How did the Israelites communicate with the Lord? (1:1–2)
When Joshua was commissioned, the Lord said Eleazar would make decisions for Joshua with the Urim (Nu 27:21), which was probably used in this case as well. The Urim and Thummim were small objects kept in the high priest’s breastpiece, which was attached to the front of the ephod (Ex 28:30). With the stones, the high priest sought a yes or no answer from God. See the article What were the Urim and Thummim? (Dt 33:8).
Why cut off the king’s thumbs and big toes? (1:6–7)
Judah’s soldiers wanted to humiliate and cripple the conquered king. Without thumbs, he could no longer wield a weapon. Without big toes, he could no longer run during battle. Such treatment of war prisoners was common among nations at the time. The defeated king accepted his fate philosophically. He knew his punishment was no worse than the various tortures he had imposed on those he had conquered.
Why give your daughter as a trophy of war? (1:12–13)
Caleb was essentially hiring someone to lead a successful attack on Debir. His offer was consistent with customs of the time. Because women were valued primarily for the work they could do, when a daughter married, it meant her family lost a worker. A prospective groom would compensate the bride’s family by paying a bride-price to finalize the marriage contract. By waiving the bride-price for his daughter, Caleb offered his warriors the chance to gain a wife with heroism rather than wealth. See Were Israelite girls treated like property? (Jos 15:17).
Why did chariots fitted with iron stop them? (1:19)
Chariots were particularly difficult to fight against on open plains because of their maneuverability and speed. When fitted with iron, chariots were virtually invincible. During the shift from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age (c. 1200 BC), the Canaanites jealously guarded the metallurgical secrets they had learned from the Hittites of Asia Minor. Iron became as highly prized as gold and silver, and it was seen as a sign of great strength and power. Iron weapons gave the Philistines a considerable advantage in battle against the hill-dwelling Israelites (1Sa 4:1–2, 10).
Do enemies make good neighbors? (1:21)
It was common for enemies during this era to maintain a fragile truce. But pagan enemies didn’t make good neighbors. With the Jebusites living nearby, the Benjamites fell victim to various temptations—they intermarried with their neighbors and participated in their wickedness and idolatry.
Was it common practice to spare cooperative enemies? (1:25)
The man the tribes of Joseph spared was not merely cooperative; he chose to side with the Israelites against his own people. Apparently he believed that the Israelites were favored by God and that the people of Luz/Bethel were not. The fact that he and his family left the area to build a city elsewhere shows his willingness to start a new life away from former allegiances (v. 26).
Why make slaves of the Canaanites? (1:28)
The text suggests that Israel enslaved the Canaanites out of laziness and unbelief. God had commanded Israel to drive the Canaanites out of the land completely (Dt 7:1–2; Jos 1:4; 3:10; 23:5, 12–13). Instead of obeying God, the Israelites chose to acquire a slave force to do their work for them. As it turned out, Israel didn’t conquer the Canaanites completely until King David’s time. The Israelites paid a hidden price for enslaving the Canaanites: when the Canaanite slaves were assimilated into northern Israel, they accelerated the nation’s slide into idolatry.
What kind of angel spoke to the nation? (2:1, 4)
Some say this was a temporary manifestation or appearance of God himself (a theophany). See Was this an angel or the Lord? (6:11–12). Others think this angel may have been a human messenger, such as Phinehas the priest or perhaps a prophet. Since this book includes several appearances of angels as they are commonly understood—as heavenly messengers—that is probably how this account should be understood as well.
Why did the Israelites offer sacrifices at Bokim? (2:5)
Perhaps because of their sin or because of the trouble God said the Canaanites would cause them. By offering sacrifices, the people acknowledged God’s pronouncement and affirmed their covenant relationship with him. Israel sometimes built altars at the sites of significant events.
Why was this time of the judges so troubled? (2:10–23)
Israel was a theocracy—that is, God was its ruler. The people were to obey God and follow his leadership. But the people found it difficult to follow a leader without a human face and presence. By the time Joshua—the last of the great leaders of the exodus—died (v. 8), a new generation had grown up; they knew neither the LORD nor what he had done for Israel (v. 10). So God raised up judges to save them. Israel, having been met with disaster (v. 14), accepted each judge when they needed military and civil leadership. And if he or she was a godly leader, the people obeyed God and kept the covenant. But after each leader’s death, the people again turned away from the Lord and followed the example of the pagan Canaanites who lived among them—worshiping Baal, Asherah and other idols.
Ultimately, God met our need for a leader with a human face once and for all—in Jesus Christ, who became one of us and who is able to empathize with our weaknesses [for he] … has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin (Heb 4:15). He is now always with believers to the very end of the age (Mt 28:20).
How could a whole generation not know the Lord? (2:10)
Evidently, the Israelite parents had failed to teach their children. God had commanded the Israelites to pass his laws and moral values along to the next generation (Dt 6:4–9). Gradually influenced by the paganism around them, however, the Israelites surrendered to the prevailing cultural and social values—despite the angel’s direct warning.
Why did the people need leaders to keep them faithful to God? (2:19)
Without strong leadership, keeping faith with God seems to have been almost impossible for the people of Israel. Even with the leadership of godly men like Moses and Joshua, the people had fallen under the influence of the idol worshipers who lived around them. Most of the judges were military leaders rather than spiritual leaders. They liberated the people from oppressors, but after each judge died, the people returned to the idol worship practiced by their oppressors and neighbors. See the article Why was this time of the judges so troubled? (2:10–23).
Why did God decide to stop helping Israel? (2:20–21)
God worked with Israel on the basis of a conditional covenant, or agreement. It specified certain conditions the Israelites had to follow if they wanted to receive God’s promised blessings. They could expect life and prosperity or death and destruction, depending on their response to God’s commands (Dt 30:15–18). God didn’t change his mind; he merely carried out the terms of the covenant.
Why did God test Israel? (2:22)
God’s testing of Israel was an ongoing examination to determine whether or not the nation would keep the way of the LORD and walk in it as their ancestors did. It was not a once-for-all event, like a final exam at the end of a course. Rather, the attacks, as well as the proximity of several nations (3:5) over a number of years, challenged the faithfulness of Israel. Each new test actually brought Israel a new opportunity to love and serve God.
Why did God want them to learn warfare? (3:2)
The Lord taught warfare to an inexperienced generation of Israelites for two reasons: (1) to help them better protect themselves and (2) to test their faith and obedience. Engaging in war with their enemies gave them opportunities to see God’s promises at work.
What were the signs that the Spirit had come on Othniel? (3:10)
Othniel probably displayed unusual leadership abilities. It’s likely that God equipped him with extraordinary wisdom, courage and strength that would have been evident to the people of Israel and their oppressors. This was not unusual in Israel’s history; God had raised up others on whom his Spirit worked in special ways (e.g., Ex 31:1–5).
