Judges

VIEW:44 DATA:01-04-2020

JUDGES (Book of)
1. Name.—The Heb. title Shôphetîm (‘Judges’) is parallel to Melâkhîm (‘Kings’); both are abbreviations, the full title requiring in each case the prefixing of ‘the Book of’; this full title is found for Judges in the Syriac Version, for Kings in, e.g., 2Ch_20:34 (where ‘of Israel’ is added) 2Ch_24:27. Just as the titie ‘Kings’ denotes that the book contains an account of the doings of the various kings who ruled over Israel and Judah, so the title ‘Judges’ is given to the book because it describes the exploits of the different champions who were the chieftains of various sections of Israelites from the time of the entry into Canaan up to the time of Samuel. It may well be questioned whether the title of this book was originally ‘Judges,’ for it is difficult to see where the difference lies, fundamentally, between the ‘judges’ on the one hand, and Joshua and Saul on the other; in the case of each the main and central duty is to act as leader against the foes of certain tribes. The title ‘judge’ is not applied to three of these chieftains, namely, Ehud, Barak, and Gideon, and ‘seems not to have been found in the oldest of the author’s sources’ (Moore, Judges, p. xii.). In the three divisions of which the Hebrew Canon is made up, the Book of Judges comes in the first section of the second division, being reckoned among the ‘Former Prophets’ (Joshua, Jdg_1:1-36; Jdg_2:1-23 Samam., 1 and 2Kings), the second section of the division comprising the prophetical books proper. In the LXX [Note: Septuagint.] the Book of Ruth is sometimes, in some MSS, included in that of Judges, other MSS treat the Pentateuch and Jos. [Note: Josephus.] , Jg., Ruth as one whole. [For the meaning of the word ‘judges’ see preceding article.]
2. Contents.—The book opens with an account of the victories gained by Judah and Simeon; Caleb appears as the leader of the tribe of Judah, though he is not spoken of as one of the judges. There follows then an enumeration of the districts which the Israelites were unable to conquer; the reason for this is revealed by the messenger of Jahweh; it is because they had not obeyed the voice of Jahweh, but had made covenants with the people of the land, and had refrained from breaking down their altars. The people thereupon lift up their voices and weep (whence the name of the place, Bochim), and sacrifice to Jahweh. The narrative then abrnptly breaks off. This section ( 1:1–2:5) serves as a kind of Introduction to the book, and certainly cannot have belonged originally to it; ‘the whole character of Jdg_1:1 to Jdg_2:5 gives evidence that it was not composed for the place, but is an extract from an older history of the Israelite occupation of Canaan’ (Moore, p. 4). As this introduction must be cut away as not belonging to our book, a similar course must be followed with chs. 17–21; these form an appendix which does not belong to the book. It will be best to deal with the contents of these five chapters before coming to the book itself. The chapters contain two distinct narratives, and are, in their original form, very ancient; in each narrative there occurs twice the redactional note, ‘In those days there was no king in Israel’ (Jdg_17:6, Jdg_18:1, Jdg_19:1, Jdg_21:25), showing that the period of the Judges is implied. Chs. 17, 18 tell the story of the Ephraimite Micah, who made an ephod and teraphim for himself, and got a Levite to be a ‘father and a priest’ to him; but he is persuaded by 600 Danites to go with them and be their priest; they then conquer Laish and found a sanctuary there, in which a graven image (which had been taken from Micah) is set up. The narrative, therefore, purports to give an account of the origin of the sanctuary of Dan, and it seems more than probable that two traditions of this have been interwoven in these two chapters. In chs. 19–21 the story is told of how a concubine of a certain Levite left him and returned to her father; the Levite goes after her and brings her back. On their return they remain for a night in Gibeah, which belonged to the Benjamites; here the men of the city so maltreat the concubine that she is left dead on the threshold of the house in which her lord is staying; the Levite takes up the dead body, brings it home, and, after having cut it up, sends the pieces by the hands of messengers throughout the borders of Israel, as a call to avenge the outrage. Thereupon the Israelites assemble, and resolve to punish the Benjamites; as a result, the entire tribe, with the exception of six hundred men who manage to escape to the wilderness, is annihilated. Although six hundred men have survived, it appears inevitable that the tribe of Benjamin must die out, for the Israelites had sworn not to let their daughters marry Benjamites; this causes great distress in Israel. However, the threatened disaster of the loss of a tribe is averted through the Israelites procuring four hundred maidens from Jabesh in Gilead, the remaining two hundred required being carried off by the Benjamites during the annual feast at Shiloh. The children of Israel then depart every man to his home. The narrative appropriately ends with the words, ‘Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.’ Although these chapters have been very considerably worked over by later hands, it is probable that they have some basis in fact; it is difficult to account for their existence at all on any other hypothesis, for in themselves they are quite purposeless; there cannot originally have been any object in writing such a gruesome tale, other than that of recording something that actually happened.
