CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO LESSONS

The Book of Judges
David A. Denyer

INTRODUCTORY THOUGHTS

In a popular treatment of the book of Judges (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay), the writer (Gary Inrig) penned this:

"The book of Judges is filled with people very much like us - people with God-given potential for greatness and unfailing capacity for catastrophe. When they dared to trust God and depend upon Him, they were indeed people with hearts of iron who made a positive, godly impact on their times. But when even the greatest heroes depended upon the flesh, they were revealed as people with feet of clay, who not only experienced but also caused spiritual catastrophe. As (you read) their lives (you) discover the great principles God reveals about His work in His people. (You) can learn what it is to live a powerful, productive life in the middle of a society which is increasingly hostile to the disciples of the Lord Jesus" (p. 7)

The writer of that book begins chapter one by saying, "It's a fundamental principle that the Holy Spirit of God tries to communicate about spiritual survival in a society without standards. Partial defense is no defense at all. D. L. Moody once said, 'The place for a ship is in the sea, but God help the ship if the sea gets into it'" (p. 11).

I. INTRODUCTION (1:1 - 3:6)
As we've seen, there are really two introductions. There is an Historical Introduction in 1:1 - 2:5 in which we have statements concerning Israel's failure to conquer the land of Canaan as they had been instructed to do. Here we find verses like 1:1-3 coupled with 1:19 and 1:34 (READ), and there is a Theological Introduction from 2:6 through 3:6 in which we're given reasons for the partial conquest; in 2:8-15 and 2:16-19 the repetition of Israel's sin is outlined; and in 2:20-3:6 we find the results of Israel's sin - that being the oppression brought upon them for abandoning Yahweh and getting involved in Baal worship.

The double introduction (as well as the double conclusion) was written to add those things important to the interpretation and understanding of the purpose of the book and to separate out those things that would detract from the primary message of the cycles section.

II. BODY OF THE BOOK (3:7 - 16:31)
(Here are illustrations of rebellion, retribution, repentance, and restoration). The body of the book outlines six oppressions and twelve deliverers. We read of OPPRESSION from the hands of the Arameans, Moabites, Canaanites, Midianites, Ammonites, and Philistines. And when- ever there was oppression, God raised-up a DELIVERER to enable his people to escape the situation. Notice, however, that not every oppression Israel suffered during the judges' era is fully narrated (or for that matter alluded to). We can see that from 10:11-14 where the Lord refers to the oppressions of some peoples for which there is no corresponding narration in the book (e.g., Egyptians, Amories, Sidonians, Maonites). It is also evident in the lack of plot development of the minor or noncyclical judges.

There were six GREATER (or "major") JUDGES/DELIVERERS [that is, individuals about whom we have more information]: Othniel (3:7-11), Ehud (3:12-30), Deborah (4:1 -5:31), Gideon (6:1 - 8:35), Jephthah (10:6 - 12:7), and Samson (13:1 -16:31). [An acronymn helps me remember them: J-O-D-G-E-S].
[Gideon is the central character (more space is given to him); after defeating the Midianites he was asked to be king (8:22), but refused (8:23)]. [Abimelech (ch. 9) sought kingship at Shechem but was killed by a millstone dropped by a woman from Thebez. This account is an interlude and is anti-monarchial].

There were six LESSER ("minor") JUDGES/DELIVERERS: Shamgar (3:31), Tola (10:1-2), Jair (10: 3-5), Ibzan (12:8-10), Elon (12:11-12) and Abdon (12:13-15).

III. CONCLUSION (chs. 17 - 21)
To repeat, just as there are two introductions, so there are two conclusions. The first is in chapters 17 & 18 where we learn about a Levite named Micah and the resettlement of the Danites to the northern part of the country of Canaan (17:1 - 18:31). The second conclusion tells about another Levite, his concubine, and what happened to the Benjamites because they refused to assist in punishing the "wicked men" from among them (19:1 - 21:25).

In summary, there are two overarching spiritual lessons to be learned from studying this book - the book of Judges. These lessons are not just informational but also provide a challenge for our Christian growth. The first lesson is that all of us have problems, but they are lessened and sometimes solved if we do the will of God. The second is that this book shows how God works in and for and with his people. In other words, here is theological historiography. God is at work in people's lives because they allow him to be at work. CAN THAT BE SAID OF YOU?

