it is the Israelites’ evildoing that is prominent in Judges. Besides the text’s explicit statements to that effect (2:11; 3:7, 12; 4:1; 6:1; 10:6; 13:1), the Israelites also fail to drive out the Canaanites according to Yahweh’s desire (1:18–36); they fail to pass on their faith in Yahweh to a future generation (2:10); they refuse to join in Yahweh’s military enterprises (5:15b–17, 23); they attack Yahweh’s deliverer who seeks to destroy a Baal altar (6:28–30); they play harlot after Gideon’s ephod (8:27); they replace Yahweh with Baal-berith (8:33); they turn over the Spirit-directed deliverer to the enemy (15:11–13); they manufacture sacred idols for private cults (17:1–13); a whole tribe sponsors paganism (18:14–31); brutality and immorality reign unchecked (19:1–30); and, finally, the entire nation is plunged into a civil war (20:1—21:25).30 The judge-deliverers that God raises go from bad to worse (except for Othniel who fits the paradigm of 2:11–19 precisely): Ehud is deceptive, Barak is fearful, Gideon is arrogant (and his offspring, Abimelech, ungodly and ruthless), Jephthah is manipulative, and Samson is profligate. Yet despite the despicable infidelity shown by his people, and the deplorable example set by his leaders, Yahweh remains, time and again, gracious and willing to intervene on behalf of his people and deliver them (2:16, 18; 3:9–10, 15; 4:6–7, 23; 6:11–12, 14, 16, 34, 38, 40; 7:2, 7, 9, 22; 11:29, 32; 13:3–5, 25; 14:6, 19; 15:14, 19).

Block speculates that the prophetic message of Judges would have been most appropriate for the protracted and pernicious reign of Manasseh (790–739 BCE; see 2 Kgs 21:1–18; 2 Chr 33:1). This regent reconstructed pagan cultic installations and “worshipped all the host of heaven and served them” (2 Kgs 21:3), not to mention the altars he raised to them in Yahweh’s temple (21:4–5)—not very different from the Israelites in the days of the judges (Jdg 2:3, 11–13, 17, 19; 3:6–7; 6:25–32; 8:27, 33; 10:6–16; 17:1–13; 18:14–20, 30). Indeed, Manasseh, like Jephthah, engaged in child sacrifices, and involved himself in demonic practices—“great evil in the sight of Yahweh, provoking him to anger” (2 Kgs 21:6). As did Abimelech, Manasseh, too, was a brutal tyrant who “shed much innocent blood” that “filled Jerusalem from one end to another.” And, as the nation followed Gideon, so, under the aegis of Manasseh, Israel was plunged into sin, doing more evil than the nations around (21:6, 9), and failing to listen to the warnings of God through his prophets (21:10–15).31

Purpose

The book is gory, with bloodletting without remit. There is the assassination of Eglon (Jdg 3:21–25); the killing of Sisera (4:21); the execution of Oreb and Zeeb (7:25) and of Zebah and Zalmunnah (8:21); the murder of sixty-nine of his siblings by Abimelech (9:5); the assassination of Abimelech (9:53–54); the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter (11:39); Samson’s suicidal exertions (16:30); and the murder of the Levite’s concubine (19:27). That adds to seventy-nine specific individuals killed. But it is the large-scale killings that are shocking: ten thousand Canaanites and Perizzites “struck down” by the Judah-Simeon coalition (1:4); “about” ten thousand Moabites killed by Ehud and his army (3:29); six hundred Philistines struck down by Shamgar (3:30); 120,000 Midianites killed by Yahweh (7:22; 8:10); the burning alive of “about” a thousand in Shechem (9:49); 42,000 Ephraimites felled by Jephthah (12:6); Samson’s killing of thirty Philistines (14:19), later another thousand (15:15), and finally three thousand more (16:27, 30); 22,000 Israelites killed by Benjamin on one day (20:21) and 18,000 on another (20:25); and 25,100 Benjaminites killed by Israel (20:35). That comes to a total of 242,730 in numbered military casualties alone. Whew! It is certain that the defeats of Canaanite armies and cities—and some internecine warfare by Israel—involved killing as well, but no victim tallies are given (1:4, 5, 8, 9–10, 17, 18, 25; 3:10; 4:15–16, 24; 8:12, 17; 9:43, 45; 11:32; 12:4; 15:8; 18:27; 21:10). In addition, there might have been more wars fought by Israel as suggested in Yahweh’s reproach of his people in 10:11–12 that lists some defeated people groups not mentioned elsewhere in Judges.32 Altogether, roughly a quarter of a million people perish in Judges!33 No wonder there is weeping by the nation at the beginning (2:4), and there is weeping by the nation at the end (20:23, 26; 21:2). Webb is right: “Judges does not simply give us raw violence, but interpreted violence. The challenge for those of us who read it as Scripture is not whether we can identify with the violence, but whether we can identify with the theology that frames and interprets it.”34 Authors always do things with what they say and the burden of the interpreter is to figure out what they are doing, even with all the slaughter and mayhem—the thrust of the text, the theology of the pericope. It is this entity alone that can guide the reader to valid application that is aligned to the intent of the author(s).