How did the Israelites cry out to the Lord? (3:15)
Although we don’t know how widespread this spiritual distress call was, it’s likely the leaders and people of Israel called out to God both individually and collectively. Their prayers to God were born of desperation, like that of their ancestors who had suffered oppression in Egypt. It seems that for most of them, the plea may have been a superficial means of escaping oppression, because their fervor for seeking God did not last.
What were these stone images near Gilgal? (3:19)
They may have been carved stones that were much larger than typical pagan idols and therefore served as landmarks. Alternatively, they may have been a local boundary marker. Still another possibility is that they were the stones set up by Joshua to commemorate the miraculous crossing of the Jordan River (Jos 4:19–24).
Why did it take a left-handed man to pull this off? (3:21)
Ehud hid his weapon on his right thigh, making it easy to draw the blade with his left hand. When Ehud passed through the palace gates, the guards probably looked for a weapon strapped to his left thigh, where right-handed soldiers carried their swords, and they did not see the short sword he concealed. As a result, Eglon thought Ehud was unarmed and was taken by surprise.
Can assassination be God’s will? (3:21)
The Moabite oppression was broken and Israel’s territory freed because of Ehud’s courage and cunning. However, we don’t have to admire Ehud’s assassination of Eglon or say that God approved of it. Other such distasteful scenes in this book reflect prevailing wickedness and not necessarily the plan of God. These stories cannot be used to sanction evil or attribute it to God. Humans are always responsible to God for their actions, regardless of the benefits of the outcome. The accomplishment of God’s will never requires a breach of his covenant or character.
Why provide such gruesome details? (3:22)
Details, even unpleasant ones, make a narrative vivid and fully informative. In this case, the details demonstrate that Ehud, because of the force with which he drove his sword, carried out his task thoroughly and with determination.
An oxgoad was a long wooden stick, sometimes having a stone or metal tip. It was used to poke oxen to make them keep moving when working. It was a simple farm instrument that many Israelites owned, and for Shamgar to use it successfully against hundreds of well-armed Philistines shows God’s supernatural blessing on his exploits.
In what way did the Lord sell his people? (4:2)
The Lord sold them by allowing them to be defeated by a pagan nation. The domination of their enemies left them hopeless and in virtual slavery (2:14; 3:8; 10:7; 1Sa 12:9). Moses used this graphic word himself in his prophetic song (Dt 32:30): Israel had clearly been warned that God would indeed “sell” them to their enemies if they forsook him.
How could a woman be a leader in a patriarchal society? (4:4–5)
Although it was rare for a woman to be a leader in Israel, there was no divine injunction against it (e.g., Miriam, Ex 15:20; Huldah, 2Ki 22:14). In fact, God blessed Deborah for her trust in him, and because the people recognized God’s hand on her, they sought her out for her wisdom.
Why did Barak insist that Deborah go with him to Mount Tabor? (4:8)
After 20 years of oppression at the hands of the Canaanites, Barak had reason to be concerned. Deborah, a prophetess, was recognized as one to whom God spoke. Barak probably wanted her to accompany him as insurance that God would go with them and assist them in rebelling against their oppressors. This may also be an early indicator of a common religious phenomenon in Judges—people with a “lucky charm” mentality.
Jael knew that her husband, Heber—along with the rest of the Kenite clan—had tried to be friends to both the Israelites and the Canaanites. But by killing Sisera, she declared herself loyal to Israel. She may have known that whoever blessed Israel would in turn be blessed (Ge 12:3), or she may simply have wanted to repay a favor to Deborah or Barak.
Should Jael be praised for killing a man she welcomed into her tent? (4:21; 5:24–27)
Sisera had no claim to Jael’s hospitality. He was a military commander on the run while his soldiers were fighting and dying. Jael was alone and in no position to refuse entrance to this powerful warrior who had been a brutal oppressor of God’s people for 20 years. Jael’s people, the Kenites, were descendants of Moses’ father-in-law and thus had a long history of close relations with the Israelites (1:16). When faced with Israel’s oppressor, Jael used the only weapons of war most women had—her wits and whatever was at hand. Deborah described Jael as most blessed of women (5:24). Like Rahab before her (Jos 2:1–21), Jael chose to side with the people of God.
Why include a song in a history book? (5:1)
The song of Deborah and Barak is a celebrative chronicle of the Israelites’ victory. It was sung to inspire praise and adoration for God, affirming his saving power and concern for his people. It proclaimed Israel’s faith. It also encouraged intertribal cooperation by commending the tribes that had joined in the battle and rebuking those that had not. Songs were a commonly used teaching tool in many ancient cultures.
Why would the roads be abandoned? (5:6)
This image offers a clue about these difficult and violent times in Israel. Basic communication and travel was disrupted. Commerce was impossible. Those who had to travel took obscure paths to avoid the robbers who had commandeered the main roads.
In what way did village life cease? (5:7)
The rampages of the Canaanites threatened the farmers, who typically lived in small villages near their farmlands. Small communities did not have walls or soldiers to keep out marauders. Some farmers may have gone into hiding, hoping to farm secluded plots of ground. Others may have sought safety within walled towns. Either way, villages were left desolate.
What did the Israelites fight with? (5:8)
It’s likely that the Canaanites suppressed the Israelites by taking their weapons and not allowing the manufacture of new ones. Sometimes Israel’s enemies allowed no blacksmiths in the land, which prevented them from making spears and swords (1Sa 13:19). The song says there were no weapons at all in Israel, but that is no doubt poetic exaggeration; there were weapons enough to fight the battle at Kishon. They probably relied on small, concealed weapons and farming implements such as the oxgoad (Jdg 3:31), not large shields and spears.
What did these tribes do? (5:15–17)
Reuben to the southeast, Dan to the south and Asher to the northwest lived some distance from the action (see Map 4 at the back of this Bible). They probably felt relatively secure and preferred to stay home rather than get involved in the battles of others. But that was precisely Deborah’s concern. In effect, their disloyalty showed that they viewed the tribes of Israel as separate entities rather than as a single nation. This is a recurring issue throughout the book of Judges (8:6–9; 12:1–7; 21:8).
Perhaps near the Kishon River, where the battle was fought. Some think Meroz was a Canaanite town that had previously made a treaty with Manasseh. The people of Meroz, probably thinking Israel would be defeated, broke the treaty and changed loyalties to avoid punishment by the Canaanites. It was common practice for the people of the land, including the Israelites later on, to hedge their bets and try to be in the good graces of whoever was most powerful at any given time (8:6, 8).