THE TWOFOLD VALUE OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES:
1. Here is an account of Israel's history nowhere else recorded, and
2. Here is a warning against spiritual apostasy (and this is the most important of the two purposes/values).

In spite of Israel's faithLESSness God's faithFULness was demonstrated by raising up judges to deliver the people - just as later, during the period of the monarchy, he raised up prophets to warn them of their divergence from the Mosaic Law.

DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE BOOK:
Nowhere in the book are we told who wrote or edited this document. Jewish tradition assigns it to Samuel, but there is no support for this claim. At the same time, remember that most of the Old Testament is anonymous; it's best to leave this book there as well. It appears as though the author/editor utilized sources that were written nearly contemporaneous with the events. That suggests that the same person responsible for the book of Joshua may have also authored Judges - but that's speculation. If that was the case, the changes between the two books are remarkable. What I mean is, the book of Joshua refers, in the main, to the Israelite's obedience to the will of God, whereas the book of Judges refers to the fact that "everyone did as he/she chose."

TITLE OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES:
The Hebrew title of the book of Judges is shophetim. The verb shophat, of which the title is a participle, means more than "to judge." As we've seen, also it means, "to govern, administer, exercise leadership" (Block, p. 23), "to vindicate" or "to rule" (BDB, 1074); in a sense these latter meanings are a more accurate description of what these persons did. A brief description of the meaning of the word is given in Judges 2:16, "The Lord raised up judges, who saved them out of the hands of these raiders."

In other words, these people were "saviors," or "deliverers," or "vindicators," and it would be wrong to think of them as having a judicial role (or only a judicial role). They were basically executives in nature, though they may have done some judicial work (as Deborah). Furthermore, they were "charismatic rulers" in the sense that the Spirit of God came upon them to enable them to perform their tasks. In 2:16-19, we have the designation hosheach, from which we
get the word we translate "to save," and as we know, from that Hebrew verb come the names Hosea, and Joshua, and from the Greek counterpart, the name Jesus. See Matthew 1:21 where an angel appeared to Joseph to tell him Mary would give birth to a son. He was to be named Jesus, because he would save his people from their sins.

As we've learned, and according to the theocratic principle in ancient Israel and in this book, the only real judge in the book was YAHWEH. Others served as his representatives, but HE WAS THE JUDGE (see 11:27).

I've also said, but need to repeat that THE SETTLEMENT PERIOD is characterized by a kind of cyclical situation (though as evangelicals we believe that history is moving toward a goal with God as sovereign over it):
rebellion
restoration retribution
repentance
In this cyclical pattern there is an underlying call by the historian to learn from the past. But as we've also seen, that is something very few of us do! It's apparent to all who give thought to this round-robin structure that it is not artificially imposed upon it; rather, it's a precise picture of man's basic nature: man sins, God allows various tribulations to come (not so much as punishment but as a means of drawing the person to the Almighty), then in the midst of the story - usually after all human resources have been exhausted - the individual cries out to the Lord and He delivers. The unfortunate thing is that it is not long before the person is right back at sinning again. Unless the Holy Spirit breaks this cycle the merry-go-round continues throughout life.

To make this personal, "How is it in your life? Where are you in that cycle?" And I ask the questions because there may well be some here who are in the rebelling stage; and perhaps others in the retribution stage, while all of us ought to be living in the repentance/restoration/-reproduction stage.

As far as the biblical writer was concerned, the gift of the "land" was seen as a token of the Lord's fidelity to his promises and a manifestation of his power to accomplish what he promised. The Lord's fidelity in giving the land should be matched by the fidelity of his people in receiving the gift. They, as he, should keep their promises and do what's expected of them. THE BOOK OF JUDGES, I repeat, SHOWS THAT IT WASN'T.

It would be worth our time to take a related sidetrack for a few minutes. And that would be to think about the subjects of "Deuteronomic History" and "Primary History," as so many Old Testament scholars do in relation to the opening nine books of the Bible. Among the things to note are that the first nine books of the Hebrew Bible are always in the fixed order that we find them and they are an integrated (and continuous) history of God's working with his people from creation to the release of Jehoiachin from Babylonian captivity on March 21, 561 B.C. [see 2 Kgs. 25:27-30].