O’Connell notes the pervasive influence of Deuteronomic phraseology and ideology in Judges.35 Explicit condemnation of Israel for failing to uphold Yahweh’s covenant occurs in 2:1–3, 11–19; 2:20—3:6; 3:7; 6:7–10, 25–26; 8:27; 9:56–57; 10:6–16, 30–31, 39; 14:1, 7, 8–9; 15:1; 16:17; 17:1–13; 18:31; 19:22–27; 21:1–23. The assessment, when all is said and done, is abysmally negative, and Israel becomes her own enemy, led by her leaders into a spiraling catastrophe, each judge worse than the one preceding. So this is ultimately a book on leadership, or rather, the lack thereof.

The book of Judges is concerned with seeking an answer to a straightforward question, “Who is going to lead Israel?” The book begins with this question (Jdg 1:1) and a variation is repeated towards the end (Jdg 20:18). . . . The stories in the book are less about battles and the reasons for them than they are about such issues as how the various judges attained their office, what individuals did in order to express their leadership, what judges’ relationships were with the deity, their reasons for fighting, how much power they wielded before and after their major battle/s, and what other actions they carried out which impacted their relationship with the Israelite deity and set the stage for the next generation. The book begins with Othniel, the model judge, and ends with Samson, who is so negatively evaluated that he not only dies in battle with foreigners, but his death leads to anarchy in Israel. These poles, Othniel and Samson, highlight the steadily decreasing worth of the judges over time, and at the same time, the downward spiral of all Israel.36

Evildoing and the recurring cycles of ever worsening leadership take over the structure of the book.37 All this, despite the graciousness of God in intervening in each chaotic iteration to raise up a deliverer to defeat the oppressing enemy. Finally, Judges culminates in horrible idolatry and a horrific civil war, in an age of godlessness and leaderlessness, when “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (21:25).

Though the book is about the misdeeds of God’s leaders, it is also entirely applicable to the lives of God’s people, for the latter are only as good as the former are. God’s leaders draw God’s people to their level, explaining the higher standards for leadership throughout Scripture. But those criteria, whether they be in Judges or elsewhere, are appropriate for God’s people to adopt, for God desires that all his people be like his leaders, emulating their holiness, faith, and zeal for him. Besides, all of God’s people are leaders in some arena or another, to some degree, in some fashion. Therefore it behooves all believers to take the lessons of the book of Judges to heart.

Canaanization of Israel

Within the first three chapters of the book that make up the Prologues (I and II: Jdg 1:1—3:6), the seed of the Israelites’ Canaanization is sown and quickly takes root: they fail to drive out the native peoples—2:1–5 and 2:6—3:6 are clear in labeling this a spiritual failure and covenantal violation. From that point, the descent is spiral with a cyclical repetitiveness (2:11–19) that worsens with each iteration of the judge stories (2:17–19), and it is rapid, occurring within a generation or two (2:10). Yahweh is forgotten (2:6–10; 3:7), and exogamy with the Canaanites deals the final coup (3:6).38

From there on, in the Body of the book (3:7—16:31), it is one disaster after another, each judge progressively worse than the one preceding, and leading the nation deeper into the abyss. Until the judgeship of Gideon, the land finds rest at the end of each cycle; after him, this never happens again. By the time of Samson, even the standard practice of the Israelites crying out to Yahweh in despair when under oppression disappears: the Israelites seem to have become strangely content under a foreign thumb. This last judge shows no involvement with the rest of Israel and even gets himself killed—a first for the book. Towards the end, then, the judges themselves become the problem!

The scope of the Israelites’ idolatry also expands as time goes on, with 10:6 laying out God’s indictment of his people for having gone after Baals, Ashtaroth, and the gods of Aram, Sidon, Moab, Ammon, and the Philistines—seven species of false deities. They just kept on adding to their sacrilegious pantheon. In parallel, Yahweh’s rebuke testifies to his having delivered Israel from seven people groups/nations: Egyptians, Amorites, Ammonites, Philistines, Sidonians, Amalekites, and Maonites (10:11–12).39 And with this, the otherwise paradigmatic deliverance by Yahweh, a fixture of each cycle thus far, transforms into a stinging rebuke (10:14).

The final chapters composing the Epilogues (I and II: Jdg 17:1—21:25) show the depth to which Israel has fallen: gross idolatry, failure of the priesthood, utter immorality, and a bloody civil war attest to the almost total Canaanization of God’s people. No more was the enemy external; it was entirely within. Israel was collapsing from its own internal moral bankruptcy. “The spiritual condition of the people inhabiting the land of Canaan at the end of the settlement period is the same as it had been at the beginning. It had made no difference that a new group of people [Israel] now occupies the land.”40 The dangers of those godless and leaderless times are ever present in every age.