The Book of Judges itself is comprised in Jdg_2:6 to Jdg_16:31; and here it is to be noticed, first of all, that a certain artificiality is observable in the structure; the exploits of twelve men are recounted, and the idea seems to be that each represents one of the twelve tribes of Israel, thus: Judah is represented by Othniel, Benjamin by Ehud, the two halves of the tribe of Manasseh by Gideon (West) and Jair (East), Issachar by Tola, Zebulun by Elon, Naphtali by Barak, Ephralm by Abdon, Gad by Jephthah, and Dan by Samson; besides these ten there are Shamgar and Ibzan, two unimportant Judges, but against them there are the two tribes Reuben and Simeon, who, however, soon disappear; while the tribe of Levi, as always, occupies an exceptional position. This general correspondence of twelve judges to the twelve tribes strikes one the more as artificial in that some of the judges play a very humble part, and seem to have been brought in to make up the number twelve rather than for anything else. The following is an outline of the contents of these chapters:—
There is, first of all, an introduction (Jdg_2:6 to Jdg_3:6) which contains a brief but comprehensive résumé of the period about to be dealt with; as long as Joshua was alive, it says, the children of Israel remained faithful to Jahweh; but after his death, and after the generation that knew him had passed away, the people for sook Jahweh, the God of their fathers, and served Baal and Ashtaroth; the consequence was that they were oppressed by the surrounding nations. Jdg_2:15-19 sound what is the theme of the whole book: the nation distressed, a judge raised up who delivers them from their oppressors, relapse into idolatry. The introduction closes with a list of the nations which had been left in the Promised Land with the express purpose of ‘proving’ the Israelites. [For the historical value of this Introduction, see § 5.] Of the twelve Judges dealt with, seven are of Quite subordinate importance, little more than a bare mention of them being recorded; they are: Othniel (Jdg_3:7-11), who delivers the children of Israel from Cushan-rishathaim, king of Mesopotamia; he is mentioned incidentally in Jdg_1:13 as marrying the daughter of Caleb; Shamgar (Jdg_3:31), of whom nothing more is said than that he killed six hundred Philistines; Tola (Jdg_10:1-2); Jair (Jdg_10:3-5); Ibzan (Jdg_12:8-10); Elon (Jdg_12:11-12); and Abdon (Jdg_12:13-15). Of real importance are the accounts which are given of the other five judges. (1) Ehud, who delivers Israel from Egloa, king of Moab (Jdg_3:12-30). (2) Barak, who is, however, rather the instrument of Deborah; chs. 4, 5 give accounts, in prose and poetry respectively, of the Israelite victory over Sisera. (3) Gideon. Of the last there are likewise two accounts (Jdg_6:1 to Jdg_8:3 and Jdg_8:4-27), with a later addition (Jdg_8:28-35); some introductory words (Jdg_6:1-10) tell of the Midianite oppression; Jdg_6:11-24 describe the call of Gideon, of which a second account is given in Jdg_6:25-32; the invasion of the Midianites and Gideon’s preparations to resist them (Jdg_6:33-35) follows; and in Jdg_6:36-40 the story of the sign of the fleece is told. Ch. 7 gives a detailed account of Gideon’s victory over the Midianites, and Jdg_8:1-3 contaios an appendix which tells of Ephraim’s dissatisfaction with Gideon for not summoning them to repel the Midianites, and the skilful way in which Gideon pacifies them. In Jdg_8:4-21 comes the second account of Gideon’s victory, the result of which is the offer to him of the kingship and his refusal thereof (Jdg_8:22-28); Jdg_8:29-35 forms a transition to the story of Gideon’s son, Abimelech (see below). (4) The history of Jephthah is prefaced by Jdg_10:17-18, which tells of the Ammonite oppression; Jephthah’s exploits are recounted in Jdg_11:1 to Jdg_12:7; a biographical note (Jdg_11:1-3) introduces the hero, and a long passage (Jdg_11:4-29) follows, describing how the conflict with the Ammonites arose; it is a question concerning the ownership of the lands between the Jabhok and the Arnon, which are claimed by the Ammonites, but which the Israelites maintain have been in their possession for three hundred years. As no agreement is arrived at, war breaks out. A section, which is of