As you'll see, there are other "links" that bind the books of Joshua through Kings together. For example, the opening statement found in Joshua and that found in Judges: "After the death of Moses" (Josh. 1:1), and "After the death of Joshua" (Jdg. 1:1). In First Samuel 25:1 the statement is slightly different when we read, "Now Saul died," but when we get to Second Samuel 1:1, we find, "After the death of Saul," and in Second Kings 1:1 it says, "After Ahab's death." Throughout that book, Kings, we find "after the death of (a national leader)," and then the successor
is named. What I'm trying to say is, there is continuity in the books known as the "Former Prophets."

At least nine correspondences can be detected within the Deuteronomic History:
1. As we've seen, there is a continuous history with a unified chronological scheme.
2. What we find is "interpretation" from a prophetic point of view, grounded in Deuter-onomy (e.g., Joshua 8:30-35).

3. There is a continual assessment of the situation in retrospect and prospect in speeches made by (1) God (through the prophet), (2) a public figure (such as Joshua or Solomon), and (3) the author/editor.

4. There is recognition of times of crisis, especially in the transition from one generation to the next.

5. Strained relations between God and his people took place, including cycles of human rebellion, rejection by God, repentance, and rehabilitation. The periods of probation were of varying length.

6. Situations are unstable because of ambivalent combinations of promises, guarantees, continual assurances, provisional warnings, and un-revisable judgments.

7. The author/authors was/were interested in the national institutions: land, king, army, temple, and priesthood.

8. A major concern in these books is the threat of assimilation to the surrounding culture, especially the religious culture and/or practices.

9. There are stock expectations for the kingly conduct of the leaders.

REFERENCE, etc...

An eighteenth century German scholar, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), established History of Philosophy as a field of study. Among the many things Hegel said and wrote is the statement, "What history teaches us is that nobody has ever learned anything from history."

The book of Judges is a tragic illustration of that. It covers an obscure period of Israelite history - 200 to 350 years - between the occupation of Canaan under Joshua and the emergence of the monarchy under Samuel. It wasn't a time of development as some claim, because the Israelites didn't move ahead during those years. For every step forward the people took, they seem to have taken two backwards! It might be better to call the settlement period "ISRAEL'S DARK AGES." (This was called the "dark ages" because of so many knights).

Most of the biblical data we have on the Israelite settlement is either in the later chapters of the book of Joshua, the book of Judges, the book of Ruth, or smatterings of information at the beginning of the book of Samuel.

During this time of uncertain length and indefinite leadership upheaval was the order of the day. Joshua had made assignments of territory for the people, but these newcomers encountered difficulties as they tried to establish themselves on their respective pieces of God-appointed real estate. Each of the twelve tribes was to go to designated area, rout out the remaining occupants and control the land. But they rarely succeeded.

Humanly speaking there were two POLITICAL FACTORS responsible for this halt in progress, this lack of advancement. One was external; the other was internal. The EXTERNAL factor was that Canaan was still permeated and surrounded by hostile forces, people who bitterly resented Israel's recent invasion of "their" country. The INTERNAL factor was disunity. The Israelites came out of Egypt a loose-knit confederation of twelve tribes; when they first occupied the Promised Land they retained that identity by dividing the territory among the tribes.

It's true, the peoples' experience in the wilderness had forged a clear sense of national identity, but at this early point in her history tribal identity still took priority over national identity as often as not. And the result was that there was a great deal of intertribal feuding and a good amount of clannish parochialism. REGIONAL interests came before NATIONAL interests, and it made it very difficult to summon collective action against an aggressor. Sometimes it happened, but that was the exception rather than the rule! As far as secular historians are concerned, those twin problems - enemies without and disunity within - are enough to explain the lack of prosperity and of cultural improvement during the period of the Judges.

But it's characteristic of the inspired author to go further in his analysis than to provide an historical record of political happenings. He was convinced that behind both of these weakening political obstacles to progress there were more fundamental and important SPIRITUAL problems in the country. And he spells it out in an early section of the book of Judges. Look with me at the second chapter. I'll READ verses 8-11.

Those are key verses because they show that in the estimate of the sacred historian Israel's trump card, as it were, in this dangerous and complex world of Middle Eastern politics, was the covenant - the agreement or pact the people made with God under Moses at Mount Sinai. That covenant was the answer to both Israel's external and internal problems. It was the key to her national unity because whereas other nations could only be effectively united by a massive centralization of political power under a despotic monarch, Israel was unique in being able to enjoy the liberty of her highly devolved tribal structure. The Israelites' national identity was grounded not in the dominance of a ruling family but through a shared commitment to Yahweh, the ONE TRUE GOD, as her king. That was the key to her - to Israel's - national unity.