Thematic Parallels: Prologues and Epilogues

There are significant parallels and links between the different sections and narrative pericopes in Judges, reinforcing the charitable assumption of reading that “a single creative mind stood behind the present form of the book, and that each constituent narrative is to be read as an integral part of the larger whole.”41

Links between the Prologues and Epilogues include: the selection of Judah to lead military campaigns (foreign in 1:2; but domestic in 20:18)42; battles as ~r,xe (kherem, “holy war”; 1:17; and 21:1143); “inquiring” of Yahweh (1:1 and 20:18, 23, 2744); treatment of women (1:11–15; and 19:1–30; 21:1–25); idolatry (1:11—3:6; and 17:1—18:31); references to Jebusites (1:21 [×2]; 3:5; and 19:11) and to Jerusalem (1:7, 8, 21 [×2]; and 19:10) 45; “struck . . . with the edge of the sword” (of enemies: 1:8, 25; but of fellow-Israelites: 18:27; 20:37, 4846); corporate weeping at a cultic site before Yahweh (2:4; and 20:23, 26; 21:247); “covenant” (2:1, 2, 20; and 20:2748); links to Moses (1:16, 20; 3:4; and 18:30); and “giving” of “daughters” as “wives” (1:12, 13; 3:6; and 21:1, 7, 18).49 Interestingly, the cultic centers, Jerusalem, Bethel, and Shiloh are mentioned only in the Prologues and Epilogues (Jerusalem: 1:7, 8, 21; 19:10; Shiloh: 18:31; 21:12, 19, 21; and Bethel: 1:22, 23; 2:1 [possibly with a pseudonym, Bokim]; 20:18, 26, 31; 21:2, 19), with the exception of Bethel in Jdg 4:5. All of this indicates careful textual construction, subservient to the theological intent of the narrator/editor/redactor.

In sum, the events in the Prologues and in the Epilogues are “practically two sides of the same coin. While one records Israel’s failure to do what was right, the other records Israel’s success in doing what was wrong, and both resulted in a diminishing of national fortune”—things were going from bad to worse.50

Thematic Parallels: Prologues and Body

Prologue I (1:1—2:5) and II (2:6—3:6) also have substantial links with the Body of Judges (3:7—16:31). The most obvious connection is the paradigm of 2:11–19 that forms the skeleton of each of the subsequent judge narratives: evildoing (2:11); punishment by being given into the hands of enemies for a certain number of years (2:14 [×2]); groaning of the Israelites in distress (2:18); Yahweh’s raising up of judge-deliverers (2:16, 18); Yahweh’s support for those leaders (2:18); deliverance of Israel from the hands of enemies (2:16, 18); and the land’s rest for a number of years and the judge’s death (2:19). This cycle repeats in the story of each succeeding judge (see Pericope 2: Jdg 2:6—3:11).

In Prologue I, the sequence of activities shows two movements: a general geographic and directional trajectory that heads from south to north, based on tribal location, and a second moral and spiritual trajectory that describes the decreasing success of the tribes in their attempts to take over lands allotted to them.51

The geographic structuring in the narrative of Prologue I (Pericope 1: Jdg 1:1—2:5), with a south-to-north organization of tribal activities, is as follows: Judah, Simeon, Benjamin, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and Dan (1:2–36). This reflects the arrangement of the judges in the Body, from Othniel (Judah) in the south to Samson (Dan) in the north (see above). But the whole scheme is “too neat to be an accurate reflection of actual historical reality. For historical reality is almost inevitably messy, and therefore does not readily lend itself to orderly schematisation.”52 Besides, the unsuccessful undertakings of Dan to appropriate land actually took place in their original location in the south (Josh 19:40–46); but in Prologue I, they have been placed at the end of the schema, in the north, which is where they ended up quite successfully (Jdg 18:1–31). This idiosyncrasy (but in furtherance of the author’s theological agenda) is visible also in the story of Samson: the sequence of judges from south to north (Judah to Dan) implies Samson’s northern center of operations, but the actual cities in which he was active were in the south—Zorah, Eshtaol, Gaza, Ashkelon (see Pericope 10: Jdg 13:1—14:20 and Pericope 11: Jdg 15:1—16:31). He even had to deal with the southern Judahites (15:10–13). Thus a dischronology is created here, likely to connect Prologue I and Body (Pericopes 10 and 11) to serve a theological agenda—the author was doing something with what he was saying.53

But what primarily links these trajectories in Prologue I to the Body is that the same spiritual route in the former is taken by the narrator in arranging the narratives of the judges in the latter. In Prologue I, from Judah to Dan things go from bad to worse, the result of spiritual failure (2:1–5), a pattern subsequently reflected in the Body—from Othniel to Samson. As the commentary shows, each judge story depicts a situation worse than that of the one it follows. A progressive deterioration of morality and spirituality is evident in the accounts as one proceeds through the Body (adumbrated in 2:19): decreasing faith in Yahweh, increasing self-interest of the judges, diminishing participation of the tribes with each military campaign against oppressing enemies, increasing brutality against fellow-Israelites54, and Yahweh’s mounting frustration with his people’s recalcitrance and recidivism.55 This makes the iterations of each narrative not a cycle, but rather a retrogressing spiral, sliding into an abyss of national disaster in the Epilogues.56 Altogether, there is dissolution.