great interest archæologically (Jdg_11:30-40), tells then of a vow which Jephthah made to Jahweh, to the effect that if he returned victorious from the impending struggle with the Ammonites, he would offer up in sacrifice the first person whom he met on his return coming out of his dwelling. He is victorious, and the first to meet him was, as according to the custom of the times he must have expected (see Jdg_5:28, 1Sa_18:6-7, Psa_68:11), his daughter—the words in Jdg_11:39, ‘and she had not known man,’ are significant in this connexion;—his vow he then proceeds to fulfil. The next passage (Psa_12:1-8), which tells of a battle between Jephthah and the Ephraimites, in which the latter are worsted, reminds one forcibly of Psa_8:1-3, and the two passages are clearly related in some way. (5) Lastly, the history of Samson and his doings is recorded, chs. 13–16; these chapters contain three distinct stories, but they form a self-contained whole. The first story (ch. 13) tells of the wonderful experiences of the parents of the hero prior to his birth; how an angel foretold that he was to be born, and that he was to be a Nazirite; and how the angel ascended in a flame from the altar on which Manoah had offered a sacrifice to Jahweh; Jdg_13:24-25 record his birth and hie growth to manhood, the spirit of Jahweh being upon him. The fourteenth chapter gives an account of Samson’s courtship and marriage with the Philistine woman of Timnah: Jdg_13:1-4 his first meeting with her, and his desire that his parents should go down to Timnah to secure her for him, they at first demur, but ultimately they accompany him thither. His exploit with the lion, his riddle during the wedding-feast, the craft of his wife in obtaining the answer to the riddle from him, and the way in which he paid the forfeit to the wedding guests for having found out the answer to the riddle,—all this is told in the remainder of the chapter (Jdg_13:5-9). Further exploits are recounted in ch. 15: Samson’s burning of the Philistines’ fields by sending into them foxes with burning torches tied to their tails (Jdg_15:1-8); the Philistines attack Judah in consequence, but the men of Judah bind Samson with the purpose of delivering him up; he, however, breaks his bonds, and kills a thousand Philistines with the jawhone of an ass (Jdg_15:1-9); the remaining verses describe the miracle of the origin of the spring in En-hakkore (Jdg_15:18-20). In ch. 16 there is a continuation of Samson’s adventures: his carrying off the gates of Gaza (Jdg_16:1-3); his relationship with Delilah and her treachery, resulting in his final capture by the Philistines (Jdg_16:22); their rejoicing (Jdg_16:23-25); the destruction of the house, and death of Samson (Jdg_16:26-30); his burial (Jdg_16:31).
The section dealing with Abimelech (ch. 9), though certainly belonging to the Gideon chapters (6–8) stands on a somewhat different basis, inasmuch as Abimelech is not reckoned among the judges (see following section): Abimelech is made king of Shechem (Jdg_9:1-6); Jotham his brother, delivers his parable from Mt Genzim, and then flees ((Jdg_6:7-9); the quarrel between Abimelech and the Shechemites (Jdg_9:22-25); Gaal raises a revolt among the Shechemites (Jdg_9:26-33); Abimelech quells the revolt (Jdg_9:34-41); Shechem is captured and destroyed (Jdg_9:42-45); its tower burned (Jdg_9:46-49); Abimelech’s attack Thehez, and his death (Jdg_9:50-57). Lastly, there is the short section Jdg_10:6-16, which, like Jdg_1:1 to Jdg_2:5, partakes of the nature of Introduction, and is of late date.
3. Arrangement and Sources.—The question of the sources of our hook is a difficult and complicated one; the different hypotheses put forward are sometimes of a very contradictory character, and proportionately bewildering. It seems, indeed, not possible to assign, with any approach to certainty, the exact source of every passage in the hook; but there are certain indications which compel us to see that the book is compiled from sources of varying character and of different ages; so that, although we shall not attempt to specify a source for every passage—believing this to be impossible with the hook as we now have it—yet it will he possible to point out, broadly, the main sources from which it is compiled.