What's more, this covenant was necessary to her MILITARY SURVIVAL. For whereas other nations relied upon the numerical superiority of their armed forces or the technological superiority of their weaponry, Israel had the LIVING GOD on her side, a God who had promised deliverance from all the Israelite's enemies provided the people remain faithful to him. But, of course, that proviso was the weak link, wasn't it?

The Israelites were NOT faithful to God, says the writer of Judges. In spite of all the people had learned and experienced in the wilderness, once those events became history, the Israelites fidelity to the covenant broke down.

The gods of the Canaanites and of the other neighbors offered more sensual attractions than the austere and morally demanding worship of Yahweh. Perhaps it was inevitable that idolatry should set in. Look at verses 12 & 13, "They forsook the Lord, the God of their fathers, who brought them up out of Egypt. They followed and worshiped various gods of the peoples around them. They provoked the Lord to anger because they forsook him and served Baal and the Ashtoreths."

As far as the biblical historian was concerned, it was this spiritual apostasy rather than those political factors I've mentioned that was really responsible for Israel's stagnation. In abandoning the covenant the Israelites dissolved the social glue, which held the tribal confederation together, and in doing so invited all kinds of internal anarchy. Worse still, Israel forfeited the divine protection, which alone could guarantee her borders against all those would-be aggressors. She laid herself wide open to enemy attack.

In verse 14, you see that's what begins to happen, "In his anger against Israel the Lord handed them over to raiders who plundered them. He sold them to their enemies all around, whom they were no longer able to resist." And it's at just this point in his analysis that THE JUDGES come in, those men and women who served as leaders during this period, and after whom this book is named. Look at verses 15 & 16, READ.

In spite of being called "Judges," these individuals weren't judicial figures, they were WARRIORS. They appeared at times of national emergency to remind the people of the covenant, to summon the fragmented tribes to common action, and to lead them to victory over their foes. Furthermore, these people were not just "opportunists" who took advantage of the national crisis. They were GOD SENDS. Look at verse 16, "Then the Lord raised up judges...."

So this is a strangely paradoxical scheme in which the writer of Judges sets this period of history. The same God who was PUNISHING the Israelites for their idolatry by allowing the people to fall victim to their enemies was simultaneously DELIVERING them from those very enemies by the hand of these specially commissioned individuals. And according to the biblical writer, this strange tension between JUDGMENT and SALVATION occurred not just once in this period but at least a dozen times. Look at verses 18-20a, READ.

So you see what I mean about this book being an illustration of Hegel's maxim: folk don't learn from history. That's what they learn: that they don't learn!
Whoever authored this anonymous book did so under the inspiration of the Spirit of God, and did it to teach his readers how to live. This, in fact, is what the Apostle Paul said many years later: "Everything that was written in the past" (a reference to the Old Testament) "was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom. 15:4). Taking that as a clue, let me personalize what I've been saying. In a popular treatment of the book of Judges Gary Inrig penned this:
"The book of Judges is filled with people very much like us - people with God-given potential for greatness and unfailing capacity for catastrophe. When they dared to trust God and depend upon Him they were people with hearts of iron who made a positive, godly impact on their times. But when even the greatest heroes depended upon the flesh, they were revealed as people with feet of clay, who not only experienced but also caused spiritual catastrophe. As you read their lives you discover the great principles God reveals about His work in His people. You can learn what it is to live a powerful, productive life in the middle of a society which is increasingly hostile to the disciples of the Lord Jesus" (Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay, p. 7).

He is right. The book of Judges speaks to our time because it presents living examples of a few people who served God in an age of apathy, apostasy and anarchy - a people, as I said, who lived in a society without standards. They served God in days like I've described, and not only survived but flourished. But, as I've also said, we read in this book of the majority who gave in to sin. We're told of the consequences of spiritual compromise and flagrant disobedience. No other part of Scripture so emphatically declares that spiritual disaster occurs when people draw back from wholehearted commitment to the Lord Jesus. You see, it's a fundamental principle that the Holy Spirit of God tries to communicate about spiritual survival in a society without standards (and we certainly live in that kind of world, don't we? D. L. Moody once said, "The place for a ship is in the sea, but God help the ship if the sea gets into it."