Why talk about Sisera’s mother? (5:28)
Deborah’s song is poetry, not a factual, narrative account. Deborah and Barak probably did not have any information about Sisera’s mother. But they poetically expressed the emotions she was likely to have felt. This was their way of describing the anguish of their defeated enemies in contrast to their own exuberant joy.
Why did Midian destroy Israel’s crops? (6:4)
This common practice of warfare kept the Israelites in dire straits, constantly scrambling just to survive. The Midianites wanted Israel to be too weak to mount a counterattack. They may also have used some of the crops for themselves, since they lived off the land as semi-nomads.
Was this an angel or the Lord? (6:11–12, 14–16)
It isn’t clear. The writer uses angel of the LORD (v. 11) and the LORD (v. 14) interchangeably. The terms are synonymous in this case. The temporary manifestation or appearance of God in human or angelic form (a theophany) occurs several times in the Old Testament. Also, God’s activities and his characteristics are commonly referred to in human terms in the Bible. In either case, the text is clear that this was God’s messenger with God’s message. See the article Who was the angel of God? (Ge 21:17).
Was Gideon angry with God? (6:13)
It seems Gideon was disappointed with God and perhaps angry as well. He was almost certainly not alone. The oppression of the Israelites by the Midianites was severe and painful, and the people would have been apt to blame God. Many Israelites surely thought, God can do anything, so why doesn’t he take all our problems away? In reality, the oppression by the Midianites was well-earned divine punishment for idolatry (2:10–15), not an indication that God didn’t care about his people.
Was Gideon right to ask for a sign? (6:17)
Gideon wanted to be certain that: (1) the message was truly from God and (2) the things the messenger said would happen. A sign would confirm this for him. The Lord honored the request, though he had already assured Gideon of success in resisting the Midianites.
Why did the LORD reassure Gideon that Gideon was not going to die? (6:23)
The Hebrew translated the angel of the LORD (v. 22) could mean the angel who is the LORD or the angel through whom the LORD manifests himself. From Gideon’s response, it’s evident that he assumed the visitor was the Lord himself. And he knew that for a sinful human to be in the visible presence of God meant death (Ex 33:20). The supernatural visitor, whether God himself or an angel, assured Gideon that he would not die. See Was this an angel or the Lord? (6:11–12).
Why did God choose someone whose family worshiped Baal? (6:25)
Gideon’s family mixed their worship of God with the worship of false gods. Sadly, this was more common in Israel at this time than the exclusive worship of the one true God. Gideon, for his part, was keenly aware of his own inadequacies and was extremely reluctant to be Israel’s leader (v. 15). Perhaps it was because of Gideon’s humility that God used him. God saw Gideon’s weaknesses but gave the young man the grace to be a courageous leader.
What was a proper kind of altar? (6:26)
This might refer to the materials used in its construction. Unlike altars to pagan gods, altars to the Lord were made with natural—uncut—stones. Proper may also refer to the purpose of the altar; it was a place where only the true God was worshiped.
Who were these Abiezrites? (6:34)
The men of Abiezer, Gideon’s hometown, were the first to respond to his call to action. They claimed to be the poorest clan in the tribe of Manasseh (v. 15).
Can we determine God’s will by “putting out a fleece”? (6:36–40)
In Judges 6, Gideon placed a wool fleece on the threshing floor to confirm God’s command to fight the Midianites. His test was a way of gaining confidence in God’s will. However, the fleece really exposed Gideon’s lack of faith. God had already revealed his presence (v. 12), his unmistakable instructions (vv. 14–16) and his power (vv. 21–22). Gideon had everything he needed in order to know and follow God’s will. But because he lacked faith, he searched for more evidence, more assurance and more confidence.
Today, God communicates his will through his Word, the Bible. And where his Word is clear, we should not put out our own “fleece” to decide whether or not we should obey. For example, the Bible’s commands to tell the truth and submit to authority are non-negotiable. To test God regarding whether or not either one is his will for our lives only reveals a lack of faith. Putting out a fleece at these times is usually more about second-guessing God’s direction than about seeking it.
However, the Bible isn’t always specific in its application of God’s commands. We know God calls us to serve, but we may not be sure where or in what capacity. We know God is leading us to develop our talents, but we don’t know which college to attend or which job to apply for. At these times, we may seek the signs that clarify God’s leading (Ge 24:1–21). In this way, we act wisely (Eph 5:17) and avoid presumption (Jas 5:17) in obeying the will of God.
What is “putting out a fleece”? (6:37–40)
Some Christians use the phrase “putting out a fleece” to express their desire to know exactly what God’s will is for them. Putting out a fleece often describes a specific action that tests God’s approval or disapproval. See the article Can we determine God’s will by “putting out a fleece”? (6:36–40).
What was significant about the way the men drank? (7:5–6)
The drinking test had no special significance or historical precedent. It was simply a way to reduce the size of the army to 300 men. The point is that God was not interested in mounting forces of superior size to secure the victory.
Why choose these 300 men? Were they the best fighters? (7:7)
The text gives us no evidence that these 300 men were the best fighters; it only says that they were the ones remaining after God’s seemingly arbitrary test. We do know, however, that these men didn’t need to fight. God trimmed the ranks of Gideon’s army to prove his own might in the face of the Midianite oppressors.
Was the Midianite’s interpretation inspired by rumors or by God? (7:14)
No doubt the Midianites had heard about Gideon’s uprising and the army he had gathered, and the dream reinforced what they’d heard. However, God made the interpretation clear to confirm to Gideon that God was with him. Because of the dream, Gideon could see that the surprise attack would cause panic among the Midianites.
How could Gideon understand their language? (7:15)
The Midianites consisted of five families that were linked to Abraham through Midian, Abraham’s son by his concubine Keturah (Ge 25:1–4). The Midianite language, if not identical to Hebrew, was similar enough for Gideon to understand what the sentries were saying.
Do dreams help us know God’s will today? (7:15)
Today God’s Spirit most often guides people through Scripture, prayer, worship, the counsel of godly friends and circumstances. Rare incidents do occur when someone is led by a vision or a dream. However, if God chooses to reveal his will through a dream, we can be confident that it will not conflict with the truth he has already revealed in his Word.
What time was the middle watch? (7:19)
It was between 10:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., the second of three periods during the night when guards were posted to keep watch.
Why were they to seize the waters of the Jordan? (7:24)
This probably meant that they were to control the places where people could cross the river. In this way they could cut off some of the escape routes of the Midianites and inflict greater losses to their army.
Why didn’t these towns offer help to their fellow Israelites? (8:6, 8)
Gideon’s tiny attack force did not inspire people’s confidence that it would be a long-lasting protective army. The people of Sukkoth and Peniel felt that their security in the long run depended on maintaining good relations with the Midianites. Rather than risk later revenge from the Midianites, they treated Gideon’s request coolly and refused to give him supplies.