(1) It may be taken for granted that the exploits of tribal heroes would be commemorated by their descendants, and that the narrative of these exploits would be composed very soon, probably immediately in some cases, after the occurrences. So ingrained is this custom, that even as late as the Middle Ages we find it still in vogue in Europe, the ‘Troubadours’ being the counterpart of the singers of far earlier ages. It is therefore clear that there must have existed among the various Israelite tribes a body of traditional matter regarding the deeds of tribal heroes which originally floated about orally within the circumscribed area of each particular tribe. Moreover, it is also well known that these early traditions were mostly sung—or, to speak more correctly, recited—in a primitive form of poetry. The earliest sources, therefore, of our book must have been something of this character.
(2) It is, however, quite certain that some intermediate stages were gone through before the immediate antecedents of our present book became existent. In the first place, there must have taken place at some time or other a collection of these ancient records which belonged originally to different tribes; one may confidently assume that a collection of this kind would have been put together from written materials; these materials would naturally have been of varying value, so that the collector would have felt himself perfectly justified in discriminating between what he had before him; some records he would retain, others he would discard; and if he found two accounts of some tradition which he considered important, he would incorporate both. In this way there would have arisen the immediate antecedent to the Book of Judges in its original form. The ‘Song of Deborah’ may be taken as an illustration of what has been said. At some early period there was a confederacy among some of the tribes of Israel, formed for the purpose of combating the Canaanites; the confederates are victorious; the different tribes who took part in the battle return home, and (presumably) each tribe preserves its own account of what happened; for generations these different accounts are handed down orally; ultimately some are lost, others are written down; two are finally preserved and incorporated into a collection of tribal traditions, i.e. in their original form they were the immediate antecedents of our present accounts in Jdg_4:4 ff; Jdg_5:1 ff.
(3) We may assume, then, as reasonably certain, the existence of a body of traditional matter which had been compiled from different sources; this compilation represents our Book of Judges in its original form; it is aptly termed by many scholars the pre-Deuteronomic collection of the histories of the Judges. This name is given because the book in its present form shows that an editor or redactor took the collection of narratives and fitted them into a framework, adding introductory and concluding remarks; and the additions of this editor ‘exhibit a phraseology and colouring different from that of the rest of the book,’ being imbued strongly with the spirit of the Deuteronomist (Driver). It is possible, lastly, that some still later redactional elements are to be discerned (Cornill). Speaking generally, then, the various parts of the book may be assigned as follows: Jdg_1:1 to Jdg_2:5, though added by a later compiler, contains fragments, probably themselves from different sources, of some early accounts of the first warlike encounters between Israelite tribes and Canaanites. In the introduction, Jdg_2:6 to Jdg_3:6, to the central part of the book, the hand of the Deuteronomic compiler is observable, but part of it belongs to the pre-Deuteronomic form of the book. The main portion, Jdg_3:7-16, is for the most part ancient; where the hand of the Deuteronomist is most obvious is at the beginning and end of each narrative; the words, ‘And the children of Israel did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord …,’ at the beginning, and ‘… cried unto the Lord, … and the land had rest’ so and so many years, at the end, occur with monotonous regularity. ‘It is evident that in this part of the book a series of independent narratives has been taken by the compiler and arranged by him in a framework, designed for the purpose of stating the chronology of the period, and exhibiting a theory of the occasion and nature of the work which the Judges generally were called to undertake’ (Driver). The third division of the book, chs. 17–21, is ancient; ‘in the narratives themselves there is no trace of a Deuteronomic redaction’ (Moore); but they come from different sources, chs. 17, 18 being the oldest portions.
4. Text.—A glance at the apparatus criticus of any good edition of the Massoretic text, such as Kittel’s, shows at once that, generally speaking, the Hebrew text has come down to us in a good state; ‘it is better preserved than that of any other of the historical books’ (Moore). A number of errors there certainly are; but these can in a good many cases be rectified by the versions, and above all by the Greek version. The only part of the book which contains serious textual defects is the Song of Deborah, and here there are some passages which defy emendation. In the Greek there are two independent translations, one of which is a faithful reproduction of the Massoretic text, and is therefore not of much use to the textual critic.
