The Book of Judges

Barry G. Webb

• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781467436397
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Eminently readable, exegetically thorough, and written in an emotionally warm style that flows from his keen sensitivity to the text, Barry Webb's commentary on Judges is just what is needed to properly engage a dynamic, narrative work like the book of Judges. It discusses not only unique features of the stories themselves but also such issues as the violent nature of Judges, how women are portrayed in it, and how it relates to the Christian gospel of the New Testament.Webb concentrates throughout on what the biblical text itself throws into prominence, giving space to background issues only when they cast significant light on the foreground. For those who want more, the footnotes and bibliography provide helpful guidance. The end result is a welcome resource for interpreting one of the most challenging books in the Old Testament.

TEXT AND COMMENTARY

I. INTRODUCTION (1:1–3:6)

A. AFTER JOSHUA: MILITARY DECLINE (1:1–2:5)

As explained above,1 1:1–2:5 is the first of two passages which together form a two-part introduction to the book. It tells how the Israelites fared as they tried to complete the conquest of Canaan by occupying the areas that had been allotted to them by Joshua (Josh. 13–19). Like the biblical accounts of the careers of Saul, Solomon and Uzziah, it begins well and ends badly. It begins with Israel as a whole seeking direction from Yahweh (1:1–2), and ends with them weeping before him (2:1–5).2 The intervening verses recount the activities, successes, and failures of the individual tribes, beginning with Judah and Simeon in 1:9, and ending with Dan in 1:34. The fortunes of the southern tribes led by Judah are described first (vv. 3–17), then those of the northern tribes led by the two Joseph tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh (vv. 22–35). Each of these major sections has a short appendix (see p. 92). Of particular interest is the strategic repetition of the verb ʿālâ, “to go up,” in 1:1–2:5 as a whole. In 1:1–2 the Israelites ask, “Who will go up?” The account of the fortunes of the southern tribes begins when Judah “goes up” in verse 4. The corresponding section dealing with the northern tribes begins when Joseph “goes up” in verse 22, and the conclusion is reached when the angel of Yahweh “goes up” in 2:1. This is partly a simple matter of topography—a movement up into the central hill country.3 There is a subsequent “going down” (v. 9). But the “going up” has more significance than this. The repetition of ʿālâ unifies the passage as a whole, helps to delineate its parts, and shows us that the end comes in 2:1–5 rather than at the end of chapter 1. When the angel of Yahweh “goes up” in 2:1 a climax is reached. All that has gone before is reviewed and evaluated, and this evaluation produces the weeping of 2:4. While there have been successes in chapter 1, overall it has been a chronicle of failure.

1. The Israelites Inquire of Yahweh (1:1–2)

Every limit is a beginning as well as an ending.

George Eliot4

1After the death of Joshua,5 the Israelites asked Yahweh, “Who will go up to the Canaanites for us first, to fight them?”

2Yahweh replied, “Judah6 will go up; hear this7—I have given the land into his hand.”

1 After the death of Joshua links what follows to what has preceded it. It tells us that the death of Joshua did not end Israel’s story; something followed it, and the book of Judges will tell us what it was. But the same words also separate what follows from what has gone before. The death of Joshua was a boundary event, dividing Israel’s time into a “before” and an “after,” as Jesus was later to divide the world’s time into B.C. and A.D. Moses personally commissioned Joshua as his successor (Deut. 31:1–8). The “book of the law,” which was the charter for Joshua’s life, was the revelation God had given to Israel through Moses (Josh. 1:1–9). Joshua led Israel across the Jordan as Moses had led them through the Red Sea. In other words, Joshua’s ministry had been a continuation and completion of Moses’ ministry, as the ministry of the apostles would the continuation and completion of Jesus’ ministry (Josh. 4:14, 23–24). The death of Joshua was the end of an era. Israel’s life would go on, but would never be quite the same again.