What kind of lesson could desert thorns and briers teach? (8:16)
This most likely was capital punishment accomplished by torture. The men of Sukkoth learned to support Gideon when they saw their elders suffer a painful death, beaten with whips made of thorns and briers.
Was Gideon right to extract such brutal revenge? (8:16–17)
Gideon was at least right in his own estimation (17:6; 21:25). He had warned the men of Sukkoth that they would suffer such consequences if they persisted in supporting Israel’s enemies (8:7). The death penalty probably seemed appropriate because their refusal to help him in battle constituted treason, a capital offense.
What was Gideon’s ephod? (8:27)
The original ephod was worn by the high priest (Ex 39:1–26). The attached breastpiece held the Urim and Thummim, which were used to determine God’s will (Ex 28:30; Lev 8:8; see the article What were the Urim and Thummim? [Dt 33:8]). Gideon’s ephod was made from the gold earrings of the defeated Midianites. The problem was not with the ephod itself, but with what it became in the minds of the people. When they began to worship it, they violated God’s command against making and worshiping images.
How could Gideon make such a big mistake? (8:27)
While refusing to become Israel’s king (vv. 22–23), Gideon did in fact assume many of the prerogatives of a king: he established a large harem (v. 30) and amassed a fortune from his grateful soldiers, including royal robes (v. 26). With the gold Gideon was given, he made an ephod, likely replicating that which the high priest wore. Gideon seems to have wrongly assumed priestly functions. Regardless of his intentions, Gideon—who had boldly broken up his father’s altar to Baal (6:25–27)—was now setting a snare for himself and his own family.
Why did Gideon have so many wives? (8:30)
The practice of having many wives was part of his culture. The story of Adam and Eve infers that one wife for each husband was God’s intention for marriage (Ge 2:24). But early on several men, including Abraham, Jacob and David, married multiple wives without God’s express disapproval. Though it was not necessarily considered a sin to have multiple wives at that time in Biblical history, the practice contributed to family problems, breakdowns in relationships and sin. See the article Why did David have so many wives and concubines? (2Sa 5:13).
Were Abimelek’s charges true? (9:2)
Gideon had promised that neither he nor his son would rule over Israel (8:23), so Abimelek’s influence was limited primarily to Ophrah, his hometown. However, Abimelek’s name itself, which means “my father is king,” causes some to wonder how Gideon handled his ongoing role as leader. Abimelek may indeed have manifested charisma similar to that of his father, but with less prudence. He apparently played on the fears of his relatives that Gideon’s many sons could oppress them, and he used their fears as a political opportunity to promote himself. Besides selfish ambition, he may also have been motivated by jealousy and hatred. His half brothers probably looked down on him because he was the son of a slave girl (9:18).
How could Jotham be heard without getting killed? (9:7)
Being within earshot didn’t necessarily mean that he was within the clear shot of a bow. Jotham climbed the slopes of Mount Gerizim—perhaps shouting down from the top of a cliff or out of a cave or from a hiding place behind some rocks. The rough terrain made it possible to be heard but not easily reached. Also, the walls of the valley may have served to amplify his voice. Another possibility is that the Shechemites were feasting and drinking to Abimelek’s coronation and were in no condition to chase Jotham.
What does this parable mean? (9:8–15)
Plants that produce olives, figs and grapes are valuable. Thornbushes are worthless weeds that burn quickly. The meaning of Jotham’s story is that Abimelek (the thornbush) had killed off his competition, Gideon’s 70 sons (the worthy plants). Fiery, combustible Abimelek would eventually destroy even the Shechemites who wanted him as king (vv. 42–57).
What does this fire … from Abimelek refer to? (9:20)
This prediction that Abimelek and the people of Shechem would destroy each other was fulfilled three years later (vv. 22, 42–57). The thornbush (v. 15), which has the quality of burning quickly (Ps 58:9), would ignite a deadly blaze, and Jotham’s curse would be fulfilled in a remarkably literal way (Jdg 9:49, 57).
Why was Shechem, a city of refuge, so torn by conflict—and finally destroyed? (9:22–24, 45)
Shechem was intended to be a city of refuge for those accused of murder (Jos 21:21), but it became a place of violence, conspiracy and treachery. As there is “no honor among thieves,” so it is with traitorous killers. In judgment God allowed these people to turn their hatred on each other.
Why would God stir up animosity between Abimelek and the Shechemites? (9:23)
We may debate whether God caused the breakdown of the relationship between Abimelek and the Shechemites or whether he permitted them to reap the consequences of their own treacherous ways. The author of Judges, in language consistent with Old Testament theology, attributes the action to God as a recognition that God is in control of all history. God, as the ultimate power, can use anything to accomplish his purpose, regardless of how disastrous it seems to be (Ge 50:20).
What was this diviners’ tree? (9:37)
At this time, the tree was apparently a gathering place for fortunetellers and their clients. It may have been the same tree where the people of Shechem crowned Abimelek their king (v. 6). It may also have been the oak at Moreh, where Abraham built an altar to the Lord (Ge 12:6–8) and where Jacob buried the idols carried by his household (Ge 35:4).
Why did Abimelek scatter salt over the city? (9:45)
Salt ruins soil so that nothing can grow in it (Dt 29:23). It was a common practice in the ancient world for warriors to salt the conquered land of their enemies, including the farmland of adjoining cities, so that it would be desolate and not bear crops for many years to come. Salting land is also used in the Bible as a symbol of God’s judgment (Ps 107:34; Jer 48:9).
What kind of tower could hold 1,000 people? (9:46, 49)
Some towers were built into city walls, but larger ones stood alone as fortresses or citadels. This particular tower apparently stood some distance from the city of Shechem. Since it was connected to a stronghold of a pagan temple, it seems to have been more than a mere tower. Shechem had already been destroyed (v. 45), so some think this tower may have been some distance away at Beth Millo (v. 6).
Do curses have real power? (9:57)
Generally, yes—just as blessings are effective by God’s enabling. In Old Testament history, many curses like Jotham’s were fulfilled as the outworking of God’s judgment. Moses himself offered the people a choice between blessings and curses (Dt 27:11–28:68; Jos 8:33). The power was not in Jotham, but in God. God used Jotham as his spokesman to pronounce judgment.
What was significant about riding on donkeys? (10:4)
Riding on a donkey was a mark of both prestige and power. Horses were evidently not present in the region until later, when Solomon imported them.
What was the attraction of foreign gods? (10:6)
See the article Why would the Israelites be tempted by other gods? (Jos 23:7).
Why couldn’t God bear to see Israel suffer? (10:16)
Once the Israelites turned back to him and began to act faithfully again, their suffering at the hands of their enemies was no longer a punishment for their unfaithfulness (2:10–15). It then became a hardship that God desired to protect them from. His compassion and love for them were aroused; he resolved to end their suffering and deliver them according to his mercy, for he promises mercy to those who put their trust in him.