5. Historical value.—There are few subjects in the Bible which offer to the student of history a more fascinating field of study than that of the historical value of the Book of Judges. It will be clear, from what has been said in § 3, that to gauge its historical value the component parts of the book must be dealt with separately; it is also necessary to differentiate, wherever necessary, between the historical kernel of a passage and the matter which has been superimposed by later editors; this is not always easy, and nothing would be more unwise than to claim infallibility in a proceeding of this kind. At the same time, it is impossible to go into very much detail here, and only conclusions can be given. Jdg_1:1 to Jdg_2:5 is, as a whole, a valuable source of information concerning the history of the conquest and settlement of some of the Israelite tribes west of the Jordan; for the period of which it treats it is one of the most valuable records we possess.
Jdg_2:6 to Jdg_3:6, which forms the introduction to the main body of the book, is, with the exception of isolated notes such as Jdg_2:9, Jdg_3:5, of very little historical value; when, every time the people are oppressed, the calamity is stated to be due to apostasy from Jahweh, one cannot help feeling that the statement is altogether out of harmony with the spirit of the book itself; this theory is too characteristic of the ‘Deuteronomic’ spirit to be reckoned as belonging to the period of the Judges.
Jdg_3:7-11, the story of Othniel, shows too clearly the hand of the ‘Deuteronomic’ redactor for it to be regarded as authentic history; whether Othniel is an historical person or not, the mention of the king of Mesopotamia in the passage, as having so far conquered Canaan as to subjugate the Israelite tribes in the south, is sufficient justification for questioning the historicity of the section.
On the other hand, the story of Ehud, Jdg_3:12-30, is a piece of genuine old history; signs of redactional work are, Indeed, not wanting at the beginning and end, but the central facts of the story, such as the Moabite oppression and the conquest of Jericho, the realistic description of the assassination of Eglon, and the defeat of the Moabites, all bear the stamp of genuineness. In the same way, the brief references to the ‘minor’ judges—Shamgar (Jdg_3:31), Tola (Jdg_10:1-2), Jair (Jdg_10:5-5), Ibzan (Jdg_12:8-10), Elon (Jdg_12:11-12), and Abdon (Jdg_12:13-15)—are historical notes of value; their Interpretation is another matter; it is possible that these names are the names of clans and not of individuals; some of them certainly occur as the names of clans in later books.
The ‘judgeship’ of Deborah and Barak is the most important historical section in the book; of the two accounts of the period, chs. 4 and 5, the latter ranks by far the higher; it is the most important source in existence for the history of Israel; ‘by the vividness of every touch, and especially by the elevation and intensity of feeling which pervades it, it makes the impression of having been written by one who had witnessed the great events which it commemorates’ (Moore); whether this was so or not, there can be no doubt of its high historical value; apart from the manifest overworking of the Deuteronomic redactor, it gives a wonderful insight into the conditions of the times.
Chs. 6–8, which combine two accounts of the history of Gideon, have a strong historical basis; they contain much ancient matter, but even in their original forms there were assuredly some portions which cannot be regarded as historical, e.g. Jdg_6:36 ff.
Ch. 9, the story of Abimelech, is one of the oldest portions of the book, and contains for the most part genuine history; it gives an instructive glimpse of the relations between Canaanites and Israelites now brought side by side; ‘the Canaanite town Shechem, subject to Jerubbaal of Ophrah; his balf-Canaanite son Abimelech, who naturally belongs to his mother’s people; the successful appeal to blood, which is “thicker than water,” by which he becomes king of Shechem, ruling over the neighbouring Israelites also; the interloper Gaal, and his kinsmen, who settle in Shechem and Instigate insurrection against Abimelech by skilfully appealing to the pride of the Shechemite aristocracy—all help us better than anything else in the book to realize the situation in this period’ (Moore).
The section Jdg_10:6-18 contains a few historical notes, but is mostly Deuteronomic. The Jephthah story (Jdg_11:1 to Jdg_12:7), again, contains a great deal that is of high value historically; the narrative does not all come from one source, and the Deuteronomist’s hand is, as usual, to be discerned here and there, but that it contains ‘genuine historical traits’ (Kuenen) is universally acknowledged.
