Background and Themes of Judges

Engaging any literary masterpiece requires more than a simple reading of the text. In the case of biblical literature, and especially with regard to the fascinating historical narratives in the book of Judges, an understanding of the broader landscape of the ancient Near East, the thematic initiatives that bridge the meaning of the stories, and the debated scholarly issues that surround the book open limitless possibilities for interpretive engagement. However, the backdrop, themes, and interpretive conundrums remain open to debate. Without a proper understanding of a broad spectrum of interpretive clues, the reader risks missing the meaning and the significance of the text. The historical background, canonical placement, archaeological data, iconographical imagery, cultural milieu, biblical themes, and engagement with critical-interpretive issues all combine as necessary tools to support a deep, well-rounded understanding of the book of Judges. The following research first engages several background issues, relevant archaeological data, and ancient Near Eastern literature. Next, an overview of Israel’s culture and pertinent iconography commences, which is followed by a detailed thematic analysis that juxtaposes various motifs. Finally, a dive into the leading issues debated by modern scholars concludes the analysis.

Background Issues

Background Issues Introduction

The riveting narratives within the book of Judges are some of the most well-known and beloved stories in all of Scripture. From the fascinating account of Gideon’s fleece to the intrigue of Samson’s escapades, the adventures in the book of Judges have mesmerized both children and adults alike. The question is what contextual, archaeological, and literary evidence exists to support an understanding of the meaning and historical realities of the texts. By ignoring the biblical and extra-biblical clues, the interpreter risks not only misinterpreting the content, but also ignoring the historical veracity of the texts. The historical and canonical context, relevant archaeological data, and ancient literary parallels enhance understanding of the text and support the historicity of the book of Judges within a framework of the ancient Near East. The following brief analysis first provides an overview of the book’s background along with an analysis of its historical and canonical context. Next, a survey of the major relevant archaeological material commences with an emphasis on the excavations at Tel Miqne, Tel Balata, and Tel Qasile. Finally, a survey of relevant ancient Near Eastern literary parallels completes the analysis, which focuses specifically upon the Merneptah Stela, the Amarna Letters, the Ugaritic collections, and the Great Karnak Inscription of Merneptah.

Historical and Canonical Survey

At the end of the book of Joshua, the Israelites had not conquered all of the land allocated to them by Yahweh. The book of Judges continues the story of the Israelites now residing in Canaan, a small strip of land west of the Mediterranean Sea and east of Mesopotamia. Unfortunately, the Canaanite influence upon Israel resulted in a downward spiral of apostasy. Although Yahweh chooses various judges or rulers to lead His people, the Israelites continue a circular pattern of apostasy, oppression, repentance, deliverance, and a generation of peace. At the conclusion of the book of Judges, the corruption of the people of Israel seems almost hopeless.

Appropriately assessing the historical context of the book of Judges requires an investigation of both the compositional and referential historical context. First, regarding the compositional historical context, Mark Boda provides three developments: early critical scholarship, later critical scholarship, and modern literary unity.[1] Early critical scholarship leaned on the work of Julius Wellhausen’s documentary hypothesis, which suggests the original form of Judges arose from both the Jahwist (J) and Elohist (E) sources with redactions occurring by later editors.[2] In a study from 1943, Martin Noth represents later critical scholarship by espousing a Deuteronomistic History (DtrH), which, Steven McKenzie explains, assumes that the books of Deuteronomy through 2 Kings were a single unified story written by an author around 562 BC through a process of compilation, editorialization, and composition.[3] More recently, Barry Webb represents a form of modern literary unity by utilizing a synchronic approach that focuses on the final form of the text.[4] In other words, Webb makes a case for a coherent unity of the entire book of Judges.

Regarding referential historical context, the debate regarding alternative views of the historicity of Judges is beyond the scope of a background introduction. However, according to Boda, a general consensus does exist among scholars regarding the rise of the Israelite monarchy around 1000 BC; thus the dating of the book of Judges must precede the time of David.[5] Accordingly, the likely timeframe of the events in the book of Judges occurred around the Early Iron Age.

Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel: Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary

However, at this point, attempting to establish the details of the chronology within the book of Judges becomes quite difficult. Although many of the place names in the book of Judges align with the geography of the ancient Near East, according to Daniel Block, not a single character within the narrative of Judges exists within the extra-biblical sources of the ancient Near East.[6] Thus, reliance upon internal evidence from the biblical account is necessary, which presents a significant challenge.

By working through the narratives, the total number of years from the Exodus to the time Solomon began building the temple is approximately 590 years, but 1 Kings 6:1 states the timeframe is 480 years.[7] Boda’s explanation is that the book of Judges may not follow a strict chronology and that overlapping timeframes have occurred in the narrative.[8] In addition to the general dating and specific chronology of referential history, various possibilities exist regarding the nature of Israel’s conquest of the land, specifically due to lack of structure within a loose tribal confederacy. McKenzie asserts that since no archaeological evidence exists supporting an Israelite conquest, alternative methods of settlement including infiltration and peasant revolt models have been espoused.[9] Further, Boda acknowledges that some scholars avoid the subject altogether and consider the book of Judges a myth.[10] However, alongside Boda, this research assumes the biblical account reconstructs Israel’s historical past.

The book of Judges places itself within the canon of both the Jewish Hebrew Bible and the Christian Bible directly after the book of Joshua. However, the Hebrew Bible assigns Judges to the Former Prophets alongside Joshua, Samuel, and Kings, while the Christian Bible assigns Judges to the Historical Books that include Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. In one sense, Judges is prophetic with regards to the warnings presented and, in another sense, the book of Judges is historical with regards to presenting the ongoing story of Israel. Judges also finds its place within the canon intertextually. According to Block, the reference to Sisera, the Philistines, and the king of Moab in 1 Samuel 12:9-11 clearly shows that the author was aware of the book of Judges.[11] Furthermore, the prophets Isaiah and Hosea both allude to the time frame of the Judges. Isaiah appears to reflect on Gideon by referring to the days of Midian (Isa 9:4), and Hosea refers to the corruption during the days of Gibeah (Hos 9:9, 10:9) as well as the evildoers of Gilead (Hos 6:8). Finally, Block also notes the potential allusions to the Song of Deborah in Psalm 68:7-14 and the list of Israelite oppressors in Psalm 83.[12] Without question, the book of Judges appropriately resides within the biblical canon. The compositional and referential historical and canonical context of the book of Judges not only enhances an understanding of the book of Judges but also supports the historicity of its events.

Archaeological Survey

Israel entered the land as a people group in covenant with Yahweh commissioned to drive out the Canaanites. However, many nations were left in the land during the time of the Judges “to test Israel” (Judg 3:1).[13] Judges 3:3 lists the remaining nations and specifically refers to the five cities of the Philistines. Block explains that the Philistines were one of the groups of Sea Peoples who migrated into Canaan around 1200 BC and formed the Philistine Pentapolis of city-states, which included Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, Gath, and Gaza.[14] All five sites have been excavated. One prominent site is Tel Miqne, which, according to Trude Dothan and Seymour Gitin, is associated with the city of Ekron.[15] The Iron Age architecture confirmed the location of a major city during the time period of the events of Judges.[16] The excavations, according to Dothan, suggest a large urban district associated with the Sea Peoples based on the evidence from pottery and cultic installations.[17]

In Judges 9, the notables from the Canaanite city of Shechem contributed 70 shekels to Abimelech, Gideon’s son, which he used to murder 70 of his half-brothers (Judg 9:1-21). Ultimately, the people of Shechem began to worry about their involvement, and a clan revolted, which led to Abimelech setting fire to the Shechem Temple killing about one thousand (Judg 9:22-49). According to Lawrence Stager, Tell Balata began excavation in 1913, and the Temple at Shechem was discovered in 1926.[18] Excavation resumed between 1956 and 1973 by American excavators who dated the construction of the temple before the events of Gideon between 1650 and 1550 BC.[19] In contrast, Stager asserts that the temple adorned with an altar and pillars was not destroyed until around 1100 BC due to its nature and size, and thus was the temple referred to in Judges 9:46.[20]

Another famous temple in the book of Judges is seen in the story of Samson. After Delilah cuts Samson’s hair, the Philistines capture him, gouge out his eyes, and put him to work (Judg 16:1-22). The Philistine noblemen brought Samson to the temple in Gaza where they had planned a sacrifice to their god, Dagon (Judg 16:23-27). Samson locates the two pillars of the temple and pushes them over killing the Philistines (Judg 16:28-31). According to Block, a Philistine temple to Dagon has not yet been located in the city of Gaza.[21] However, a Philistine temple has been excavated at a site called Tell Qasile originally settled by the Philistines around 1100 BC.[22] The main room of the temple measured approximately eighteen feet by twenty-four feet, and several bones were found at the site suggesting sacrificial offerings.[23] Importantly, the archaeological evidence reveals two support columns made of wood, which were set on stone footings to support the structure of the building providing evidence that Philistine temples such as the one toppled by Samson existed during the time of Judges.[24]

Many additional excavations that potentially reflect sites referred to in Judges also exist. For example, the town of Laish (cf. Judg 18:7) is located at Tell Dan and demonstrates the presence of Aegeans, the town of Bethel (cf. Judg 4:5) is located at Tell Beitin, the town of Succoth (cf. Judg 8:5) is identified with Tell Deir Alla, and the town of Timnah (cf. Judg 14:1) is located at Tell Batash where evidence shows a transfer of power from Canaanites to the Philistines and then to the Israelites.[25] Furthermore, a treasure trove of archaeological artifacts have been uncovered that relate to the timeframe of Judges. For example, food-processing implements such as millstones (cf. Judg 9:53) were ubiquitous, looms have been found in domestic settings (cf. Judg 16:13-14), archaeology has uncovered an abundance of images of deities (cf. Judg 17:3-4), and slinging stones were also common in the archaeological finds (cf. Judg 20:16).[26] The relevant archaeological data enhances understanding and supports the historicity of the book of Judges within a framework of the ancient Near East. 