Why did the elders pick an outcast to lead them? (11:4–6)
The elders recruited Jephthah because no leader emerged when the troops assembled at Mizpah (10:17–18). With their very survival at stake, they did not worry about protocol or pedigree. The crisis demanded that they do whatever was necessary to protect themselves. Their choice was Jephthah, the illegitimate son of Gilead (11:1), who had proven his charismatic skills as a leader in exile (v. 3).
Why did Jephthah repeat himself? (11:11)
With this second declaration, Jephthah was formally installed as the commander of Israel’s army. He repeated before the troops what he and the elders had earlier vowed. Also, the rank-and-file soldiers confirmed the elders’ choice and agreed to Jephthah’s terms: if he led them in war, they would follow him in peace as well (vv. 8–10).
How could this event be viewed so differently by the two nations? (11:13–15)
Jephthah argued that Israel had taken land from the Amorites (v. 21), not the Ammonites. The Lord had forbidden Israel to take any land belonging to the Ammonites (Dt 2:19). The Ammonite king may have been claiming territory that had belonged to his people before it belonged to the Amorites.
Was this a legitimate reason for war? (11:23–24)
Jephthah’s logic made sense in the culture of that day. People assumed that the god of each nation established its territorial boundaries and that stronger gods dominated weaker gods. Jephthah didn’t say he believed in the Ammonite god, but he appealed to the Ammonites’ belief in their god Chemosh. If the Ammonites thought Chemosh was going to give them the land of Israel, Jephthah was determined to defend God’s honor. His conviction was centered in the truth that the Lord had given Israel the land in which they lived.
What were the signs that the Spirit of the LORD had come on Jephthah? (11:29)
The Spirit empowered Jephthah to lead Israel’s army. As he headed to battle, troops from the tribes of Gad and Manasseh joined him. Gideon had earlier had a similar experience: when the Spirit of the Lord had come on Gideon, he had summoned troops to join him in battle, and they had responded to his call (6:34–35).
If the Spirit of the LORD was on Jephthah, how could he make such a thoughtless vow? (11:29–31)
There is no connection between the Spirit’s empowering of Jephthah and his vow. Possessing the Holy Spirit to do the work of God does not guarantee a person will be faultless in other areas of life. Jephthah, like Gideon, attempted to strike a deal with God instead of just trusting him.
What was behind this bizarre deal with God? (11:31, 39)
This story often troubles us and creates several questions:
1. Why would a man who was used by God take such risks with his family? Though anointed by God, Jephthah was far from infallible. Perhaps he thought God would be impressed by his devotion.
2. Could God be honored by a sinful act (human sacrifice) if it was to fulfill a vow? No. Fulfilling a vow was a high priority in ancient times (Nu 30:2; Dt 23:21–23; Ecc 5:1–5), and Jephthah apparently was afraid of breaking his vow and didn’t want to be humiliated by reversing his promise. But God had outlawed human sacrifice (Lev 18:21; 20:1–5). God disapproves of sin, even when it is committed to fulfill a vow.
3. Why didn’t Jephthah take some alternate action? He may have. In fact, some think it is not absolutely clear that he kept his vow. His sacrifice may have been to dedicate his daughter to the Lord for lifelong service and perpetual virginity (vv. 38–39). However, since he had vowed to sacrifice a burnt offering (v. 31), this explanation seems unlikely.
This whole episode illustrates that even those whom God uses as leaders do not always follow his ways. Rather than trust God, Jephthah tried to bargain for God’s blessing, and he mixed his own ideas and cultural practices with the truth about God and his ways. As with many others throughout the book of Judges, what Jephthah got was grief instead of blessing.
Why was Jephthah’s daughter more concerned about not marrying than about dying? (11:37)
The goal of every Hebrew girl was to marry and have children. Whether Jephthah was sacrificing his daughter’s life or only her opportunity to marry and have children, she would do neither. The yearly commemoration of this noble young woman (vv. 39–40) makes more sense if she died at the hands of her father. The death of Jephthah’s only child (v. 34) would mean the end of his family line, adding to his daughter’s grief over her inability to marry and have children. See the article What’s behind this bizarre deal with God? (11:31).
Why did Jephthah’s daughter roam the hills for two months? (11:37)
Her retreat to the mountains may have been personal, or it may have been a local custom. It may also have reflected the beliefs of the Canaanite society in which she lived. The mourners who accompanied her may have feared that the sacrifice of her fertility would make the land unfruitful; hence they were crying not only for their friend but also for themselves.
How widespread did this custom become? (11:39–40)
Because there is no other mention of this custom in the Old Testament, the ceremony may have been practiced only in the region where Jephthah’s family lived.
Why were the men of Ephraim so offended? (12:1)
Not being invited to the fight was an insult to their pride, undermining their role as a leading tribe. Ephraim claimed leadership responsibility for all the northern tribes as well as for those who lived east of the Jordan (see Map 4 at the back of this Bible). Ephraim figured quite prominently in northern Israel throughout all her history. The men of Ephraim felt entitled to share in the glory and spoils of war (see also 8:1).
Why couldn’t the Ephraimites pronounce Shibboleth? (12:6)
Shibboleth, meaning “floods,” was apparently chosen as the password because those living west of the Jordan could not pronounce the sh sound. A phonetic limitation of their dialect betrayed them.
Who appointed the judges? (12:8, 11, 13)
The judges were raised up by God in response to the Israelites’ cries for help (2:16). Gideon, for example, had a personal encounter with an angelic messenger. Jephthah was selected by the tribal elders and approved by the people. Samson’s parents were instructed to dedicate him for service to the Lord. The methods may have varied, but in each case God enabled the person that was called to lead, and the people recognized the person’s leadership.
Were marriages to outsiders unusual? (12:9)
It was permissible to marry outside a clan or even a tribe as long as the spouse was still from another Israelite tribe. But marrying a foreigner was prohibited (Dt 7:1–4). The neighboring nations’ worship of pagan gods would undermine Israel’s commitment to the Lord.
Why did Abdon’s sons and grandsons ride on donkeys? (12:14)
Riding on a donkey was a mark of both prestige and power. Horses were evidently not present in the region until later, when Solomon imported them.
This was a person who was ceremonially consecrated to the Lord and who thus lived an ascetic lifestyle—abstaining from grape products, nonkosher foods, haircuts and contact with dead bodies. For Samson (as for Samuel and John the Baptist) this was a lifelong vow. The Bible also gives examples of temporary Nazirite vows (Ac 18:18; 21:23–24).