The first difference Israel had to confront as they went forward was one of leadership. After Moses there had been Joshua, but after Joshua there was no one in particular. Who would lead them now? There was no longer anyone who was obviously chosen by God as Moses and Joshua had been; certainly no one with the same commanding profile and character. So the question asked at the beginning of the book is a natural one in the circumstances: Who will lead us now that Joshua is dead? The good news is that while Joshua himself was dead, the impact of his life lived on. He left behind him a united Israel who knew that even with Moses and Joshua gone they were not leaderless, for Yahweh was their supreme leader now as he had always been. It was a lesson they had learned from Moses and Joshua themselves, and learned well. These men had always pointed beyond themselves to Yahweh, and taught the Israelites that it was he, above all, that they must obey. So it is to him that they turn as the book of Judges opens. It is a promising start to this next chapter of Israel’s life. After Joshua’s death the Israelites asked Yahweh something. What a disarmingly simple way this is of telling us how the Israelites understood themselves to be related to God! They could ask him questions and expect that he would hear and answer them. They were on speaking terms with him. So, of course, had Moses and Joshua been, and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It was the way it had always been from the beginning of Israel’s history, and of history itself. Of course it was God, not they, who had begun the conversation. It was his initiative that had made it possible. But it was a real conversation, based on real revelation and real grace. They had met and come to know the God who draws people into relationship with himself by speaking to them, and allowing them to speak to him. All parts of the conversation were not of the same importance. What God had said to Adam, Moses, and Abraham was foundational to everything else. Nor did he speak to everyone in the same way, or with the same directness and intimacy; not even to all his chosen prophets. Since Moses no prophet had arisen whom Yahweh knew “face to face” as he knew Moses (Deut. 34:10). But the conversation did go on, and it remained at the very center of Israel’s life with God. Judges begins with the resumption of this conversation: the Israelites asked Yahweh something, and he replied. As we shall see, dialogues (conversations) are at the core of the Judges narrative as a whole, and play a key role in the development of its themes—especially dialogues between the two principal characters, Yahweh and Israel.

We are not told how the “asking” was done, and in terms of how the story works it is probably not important for us to know. It is the fact of the asking rather than the manner that matters. But if we are curious and want to know, we will have to work with the clues we have been given in the story so far (Genesis to Joshua), and in the book of Judges itself. In this connection it is noteworthy that Judges closes (or nearly so) with the Israelites inquiring of Yahweh again, and this time more details are provided. In chapter 20 they ask the same question as in 1:1, this time at Bethel, and it seems that the place is significant: “they went up to Bethel; and the Israelites asked God …” (v. 18). They do so again in verses 27–28, again at Bethel, and this time we are told why they went there: “The ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, and Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, was ministering before it.” It appears that Bethel itself is not the primary thing, but the presence there of the ark and the high priest at that time. In 1:1 we are at a different time, before Bethel was conquered and occupied (1:22–26). But it is reasonable to assume that the other conditions for proper inquiry were already in place. The law of Moses indicates that, as well as a duly appointed priest, the Urim and Thummim were normally involved in seeking direction from God (Exod. 28:29–30; Lev. 8:8). The high priest carried these two stones in the breastpiece which he wore over his heart, and somehow used them to “make decisions” for the Israelites; that is, to determine what God wanted them to do (Exod. 28:30 NIV). According to Numbers 27:18–21, this is the way in which Joshua himself had been given instructions concerning Israel’s movements and encampments in the wilderness.8 However, it would be hazardous to assume that anything was completely normal in the period of the judges, including the manner of “asking God” about things. Fortunately the next verse throws a little more light on the issue.

2 The nature of Yahweh’s response given here (a whole complex sentence rather than a simple “yes” or “no”) suggests that in this case something more was involved than the simple use of the oracular stones—most likely the delivery of a spoken oracle by the priest himself, or (as elsewhere in Judges) by a prophet, or by the mysterious “messenger of Yahweh.”9 The substance of the question presupposes that part of the Joshua narrative which refers to the “remaining nations” and Yahweh’s promise to dispossess them; that is, Joshua’s farewell address in Joshua 23 (esp. vv. 4–5). After the death of their great military leader the Israelites (still full of enthusiasm to continue the struggle) seek guidance directly from Yahweh concerning the further conduct of the war. Their inquiry envisages a series of campaigns by individual tribes or groups of tribes. But the concept of a united Israel is also present. Whoever goes first will also go for us, that is, for Israel as a whole. It will be the first symbolic blow which will open the next phase in the struggle between Israel and the Canaanites. In his reply Yahweh gives this honor to Judah. The tribe is here referred to by the name of its ancestor. The tribe of Simeon is referred to in the same way in the next verse.

The force of the statement, “I have given10 the land … ,” is probably, “I have decided to give it”;11 that is, the divine decision has already been made, and therefore the outcome is certain. Furthermore, given the symbolic nature of what Judah is about to do, the land in question is best taken here as the whole land of Canaan as promised to Israel. The effect of this brief exchange, and particularly the promise of victory at the end of the verse, is to suggest that the struggle for full possession of Canaan is about to enter its last phase, and will soon be brought to a successful conclusion. Tha...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• General Editor’s Preface
• Author’s Preface
• Principal Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Text and Commentary
• Notes
• Authors
• Subjects
• Scripture References