You and I live in what could be called the "me generation." Many of us have been taught to be independent, to stand up for our own rights and to do our own thing. Frank Sinatra sort of captured this idea when he sang, "I'll do it my way." People are admired who step to the beat of a different drummer, and most of us grew up being told how important it was to develop a proper self-image. Yet all of those encouragements and/or instructions or attitudes have led to a society that's increasingly secular, intensifyingly pagan, and vigorously anti-Christian.

This approach to life isn't new. We need only look at the Bible to discover that from the beginning mankind adopted a "me first" mentality. It happened in the Garden of Eden. We read about it in the account of Cain and Abel. You can't read the story of the days of Noah prior to the flood without realizing the same thing. It happened at the Tower of Babel and during the days of the Patriarchs. Then when we get to the book of Judges we're told twice, "Everyone did as he saw fit." The KJV has it, "Everyone did what was right in his own eyes" (17:6; 21:25). Immediately prior to that statement it says, "In those days Israel had no king" (also in 18:1 and 19:1). In commenting on that situation Daniel Block said, "The Israelites do not need either a governor or a king to lead them into sin, they will do on their own" (p. 476).

You see, the Apostle Paul was right: "we reap what we sow. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction" (Gal. 6:7-8). God permitted inroads of oppression to overtake His people because they chose to do what they wanted rather than to obey the known will of God. There was so much potential for the chosen people of God when they came into the Promised Land, yet that potential was not realized. Grave difficulties, dissensions and weaknesses took its place. It was only because of the grace of God in periodically raising up Judges that Israel was kept from going down the tubes far sooner than it did.

In reading the book of Judges it's interesting to note that the term "judge" is never used in the singular with regard to a particular person. Each of them is called "one of the judges" or "among the judges of Israel." The only exception to this is in Judges 11:27 where Jephthah is speaking to the king of the Ammonites. Listen to what he said,
"I have not wronged you, but you are doing me wrong by waging war against me. Let the Lord, THE JUDGE, decide the dispute between the Israelites and the Ammonites."

So the important thing to see as one studies this book is that THE ONE WHO TURNS OUT TO BE THE REAL JUDGE IS THE LORD HIMSELF. And, of course, that's still the case. Others may be His instruments, but the Lord God of Israel is the real magistrate. How thankful we ought to be when we realize that in that position HE can and does and will make the right decision concerning everyone of us. Isn't that encouraging? As our Judge and as the omniscient one HE knows every deed we've done, every thought we've had and every reward we should receive!

Another thing to keep in mind when reading or studying the book of Judges is that none of the Judges is presented as a saint. They were often corrupt, in many respects weak, and in all kinds of ways reflected the moral degeneracy of their times. The Bible is very candid about that; and it can be because in Scripture we have a record of how God took imperfect people and used them in crisis situations. To say it differently, GOD REGULARLY USES THE INSIG-NIFICANT TO ACCOMPLISH THE IMPOSSIBLE. In short, the message of the book of Judges is not what a great individual so and so was, but WHAT A GREAT GOD WE HAVE! The hero of this book is not the Judges but the Lord (Yahweh); and we must understand that. In fact, in a strange way, it's the grace and power of God that's thrown into sharp relief by the inadequacies and failures of these people through whom he chose to work. The very failure and weaknesses and moral degeneracy of these men and women is part of the message.

If we put it that way there are two kinds of lessons these judges teach us. On the one hand, they provide LESSONS OF ENCOURAGEMENT. We learn that God can and does use weak and imperfect people. And that's good news anytime; otherwise, he'd not be able to use us. On the other hand, there are LESSONS OF WARNING. Those whom God uses, sometimes in quite remarkable and unusual ways, make appalling blunders. That's an important lesson too; otherwise some of us might go around thinking ourselves infallible.

This book of the Bible stands out from its predecessor and its successor in the canon by virtue of its title. Unlike "Joshua," and unlike "Ruth," whose titles give the name of a prominent individual, "Judges" is named after an office, "judge," which is put in the plural. This shouldn't surprise us because in the Hebrew Bible (our Old Testament) we have the book of "Kings," and in the New Testament we have the "Acts of the Apostles." Both of those writings are in plural form, and indicate influential leaders.