Why did Samson’s parents ask for parenting advice? (13:8)
Many factors are involved in the way children turn out. Samson’s parents wisely asked for God’s help in knowing how to raise him. Of course, even with good parents and God’s blessings, children can choose to act selfishly and destructively. Samson proves this point, as he seems to have been spoiled and incorrigible (14:2–3).
What was wrong with grapes and wine? (13:14)
Grapes and wine were delicacies, but to a Nazirite they had spiritual significance. Fruit from the vineyard may have symbolized the intoxicating qualities of wine. The vineyard may also have been a reminder of the sins of the Canaanites (who practiced prostitution with their agricultural fertility cults). Though other Israelites could drink wine, the life of a Nazirite could not be touched with even a hint of impropriety.
In what way was the angel’s name beyond understanding? (13:18)
This Hebrew word can also be translated “wonderful” (see the NIV text note). This was a way of saying that he was something to wonder at; he was no ordinary messenger. Some think this implies that he may have been a temporary manifestation or appearance of God himself (a theophany). This same Hebrew word is later used by Isaiah to describe the Messiah (Isa 9:6). Since God is beyond our understanding, any attempt to describe him in human terms will always be inadequate.
How did the Spirit of the LORD begin to stir Samson? (13:25)
This expression describes results more than methods. We can’t be sure precisely how Samson encountered the living God. But we do know that the Spirit of the Lord equipped Samson to be a judge and infused him with enormous physical strength. Other judges were differently gifted: Othniel (3:10) and Gideon (6:34) were gifted with leadership abilities.
Why did God choose such sinful people to be judges? (14:1–16:31)
Some judges, such as Deborah (4:1–5:31), were faithful and noble. But most reflected the character of their times. They were ordinary people who were influenced by their culture and the company they kept. The judges were not primarily rulers; they were deliverers. Many of them were fierce warriors, chosen to marshal military strength rather than give spiritual leadership.
God used Ehud’s skill to kill an oppressive king and rally an army (3:12–30). Jephthah’s zeal led him to military might but also to make a rash vow that cost him the life of his daughter (11:1–40). Samson’s bravado resulted not only in the defeat of the Philistines but in his own death as well (13:1–16:31). God did not encourage the judges in their failings; he used them despite their failings.
Did God cause Samson to break his own command? (14:4)
No. Samson’s passions were his own; they caused him to desire a wife contrary to God’s revealed will (Dt 7:1–4). However, God remained involved in Samson’s life despite Samson’s sinful choices. God was committed to accomplishing his purposes (Ro 8:28)—using Samson’s failures as well as his successes. Since the author of Judges wrote after the fact, some editorial comments like these (note the parentheses in the text) provide insight into God’s sovereign involvement.
Does the power of the Spirit give physical strength? (14:6)
While the Spirit gave physical strength to Samson, he gave courage and strength to others (e.g., Amasai [1Ch 12:18]). This does not establish a principle, however. It is more appropriate to say that the Lord gives his servants whatever is necessary to accomplish the tasks to which he has called them. For example, the Spirit gave Bezalel craftsmanship skills in order to complete the work of the tabernacle (Ex 31:1–5).
Why was Samson given 30 companions? (14:11)
It was customary for the groom to be surrounded by his friends (the groomsmen). Since Samson was getting married in the bride’s city rather than his own, the bride’s family, who had a vested interest in Samson, may have provided these men to serve as groomsmen and perhaps as bodyguards.
Why give someone sets of clothes? (14:12–13)
Sets of clothes are mentioned elsewhere in the Bible as gifts of value (2Ki 5:22).
Why such a harsh threat just to solve a riddle? (14:15)
It was important for the Philistines to gain power over Samson, whose great strength represented a potential problem for them. In addition, they did not like the idea of any Israelite making them look foolish, since they regarded themselves as the masters of the Israelites. Their cruel disregard for the lives of Samson’s wife and her family is shown in the severity of their threat.
Why would God’s Spirit give Samson strength in order to kill people? (14:19)
God undoubtedly gave Samson superhuman strength, but this does not mean that such strength was intended to be used to kill people. Although Samson used his brute strength to kill 30 Philistines for his own reasons (to pay off his bet), God may have had other things in mind. Although Samson’s motives were often self-indulgent, God used Samson, despite his follies, to bring judgment on the Philistines during a dark time in Israel’s history.
How could the woman marry while she was still married to Samson? (14:20)
The bride should not have been able to marry another man since she was Samson’s wife (vv. 15, 16; 15:1, 6). Apparently the marriage had not been consummated. Until it was, the Philistines may not have recognized the marriage as legitimate. Because Samson left in such anger, the bride’s father doubted he would return to claim her as his wife (15:1–2). To keep her from being disgraced, her father gave her to the best man.
How could Samson catch 300 foxes? (15:4)
Perhaps his superior strength was matched by a superior agility that enabled him to outrun them as they tried to escape. Or perhaps he devised traps and caged the foxes until he had enough for his malicious arson at Timnah. However he managed it, Samson was in a class by himself. Any warrior who could kill 1,000 armed soldiers with the jawbone of a donkey (v. 15) could handle 300 foxes.
Why weren’t the Israelites happy that Samson had attacked the Philistines? (15:11)
They feared that the Philistines, who were both brutal and more powerful than they were, would slaughter large numbers of Israelites in retaliation for Samson’s attack.
What did a man like Samson have to fear? (15:11–12)
In spite of his unusual physical strength, Samson’s inward strength seems at times to have been limited by his impulsivity and arrogance. He had taken revenge on his own behalf without regard for the safety of his countrymen. And for all his strength, Samson was still mortal (v. 18). Confronted by 3,000 angry Israelites, he had good reason to be fearful. Moreover, since those confronting him on this occasion were his own people—the people he had been sent to deliver—he may have realized that he was not likely to receive supernatural power to oppose them.
Did God’s miraculous supply of water indicate he approved of Samson’s deeds? (15:19)
God’s responsiveness didn’t mean he approved of the things Samson had done. God responded because Samson, despite his arrogance and violence, cried out to him, as the Israelites had done in the desert (Ex 17:1–7; Nu 20:2–13). God, in his mercy, graciously supplied Samson’s need.
How could a man as wicked as Samson lead Israel? (15:20)
Samson had charisma. He was also hotheaded, selfish and demonstrated little control over his passions. He was a wicked and profane man, even though God had set him apart from birth (13:3–5). Samson broke every regulation of his Nazirite call (Nu 6:1–12), including drinking wine and other fermented drink and defiling himself by coming into contact with dead bodies. He ate nonkosher foods, slept with prostitutes, married an unbelieving Philistine woman, ate honey from a carcass and courted death, particularly when he went on killing sprees among the Philistines.
However, Samson also helped free Israel from oppression at the hands of the Philistines. God made him a warrior of extraordinary strength who could kill 30 men with his bare hands or 1,000 with the jawbone of a donkey.