Thematic Parallels: Epilogues and Body

The events of the Epilogues are characterized by wanton brutality and profligacy. But the echoes between these stories and those in the Body are deliberate. “[B]y showing that the bizarre acts in the epilogue have all found precedents in the lives of the judges, the narrator has managed to cast the judges in a very uncomplimentary light.”57 The judges in the Body are no better than the characters in the Epilogues.

Micah’s and the Danites’ idolatry reflects the sad situation at the end of Gideon’s judgeship (Pericope 7: Jdg 7:23—8:32). Interestingly, dApae (’epod, “ephod”) as a cultic object in its six occurrences in Judges has a uniformly negative connotation. Five of these occur in Epilogue I (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31): 17:5; 18:14, 17, 18, 20; the only other instance is in 8:27, of Gideon’s manufacture of this illicit sacral item. The fact that the mentions of ephod are somewhat unnecessary for the story of Micah and the Levite, there being other incriminating cultic objects, makes it likely that dwpa is a deliberate attempt to link the narrative of Epilogue I with the Gideon story.58

The audacious violations of the law and of propriety perpetrated by the Levite in Epilogue I (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31) are comparable to Samson’s misdemeanors (Pericope 10: Jdg 13:1—14:20 and Pericope 11: Jdg 15:1—16:31). The former include: wandering away from an appointed Levitical town (17:7, 9); seeking employment away from the main sanctuary (17:8, 9; 18:4); idiosyncratic relationship with patron (17:10–12); engagement in idolatry (18:20); and taking on the title of a priest, though he was not a descendant of Aaron (18:30). Samson’s reckless malpractices include: amorous inclinations towards Philistine women, even marrying one of them (14:1–4, 10–18; 16:1, 4), and then abandoning her (14:19–20); neglect of his Nazirite vow (14:5, 8–9, 10, 19; 15:8, 15; 16:17); and his wanton violence throughout the narrative.59 The Levite of Pericope 12 was associated with the Danites; Samson, of course, was a Danite. Thus both this Levite and the Danite judge succeed in flouting the regulations and stipulations that defined their divine callings.

Even the Danites’ exploits in Epilogue I reflect those of the Danite, Samson, in Pericopes 10 and 11. Both narratives are linked to Zorah and Eshtaol (13:2, 25; 16:31; and 18:2, 8, 11) and Mahaneh-dan (mentioned only twice in Scripture: 13:25 and 18:12); departing Zorah and Eshtaol, both Samson and the Danites “see” either an attractive woman or a secure city (14:1 and 18:7), and attempt to persuade either parents or fellow tribesmen to take action based on this “seeing” (14:2 and 18:9); Samson decides what is “right in my eyes” (14:3), and Epilogue I points out that every Israelite was doing what was “right in his own eyes” (17:6).60

The story of the other Levite, in Epilogue II (Pericope 13: Jdg 19:1–30 and Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25), is also linked to Samson’s story: the idea of prostitution is present in both (16:1; and 19:1–2); both Samson and the Levite seek to win back their spouses from whom they have been separated—both men arrive at the houses of their fathers-in-law (15:1; and 19:2–3); both spouses meet a violent death (15:6; and 19:27), caused, directly or indirectly, by men seeking relations with them (15:1; and 19:25); and both Samson and the Levite seek revenge (15:3, 7; and 19:29—20:7).61

There are also likely parallels between Epilogue II (especially Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25) and the story of Ehud (Pericope 3: Jdg 3:12–31): the left-handedness of Ehud the Benjaminite (3:15, “bound in the right hand”) and that of the Benjaminite warriors (20:16, also “bound in the right hand”) are the only two instances in the OT of this obscure term62; and the relatively rare gentilic terms describing the tribal affiliation of Ehud (3:15: ynIymiy>h;-!B,, ben-haymini) and that of the Gibeahites (19:16: ynIymiy> ynEB., bne ymini).63

The near-annihilation of the Benjaminites by the rest of Israel in Epilogue II (especially Pericope 14) is striking for its internecine character: Israel vs. Israel, brother against brother (20:23, 28; 21:6). God’s people had become their own enemies exacting ~r,xe upon their own. But note the links with Gideon’s punishment of an Israelite town, Penuel, that had refused to render him aid in his pursuit of two Midianite kings: Gideon later kills the Penuelites (8:17). This is particularly remarkable since the judge, soon thereafter, tells the captured kings that he would have saved their lives had it not been for their having killed his siblings (8:19). In other words, Gideon had been harsher with his fellow-Israelites, than he would have been with foreign enemy rulers (Pericope 7: Jdg 7:23—8:32). Also note the parallels between the Benjaminite massacre in Epilogue II (specifically, Pericope 14) and Jephthah’s treatment of Ephraimites (Pericope 9: Jdg 10:6—12:15). Jephthah diplomatically negotiates with the king of Ammon (11:12–28) but shows no patience for, and offers no bargain to, his fellow-Israelites from Ephraim: instead he slaughters 42,000 of them (12:1–6). Thus the Israelites against the Benjamintes, Gideon against the Penuelites, and Jephthah against the Ephraimites, all show the same brutal and homicidal tendencies against fellow-Israelites.64