Ancient Near Eastern Literature

A survey of the relevant ancient Near Eastern literature to the book of Judges must commence with the Merneptah Stela, the Amarna letters, the Ugaritic collections, the Merneptah relief at Karnak, and a brief reference to Hittite literature. First, it is impossible to ignore the importance of the Merneptah Stela. The Egyptian Pharaoh, Merneptah, began his reign in 1213 BC and, according to Block, the Merneptah Stela was erected in approximately 1208 BC to commemorate the king’s victories in Canaan.[27] Importantly, the stela is the earliest attestation of Israel in extra-biblical literature.[28] James Hoffmeier notes that many scholars observe a parallelism in the inscription between Hurru and Israel suggesting a significant presence of Israelites in the region.[29] Furthermore, Hoffmeier continues, the writing of Israel on the stela appears to indicate an ethnic group rather than a region or city, which aligns with the image of Israel represented in the book of Judges.[30]

The Amarna letters are a collection of literary finds that may parallel the importance of the Merneptah Stela. Victor Matthews and Don Benjamin explain that in 1887 a woman found the collection of 382 tablets in Egypt that documented various diplomatic exchanges between rulers and vassal kingdoms in Canaan.[31] The significance of the Amarna letters resides not in the identification of Israelites, but instead, in highlighting the social unrest during the fourteenth century BC that parallels a similar political landscape of the time of Judges.[32] Many references to place names, individuals, and topics within the Amarna letters also occur in the book of Judges. For example, Block explains that the letters refer to the city of Jerusalem (cf. Judg 1:7) as a vassal of the Pharaoh at the time, the city of Ashkelon (cf. Judg 1:18) as a Canaanite city conquered by Merneptah, the city of Gezer (cf. Judg 1:29) as a flourishing economic and political center, and the Sidonians (cf. Judg 3:3) as a leading member of the anti-Egyptian coalition.[33] Other important parallels reference tribal confederations. Harry Hoffner notes that a Hittite text called “The Deeds of Šuppiluliuma” found within the Amarna letters identifies a number of tribes or tribal groups, which parallel the tribal confederacy involved in the conflicts recorded in the book of Judges.[34]

The discovery of a collection of Ugaritic texts from approximately the twelfth century provides another rich source of relevant ancient Near Eastern literature. According to Block, the Ugaritic collection, especially the poetry, has provided significant ritual and mythological texts referring to the Canaanite deities referenced in the book of Judges.[35] For example, in the Ugaritic mythological literature, Block explains Astarte (Ashtaroth) is the spouse of Baal and the reference to Baals (cf. Judg 2:13) refer to local manifestations of the deity.[36] The goddess named Asherah is associated with Baal in the book of Judges and is also referred to in Ugaritic poetry (cf. Judg 3:7). Nick Wyatt explains that in the Baal cycle, Asherah is the wife of the god El and the mother of seventy gods who intercedes for Baal.[37] Although a comprehensive analysis of the parallels between Ugaritic literature and the book of Judges is beyond the scope of the analysis, one more example assists. The importance of a son as documented in Judges 13 also has parallels in Ugaritic poetic literature. In the story of Aqhat, a son not only was important for the wellbeing of the parent but had important implications for the afterlife.[38]

A major parallel comes from the Great Karnak Inscription of Merneptah. First, the inscription dated to the thirteenth century is the only extra-biblical reference to the Sea Peoples and states that the Egyptian forces defeated “the foreign countries [or ‘peoples’] of the sea.”[39] Furthermore, the victory hymn of Tuthmosis III was also found in a temple at Karnak, which parallels Deborah’s victory hymn in Judges 5.[40] Finally, although Hittite references are less prominent, a Hittite incarnation does reference both the country of Sidon and the country of Tyre when listing geographical names (cf. Judg 3:3).[41] The ancient literary parallels enhance understanding of the text and support the historicity of the book of Judges within a framework of the ancient Near East. 

Background Issues Conclusion

Although reading the biblical stories in Judges provides entertainment akin to the action and drama of modern motion pictures, by placing the book of Judges within its historical and canonical context, the interpreter can move beyond entertainment into illuminating understanding. Furthermore, by identifying relevant archaeological data, not only does the motion picture come alive, but its historicity also solidifies. Finally, the ancient Near Eastern literary parallels support the book’s historicity and also deeply immerses the reader into the cultural milieu of the ancient Israelites. Without question, the historical and canonical context, relevant archaeological data, and ancient literary parallels enhance understanding of the text and support the historicity of the book of Judges within a framework of the ancient Near East. From a personal perspective, by engaging the contextual, archaeological, and literary factors related to the book of Judges, not only does the content provide a deeper understanding of the text and a strong apologetic for historical veracity, but also, it provides a foundation for the enhancement of biblical exposition.

Iconography and Culture

Iconography and Culture Introduction

The cultural milieu of any particular ancient society creates a retroactive version of empathy that places the reader inside the shoes of individuals from thousands of years ago. Iconography provides a similar experience but provides images that act as a time machine allowing readers to travel into the past through the use of virtual art galleries. The question is exactly what was the ancient culture of the Israelites that sets up the time period of the Judges, and how exactly does the extant ancient Near Eastern iconographical evidence support the thematic initiatives of the book of Judges? Without an understanding of the Israelite culture and iconographical evidence, the reader may miss crucial interpretive elements within the narrative. A recognition of the cultural elements of settlement, domestication, technology, and religion combined with an awareness of the iconography that supports the thematic initiatives of the book of Judges provide a framework for enhanced understanding of the famous narratives. Accordingly, the following analysis provides a brief summary of the pertinent cultural components of ancient Israel followed by a summary of the relevant iconographical data.

Cultural Overview

Sometime, likely in the early fourteenth century BC, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan came to an end. However, it was clear to the Israelites that despite the land allotment to the tribes, the entirety of the land had not been conquered. Specifically, Carl Rasmussen explains that the southwestern portion eventually controlled by the Philistines, the coastal plain, the Jezreel Valley, and the land of Canaan north of Dan all remained unconquered.[42] Thus, the Israelite settlement consisted primarily of the extended hill country of Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh, portions of Galilee, and parts of Gilead and Moab. The dating of the oppression of Israel, according to Robert Chisolm, likely began around 1330 BC and the final Samson narrative ends around 1130 BC.[43]

Domestically, the Israelites likely lived primarily as farmers among the more sparsely populated areas growing crops such as grapes, olives, figs, almonds, and wheat. Technologically, Rasmussen notes a recent invention of rock-hew, plaster-line cisterns that created the opportunity for families to live further away from springs, which opened the possibility of territorial expansion.[44] However, without question, the most important aspect of the Israelites’ cultural milieu for purposes of evaluating the book of Judges was the religious beliefs of their neighbors.

The Israelites struggled with the Canaanite religion from the start. and unfortunately, the threat lasted right up to the time of the Babylonian captivity in 586 BC. The risks associated with the Canaanite religion can be summarized into four categories: (1) polytheism, (2) Baalism, (3) fertility cults, and (4) syncretism. According to Joel Burnett, polytheism was particularly evident in the Transjordanian neighbors east of the Jordan, which included the Ammonites, Edomites, and Moabites who worshipped Baal, Bel, Mot, and Adad in addition to other national deities.[45] Although polytheistic, Baalism was the most prominent opponent of Yahweh during the time of Judges. Wilhelm Herrmann describes the situation as an environment where the worship of Baal pervaded the entire Canaanite area spreading throughout the Mediterranean region.[46] Baal appealed to the Israelites as the lord of the earth because Baalism promised blessings such as rain to nourish the crops. Likewise, according to Thomas Brisco, the fertility aspects of the Canaanite religion appealed to the Israelites, which, once again, promised blessing.[47] Finally, the unfortunate temptation to some faithful Israelites was to engage both Yahwehism and Baalism, which led to various forms of syncretism. It was within a cultural environment of recently established rural settlements deeply influenced by the religious beliefs of its neighbors that Israel’s story engages Yahweh’s appointed judges.