Samson was a judge, but not in the sense of ruling Israel in judicial matters or guiding it in ethical conduct. Rather, he served as a deliverer and protector by keeping relations between the Israelites and Philistines in constant upheaval. Through his actions, Samson helped keep Israel from being absorbed into the Philistine culture.
Why did the people follow someone they had betrayed? (15:20; see vv. 11–12)
The men of Judah had betrayed Samson because he had put them in danger and because they were intimidated by the Philistines. Once Samson defeated their enemies, the people of Judah happily supported him again.
How much would eleven hundred shekels of silver have been worth? (16:5)
A shekel was a bit less than a half ounce (the measurement standards were not exact, however, so this figure could vary from time to time and place to place). Eleven hundred shekels was the equivalent of approximately 33 pounds of silver. In today’s market, where prices fluctuate substantially, it would be equal to nearly $15,000. It was an extraordinarily generous amount of money (cf. 17:10).
Why did Samson wear seven braids? (16:13)
In ancient Israel, the number seven had symbolic significance. Seven was the “perfect” number—indicating completeness or even holiness. As a Nazirite set apart to God, the fact that Samson had seven braids may have indicated his special, holy calling.
Why did Samson give in to Delilah’s nagging? (16:16–17)
It seems Samson was influenced more by his passion than by his will. And he was often self-seeking and shortsighted, as when he had insisted on a Philistine bride (14:2–3). In addition, he was often ruled by his rage (14:19; 15:8), and his uncontrolled lust had led to his trysts with Delilah in the first place (16:4). Blinded by his own desires, he could not readily discern God’s will.
After all he’d done, why was cutting his hair so bad? (16:20)
The Lord had remained with the willful Samson even though Samson had visited prostitutes and sinned in many other ways. The haircut was a violation of his Nazirite vow (13:5; Nu 6:4) and a visible and blatant renunciation of God’s sovereignty in his life.
Did God leave Samson permanently? (16:20–22)
No. God’s love for Samson (like God’s love for Israel) had not been exhausted, despite Samson’s foolishness and sin. Though the symbol of God’s power and presence in Samson’s life had been cut off, the hair on his head began to grow again (v. 22). The new growth suggested that God’s plan to deliver Israel from the Philistines had not been abandoned. It may also have reminded Samson of God’s care for him, giving him hope.
Dagon was one of the chief Philistine gods. Some think Dagon was a fish-god; others, a god of weather. Dagon means “grain” in Hebrew, indicating that he may have been regarded as the giver of crops. Some sources also describe Dagon as the father of Baal. The Philistines celebrated Samson’s capture, viewing it as Dagon’s revenge for the burning of the Philistines’ fields and vineyards (15:3–5) and the killing of many of their people.
How did knocking down two pillars make the whole building collapse? (16:29–30)
Archaeological evidence shows that one type of temple from this time period was constructed with two closely spaced central supporting pillars made of wood. These pillars, standing on marble bases, held most of the weight of the roof. By pushing these pillars off their bases, Samson caused the entire roof of the building to come crashing down, killing those beneath and on the roof (v. 27).
Did Samson commit suicide? (16:30)
Samson’s death may have been a casualty of war, not a suicide. His plea, Let me die with the Philistines! (v. 30), demonstrates his willingness to see the battle through to the end, even to his death. Samson’s prayer was a request for help in the ongoing fight against his enemies. Like a soldier facing overwhelming odds, Samson accepted that his own death was likely.
In Samson’s death, the prophesied purpose for his life was realized (13:5). God had raised Samson up to punish the sinful Philistines and to influence Israel’s deliverance. On this occasion—in the temple of their god Dagon—the Philistines saw Samson’s imprisonment as a sign of Dagon’s victory over the God of Israel (16:23–24). But even while the Philistines were celebrating, God was working through Samson to halt such blasphemy—to punish the Philistines and destroy the temple of a false god.
Why would someone worship the Lord by making an idol? (17:1–6)
This was a case of spiritual anarchy: In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit. Just as the people of Israel had previously attempted to worship the Lord by making a golden calf (Ex 32:1–35), so at this time many individual Israelites made household gods as a means of worshiping God in their own way. They were “customizing” their faith by mixing it with pagan practices.
Why did Micah want a personal priest in his own house? (17:5, 10, 13)
Micah may have sought the services of a personal priest to legitimize his hybrid religion. A priest was necessary to provide mediation in Israel’s religion. Micah’s syncretistic error seems more grievous because he recruited a Levite to serve as a priest, corrupting the priest’s sacred role as a servant to the God-ordained office.
Why keep repeating that Israel had no king? (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25)
This phrase, twice followed by everyone did as they saw fit (17:6; 21:25), reveals the character of the times. Spiritual life had declined. Rather than doing as God had commanded, people were following their own whims. These verses were written by someone who was living during the early time of the monarchy, when the spiritual life in Israel had improved.
Why didn’t the Levite refuse the offer? (17:11–12)
Apparently prestige was his motivation, as evidenced later when he accepted an offer to lead an entire tribe in idol worship (18:19–20).
How would the Danites have recognized the Levite’s voice? (18:3)
It’s possible they detected a southern accent, since the Levite was some distance from his home. The questions they asked support such a view. It’s also possible that they recognized his religious order by his manner of speaking, perhaps as he was chanting a ritual.
Why did the men steal the idols? (18:17)
The Danites, like Micah, thought they could attain supernatural power through the false gods. Later, in their new home, they used Micah’s idols for their own religious purposes (v. 31).
Why was the young priest glad? (18:20)
The young Levite’s self-serving character is exposed here. He was more than happy to accept the Danites’ offer. It appears that the reputation of being the spiritual sage of an entire tribe was preferred to that of a single family. His motivation was power and recognition. That seems to be why he left Bethlehem in the first place and agreed to engage in false worship.
Were the Danites right to destroy Laish? (18:27)
What occurred in Laish should never have happened. The Danites had not been overlooked when Joshua originally parceled out the land of Canaan. Dan had been given a section of land between the territories of Ephraim and Judah (Jos 19:40–48; see Map 4 at the back of this Bible). Rather than trusting God to help them drive out the Philistines in their allotted territory, the Danites sought an easier way to find themselves a home. They took advantage of an unsuspecting city outside of their territory.
How could Moses’ grandson have been involved in idol worship? (18:30–31)
When there is no prophetic voice clarifying the truth and calling the faithful to accountability, the result can be outright heresy. Even Moses’ brother had earlier slipped into idolatry during Moses’ brief absence while on Mount Sinai (Ex 32:1–6). It wasn’t that these Israelites intended to reject the Lord; they just didn’t think that it mattered if they included other gods in their worship.