Unlike the book that precedes it and the book that follows it (as arranged in our Bibles) the book of Judges does not bear a personal name in its title; and I think that's significant. What it says to me is that no one individual is dominant enough to cast a shadow over the entire book. In fact, what does cast a shadow over Judges is THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A LEADER. Another way of saying this is to call your attention to the fact that everything "after the death of Joshua" (Jdg. 1:1) was downhill. Notice what is stated in the final verse of the book of Judges: "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit" (21:25). In effect it begins by saying, "In those days there was no Joshua in Israel." The writer of Judges, whoever it was, was looking backward; he was saying, "Oh, that we did." At the end of the book the writer was looking forward and saying, "Perhaps a king would be the solution to the vacuum of "no Joshua." The opening verse of the book of Judges is, "After the death of Joshua, the Israelites asked the Lord, 'Who will be the first to go up and fight for us against the Canaanites?'" As Moses pointed out, the Israelites without a leader were sheep without a shepherd. That's what we read in Numbers 27:17. What a tragic situation!

Contrary to Jewish tradition that the book of Judges was written by Samuel, perhaps you've noticed in your reading of the Bible that the book of Joshua begins with this statement, "After the death of Moses," (1:1). The book of Judges begins, "After the death of Joshua" (1:1). What we call Second Samuel begins, "After the death of Saul" (1:1); and Second Kings starts similarly, "After Ahab's death" (1:1). Apparently one individual or a school of people was/were responsible for editing each book!

Before proceeding let me say something about this whole subject of Yahweh as Judge. The Bible is clear that God is a saving, blessing, creating, holy, loving God. Is he also a judging God? The answer is "yes." The Old Testament speaks often of God as judge. Early in biblical history, with regard to the city of Sodom, Abraham asked if it was right for the Judge of all the earth to destroy the righteous with the wicked. He said, "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?" (Gen. 18:25). Asaph, one of David's court musicians, and a man credited with having written a dozen of the psalms, made a similar claim, "The heavens declare his righteous-ness; for God himself is judge" (Ps. 50:6). Isaiah said, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our ruler, the Lord is our King; he will save us" (Isa. 33:22).

In the Old Testament Yahweh distinguishes between individuals (Gen. 16:5; 31:53; 1 Sam. 24:12, 15) and nations (Isa. 2:4). He also judges individuals (Gen. 30:6; Pss. 7:8; 26:1-2;
35:24-25; 43:1; 54:1), families (1 Sam. 3:13), nations (Gen. 15:14; Ps. 110:6; Joel 3:12; plus the captivities under Assyria and Babylonia), his people (Pss. 50:4; 67:4; Isa. 3:13; 33:22; Ezk. 36: 19), the earth (Gen. 6-8 [the flood]; Gen. 18:25; 1 Sam. 2:10; Pss. 9:8; 82:8; 94:2; 96:10); the gods and those on high (Job 21:22; Ps. 82:1-2). The fact that God could judge all these groups indicates he has authority and sovereignty over them.

To be a good judge, three things are essential: (1) authority and sovereignty; (2) just and equitable decision-making; and (3) the ability to perceive and interpret properly all the evidence. Yahweh has all three qualities. He is sovereign over all the earth. He judges people according to their ways (Ezk. 7:27; 24:14; 33:20). His judgments are righteous and based on equity (Gen. 18:25; Pss. 9:4, 8; 67:4; 72:2; 75:2; 96:10). Near the end of the Old Testament some wisdom writers raised serious questions about the justice of God [Job 8:3; 9:2, 20, 22-24]. The thing that qualified Yahweh most to be a judge was his ability to see inside a person and to know their motives and real character. The Lord said to Samuel: "They [mortals] look on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart" (1 Sam. 16:7). The psalmist said, "Prove me, O Lord, and try me; test my heart and mind" (Ps. 26:2; compare 139: 23). "If we had forgotten the name of our God, or spread out our hands to a strange god, would not God discover this? For he knows the secrets of the heart" (Ps. 44: 20-21). Jeremiah said, "But you, O Lord of hosts, who judges righteously, who try the heart and the mind, let me see your retribution on them: for to you I have committed my cause" (Jer. 11:20).

The role of the judge in the ancient world was more than that of hearing the testimony of witnesses and making a decision concerning the guilt or innocence of the accused. The role of the judge could include the discovery of the crime, plus hearing, accusing, defending, sentencing, and executing the sentence (see Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament, p. 74; Jacob, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 97).

Laban accused Jacob of stealing his household gods. Laban overtook Jacob on the road to Jabbok and rummaged through his baggage. When Laban found no incriminating evidence, Jacob said, "Although you have felt about through all my goods, what have you found of all your household goods? Set it here before my kinsfolk and your kinsfolk, so that they may decide between us two" (Gen. 31:37). After sparing Saul's life in the cave at Engedi, David said to him, "May the Lord judge between me and you! May the Lord avenge me on you; but my hand shall not be against you" (1 Sam. 24:12). Later David said, "May the Lord therefore be judge and give sentence between me and you. May he see to it, and plead my cause, and vindicate me against you" (1 Sam. 24:15).