Iconography Overview

An iconographic survey of the book of Judges first requires a brief definition and then an explanation of scope. First, according to Daniel Bodi, iconographical analysis examines visual representations such as ancient reliefs relevant to the book or time period under investigation.[48] Next, the extent of ancient Near Eastern iconography pertaining to the Former Prophets and the book of Judges in particular prevents a comprehensive analysis of the visual representations. Accordingly, the following analysis focuses on iconography that supports the basic thematic framework of the book of Judges.

Figure 1. Relief: Luxor: First court of columns, first year of Ramses II.

The first visually represented motif in the ancient Near East is the power of God over enemies. The enemy oppressors of the Israelites during the time of Judges were numerous and included kings such as Cushan-Rishathaim of Aram-Naharaim, Eglon of Moab, Jabin of Hazor, as well as the Midianites, Ammonites, and Philistines. John Walton, Victor Matthews, and Mark Chavalas identify the time of Shamgar and Jael as a period of lawlessness characterized by dangerous roads requiring travelers to boycott normal thoroughfares and, instead, travel through the back woods and hillsides.[49] The song of Deborah recognizes the risk in Judges 5:6-7 and states, “In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath, in the days of Jael, the highways were abandoned, and travelers kept to the byways. The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be until I arose; I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel.”[50] However, with the power of Yahweh on the side of Israel, it is not Israel running but, instead, Israel’s enemies as shown in the limestone relief (fig. 1) where, according to Othmar Keel, military troops from a Canaanite city are retreating into the woods.[51]

Figure 2. Cylindrical Seal: Assyria.

The power of Yahweh over enemies extends beyond the foreign nations to beasts. Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas acknowledge that lion hunting was a sport for heroes and kings, and a relief from Tel Halaf pictorially displays an image of a warrior fighting a lion, and the story of the Sumerian king, Gilgamesh, killing a lion with bare hands was common knowledge.[52] However, in Judges 14:5-6, Yahweh’s power is credited for Samson’s ability to tear a lion to pieces with his hands, a concept that is, according to Keel, similarly represented on an Assyrian cylindrical seal (fig. 2).[53]

Figure 3. Ivory carving Megiddo.

The second visually represented motif is the power of God over Israel’s enemies in general, and more specifically, God’s power over a specific type of Canaanite weaponry. Although the cycle of disintegration continues throughout the book of Judges, the Israelites and, specifically, Deborah would have agreed with the Psalmist’s words, “Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the Lord our God” (Ps 20:7). In Judges 4:12-13, Sisera calls upon 900 chariots of iron as represented by the ancient Near Eastern ivory carving of the chariot likely leading captives into exile (fig. 3). According to Keel, war chariots had been used by the Canaanites for centuries, but the valuable weapons were no match for Yahweh (Judg 4:14; 5:23).[54]

Figure 4. Temple relief
at Tell el-Retaba.

The third visually represented motif is God’s mercy and grace. In Judges 6:9-10, Yahweh reminds the Israelites just before exhorting them to not fear the gods of the Amorites that He had delivered them from the “hand of the Egyptians and from the hand of all who oppressed.” Block explains that the phrase “from the hand of Egypt” is appropriate in light of the prevalent use of the hand and the raised arm in iconographic portrayals of pharaoh’s control over his enemies such as represented in a temple relief at Tell el-Retaba (fig. 4).[55] 

Figure 5. Basalt Relief: Carchemish.

Moreover, Brent Strawn suggests that the outstretched arm represents military action and power; thus it is reasonable to conclude that the outstretched arm imagery also is applicable to Yahweh and the defeat of His enemies (cf. Exod 6:6).[56]

Figure 6. Terra-cotta

The fourth motif is God’s presence and victories represented by musical imagery. First, a horn or trumpet was a common instrument, along with tambourines and cymbals, in the ancient Near East. In Exodus 20:18, it is Yahweh who blows the trumpet and appears amid the lightning or torchlight, which announces to the Israelites they are to join Him on the mountain. However, in the book of Judges, Gideon provides trumpets and jars with torchlights to all his men (Judge 7:16).

Figure 7. Relief Armana.

The horn is visually represented in ancient Near Eastern iconography in a basalt relief (fig. 5), and, according to Keel, similar to the event on the mountain, God’s “presence could be ensured by blowing the ram’s horn and burning torches.”[57] Furthermore, music also played a celebratory role. Although a tragic ending ensues, after Yahweh intervenes, Jephthah comes home victoriously and his daughter celebrates with tambourines, represented by an ancient terra-cotta figure (fig. 6), and dancing, which is represented by an ancient relief from Armana (fig. 7) (Judg 11:34). Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas note that tambourines have been identified in archaeological reliefs as a small drum with leather stretched over a hoop without the modern-day rattle.[58]

Figure 8. Relief Karnak

The fifth motif is God’s safety and refuge as represented by rocks and mountains. For example, in Judges 20:44, the Benjamites seek safety by turning and fleeing “toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon.” Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas explain that the rock of Rimmon is likely with the el-Jaia cave in the Wadi es-Swenit about one mile outside of Gibeah, the location of limestone cliffs that could hide hundreds of men.[59] Likewise, in Judges 6:2, when the Midianites defeated Israel, the Israelites hid in the mountains. According to Keel, mountaintops, represented by men climbing a mountain to safety on a limestone relief from Karnak (fig. 8), would not only have been understood practically by the Israelites but also would often have been understood spiritually as cosmic symbolism for Yahweh’s protection.[60]

Figure 9. Dolerite Zinjirli.

The final visually represented motif is God’s kingship. Granted, Israel has a bittersweet relationship with the concept of kingship, but, without question, Israel’s ancient Near Eastern neighbors influenced the nation’s ideology of kingship. The incompetence of rulers and the lack of kings is evident throughout the book of Judges (cf. 8:27-28; 9:7-15; 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). However, although Yahweh is ultimately the king of Israel, human kingship is never completely ruled out. Accordingly, Keel explains that not only does Israel finally move toward a monarchy, but also, Israelite kingship bears some resemblance to the divinized kings of Egypt and Akkad, which is reflected in ancient Near Eastern iconography such as the dolerite image from Zinjirli (fig. 9).

Iconography and Culture Conclusion

By imagining a travel through time into the ancient past, an opportunity arises to move the ancient cultural elements and iconographic data representing real people and places into the present. Culturally, the Israelites experienced an unconquered foreign people group within an agrarian society while, simultaneously, facing the daily temptation of the Canaanite religion. Iconographically, modern readers have access to imagery that represents many of the motifs within the book of Judges including God’s power, sovereignty, mercy, grace, presence, victory, safety, refuge, and kingship.  A recognition of the cultural elements of settlement, domestication, technology, and religion combined with an awareness of the iconography that supports the thematic initiatives of the book of Judges provide a framework for enhanced understanding of the famous narratives. From a practical perspective, when a student, teacher, or expositor of the stories of the Judges engages in ancient empathy, he offers his listeners the opportunity to travel back through time into a deep river of understanding.

Biblical Themes

Biblical Themes Introduction

Thematic analysis of the book of Judges provides an opportunity for the expositor to examine and identify meaningful patterns to guide the interpretive process. However, scholars disagree not only on which patterns of meaning create thematic initiatives but also on which themes take a primary versus a secondary or even tertiary role. By ignoring the patterns of meaning, the interpreter risks missing the glue that binds the author’s message together. By digging deep into the biblical theological themes and motifs within the book of Judges and identifying their place within the larger canonical context, the expositor enhances both theological awareness and interpretive acuity.  The analysis that follows develops the themes of Judges by juxtaposing various scholarly perspectives that explore key topics that include the Canaanization of Israel, the covenantal relationship with Yahweh, human leadership, God’s sovereignty, and thematic breadth. Finally, the research concludes with an examination of the book of Judges place within the larger canonical context of Scripture.

Idol Making or Covenant Breaking

Idolatry

The central theme of idolatry is evident not only within the content, but also within the structure of all three sections of Judges. Various structural elements of the book of Judges provide insights into the process of Canaanization. First, according to Block, the prologue (Judg 1:1-3:6) provides the military (1:1-36) and theological (2:1-3:6) context of the book with 2:23 functioning as the interpretive conclusion.[61] The opening verse of the book asks who will go up and fight the Canaanites (1:1). However, the author explains in 2:22-23 that the Canaanites were left in the land to test Israel’s commitment to Yahweh. As Block explains, Yahweh purposely allowed the Canaanites to remain.[62] Allowing the Canaanites to remain in the Promised Land provides the backdrop for Israel’s Canaanization throughout the entire book of Judges.