Other links between the Benjaminite massacre of Epilogue II (specifically, Pericope 14) and the Jephthah story (Pericope 9) can be detected as well. The civil war had left six hundred Benjaminite men without wives. The resulting fraudulent and duplicitous dealings of the Israelites became a black mark on Israel’s treatment of women. The crime of gang rape of a single woman led to authorized corporate kidnaps and rapes of six hundred virgins (four hundred from Jabesh-gilead and two hundred from Shiloh). This was similar to Jephthah’s sacrifice of his only daughter. Both were the result of foolish vows/oaths (11:39; and 21:1, 7, 18, but using different words: [bv, shb‘, and rdn, ndr).65 Just as the victim in Jephthah’s story was a “daughter” (11:34, 35, 40) and a “virgin” (11:37, 38) who “did not know a man” (11:39), so also the female victims of the civil war in Epilogue II were “daughters” (21:21 [×2], making the elders of Israel father figures, akin to Jephthah) and “virgins” (21:12), who “did not know a man” (21:12). Jephthah’s daughter came out to greet him with “dancing” (11:34); the kidnapped and raped daughters of Shiloh were also “dancing” (21:21).66 These parallels make the construction far from random, and appear to be deliberate, linking Epilogue II and Pericope 9 together.67

In conclusion, there is a clear skein of links between the Epilogues and the Body of Judges, demonstrating that what happens with God’s leaders (Body: Israel’s judges) is replicated—with greater intensity and in worse fashion—by God’s people (Epilogues: leaderless Israel). Even the anonymity of most of the actors in the Epilogues points the reader to the possibility that they could be “Everyman,” a universalization of the failures of specific individuals in a community where “everyone does what is right in his/her own eyes” (see 17:1; 21:25). God’s leaders had left nefarious examples for God’s people to follow in the Body. The rest was (chaotic) history in the Epilogues, “the worst of the judges served up in one concentrated dose”!68

Theological Focus of Judges

Each pericope of Judges contributes a slice or a quantum of theology to the broad theological focus of the entire book. Those pericopal segments of theology are: uncompromising faithfulness to God, maintenance of godly traditional values, and reliance on divine strategies for success results in divine blessing (Pericope 1: Jdg 1:1—2:5 [Prologue I]); personal experience of God produces unwavering commitment to him (Pericope 2: Jdg 2:6—3:11 [Prologue 1; Othniel]); integrity in life, driven by reverence for God and reliance upon him, receives divine approbation (Pericope 3: Jdg 3:12–31 [Ehud]); reverencing of God by fearless faith characterizes godly leadership (Pericope 4: Jdg 4:1–24 [Barak]); participation in the endeavors of God, with God, keeps one in the realm of his blessing (Pericope 5: Jdg 5:1–31 [Song of Deborah]); refusal to take prideful credit for divine action results in blessing (Pericope 6: Jdg 6:1—7:22 [Gideon-1]); godliness is expressed in the rejection of self-glorifying pursuits (Pericope 7: Jdg 7:23—8:32 [Gideon-2]); an illicit thirst for power brings about the fitting retribution of God (Pericope 8: Jdg 8:33—10:5 [Abimelech]); ungodly manipulation of God for selfish purposes can lead to tragic loss of blessing (Pericope 9: Jdg 10:6—12:15 [Jephthah]); rejection of Yahweh’s interests in favor of selfish passions leads only to trouble (Pericope 10: Jdg 13:1—14:20 [Samson-1]); disdaining of one’s divine calling can lead to destruction (Pericope 11: Jdg 15:1—16:31 [Samson-2]); godless leadership brings about godlessness in society (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31 [Epilogue I]); immoral unconcern for the weak and defenseless marks a godless and leaderless community (Pericope 13: Jdg 19:1–30 [Epilogue II-1]); continued ungodliness only leads to more evildoing, greater havoc, and a hopeless future (Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25 [Epilogue II-2]).

A summative theological focus of the entire book of Judges may be discerned as follows:

Maintenance of godly traditional values, personal experience of God (Prologues), and manifesting virtues of godly leadership (Body)—integrity in life (Ehud), fearless faith (Barak), participation in the endeavors of God (Song of Deborah), giving God credit for his work (Gideon-1), rejection of self-glorifying pursuits (Gideon-2) and the thirst for power (Abimelech), avoiding manipulation of God (Jephthah), maintaining devotion to God and his interests (Samson-1), faithfully cleaving to one’s call (Samson-2)—result in a godly society and provide hope for the future (Epilogues).

And as God’s leaders and God’s people actualize these thrusts in their lives, conforming to Christlikeness pericope by pericope and sermon by sermon by the power of the Spirit, the Father’s kingdom is, in a sense, being established. This is the goal of preaching, and of preaching the book of Judges in particular. A grand task, indeed!

1. For more on this concept of preaching, see Kuruvilla, Privilege the Text! and idem, A Vision for Preaching.

2. While acknowledging its more common connotation of a portion of the Gospels, I employ “pericope” here to demarcate a segment of Scripture, irrespective of genre or length, that forms the textual basis for an individual sermon with a discrete theological thrust. Also, for the purposes of this commentary no particular distinction will be made between the divine and human authors of the biblical text.