What was the significance of this new priesthood? (18:30–31)
The descendants of Dan, feeling squeezed out of their land allotment, moved to the far north and claimed a new territory. They recruited Micah’s priest to be their own—he was, after all, a Levite. But Jonathan, a Levite and a direct descendant of Moses, led the Danites in idol worship. Their city, renamed Dan, became a center of idolatry and a rival worship center to the tabernacle in Shiloh (1Ki 12:29–30).
Was this woman the Levite’s concubine or wife? (19:1, 3–4)
She probably was a second or later wife who did not enjoy the status of a first wife. The Levite is called her husband, and the woman’s father is called the Levite’s father-in-law.
Why did the father-in-law force hospitality on the Levite? (19:4–10)
In the culture of the ancient Middle East, providing hospitality was taken very seriously. The quality of hospitality was a reflection of the character of the host. Because this man’s daughter had disgraced the family name by being unfaithful to her husband and returning to her childhood home, he may have been all the more determined to lavish expressions of apology and regret on his son-in-law. Out of respect for his father-in-law and host, the young Levite remained longer than he really wanted to.
Was it unsafe to spend the night in the square? (19:20)
Apparently. The old man performed the usual duties of a host, as was the custom: providing food, lodging and (he thought) safety. He opened his home to the Levite and his traveling companions to keep the Levite safe from the city’s predators. But it seems that neither he nor the Levite considered it his duty to protect the concubine.
Why would the host sacrifice his daughter to protect a stranger? (19:24)
Influenced by the moral decay of his culture, the old man’s priorities were obviously misplaced. Since the people of this culture defined their values for themselves (17:6), they sank as low as human depravity would allow—even as low as the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah, of which this story is reminiscent (Ge 19:1–29). The old man’s values were so askew that he actually deemed the rape of his daughter a reasonable tradeoff for maintaining his culture’s standards of hospitality. In the culture of that day, women were often treated as property rather than valued as people.
Why was the Levite outraged, since he was partially to blame? (19:25; 20:6)
He may have believed that he had given his concubine to the men of Gibeah for sexual entertainment—but for nothing more. Thus (he reasoned) they had abused his generosity by raping and abusing his concubine to death. It seems he had been thinking only of his own safety when he had sent her out to them in the first place, so it’s possible that he was at least partially angry with himself. Nonetheless, he vented his anger on the gang of rapists.
Why did he mutilate her body? (19:29)
Given the fact that she was already dead, the Levite resorted to this grisly act to evoke a visceral reaction from the surrounding tribes. He hoped to arouse their indignation by graphically illustrating the heinous crime.
What did the response of the Israelites mean? (19:30)
The first part of their response—Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt—shows that they took the incident at Gibeah to be a horrible crime, the sort that would require severe punishment. The second part of their response—Just imagine! We must do something! So speak up!—shows that they knew their retribution would have to be well crafted, since punishing a mob or (potentially) a whole city for a crime was far more complicated than punishing an individual.
Why did the Benjamites defend the guilty men? (20:13–14)
Since the “law” of the land at this time was that everyone did as they saw fit (17:6), the Benjamites placed tribal loyalty above bringing the men of Gibeah to justice for their atrocity.
Why does the Bible record the details of this battle strategy? (20:14–43)
Although the Bible does not always give such details regarding the ebb and flow of a battle, it is helpful on occasion to see with vivid clarity how things actually occurred. The reality of Biblical history affects us more deeply when we read stories with such a level of detail. This is more than words on a page; it’s the account of flesh-and-blood people who lived and breathed and had feelings. Details help us see the emotions behind the history: the sorrow and confusion of the Israelites (vv. 26, 28) was followed by scheming (vv. 29, 32); the overconfidence of the Benjamites (vv. 32, 34, 39) was followed by terror and panic (vv. 41–42).
Was left-handedness a virtue? (20:16)
No, but a large number of left-handed soldiers had honed their skills in warfare, especially in using the sling. Like Ehud before them (3:21), these Benjamites used their left-handedness to an advantage, training themselves in tasks suited to their abilities. In some battle situations, being left-handed would have provided the element of surprise.
Why, after gaining God’s guidance, did the Israelites lose 40,000 men? (20:18–25)
Anytime Israelites lost warriors in battle, it was a sign of God’s displeasure with them (Dt 20:1–4; Jos 7:4–12). The mere fact that God had reminded them of their obligation to fight (Jdg 20:23) was not a promise of an easy, immediate victory without casualties. If they had really been faithful agents of God’s judgment in this case, he would have protected them and promptly defeated the Benjamites before them. As it was, their own sins, past and present, stood in the way of immediate victory, even though they were doing the right thing by taking the battle to the Benjamites.
Why did the Benjamites not realize how near disaster was? (20:34)
When fighting is light and limited to skirmishes, an army can send out scouts to determine where enemy forces are located and how strong they are—thus assessing the likely direction of events. But in this case, the all-out fighting involved virtually every Benjamite warrior, and the life-or-death urgency of battle kept them from being able to evaluate the overall tactical situation. Thus they did not understand that they were not winning the battle this time but were actually on the verge of complete defeat.
Why is this part of the story repeated? (20:39)
In the prior verses, the story is told mainly from the Israelites’ point of view (v. 32). Beginning with this verse, we look at the story once again, but this time from the Benjamites’ point of view. The repetition helps us see how their false confidence and optimism contributed to their defeat.
They shouldn’t have done this. The precedent for total annihilation is found in the Lord’s words to Moses with regard to the worship of false gods (Dt 13:15) and to Joshua with regard to the occupation of the land (Jos 6:21). However, the Lord had prescribed limited retribution for his own people (Ex 21:12–36). Due to their own sinfulness, the Israelites administered justice incorrectly in the case of the Benjamites.
Where was the justice in all this killing? (21:10–11; see 20:47)
There is no justice when people do not seek or heed the guidance of God. He never told the Israelites to annihilate the tribe of Benjamin. He never told them to withhold their daughters from marriage to the survivors or to massacre the men of Jabesh Gilead. This whole account, from beginning to end, shows how innocent people suffered because the Israelites put their own interests and values before the Lord’s (17:6).
Why would girls be dancing at Shiloh? (21:19–21)
This dancing may have been part of the Feast of Tabernacles—a joyful celebration of God’s past provision for the Israelites while they traveled in the desert after the exodus from Egypt. During this time of celebration, the tabernacle and the ark of the covenant were kept at Shiloh (see Map 4 at the back of this Bible).
Why tell the Benjamites to kidnap girls to acquire wives? (21:21)
This custom was probably borrowed from pagan peoples. To the Israelites, it seemed to be the only way around the thoughtless vow they had made (v. 1). If the Benjamites kidnapped the girls, the Israelites could avoid breaking their vow and still allow the Benjamites to take Israelite women in marriage.