Second, both internal and external patterns of unity surround the body of Judges (3:7-16:31). Internally, Judges 2:11-21 foreshadows a pattern of Canaanization within the body of the narratives where the Israelites pursue other gods and abandon Yahweh (2:12-13), but then Yahweh raises a judge who saves them (2:16). Barry Webb asserts that the repetitive pattern provides the structural glue that unites the book.[63] Externally, the order of the narratives themselves provide evidence of Canaanization. Block explains that the order of the stories is not chronological but instead, rhetorical, which reflects a downward spiraling.[64] Beginning with the paradigmatic judge, Othniel, the apostasy gradually develops and climaxes with the story of Samson. Finally, as the narrative progresses, Block notes the disappearance of structural markers such as the formula, “The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord” (e.g. 2:11).[65] The literary disintegration follows the decline of Israel into apostasy.

Third, structural elements within the epilogue (17:1-18:31) also support the Canaanization of Israel. The first element is the repetition of the phrase, “In those days there was no king in Israel” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). Although scholars often assume the refrain points to a pro-Davidic polemic, Block disagrees and suggests that Israel recognized “no one, not even God, as king.”[66] Second, the first section of the epilogue (17:1-18:31) describes the episodes of the Danites, while the second section describes the Benjamites (19:1-21:25). The relevance, according to Block, is that the former represents religious Canaanization and the latter represents moral Canaanization.[67] The structure of all three sections of Judges, the prologue, body, and epilogue, support the thematic development of the Canaanization of Israel.

Covenant

Although the thematic emphasis placed on the Canaanization of Israel by Block has a close connection to Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh, certain scholars assert that the Sinaitic covenant is the primary thematic element running through Judges. Paul Williamson highlights the bilateral nature of the Mosaic covenant that requires obedience (cf. Deut 11:13-17; Exod 19:5-6) and should result in the mediation of God’s blessing to the nations rather than Israel becoming like the nations.[68] Steven McKenzie explains that it was Martin Noth who popularized the notion of a Deuteronomistic History, which assumes that the books of Deuteronomy through 2 Kings were a single literary work.[69] Accordingly, Deuteronomy provides both the historical backdrop and the standards necessary for keeping the covenant relationship intact, which is clearly at risk in the book of Judges (cf. 2:20-23). Scholars, such as J. P. U. Lilley, recognize that a covenant motif exists in Judges, but they also contend that “it is not dominant.”[70] Alternatively, Lauren A. S. Monroe posits that the cycle of covenant breaking in Judges 2 is the Deuteronomistic Schema that sets the “theological agenda for the book.”[71] The placement of Judges within the original Deuteronomistic History provides support for the emphasis upon the covenantal theme. In the original Deuteronomistic History, Webb explains that Judges 2:6-10 and following was a continuation of Joshua 23, which served as the Deuteronomist’s introduction of the judgeships, while 1 Samuel 12 was the conclusion of the judgeships.[72] In sum, the covenantal framework established in the Pentateuch and, specifically, within the theological scheme of Deuteronomy weaves its way through Joshua, into the book of Judges, and throughout the entirety of the Deuteronomistic History.

Humanity’s Leadership or God’s Sovereignty

Leadership

All the major and minor judges of Israel along with many foreigners provide a form of leadership within the narratives of Judges. Unfortunately, the character and competency of the leaders were often, but not always, either lacking or completely absent. P. Deryn Guest more specifically delineates the theme of leadership into two subthemes: the satirization of kingship and the flawed judge.[73] First, the satirization of kingship, specifically foreign kings, begins in earnest with the colorful Moabite king, Eglon (3:12-30). According to Guest, Eglon’s overstressed obesity is the most obvious satirical device, which may indicate gullibility and greediness that mock the Moabite monarchy.[74] Second, the flawed judge subtheme focuses attention upon the Israelite judges. The half-hearted response of Barak to Deborah’s command (4:1-24), Gideon’s cold-blooded execution of two foreign kings (8:4-21), and Samson’s self-gratifying initiatives (14:1-16:31) all feed the flawed judge motif.[75]

The question that surrounds the theme of leadership asks why the author included such a myriad of flawed leaders. Marc Brettler answers the question using a literary-historical approach that posits that Judges is a political allegory with the purpose of encouraging the Davidic monarchy.[76] In other words, during the time of the United Monarchy, a pro-Davidic redactor reconstructed the past for the purpose of providing legitimacy to a monarchial reality. The evidence supporting a political allegory centers around the southern tribe of Judah to which David belonged. Specifically, Brettler explains that the southern leaders are the only positive leaders; the northern leaders are often characterized negatively or with ambiguity.[77] Similarly, Brian Neil Peterson notes that scholars have also recently further emphasized that the purpose of Judges was specifically tied to an anti-Saulide polemic.[78] Although the etiological nature of the book of Judges remains debated, the theme of leadership remains at the center of the discussion.

Sovereignty

If leadership is influence, then the individual judges certainly qualified as leaders. However, the question remains as to the identity of the ultimate influencer. Accordingly, Michael Wilcock has singled out God’s sovereignty as a primary thematic initiative. During the time of the judges, Wilcock contends that it was not the human rulers who led, but it was God who was in complete control.[79] Even the misguided Jephthah clearly understood that it was the Lord who was the Judge (11:27), a Judge behind the judges. However, in surprising twists and turns, it is the unsuspecting nature of God’s sovereign freedom that highlights God as the only Judge (cf. Gen 18:25; Pss 96:13; 98:9; Acts 17:3).

God’s sovereign freedom reveals itself in unpredictable ways. For example, the Ehud narrative uses the troubling elements of deception, gore, humor, and even assassination to tell the story (3:12-30). Further, Guest asserts that God exhibits His sovereign freedom through literary ambivalence and the utilization of flawed characters as vehicles for theological conversation.[80] Although God’s unpredictable sovereignty manifests itself throughout the judgeships, deeper meaning emerges as the reader digs into the topic of God’s sovereign freedom.

The ambiguity, unpredictability, and surprise of the narratives accentuate the ironic importance of ignorance and bewilderment that unlocks theological meaning. The verb “to know” (ידע) is used multiple times during the Samson narrative. For example, Webb explains that Manoah does not know the visitor (13:6), and the secret to Samson’s strength is also not known (16:9).[81] The Philistines use coercion and bribery to extract knowledge regarding Samson’s strength from Delilah (16:4-6). However, Webb points out that, although the Philistines obtain the knowledge they desire, they do not know that Yahweh, in His sovereign freedom, has given Samson to the Philistines to destroy them and their god, Dagon.[82] The elusive knowledge may lead the readers to question God’s actions. However, God’s unpredictability is predictable. Ignorance and bewilderment are necessary to remove humanity’s ability to control outcomes and manipulate Yahweh because it is Yahweh, not the judges, who is in control.

Singular Purpose or Multiple Intentions

Singularity

The debate surrounding thematic breadth of the book of Judges continues to rage. Certain scholars assume the original author had a singular agenda in mind. However, others contend that a single theme necessarily leads to reductionism. Tammi Schneider focuses a significant amount of effort on the role of several women in Judges both from a positive perspective, providing legitimacy to men, and a negative perspective, acting as foils.[83] Unfortunately, the women in Judges also play a more tragic role. Three references to women in the final chapters of the book of Judges reveal the profound corruption of Israel. The first woman was the Levite’s concubine who was horrifically raped, abused, and dismembered (19:24-30). The second group included 400 women remaining from the destruction of Jabesh-gilead handed over to the Benjamites when Israel attempts to save them from extinguishment (21:12-14). The third group of women who were celebrating at a festival in Shiloh were also given to the Benjamites (21:19-21). Schneider observes that the nameless women were used as pawns and kept from protection to reveal the absolute corruption of Israel.[84]

Although the role of women in the book of Judges may provide a singular focus, the topic of women also effortlessly engages the broader thematic initiatives. First, it is difficult to disconnect the victimization of women from the continued idolatrous activity, which, by definition, risks the Israelites’ covenantal relationship with Yahweh. Second, regarding the theme of leadership, Schneider suggests the depravity associated with the abuse of women may point to a reason needed to legitimize the monarchy through the Davidic line.[85] Third, although difficult to observe at any given point in time, God’s unpredictable sovereign freedom continues to reveal itself during the unimaginable episodes involving the abuse of women. Accordingly, even if a singular thematic emphasis appears to emerge, the variegated theological messaging requires the reader to engage the possibility of diversity.

Multiplicity

The diversity of content and biblical theological initiatives provides ample opportunity for scholars to insist on a multiplicity of themes in the book of Judges. Lee Roy Martin suggests that the thematic breadth of a work arises from several narrative mechanisms including repetition, the narrator’s text, the location of narrative elements, and narrative techniques such as plot and setting.[86] Scholars recognize that narrowing the book of Judges to a single theme not only risks a reductionistic reading, but it also may thwart a wholistic examination of the narrative mechanisms.

Cheryl Brown emphasizes multiple traditional thematic initiatives such as the covenant, disunity, and grace. [87] The covenant theme clearly manifests itself in both the idolatry motif that risks undermining the covenantal relationship (2:20-23) and the concept of a Deuteronomistic History, which ties the book of Judges back to the Sinaitic covenant. The breakdown of the divine-human relationship is also revealed in the disunity observable in the civil war between the Benjamites and the Israelites that concludes the book (20:1-48). Finally, God continues to demonstrate His grace throughout the book by forgiving and restoring Israel and faithfully controlling the direction of the nation through His acts of sovereign freedom.