Following the breaking of the two stone tablets on which the Decalogue was written Moses chiseled out two other tablets, and Yahweh appeared to him and proclaimed, "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished..." (Ex. 34:6). He is a just Judge who will not leave unpunished the guilty ones (Ps. 9:12). He hauls them into "court" and accuses them of breaking the covenant. The Lord often has a controversy with, or "indictment" against his people (Isa. 1:18; Jer. 2:9; Hos. 4:1-3; 12:2; Mic. 6:2).

The belief that God is judge is reflected in some personal names:
"Jehoshaphat" means "Yahweh judges,"
"Daniel" means, "God is judge" (as does "Eliphal," 1 Chron. 11:35),
"Abidan" occurs three times in the book of Numbers and means "my father is judge" (see Num. 1:11; 2:22; 7:60; 10:24).

Sometimes the word "judge" is used of God in a political role like that of earthly judges. It includes his ability to perceive the difference between good and evil and to act on that perception. Solomon prayed, "Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, able to discern between good and evil" (1 Kgs. 3:9). Ludwig Kohler said that God does not so much say what is right; rather, he helps to make things right (Old Testament Theology, p. 32).

In other words, THE DESIGNATION "JUDGE" as we understand it, IS INAPPRO-PRIATE WHEN USED OF THESE OLD TESTAMENT PEOPLE MENTIONED IN THE BOOK OF JUDGES. The men and women were not judicial figures; they were warriors. The primary function of all of them appears to be the same: to deliver Israel from oppression (cf. 2:16-18). Crenshaw calls them "warrior-rulers" (Old Testament Story and Faith, p. 119); but in essence the Judges were would-be rulers or leaders. In light of the spiritual need of the day, they were to be "catalysts" or "stimuli" for godly living. In essence, their purpose was not judicial but soteriological. This is why two of the Judges (Othniel [3:9] and Ehud [3:15]) are designated moshia'.

In First Samuel 8:5 (set in the period of the judges) the elders asked Samuel to "appoint for us, then, a king to govern [shaphat] us like other nations." The sense is obviously "to rule" or "to govern," not "to judge," because the king is described as one who will appoint officials, levy taxes, and go to war for the people (8:11-20). The same word is used in Psalm 2:10, "Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned O rulers [shaphat] of the earth."

If you check the major Bible versions you'll find that only three (Moffatt, Today's English Version, and the Jewish Publication Society's rendering) translate "shaphat" in 2:16 into more appropriate titles: "heroes," "leaders," or "chieftains." These same three versions translate the verb in Judges 3:10 as "avenged," "became ... leader," and "became ... chieftain," even though the verse describes Othniel's military conquest.

With that as background, let me now turn to a systematic overview of the book of Judges. Everyone I know considers the book to be divisible into three major sections of unequal length: an introduction, the body of the book, and the conclusion. I'll say more about that momentarily, but one way to divide the book is to say it consists of those parts like this:
I. In Those Days There Was No JOSHUA in Israel (1:1 - 3:6)
A. The results of this territorially (1:1 - 2:5)
B. The results of this spiritually (2:6 - 3:6)
II. In Those Days There Were JUDGES in Israel (3:7 - 16:31)
Six are referred to as major judges: Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah and Samson. Six are minor judges: Shamgar, Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon and Abdon. Their stories are given in the following verses. These, then, are the Judges whose stories are told:

A. Othniel (3:7-12)
B. Ehud (3:12-30)
C. Shamgar (3:31)
D. Deborah and Barak (4:1 - 5:31)
E. Gideon (6:1 - 8:35)
F. Abimelech (9:1-57)
G. Two lists of minor judges (10:1-5; 12:8-15)
H. Jephthah (10:6 - 12:7)
I. Samson (13:1 - 16:31)
III. In Those Days There Was No KING in Israel (17:1 - 21:25)
A. The results of this: spiritual and tribal migration (17:1 - 18:31)
B. More results of this: an all-Israelite civil war (19:1 - 21:25).