3. See Kuruvilla, Text to Praxis, 142–90; and idem, “Pericopal Theology,” 3–17.

4. Adapted from Tertullian, Apology 39.

5. After all, God’s ultimate design is to conform his children into the “image” (eivkw,n, eikōn) of his Son, Christ (Rom 8:29). See Kuruvilla, Privilege the Text! 238–68; and idem, “Christiconic Interpretation,” 131–46.

6. It is into the likeness of Christ’s perfect humanity that God’s people are being transformed, not his deity, of course. And, needless to say, such growth in Christlikeness can only be accomplished in the power of the Holy Spirit (see Kuruvilla, Privilege the Text! 204–7).

7. Bowman, “Narrative Criticism,” 17.

8. Best, “The Reading and Writing of Commentaries,” 358.

9. With the goal of maximizing size-to-benefit ratio, this commentary will not repeat matters discussed extensively in standard works on Judges—historical criticism, redaction criticism, and textual criticism—unless they are immediately relevant to the theological interpretation of the pericope at hand. Abundant information on all of this may be unearthed from standard commentaries on the book. See, for instance: Chisholm, Judges and Ruth; Block, Judges, Ruth; Webb, Judges; Butler, Judges; Younger, Judges, Ruth; Boling, Judges; and Schneider, Judges.

10. Butler, Judges, 82.

11. Such a non-military role is Deborah’s portfolio (Jdg 4:4), one of adjudication and arbitration. See Pericope 4 (Jdg 4:1–24).

12. “Judge” as a regular verb or as a participle shows up in 2:16, 17, 18, 19; 3:10; 4:4; 10:2, 3; 11:27; 12:7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14; 15:20; 16:31. For judges as deliverers ([vy, ysh‘, “to deliver”), see 2:16; 3:9, 15, 31; 6:14, 15; 8:22; 10:1; 13:5. They are always raised up by Yahweh (or his agent). Yahweh himself is also acknowledged as the one who “delivers” Israel in 2:18; 6:36, 37; 7:7; 10:12, 13.

13. Block, Judges, Ruth, 23–24. Less clear is how the “minor judges” perform their “judging”: 10:3; 12:8–9, 11, 13, 14. No military, or for that matter, forensic responsibility is explicitly assigned to these.

14. Pericope divisions assign Prologue I (Jdg 1:1—2:5) to Pericope 1; Prologue II (Jdg 2:6—3:6) to Pericope 2 that also includes the story of the first judge, Othniel (3:7–11); Body (Jdg 3:7—16:31) to Pericopes 3–11, though 3:7–11 is part of Pericope 2; Epilogue I (Jdg 17:1—18:31) to Pericope 12; and Epilogue II (Jdg 19:1—21:25) to Pericope 13 (Jdg 19:1–30) and Pericope 14 (Jdg 20:1—21:25).

15. The Barak-Abdon switch also confirms that Barak is the judge, i.e., military deliverer, of Judges 4, not Deborah. See Wong, Compositional Strategy, 244–46.

16. Ibid., 241 (also see 239–41).

17. Also see Neh 9:27–28 that recognizes this cyclical nature of the narrative.

18. Their longevity in service, ranging from seven to twenty-three years, makes them hardly minor in real-life importance; they are minor only in the narrator’s theological agenda.

19. Beem, “The Minor Judges,” 150–51.

20. Figure below from Williams, “The Structure of Judges 2:6—16:31,” 81.

21. Williams also notes that both Ehud and Jephthah deal with the offspring of Lot: Ehud with Moab, and Jephthah with Ammon. Both send messages or messengers to the oppressing enemy king (3:19–20; 11:12–14), and both are involved with Ephraimites (3:27; 12:1–6). Incidentally, the middle judge of each quadrant has some connection with Ephraim: besides Ehud who leads them and Jephthah who slaughters them, Gideon placates them, and Abdon represents them (ibid., 81–82). The Shamgar–Ibzan exception to the major-minor combination is not easily explained, other than that they appear to be the most obscure of the twelve.

22. See ibid., 82.

23. Younger, Judges, Ruth, 38. Each of the two at the center of the list of six major judges, Barak and Gideon, has a second protagonist—Deborah and Abimelech, respectively. And, incidentally, the stories of these two judges also have a named pair of enemy kings/leaders: Jabin and Sisera (in Barak’s account), and Zeeb and Oreb, and Zebah and Zalmunnah (in Gideon’s account). Abimelech’s story, essentially a continuation of Gideon’s, also has two named antagonists: Jotham and Gaal. After the third major judge comes the Song of Deborah taking up a whole chapter (Pericope 5: Jdg 5:1–31). This puts the hymn in the structural center of the book of Judges, with three major judges preceding (Othniel, Ehud, and Barak), and three major judges following (Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson). All this further confirms the careful structuring of the book.

24. Block, Judges, Ruth, 59–61; and Chisholm, “The Chronology of the Book of Judges,” 247–48. The table is modified from ibid., 251. Of course, the number 480, equivalent to twelve generations of forty years each, may be an artificial and theological construct, rather than chronological and historical. Likewise, the timespans in Judges: the years of judgeship and lengths of enemy oppression appear precise (3:8, 14; 6:1; 9:22; 10:2, 3, 8; 12:7, 9, 11, 14), whereas the periods of the land’s rest are noted as multiples of forty (3:11, 30; 5:31; 8:28), another generational index perhaps (Block, Judges, Ruth, 63).