Additionally, Robert O’Connell emphasizes the multiplicity of themes in less traditional thematic initiatives such as kingship, the priority of Judah, and social justice. [88] The etiological nature of the themes of kingship and Judean priority are supported by the possibility of a pro-Davidic and anti-Saulide initiative. Also, the emphasis on the role of women certainly provides support for the thematic element surrounding the topic of social justice. In sum, the diversity of topics, assortment of biblical theological directives, and multifaceted narrative mechanisms require scholars to take seriously the potential thematic breadth of the book of Judges.

Canonical Analysis

Canonically, the book of Judges provides a bridge between the book of Joshua and the book of 1 Samuel. The bridge highlights the stark contrast between the unified nation of Israel at the end of Joshua and the complete breakdown of unity at the beginning of 1 Samuel. Martin summarizes the contrast by stating, “The Israelites moved from victory to defeat, from unity to fragmentation, and from faithfulness to idolatry.”[89] The book of Judges also provides an explanation for the continued existence of foreigners. Accordingly, according to Martin, Israel’s archenemy at the end of Judges, the Philistines, remain intact at the beginning of 1 Samuel.[90] Finally, the concept of monarchy looms large. Martin notes that, although kingship is not explicitly required, the idea is prevalent, and the conclusion prepares its way.[91]

The immediate canonical context of Judges engages important themes identified within the book. First, the contrast between Joshua and 1 Samuel exhibits the transition from faithfulness to faithlessness that highlights the theme of idolatry and covenant breaking. Second, the continuation of foreign influence at the end of Joshua and the beginning of 1 Samuel illuminate the theme of Israelite Canaanization. Finally, the prevalence of a monarchial setup for the books of Samuel provide support for an etiological explanation of the book of Judges, more specifically, a pro-Davidic and anti-Saulide polemic.

The broader canonical context of the Old Testament addresses the important question of how Judges fits within the covenantal framework that extends blessings to all nations (Gen 12:1-3). According to J. Clinton McCann, nothing in the book of Judges undermines God’s will for His universal engagement of all nations, but the question is whether the Israelites will play their role in fulfilling their part.[92] The answer to the question in the book of Judges is “no” (cf. 2:20-23). Next, the cycle of disobedience where Israel commits idolatry, calls to Yahweh, and receives His mercy both looks back to the Exodus (cf. Exod 32:1-14) and forward to the Latter Prophets (cf. Isa 40-55). McCann suggests that each deliverance in Judges provides a new mini-exodus event, events that also reflect a new exodus in the Latter Prophets, especially from the book of Isaiah upon the return from exile.[93] In short, the broader canonical context, like the immediate context, sheds light on the thematic initiatives in the book of Judges.

Biblical Themes Conclusion

A deep thematic and canonical analysis of the book of Judges highlights an assortment of meaningful patterns. First, the Canaanization of Israel is evident in all three major sections of Judges and the covenantal theme weaves the Sinaitic covenant into the book of Judges as the Israelites risk destroying their relationship with Yahweh. Second, the leadership theme not only spotlights the flaws of the judges and prepares for a monarchial establishment, but also illuminates Yahweh’s sovereign freedom. Third, a singular thematic focus sheds light on important subthemes, but risks reductionism, while a multiplicity of themes broadens the thematic spectrum, but risks blurring the prominence of the varied motifs. Finally, an exploration of the canonical context of Judges looks backward to furnish exegetical nuance and looks forward to present thematic resolution. Certainly, digging deep into the biblical theological themes and motifs within the book of Judges and identifying their place within the larger canonical context enhances both theological awareness and interpretive acuity of the biblical expositor. The practical significance of digging deep into the thematic initiatives of Judges moves beyond the acquisition of knowledge and provides the expositor an opportunity to communicate a life-changing message.

Critical-Interpretive Issues

Critical-Interpretive Introduction

An analysis of the critical-interpretive issues of the book of Judges allows the student to identify and engage in disparate views that inform coherent conclusions. Unfortunately, scholars not only disagree regarding the outcomes of the arguments, but they also disagree on which interpretive issues need debated. If the critical-interpretive issues are ignored, then the student risks the possibility of engaging in a discussion that does not exist. An identification of the primary critical-interpretive issues within the book of Judges provides the interpreter the opportunity to sharpen hermeneutical acumen while, simultaneously, joining an ongoing conversation surrounding relevant scholarly initiatives. The following analysis identifies three of the most debated topics in recent times by juxtaposing differing scholarly perspectives. First, a discussion regarding the methodology of Israel’s entrance into Canaan ensues followed by an analysis of the complex chronological issues surrounding the period of the Judges, and, finally, the research concludes with a brief assessment of the distinct views of judgeship.

The Entrance

Invasion and Conquest

Scholarly debate continues around the relationship between the book of Judges and the settlement methods documented in Joshua. Conservative scholars often lean toward the conquest model. Joshua 10:40 is representative, which states, “Joshua struck the whole land…and all their kings. He left none remaining.”

F. Albright championed the conquest model with the support of archaeological evidence, and, more recently, Yigael Yadin carries the baton.[94] Iain Provan, V. Philips Long, and Tremper Longman recognize that the conquest model builds its case primarily upon archaeological evidence from the destruction of Canaanite cities such as Bethel, Debir, Eglon, Hazor, and Lachish during the Late Bronze Age.[95] Yadin builds on Albright’s work by recognizing that the archaeological evidence does, at times, contradict the biblical account, but the excavations at sites like Hazor cannot be ignored (cf. Josh 11:10-11). Yadin explains that his excavations at Hazor provide evidence of the destruction and conflagration of a large Canaanite city in the late thirteenth century BC.[96] Pottery provides an important key to the dating of the destruction of Hazor. Yadin explains that Mycenean IIIB pottery found in Hazor’s destruction layer was not used after about 1230 BC.[97] However, the dating of the destruction of Hazor to the thirteenth century creates two additional chronological challenges.

Judges 4:2 refers to the king of Hazor, which states, “And the Lord sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor.” If Yadin is correct and Hazor was destroyed in the thirteenth century by Joshua (cf. Josh 11), then how is it possible for Deborah to be fighting against the king of Hazor in Judges 4? Some scholars, such as Benjamin Mazar, answer the question by reversing the chronological sequence of Joshua and Judges, but Yadin concludes the reference to the king of Hazor in Judges 4 is an editorial gloss assigned to a later date.[98]

The issues surrounding the dating continue with attempts to reconcile the destruction of Hazor in the thirteenth century with the dating of the Exodus. In Judges 11:26, Jephthah claims that Israel had possessed the Transjordan territory for 300 years. Provan, Long, and Longman place Jephthah in the eleventh century BC, which resolves the issue by putting the conquest in the fourteenth century.[99] Alternatively, Wright discounts the round number of 300 years and, regardless, assumes that characters within a story may provide incorrect chronological data.[100] In sum, although the conquest model continues to garner favor, many scholars disagree.

Infiltration and Revolt

Two popular alternative views to the conquest model also exist, the exogenous peasant infiltration model and the endogenous peasant revolt model. According to Provan, Long, and Longman, the peasant infiltration arose from the work of Albrecht Alt who asserted that the Israelites entrance into Canaan occurred over a long period in an environment of relative peace.[101] Alt did not completely subvert the existence of military campaigns, but instead the military encounters were isolated.[102] Martin Noth picked up Alt’s theory and, according to Larry James, expanded it by adding the concept of a twelve-tribe amphictyony, which is a union of people centered around a religious temple and common religious beliefs.[103] Both Alt’s theory and Noth’s expanded version of Alt’s theory have faced criticism from the archaeological evidence provided by proponents of the conquest model. However, Provan, Long, and Longman point out that much of the archaeological evidence supporting a thirteenth-century destruction of cities occurred subsequent to Alt’s work, and regardless, Noth was not convinced the destructions were at the hands of the Israelites.[104] Furthermore, James concludes that the genealogical reality of the tribal relationships as described in the Pentateuch provides the explanation for a common religion and language; thus Noth’s subjective theory of amphictyony is not necessary.[105]

The peasant revolt model is a hypothesis that provides another alternative to the conquest model. According to Provan, Long, and Longman, George Mendenhall differed from both the conquest and peasant infiltration models and argued that Israel emerged through a sociocultural transformation from within Canaan.[106] Mendenhall did not believe that the Bible provided sufficient information for historical reconstruction for the activities of God seem “to modern man the very antithesis of history, for it is within the framework of economic, sociological, and political organization that we of today seek understanding.”[107] Accordingly, Mendenhall assumes that the conquerors were indigenous people of Canaan who were mostly peasant farmers joining forces in religious solidarity through their relationship with Yahweh to challenge the dysfunction of the societal system’s oppressive taxation.[108] Understandably, critics have accused Mendenhall of reductionism, and K. Lawson Younger identifies the following criticisms of the peasant revolt model: (1) nomadism does not require egalitarianism, (2) farmers and urban dwellers often live in an interdependent reality, (3) egalitarian, anti-imperialistic tendencies appear to contradict the worldview espoused in Joshua.[109] Although grasping the historical realities of the Israelite people during the time of the Judges offers the opportunity to significantly enhance the interpreter’s understanding of the narratives, at the present time, no scholarly consensus exists regarding Israel’s entrance into Canaan.