Chs. 13–16, which recount the adventures of Samson, must be regarded as having a character of their own: if these adventures have any basis in fact, they have been so overlaid with legendary matter that it would be precarious to pronounce with any degree of certainty any part of them in their present form to be historical.
Chs. 17, 18 are among the most valuable, historically, in the book; they give a most instructive picture of the social and religious state of the people during the period of the Judges, and bear every mark of truthfulness.
Chs. 19–21. Of these chapters, 19 is not unlike the rest of the book in character; it is distinctly ‘old-world,’ and must be pronounced as, in the main, genuinely historical; Jdg_21:19-24 has likewise a truly antique ring, but the remainder of this section is devoid of historical reality.
W. O. E. Oesterley.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

Moses was the nation's judge after Israel left Egypt. At Jethro's suggestion, just before the giving of the Sinaitic law (Exodus 18; Deu_1:9, etc.), he appointed captains, rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, namely, the recognized heads of tribes or of chief houses in them, to judge at all seasons small matters, reserving the great ones for himself to decide, upon the principles which he should learn from God. These would number 78,600. But the elders (chosen from the elders who headed Israel in seeking freedom, and from the officers, the reluctant instruments of Egyptian tyranny: Exo_3:16; Exo_5:6, etc.), appointed Num_11:16, etc., were only seventy (the same number as had gone up with Moses unto the Lord in the mountain, Exodus 24), endued by God with the Spirit as Moses' council. This council fell into desuetude under the judges and kings; but after the monarchy the Sanhedrin was modeled on this prototype.
Regard to locality modified the genealogical principle of selection upon Israel's entrance into Canaan (Deu_16:18). The Levites, as the ultimate sources under God of jurisprudence, taught the people the law, to enable the judges and those judged to understand the right principle of decisions (Deu_17:8-13). The "judges" are mentioned Jos_24:1. Their sacro-sanctity is marked by their bearing the designation "gods," as exercising some of God's delegated power: Psa_82:1; Psa_82:6; Exo_21:6, Hebrew "gods" for "'judges," God being the source of all justice. The qualifications of a judge are given (Exo_18:21), "able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness"; "not wresting judgment, not respecting persons, neither taking a gift" (so universal a practice with Eastern judges), Deu_16:19; "not respecting the person of the poor, nor honouring the person of the mighty" (Lev_19:15); "not afraid of the face of man, for the judgment is God's" (Deu_1:17).
Especially compare Jehoshaphat's charge to his judges (2Ch_19:6-7). Judging was the only royal function, under the theocracy, which was committed to man, and being moreover in the hands of the people's natural leaders it held a very high place in popular estimation. The place of judgment was the open space before the gate, the place of public resort (Psa_69:12; Pro_8:15). The higher order of judges were called "princes," the lower "elders" (Jdg_8:14; Exo_2:14; representing the Hebrew nasiy', sar, nadiyb, nagid; nasiy' expressing "high birth", nadiyb "princely qualities", nagid "prominent station", sar "active official authority). In Jdg_8:14 the elders of Succoth are 77, i.e. 70, the number of Jacob's family with which Succoth was connected (Gen_33:17; Gen_46:27), with the sacred seven added (Exo_24:9).
The custody, in the sanctuary, of the standard weights and measures made an appeal to the priesthood in disputes a necessity; and in final appeals the high priest, as chief legal authority, decided difficult cases before the time of the kings (Deu_17:8; Deu_17:12). The Hebrew shophetim, "judges", correspond to the suffetes, the chief magistrates of Phoenician colonies. None of the nation's deliverers called "judges" (Jdg_2:16-19; Act_13:20) were of a priest's family; Eli was not a deliverer or saviour (Oba_1:21; Jdg_3:9; Jdg_3:15). Their main office was to judge or rule righteously ("feed" or tend, 1Ch_17:6) in deciding cases (Jdg_4:5; Jdg_10:2; 1Sa_7:15; 1Sa_8:3), this function of the priesthood being in abeyance after the time of Joshua; their delivering Israel was an act of Jehovah's "righteousness" or faithfulness to His covenant, consequent upon the people's penitently turning to Him (Jdg_5:11; Isa_45:8).