25. Chisholm, “In Defense of Paneling,” 376. Notice also the progressive “rest-lessness” of the land and Israel’s increasing failure to subdue its enemies, as one proceeds through the book.

26. Chisholm, “The Chronology of the Book of Judges,” 251–52. This scheme would render Jephthah’s declaration that Israel had occupied trans-Jordan for 300 years (11:26) inaccurate: Chisholm calculates that Jephthah was operating only 185 years after the Israelite conquest of 1406 BCE. Seeing Jephthah’s address as “purely rhetorical,” Chisholm is conducive to viewing this as Jephthah’s error (in addition to this judge’s mislabeling of Chemosh as the god of the Ammonites: see Pericope 9 [Jdg 10:6—12:15]). See ibid., 254. More likely, Jephthah was being hyperbolic; rather than rounding the 185-year gap to 200 years, he tacked on another century for good effect.

27. For more on this notion, see Kuruvilla, Privilege the Text! 39–43.

28. Webb, Judges, 420.

29. Chisholm, Judges and Ruth, 55.

30. Block, Judges, Ruth, 39.

31. Ibid., 66–67.

32. Among the more violent incidents in the book are the mutilation of Adonibezek (1:6), the disembowelment of Eglon (3:21–22), the skull-splitting of Sisera (4:21), the slaying of the Midianite kings (8:21), the head-crushing of Abimelech (9:53), and the burnt sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter (11:39). The gouging out of Samson’s eyes (16:21) and the dismemberment of a concubine’s corpse (19:29) may be included in this bloody catalog of violence.

33. Of note, quite large numbers are noted throughout Judges. “It is doubtful that such large numbers can be taken at face value in light of demographic analysis of ancient Palestine by modern archaeologists,” with population estimates for Israel between the twelfth and eleventh centuries BCE ranging from 50,000 to 75,000, and for Canaan in the same period ranging from 50,000 to 150,000 (Chisholm, Judges and Ruth, 110 n.2). Perhaps the large numbers in the book are hyperbolic. More likely, @la, ’lp, usually translated “thousand,” refers not to a fixed number but to a contingent of troops numbering far less than a thousand. However in Jdg 20:10, @la clearly means “thousand.” Also difficult to reconcile with this understanding of @la as a contingent is the “twenty-five thousand [@la] and a hundred,” in 20:35. “[N]o workable solution to the problem of the large numbers has so far been found, and the advantages of leaving them as they are outweigh any gains involved in changing them. They cannot be changed without upsetting their relationship to other numbers, and they serve an important rhetorical purpose that is lost if they are altered” (Webb, Judges, 74; see his discussion in ibid., 71–74). For the purposes of this commentary, the traditional numbering will be followed.

34. Ibid., 61.

35. O'Connell, The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges, 20–25, 57.

36. Schneider, Judges, xiv.

37. It must be noted that no judge is entirely bad—a fact true of most humans. That is, no doubt, why the writer of Hebrews lauds Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephthah, among other OT worthies (Heb 11:32; also see 1 Sam 12:11 that mentions Jerubbaal, “Bedan” [likely Barak], and Jephthah as “deliverers”). That does not necessarily vitiate the generally negative assessments of these individuals in the book of Judges. Of these characters, the writer of Hebrews notes in subsequent verses that “they conquered kingdoms, . . . and routed foreign armies” (Heb 11:33–34). Surely these intrepid individuals, warts and all, did exercise faith of some sort, in some way, to some degree. “The narrator’s use of the Old Testament text in this regard is neither strained nor improper,” and neither do those illustrative citations in the NT contradict the (negative) pictures painted in Judges (Chisholm, Judges and Ruth, 78).

38. Block, “Echo Narrative Technique,” 338.

39. Yahweh’s deliverances from the Egyptians, Amorites, and Maonites are otherwise not encountered in Judges, causing the reader to suspect that Israel’s malfeasance went well beyond what is described in the book.

40. Ibid., 341.

41. Wong, Compositional Strategy, 23. Much of what follows in these sections on thematic parallels is taken from ibid.

42. The choice of Judah for leadership in the civil war in Epilogue II (particularly Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25) seems quite unnecessary, since the tribe plays no distinguishing role in the ensuing battles; neither is Judah ever mentioned again. It appears to have been added simply to link the Epilogue with the Prologue.

43. The only occurrences of the root ~rx in the book.

44. No other act of “inquiring” of Yahweh occurs in the book (but see 13:18; 18:5). For that matter, the inquiries of 20:18, 23, 27 are the only instances in the OT where such a seeking of advice from Yahweh is made regarding a battle against fellow-Israelites (ibid., 34 n.17).

45. These are the only references to these peoples and this place in Judges.

46. These are the only occurrences of the phrase in Judges.

47. These are the only instances of corporate grief expressed by “weeping” in the book; 2:4 and 21:2 have the only occurrences of “lifted up their voices and wept.” The first lament takes place at Bokim, the second at Bethel. If it is true that Bokim is a pseudonym for Bethel (see Pericope 1: Jdg 1:1—2:5), then the two events are linked further.