The Chronology

Overlapping Judgeships

The chronological conundrum revolves around 1 Kings 6:1, which states, “In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel … he began to build the house of the Lord.” To reconcile the 480 years with the narrative, the interpreter must first compile the events and sum them. Block uses the following formula: (1) the desert wanderings (40 years), (2) conquest (7 years), (3) the judges (410 years), (4) the period of Eli and Samuel (52 years), (5) the Saul and David monarchy (80 years), and (6) the years of Solomon’s reign (4 years).[110] The sum of the time frame from the desert wanderings to the fourth year of the Solomonic monarchy is 593 years rather than the 480 years as documented in 1 Kings 6:1. Scholars have proposed a multitude of solutions to reconcile the perceived discrepancy.

Although David Washburn provides the most straightforward approach by simply overlapping certain judgeships, the complexity resides in the details. For example, Judges 3:31 states that after Ehud was Shamgar; thus, the two judges are not contemporaries. However, Washburn asserts that, based on Judges 5:6, Deborah and Shamgar were contemporaries and their judgeships overlapped.[111] Furthermore, Washburn notes that the introductory formula to the Jephthah narrative is not strictly sequential, and there is no rest period prior to the Jephthah narrative.[112] Accordingly, Washburn claims that the judgeships of Jephthah and Gideon overlap. Finally, Washburn also suggests that Samson overlaps Jephthah and Gideon, and simultaneously, he asserts that the minor prophets of Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, Jair, and Tola are also contemporaries.[113] Although Washburn does not claim chronological perfection, he does condense the timeframe.

Gershon Galil takes a different tactic by examining the potential overlap between Judges and the Philistine oppression in Samuel and by viewing the chronological framework of Judges through the lens of Deuteronomistic History. First, regarding the former, twenty-one years prior to Samuel’s victory over the Philistines (cf. 1 Sam 6:1; 7:2) the battle of Eben-hezer was fought and since Eli died from the shock experienced as a result of the battle, “it is clear that the last 19 years of Eli overlapped the first period of the Philistine oppression.”[114] In other words, the judgeships of Jephthah and Samson that faced the Philistine oppression overlapped with the period of Eli and the time of the exiled Ark that faced the same oppressive forces. Second, according to Galil, since the minor judges were not part of the deuteronomistic version of Judges, then they do not become part of the Deuteronomist’s chronology.[115] In sum, according to Galil, the overlap of the period of Philistine oppression along with the exclusion of the minor judges provides the data necessary to reconcile the chronology of the narratives to 1 Kings 6:1.

Literary Parallels

Although overlapping the dates and events of judgeships provides the most common approach to reconciling the dates of the stories with 1 Kings 6:1, Robert Chisolm proposes an alternative approach that utilizes linguistic evidence. The solution revolves around the statement in Judges 3:7 and 6:1, “The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord.” Chisolm identifies an ABB-ABB pattern where A represents Judges 3:7 and 6:1, and B represents the same phrase, but it commences with the verb וַיֹּסִפוּ, “and they added,” thus resulting in the statement, “The Israelites again did evil in the Lord’s sight” (Judg 3:12; 4:1; 10:6; 13:1).[116] In other words, the ABB-ABB literary pattern creates two panels where the Othniel, Ehud, and Deborah cycles run concurrently with the Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson cycles.

Chisolm also applies the theory of literary panels to specific dates and recognizes the difficulty of reconciling Judges 11:26 with his hypothesis. First, regarding the dates, Chisolm begins panel one with the Cushan-Rishathaim oppression (Judg 3:8) at approximately 1336 BC and panel two with the Midianite oppression (Judg 6:1) at 1334 BC, and then he concludes panel one with the land resting after deliverance (Judg 5:31) at 1130 BC and panel two with Samson (Judge 15:20) at 1130 BC. By removing almost 200 years from the chronological sequence, Chisolm provides a potential resolution to the 1 Kings 6:1 dilemma.[117] Second, Judges 11:26 asserts that Israel occupied the trans-Jordanian area for 300 years. The statement is problematic because Jephthah’s speech would have occurred only 185 years after the trans-Jordan invasion based on the literary reconstruction; thus Chisolm suggests that Jephthah was either using  hyperbole or simply inaccurate.[118] Although no consensus exists regarding the methodology to reconcile the narrative chronology of the book of Judges with 1 Kings 6:1, several viable options exist.

The Definition

Leaders and Judges

The Hebrew term for judge (שׁפט) has a broad semantic range; thus, the nature of the judges referred to in the book of Judges (cf. 2:16) remains debated. Although the term certainly does not align with the modern courtroom perspective, Deborah does seem to render a type of judgement that may engage in settling disputes in Judges 4:4-5. Richard Schultz summarizes the semantic range of the term as follows: (1) a preservation of social justice, (2) a divine establishment of justice through deliverance or punishment, (3) an official of Israel, and (4) a human ruler or governor.[119]

The final category, according to Block, fits the cognate expressions found in Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Phoenician and support the concept that the verb to judge, שָׁפַט, refers to a human leading or ruling.[120] In light of the possibility, Tomoo Ishida explains that, under the influence of Martin Noth, scholars have distinguished between major and minor judges and their respective functions.[121] More specifically, Noth determined that the major judges were originally identified as judges, but the minor judges were a later redaction by the deuteronomistic historian who decided to identify them by the same title as the major judges even though their functions were different: the major judges led military campaigns, and the minor judges ruled the amphictyony.[122] However, additional investigations into texts from Mari and Ugarit led Ishida ultimately to conclude that the judges were military leaders who “organized local tribal confederations called ‘Israel,’ and went to war as the commander of the arm of their confederations.”[123] Although not conclusive, contextual clues from Judges 3:10 also support the basic construct of military rule, “The Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he judged Israel. He went out to war, and the Lord gave Cushan-rishathaim king.” Finally, Richard Schultz identifies the common formula “and x judged Israel for y years” (cf. Judg 10:2, 3; 12:7, 8–9, 11, 13–14; 15:20; 16:31), which points to the meaning, “to lead.”[124]

Saviors and Deliverers

Not all scholars agree that שָׁפַט means to strictly rule or lead within the context of the book of Judges. Judges 2:16 extends the semantic range to encompass the possibility of a savior or deliverer, “Then the Lord raised up judges, who saved them out of the hand of those who plundered them.” Accordingly, Block asserts that the salvific definition of the judges in verse 16 communicates three important facts: (1) the judges’ power came from Yahweh, (2) the judges’ purpose was soteriological, and (3) the judges’ function was instrumental.[125] Furthermore, Schultz explains that Noth’s hypothesis that distinguishes between major and minor judges and applies the latter to duties relegated to the amphictyony lacks textual evidence and, besides, the minor judges, at times, engaged in military activity (cf. 3:31; 10:1, 3).[126]

Intertextual evidence also supports a nonjudicial use of the term. In 1 Samuel 8:5, the elder of Israel made the following request to Samuel and Ramah, “Appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.” The context of the request resides within a military threat from the Philistines; thus, it appears the elders are looking neither for judicial oversight nor merely a military ruler but instead, a military ruler that will deliver them from their enemy. Accordingly, Schultz correctly agrees with Block that the soteriological nature of the office pertained primarily to deliverance from foreign oppression.[127]

Critical-Interpretive Conclusion

The critical-interpretive issues within the book of Judges illuminate just how much diversity of interpretation exists within scholarship. First, regarding the entrance into Canaan, the options range from a conquest to an infiltration as well as the possibility of an endogenous revolt. Next, the issue of reconciling the chronological narrative in Judges with 1 Kings 6:1 allows for numerous options, most of which land into various methods of judgeship overlap or the possibility of literary panels as a result of linguistic analysis. Finally, the nature and function of the judges rests on the result of semantic analysis of the term שׁפט, which could suggest a judicial function, a ruler or leader, or a savior or deliverer. Without question, the primary critical-interpretive issues within the book of Judges provides interpreters the opportunity to sharpen hermeneutical acumen and join the ongoing scholarly conversation. From a practical perspective, analyzing the interpretive options allows for deeper understanding and offers the possibility of integrating differing viewpoints into the work of the burgeoning student or expositor.