A second way to outline the book (before we talk about the more traditional outline), is to note the inclusio the writer/editor used. To pick that up one must see that there are two intro-ductions and two conclusions. In looking at those K. Lawson Younger Jr. makes the point of them being an inclusio (pp. 30-31). The first introduction (A) is concerned with foreign wars of subju-gation with the herem being applied. In its counterpart, the second conclusion (A1) narrates domestic wars with the herem being applied. The second introduction (B) relates the difficulties Israel had with foreign religious idols of the Canaanites. Its counterpart, the first conclusion (B1), describes the difficulties Israel had with its own domestic idols. The inclusio is:
A. Foreign wars of subjugation with the herem being applied (1:1 - 2:5)
B. Difficulties with foreign religious idols (2:6 - 3:6)
B1 Difficulties with domestic religious idols (17:1 - 18:31)
A1 Domestic wars with the herem being applied (19:1 - 21:25).

Younger then goes on to say, "That double introduction initiates paradigms that create literary expectations for the main cycles section. Judges 1:1 - 2:5 introduces the reader to the pattern of Israel's increasing failure to drive out the Canaanites, which will be mirrored in the moral degeneration of the major judges' lives. It also reveals the geographic sequence pattern of Judah to Dan reflected in the major judge cycles (Othniel to Samson). Judges 2:6 - 3:6 introduces the reader to the all-important cyclical pattern, the framework of the cycles section. These paradigms lay the groundwork to the subsequent irony that permeates the book

"In the double conclusion (17:1 - 21:25), Israel's enemy is no longer external but internal. Cyclical time, which was introduced in 2:6 - 3:6 and had dominated the cycles section, is exhaust-ed. The period is preeminently characterized by absence: 'In those days Israel had no king.'

"The entire double conclusion is unified by the four-time repetition of a distinctive refrain: twice in full at the beginning and end of the double conclusion and twice in the center of the section with an ellipsis of the refrain's second line (lit. trans. follows):
A. In those days there was no king …
Every man did what was right in his own eyes (17:6)
B. In those days there was no king … (18:1)

B1 In those days there was no king … (19:1)
A1 In those days there was no king …
Every man did what was right in his own eyes (21:25)

"The significance of the refrain is construed through the important statement in 8:23 ('I will not rule over you…. The Lord will rule over you'). Consequently, the first line of the refrain carries a double entendre: During the period of the judges there was no physical king, but more importantly there was no spiritual king. Thus the resultant 'every man did what was right in his own eyes' is more profoundly linked to the previous chapters than is typically realized. "The war of occupation with which the book begins (Israel vs. the Canaanites) and the civil war with which it closes (Israel vs. Benjamin) bracket the book reinforcing its theme" (pp. 30-32). [See chart in Younger, pp. 32-33].
The traditional way to outline the book of Judges is to divide it into three sections.

PARALLELS IN THE INTRODUCTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
___________________________________________________________
Introduction 1 (1:1 - 2:5) Conclusion 2 (19:1- 21:25)

The Israelites asked the Lord, saying, "Who The Israelites … inquired of God … "Who
will be the first to go up and fight for us of us shall go first to fight against the Ben-
against the Canaanites?" The Lord answered, jamites?" The Lord replied, "Judah…."
"Judah is to go…." (1:1-2) (20:18)

The story of how Othniel got his wife (1:11-15) The story of how the remainder of the
Benjamites got their wives (21:1-25)

The Benjamites fail to drive out the Jebusites A Levite carefully avoiding the Jebusites
From Jebus (1:21) in Jebus suffers terrible outrage in Gibeah
of Benjamin (19:1-30)

Bochim: God's covenant, Israel's unlawful Bethel: the ark of the covenant of God,
covenants with the Canaanites, Israel's Israel weeps and fasts before the Lord
weeping before the angel (messenger) of (20:26-29)
Yahweh (2:1-5)

Introduction 2 (2:6 - 3:6) Conclusion 1 (17:1 - 18:31

The degeneration of the generations after the A mother dedicates silver to the Lord for
death of Joshua (2:6-19); God leaves certain her son to make an idol! That son makes
nations "to test the Israelites to see whether one of his own sons a priest in his idola-
they would obey the Lord's commands, trous shrine, then replaces him with a
which he had given … through Moses" Levite. That Levite is Moses' grandson.
(2:20 - 3:4) He and his sons become priests at Dan's
shrine.

[from K. Lawson Younger, The NIV Application Commentary: Judges and Ruth, pp. 32-33]

CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO LESSONS