48. The only mentions of “covenant” in Judges.

49. The only times such giving in marriage is noted in the book. All these instances (except for 3:6, which deals with exogamy) are pledges preceding a war—Caleb taking Kiriath-sepher (1:12), and the Israelites decimating Benjamin (21:1–24). But in the first case, the result is “blessing” (1:15); in the second, a “curse” (21:18) (ibid., 43–44; also see Pericope 1).

50. Ibid., 41.

51. The moral and spiritual aspects of the tribes’ failures are clearly noted in Prologue I (see 2:1–5), and what would subsequently happen with the judges in the Body is foreshadowed in Prologue II (see 2:11–19).

52. Ibid., 152.

53. Another dischronology: In 1 Sam 12:9–11, the order of the judges mentioned is Jerubbaal, “Bedan” (likely Barak), and Jephthah; in Heb 11:32, it is Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephthah. In other words, the layout of the Body (the story of the judges, 3:7—16:31, that has Barak, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson, in that order) may not necessarily be in chronological sequence. Dischronology is also observable elsewhere: a grandson of Moses, Jonathan, Micah’s domesticated Levite-priest, is in action in Epilogue I (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31; see 18:30), and a grandson of Aaron, Phinehas, in Epilogue II (specifically Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1—21:25; see 20:28). Thus the events of the Epilogues likely occurred soon after Joshua’s time. The placement of those events towards the end of the book of Judges serves the narrator’s theological purpose—he is doing something with what he is saying. So the reader’s interest, for application purposes, ought to be not behind the text, upon chronologies, histories, and such, but upon the theological thrust projected in front of the pericope.

54. Barak: verbal rebuke of non-participating tribes (5:15b–17, 23); Gideon: diplomacy with Ephraimites (8:1–3), but cruelty towards Succothites and brutality towards Penuelites (8:4–9, 13–17); Jephthah: slaughter of Ephraimites (12:1–6).

55. Yahweh personally raises up Othniel and Ehud (3:9, 15); then he sends a representative to do so for Barak (4:4–7); subsequently, he first sends a prophet to rebuke his people, accusing them of disobedience, before the angel of Yahweh raises up Gideon (5:7–10, 11–24); later, in a direct and irate remonstrance, he completely refuses to help the Israelites in the Jephthah narrative, accusing them of forsaking him (10:11–14). (Nevertheless, in all the narratives, Yahweh graciously deigns to help his people in distress.) This corresponds to the Israelites’ increasing disloyalty to, and unconcern for, Yahweh: they cry, desperate for release from oppression, in the narratives of Othniel, Ehud, Barak, Gideon, and Jephthah (3:9, 15; 4:3; 6:6; 10:10), but not in the story of Samson, where Israelites seem to be content with living under a foreign hand, and this for forty years (13:1). Indeed, though they started out worshiping only the Baals and the Ashtaroth (2:13), by the time of Jephthah, they had aligned themselves not only to these false gods, but also to a number of other pagan deities, forsaking Yahweh completely (10:6).

56. “Forsaking” Yahweh is also a theme introduced in Jdg 2:12, 13, 21 that shows up again in 10:6, 10, 13, the only instances of the verb in Judges.

57. Ibid., 139.

58. See ibid., 87–88.

59. See ibid., 89–96.

60. A specific refrain that there was no king in Israel in those days, a shortened version of the narrator’s comment in 17:6 and 21:25, brackets the Danites’ campaign (18:1; 19:1). The omission of “doing right in his own eyes” in 18:1 suggests that the concrete illustration of that axiom was the Danites’ “rape” of Laish, just as the actualization of that axiom in 19:1 was the brutal rape and murder of the Levite’s concubine (ibid., 99 n.59). Of course, the ophthalmic deficiencies of Samson drive his entire story. See ibid., 97–99; and Pericope 12 with Pericopes 10 and 11.

61. See ibid., 103–9.

62. This description of the seven hundred Benjaminite warriors in 20:16 seems rather incidental, for these fighters, their lefthandedness, and their slings play no role in the ensuing war with the Israelites. Instead, it is “sword” that occurs frequently (20:15, 17—Benjaminite swordsmen; and 20:25, 35, 37, 46, 48—Israelite swordsmen), making it quite likely that the description of their leftie “stonesmanship” was introduced as a deliberate link to the only other left-handed Benjaminite in Judges, Ehud.

63. See ibid., 112–24.

64. See ibid., 125–30.

65. Wong notes that the two words are synonymous (see Num 30:2; Ps 132:2; the former of these even has the phrase “all that came out of his mouth,” identical to “that which came out of your mouth,” Jdg 11:36). See ibid., 133–34.

66. These are the only two instances in Judges of the phrase “did not know a man” and of the noun “dancing” (another closely related verb, “to dance,” is found in 21:23).

67. See ibid., 132–35; and Pericope 14 (Jdg 20:1–21:25) with Pericope 9 (Jdg 10:6—12:15).

68. Ibid., 140.