Conclusion

The broad spectrum of interpretive tools and content available to the modern student of the Bible provides a vast opportunity for engaging any biblical text on multiple levels; the book of Judges is no exception. Specifically, the compositional and referential context, archaeological data, and comparative ancient Near Eastern literature support the historicity of the book of Judges. Next, the cultural milieu of the ancient Israelites illuminates the domestic and religious setting, and the iconographic imagery supports various thematic elements of Judges. Third, exploring the canonical placement of Judges within the Testaments and examining the various potential biblical theological themes in Judges enhances theological awareness. Finally, entering the scholarly discussion around the various critical-interpretive issues within Judges provides interpretive options and increases interpretive acumen. Certainly, the historical background, canonical placement, archaeological data, iconographical imagery, cultural milieu, biblical themes, and engagement with critical-interpretive issues all combine as necessary tools to support a deep and well-rounded understanding of the book of Judges. From a practical perspective, by utilizing the extensive interpretive tools available, both the student and scholar alike have the ability to exposit the Scriptures, and specifically the book of Judges, in a way that informs and changes lives.

__________________________

[1] Mark J. Boda, Numbers-Ruth, vol. 2 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Tremper Longman and David E. Garland (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 1048–1049.

[2] Ibid., 2:1049.

[3] Steven L. McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010), 14.

[4] Barry G. Webb, The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2008), 36–40.

[5] Boda, Numbers-Ruth, 2:1050.

[6] Daniel I. Block, Judges, vol. 2 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, ed. John H. Walton (Zondervan, 2009), 97.

[7] Ibid., 2:99–100.

[8] Boda, Numbers-Ruth, 2:1051.

[9] McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books, 51.

[10] Boda, Numbers-Ruth, 2:1050.

[11] Daniel I. Block, Judges, Ruth: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture, vol. 6 of The New American Commentary, ed. Kenneth A. Mathews and David S. Dockery (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999), 26–27.

[12] Ibid., 6:26.

[13] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008).

[14] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:137–138.

[15] Trude Dothan and Seymour Gitin, “Ekron of the Philistines: How They Lived, Worked and Worshiped for Five Hundred Years,” Biblical Archaeology Review 16, no. 1 (January 1990): 20-25.

[16] Ibid., 20-25.

[17] Trude Dothan, “Ekron of the Philistines, Part 1: Where They Came From, How They Settled Down and the Place They Worshiped In,” Biblical Archaeology Review 16, no. 1 (January 1990): 35-36.

[18] Lawrence E Stager, “The Shechem Temple: Where Abimelech Massacred a Thousand,” Biblical Archaeology Review 29, no. 4 (July 2003): 26–29.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid., 26–35.

[21] Block, Judges, 2:203.

[22] “Philistine Temple Discovered Within Tel Aviv City Limits,” Biblical Archaeology Review 1, no. 2 (June 1975): 1, 6-9. See also Amihay Mazar, “Philistine Temple at Tell Qasile,” The Biblical Archaeologist 36, no. 2 (May 1973) and “Additional Philistine Temples at Tell Qasile,” The Biblical Archaeologist 40, no. 2 (May 1977).

[23] “Philistine Temple Discovered,” 1, 6–9.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Steven M. Ortiz, “Judges” in ESV Archaeology Study Bible, ed. John D. Currid (Wheaton: Crossway, 2018), 337, 346, 355.

[26] Ibid., 350, 358, 359, 364.

[27] Block, Judges, 2:101.

[28] Ibid.

[29] James K. Hoffmeier, Context of Scripture: Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger, vol. 2 (Boston: Brill, 2003), 41.

[30] Hoffmeier, Context of Scripture, 41.

[31] Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East (New York: Paulist Press, 2016), 155.

[32] Ibid., 156.

[33] Block, Judges, 2:107, 111, 114, 122.

[34] Harry A. Hoffner, Context of Scripture: Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger, vol. 1 (Boston: Brill, 2003), 185.

[35] Block, Judges, 2:102.

[36] Ibid., 2:119.

[37] Nick Wyatt, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn, Pieter W. van der Horst, and Bob Becking, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 99–100.

[38] Simon B. Parker, Ugaritic Narrative Poetry, vol. 9, Writings from the Ancient World (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 52–53.

[39] Block, Judges, 2:103.

[40] Block, Judges, 2:143.

[41] James Bennett Pritchard, The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. (Princeton: Princeton University, 1969), 351–352.

[42] Carl G. Rasmussen, Zondervan Atlas of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 121.

[43] Robert B Chisholm, “The Chronology of the Book of Judges: A Linguistic Clue to Solving a Pesky Problem,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 52, no. 2 (June 2009): 252.

[44] Rasmussen, Zondervan Atlas of the Bible, 121.

[45] Joel Burnett, “Transjordan: The Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites,” in The World around the Old Testament: The People and Places of the Ancient Near East, ed. Bill T. Arnold and Brent A. Strawn (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016), 347–348.

[46] Wilhelm Herrmann, “Baal,” ed. Karel van der Toorn, Pieter W. van der Horst, and Bob Becking, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Grand Rapids: Brill, 1999), 133.

[47] Thomas V. Brisco, Holman Bible Atlas, Holman Reference (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998), 91.

[48] Daniel Bodi, “Mesopotamian and Anatolian Iconography,” in Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2018), 165.

[49] John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2000), 251.

[50] Ibid., 275.

[51] Othmar Keel, Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms, trans. Timothy J. Hallett (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 101.

[52] Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, 266–267.

[53] Keel, Symbolism of the Biblical World, 58–59.

[54] Ibid., 238.

[55] Block, Judges, 2:151–152.

[56] Brent A. Strawn, “‘With a Strong Hand and an Outstretched Arm’: On the Meaning(s) of the Exodus Tradition(s),” in Iconographic Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: An Introduction to Its Theory, Method, and Practice, ed. Isaak J. De Hulster, Brent A. Strawn, and Ryan P. Bonfiglio (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015), 107.

[57] Keel, Symbolism of the Biblical World, 341.

[58] Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, 263.

[59] Ibid., 275.

[60] Keel, Symbolism of the Biblical World, 181.

[61] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:77.

[62] Ibid., 6:134.

[63] Webb, The Book of the Judges, 30–32. See also Kenneth Gros Louis, “The Book of Judges: Elijah and Elisha,” in Literary Interpretations of Biblical Narratives (Nashville, 1974), 141–162.

[64] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:145.

[65] Ibid., 6:149.

[66] Ibid., 6:476.

[67] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:476.

[68] Paul R. Williamson, Sealed with an Oath: Covenant in God’s Unfolding Purpose, vol. 23 of New Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2007), 96–97.

[69] McKenzie, Introduction to the Historical Books, 15.

[70] J. P. U. Lilley, “A Literary Appreciation of the Book of Judges,” Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967): 102.

[71] Lauren A. S. Monroe, “‘They Behaved Even Worse than Their Ancestors’: Reconsidering the Deuteronomistic Origin of Judges 2:11-19,” Revue Biblique 119, no. 3 (July 2012): 347.

[72] Webb, The Book of the Judges, 19.

[73] P. Deryn Guest, “Judges,” in Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, ed. James D. G. Dunn (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans, 2003), 190–206. 

[74] Ibid., 191–192. Guest also recognizes the satirization of foreign kingship in the narratives of Deborah, Gideon, and Samson, see 193-206.

[75] Guest, “Judges,” 194–201.

[76] Marc Brettler, “The Book of Judges: Literature as Politics,” Journal of Biblical Literature 108, no. 3 (1989): 416.

[77] Ibid.

[78] Brian Neil Peterson, “The Book of Judges: An Apology for Kingship,” in The Authors of the Deuteronomistic History: Locating a Tradition in Ancient Israel (1517 Media, 2014), 197–198.

[79] Michael Wilcock, The Message of Judges, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1993), 15.

[80] Guest, “Judges,” 192.

[81] Webb, The Book of the Judges, 173.

[82] Ibid.

[83] Tammi J. Schneider, Berit Olam: Judges (Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 2000), 287–289.

[84] Schneider, Berit Olam, 289.

[85] Schneider, Berit Olam, 289.

[86] Lee Roy Martin, The Unheard Voice of God: A Pentecostal Hearing of the Book of Judges, The Unheard Voice of God (Netherlands: Brill, 2008), 95.

[87] Cheryl A. Brown, “Judges,” in Joshua, Judges, Ruth, ed. W. Ward Gasque, Robert L. Hubbard, and Robert K. Johnston, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2012), 132–133.

[88] Robert H. O’Connell, The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges (New York: Brill, 1997), 1.

[89] Martin, The Unheard Voice of God, 102.

[90] Ibid.

[91] Martin, The Unheard Voice of God, 102.

[92] J. Clinton McCann, Judges: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 1st ed. (Louisville: John Knox, 2002), 13–14.

[93] Ibid., 15.

[94] See W. F. Albright, “The Israelite Conquest of Canaan in the Light of Archaeology,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, no. 74 (1939): 11–23 and Yigael Yadin, “Is the Biblical Account of the Israelite Conquest of Canaan Historically Reliable?,” Biblical Archaeology Review 8, no. 2 (March 1982): 16–21.

[95] Iain Provan, V. Philips Long, and Tremper Longman, A Biblical History of Israel, 2nd ed. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015), 192.

[96] Yadin, “Is the Biblical Account,” 19.

[97] Ibid., 20.