These extraordinary judges, raised by God, the temporal as well as spiritual King of Israel, as His vicegerents, between Joshua and the kings were 13: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah and Barak, Gideon, Abimelech (an usurper), Tola, Jair Jephtha, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon (Bedan 1Sa_12:11), Samson. (On the dates see CHRONOLOGY.) "Saving" Israel is applied to them frequently (Jdg_3:9 margin, Judges 31; Jdg_6:15; Jdg_7:7; Jdg_11:1, margin); the Lord "raised them up" (Jdg_2:16) at intervals, as need required, by causing His Spirit to come upon them (Jdg_3:10; Jdg_6:34; Jdg_11:29; Jdg_13:25); Barak was called by a prophetess, Deborah (Judges 4); His providence overruled the people's choice in Jephthah's case. The judges ruled more continuously from Gideon's time; his sons are regarded as his natural successors (Jdg_9:1-3); so Samuel's sons (1Sa_8:1; 1Sa_7:15), he ruled until his death; so too Eli (Jdg_4:18).
Afterward, the king was expected to hear causes in person, and therefore should write and read continually a copy of the law (2Sa_15:1-4; Deu_17:18-19). David probably delegated some of the judicial office to the 6,000 Levites, and especially Chenaniah and his sons (1Ch_23:4; 1Ch_26:29). Solomon was most famed for his judgments (1Ki_3:9; 1Ki_3:16; Psa_72:1-4; 1Ki_2:5-6; 1Ki_2:33-34; 1Ki_2:46).
Two examples of forms of procedure occur: a civil case (Rth_4:2), in which Boaz calls in ten elders to witness the redemption by him of the kinsman's right from the one whose claim was first, and whom he summoned to appear"in the gate," the usual place of judgment; and a criminal one (1Ki_21:8-14), where the eiders and nobles judge, on the testimony of witnesses, in the presence of the people. So in the case of the manslayer (Jos_20:4-6; Deu_19:12; Num_35:24-25). Fees were not allowed judges (1Sa_12:3), but were regarded as bribery. Professed advocates were unknown in early times; but voluntary pleading for the defenseless was esteemed meritorious (Job_16:21; Pro_31:9; Isa_1:17).
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.

Judges. The judges were temporary and special deliverers, sent by God to deliver the Israelites from their oppressors; not supreme magistrates, succeeding to the authority of Moses and Joshua. Their power only extended over portions of the country, and some of them were contemporaneous.
Their first work was that of deliverers and leaders in war; they then administered justice to the people, and their authority supplied the want of a regular government. Even while the administration of Samuel gave something like a settled government to the south, there was scope for the irregular exploits of Samson on the borders of the Philistines; and Samuel, at last, established his authority as judge and prophet, but still as the servant of Jehovah, only to see it so abused by his sons as to exhaust the patience of the people, who at length demanded a king, after the pattern of the surrounding nations.
The following is a list of judges, whose history is given under their respective names: ?
First servitude, to Mesopotamia ? 8 years.
First judge: Othniel. 40 years. ?
Second servitude, to Moab ? 18 years.
Second judge: Ehud; 80 years.
Third judge: Shamgar. ?
Third servitude, to Jabin and Sisera ? 20 years.
Fourth judge: Deborah and Barak. 40 years. ?
Fourth servitude, to Midian ? 7 years.
Fifth judge: Gideon; 40 years.
Sixth judge: Abimelech; 3 years.
Seventh judge: Tola; 23 years.
Eighth judge: Jair. 22 years. ?
Fifth servitude, to Ammon ? 18 years.
Ninth judge: Jephthah; 6 years.
Tenth judge: Ibzan; 7 years.
Eleventh judge: Elon; 10 years.
Twelfth judge: Abdon. 8 years. ?
Sixth servitude, to the Philistines ? 40 years.
Thirteenth judge: Samson 20 years.
Fourteenth judge: Eli; 40 years.
Fifteenth judge: Samuel.
More than likely some of these ruled simultaneously. On the chronology of the judges, see Judges, The Book of..
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863

is applied to certain eminent persons chosen by God himself to govern the Jews from the time of Joshua till the establishment of the kings. For the nature and duration of their office, and the powers with which they were invested, see Jews. The judges were not ordinary magistrates, but were appointed by God on extraordinary occasions; as to head the armies, to deliver the people from their enemies, &c. Salian has observed, that they not only presided in courts of justice, but were also at the head of the councils, the armies, and of every thing that concerned the government of the state; though they never assumed the title either of princes, governors, or the like.