[98] Ibid., 23.

[99] Provan, Long, and Longman, A Biblical History of Israel, 192.

[100]  Provan, Long, and Longman, A Biblical History of Israel, 192.

[101] Ibid., 193–194. Note: The original German sources from Albrecht Alt are not readily accessible.

[102] Yadin, “Is the Biblical Account,” 5.

[103] Larry James, “An Evaluation of Martin North’s Idea of Amphictyony as Applied to Israel,” Restoration Quarterly 19, no. 3 (1976): 165.

[104] Provan, Long, and Longman, A Biblical History of Israel, 194.

[105] James, “An Evaluation of Martin,” 167, 174.

[106] Provan, Long, and Longman, A Biblical History of Israel, 194.

[107] George E. Mendenhall, “The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine,” The Biblical Archaeologist 25, no. 3 (1962): 66.

[108] Ibid., 73–85.

[109] K. Lawson Younger, “Early Israel in Recent Biblical Scholarship,” in The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches, ed. David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 181–182.

[110] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:61. For purposes of the analysis, Solomon’s fourth regnal year is assumed to be around 966 BC, which would place the exodus event circa 1446 BC.

[111] David L Washburn, “The Chronology of Judges: Another Look,” Bibliotheca sacra 147, no. 588 (October 1990): 419–420.

[112] Washburn, “The Chronology of Judges,” 422–423.

[113] Ibid., 423–425.

[114] Gershon Galil, “The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic History,” Biblica 85, no. 3 (2004): 419.

[115] Ibid., 420–421.

[116] Chisholm, “The Chronology of the Book of Judges,” 251.

[117] Ibid., 252.

[118] Chisholm, “The Chronology,” 255.

[119] Richard Schultz, “שָׁפַט,” in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 214–219.

[120] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:24–25.

[121] Tomoo Ishida, “The Leaders of the Tribal Leagues: Israel in the Pre-Monarchic Period,” Revue Biblique 80, no. 4 (1973): 515.

[122] Ishida, “The Leaders,” 515.

[123] Ibid., 527.

[124] Schultz, “שָׁפַט”, 215-216.

[125] Block, Judges, Ruth, 6:23.

[126]  Schultz, “שָׁפַט”, 218.

[127] Ibid.

Bibliography

• Albright, W. F. “The Israelite Conquest of Canaan in the Light of Archaeology.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, no. 74 (1939): 11–23.
• Block, Daniel I. Judges. Vol. 2 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary. Edited by John H. Walton. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.
• ________. Judges, Ruth: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. Vol. 6 of The New American Commentary. Edited by Kenneth A. Mathews and David S. Dockery.  Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999.
• Boda, Mark J. Numbers-Ruth. Vol. 2 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Edited by Tremper Longman and David E. Garland. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.
• Bodi, Daniel. “Mesopotamian and Anatolian Iconography.” In Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, edited by Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2018.
• Brettler, Marc. “The Book of Judges: Literature as Politics.” Journal of Biblical Literature 108, no. 3 (1989): 395–418.
• Brisco, Thomas V. Holman Bible Atlas. Holman Reference. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998.
• Brown, Cheryl A. “Judges.” In Joshua, Judges, Ruth, edited by W. Ward Gasque, Robert L. Hubbard, and Robert K. Johnston. Understanding the Bible Commentary Series. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2012.
• Burnett, Joel. “Transjordan: The Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites.” In The World around the Old Testament: The People and Places of the Ancient Near East, edited by Bill T. Arnold and Brent A. Strawn. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016.
• Chisholm, Robert B. “The Chronology of the Book of Judges: A Linguistic Clue to Solving a Pesky Problem.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 52, no. 2 (June 2009): 247–255.
• Dothan, Trude. “Ekron of the Philistines, Part 1: Where They Came From, How They Settled Down and the Place They Worshiped In.” Biblical Archaeology Review 16, no. 1 (January 1990): 26–36.
• Dothan, Trude, and Seymour Gitin. “Ekron of the Philistines: How They Lived, Worked and Worshiped for Five Hundred Years.” Biblical Archaeology Review 16, no. 1 (January 1990): 20–25.
• Galil, Gershon. “The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic History.” Biblica 85, no. 3 (2004): 413–421.
• Guest, P. Deryn. “Judges.” In Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, edited by James D. G. Dunn. Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans, 2003.
• Herrmann, Wilhelm. “Baal.” Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Pieter W. van der Horst, and Bob Becking. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Grand Rapids: Brill, 1999.
• Hoffmeier, James K. Context of Scripture: Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World. Edited by William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger. Vol. 2. Boston: Brill, 2003.
• Hoffner, Harry A. Context of Scripture: Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Edited by William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger. Vol. 1. Boston: Brill, 2003.
• Ishida, Tomoo. “The Leaders of the Tribal Leagues: Israel in the Pre-Monarchic Period.” Revue Biblique 80, no. 4 (1973): 514–530.
• James, Larry. “An Evaluation of Martin North’s Idea of Amphictyony as Applied to Israel.” Restoration Quarterly 19, no. 3 (1976): 165–174.
• Keel, Othmar. Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Translated by Timothy J. Hallett. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997.
• Lilley, J. P. U. “A Literary Appreciation of the Book of Judges.” Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967): 94–102.
• Louis, Kenneth Gros. “The Book of Judges: Elijah and Elisha.” In Literary Interpretations of Biblical Narratives, 141–162. Nashville, 1974.
• Martin, Lee Roy. The Unheard Voice of God: A Pentecostal Hearing of the Book of Judges. The Unheard Voice of God. Netherlands: Brill, 2008.
• Matthews, Victor H., and Don C. Benjamin. Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East. New York: Paulist Press, 2016.
• Mazar, Amihay. “Additional Philistine Temples at Tell Qasile.” The Biblical Archaeologist 40, no. 2 (May 1977): 82–87.
• ________. “Philistine Temple at Tell Qasile.” The Biblical Archaeologist 36, no. 2 (May 1973): 42–48.
• McCann, J. Clinton. Judges: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. 1st ed. Louisville: John Knox, 2002.
• McKenzie, Steven L. Introduction to the Historical Books: Strategies for Reading. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010.
• Mendenhall, George E. “The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine.” The Biblical Archaeologist 25, no. 3 (1962): 66–87.
• Monroe, Lauren A. S. “‘They Behaved Even Worse than Their Ancestors’: Reconsidering the Deuteronomistic Origin of Judges 2:11-19.” Revue Biblique 119, no. 3 (July 2012): 347–365.
• O’Connell, Robert H. The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges. New York: Brill, 1997.
• Ortiz, Steven M. ESV Archaeology Study Bible. Wheaton: Crossway, 2018.
• Parker, Simon B. Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Vol. 9. Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997.
• Peterson, Brian Neil. “The Book of Judges: An Apology for Kingship.” In The Authors of the Deuteronomistic History: Locating a Tradition in Ancient Israel, 165–198. 1517 Media, 2014.
• “Philistine Temple Discovered Within Tel Aviv City Limits.” Biblical Archaeology Review 1, no. 2 (June 1975): 1, 6–9.
• Pritchard, James Bennett. The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University, 1969.
• Provan, Iain, V. Philips Long, and Tremper Longman. A Biblical History of Israel. 2nd ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015.
• Rasmussen, Carl G. Zondervan Atlas of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010.
• Schneider, Tammi J. Berit Olam: Judges. Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 2000.
• Schultz, Richard. “שָׁפַט.” In New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, edited by Willem A. VanGemeren. Vol. 4. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
• Stager, Lawrence E. “The Shechem Temple: Where Abimelech Massacred a Thousand.” Biblical Archaeology Review 29, no. 4 (July 2003): 26–35, 66–69.
• Strawn, Brent A. “‘With a Strong Hand and an Outstretched Arm’: On the Meaning(s) of the Exodus Tradition(s).” In Iconographic Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: An Introduction to Its Theory, Method, and Practice, edited by Isaak J. De Hulster, Brent A. Strawn, and Ryan P. Bonfiglio. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015.
• Walton, John H., Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2000.
• Washburn, David L. “The Chronology of Judges: Another Look.” Bibliotheca sacra 147, no. 588 (October 1990): 414–425.
• Webb, Barry G. The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2008.
• Weippert, Manfred. The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Palestine: A Critical Survey of Recent Scholarly Debate. Translated by James D. Martin. London: S.C.M., 1971.
• Wilcock, Michael. The Message of Judges. The Bible Speaks Today. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1993.
• Williamson, Paul R. Sealed with an Oath: Covenant in God’s Unfolding Purpose. Vol. 23 of New Studies in Biblical Theology. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2007.
• Wyatt, Nick. Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Pieter W. van der Horst, and Bob Becking. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
• Yadin, Yigael. “Is the Biblical Account of the Israelite Conquest of Canaan Historically Reliable?” Biblical Archaeology Review 8, no. 2 (March 1982): 16–23.
• Younger, K. Lawson. “Early Israel in Recent Biblical Scholarship.” In The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches, edited by David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.