Salian remarks seven points wherein they differed from kings,
1. They were not hereditary.
2. They had no absolute power of life and death, but only according to the laws, and dependently upon them.
3. They never undertook war at their own pleasure, but only when they were commanded by God, or called to it by the people.
4. They exacted no tribute.
5. They did not succeed each other immediately, but after the death of one there was frequently an interval of several years before a successor
was appointed.
6. They did not use the ensigns of sovereignty, the sceptre or diadem.
7. They had no authority to make any laws, but were only to take care of the observance of those of Moses.
Godwin, in his “Moses and Aaron,” compares them to the Roman dictators, who were appointed only on extraordinary emergencies, as in case of war abroad, or conspiracies at home, and whose power, while they continued in office, was great, and even absolute. Thus the Hebrew judges seem to have been appointed only in cases of national trouble and danger. This was the case particularly with respect to Othniel, Ehud, and Gideon. The power of the judges, while in office, was very great; nor does it seem to have been limited to a certain time, like that of the Roman dictators, which continued for half a year; nevertheless, it is reasonable to suppose, that, when they had performed the business for which they were appointed, they retired to a private life. This Godwin infers from Gideon's refusing to take upon him the perpetual government of Israel, as being inconsistent with the theocracy.
Beside these superior judges, every city in the commonwealth had its elders, who formed a court of judicature, with a power of determining lesser matters in their respective districts. The rabbies say, there were three such elders or judges in each lesser city, and twenty-three in the greater. But Josephus, whose authority has greater weight, speaks of seven judges in each, without any such distinction of greater and less. Sigonius supposes that these elders and judges of cities were the original constitution settled in the wilderness by Moses, upon the advice given him by Jethro, Exo_18:21-22, and continued by divine appointment after the settlement in the land of Canaan; whereas others imagine that the Jethronian prefectures were a peculiar constitution, suited to their condition while encamped in the wilderness, but laid aside after they came into Canaan. It is certain, however, that there was a court of judges and officers, appointed in every city, by the law of Moses, Deu_16:18. How far, and in what respects, these judges differed from the elders of the city, it is not easy to ascertain; and whether they were the same or different persons. Perhaps the title elders may denote their seniority and dignity; and that of judges, the office they sustained. The lower courts of justice, in their several cities, were held in their gates, Deu_16:15. Each tribe had its respective prince, whose office related chiefly, if not altogether, to military affairs. We read also of the princes of the congregation, who presided in judiciary matters. These are called elders, and were seventy in number, Num_11:16-17; Num_11:24-25. But it does not appear whether or not this consistory of seventy elders was a perpetual, or only a temporary, institution. Some have supposed that it was the same that afterward became famous under the appellation of sanhedrim; but others conceive the institution of the seventy elders to have been only temporary, for the assistance of Moses in the government, before the settlement in the land of Canaan; and that the sanhedrim was first set up in the time of the Maccabees. See SANHEDRIM.
JUDGES, BOOK OF, a canonical book of the Old Testament, containing the history of the Israelitish judges, of whom we have been speaking in the preceding article. The author is not known. It is probable the work did not come from any single hand, being rather a collection of several little histories, which at first were separate, but were afterward collected by Ezra or Samuel into a single volume; and, in all likelihood, were taken from the ancient journals, annals, or memoirs, composed by the several judges. The antiquity of this book is unquestionable, as it must have been written before the time of David, since the description, Jdg_1:21, was no longer true of Jerusalem after he had taken possession of it, and had introduced a third class of inhabitants of the tribe of Judah. Eichorn acknowledges that it does not bear the marks of subsequent interpolation. Dr. Patrick is of opinion that the five last chapters are a distinct history, in which the author gives an account of several memorable transactions, which occurred in or about the time of the judges; whose history he would not interrupt by intermixing these matters with it, and therefore reserved them to be related by themselves in the second part, or appendix.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.

This name is applied to fifteen persons who at intervals presided over the affairs of the Israelites during the 450 years which elapsed from the death of Joshua to the accession of Saul. The station and office of these 'rulers of the people,' as the original literally signifies, are involved in great obscurity, partly from the want of clear intimations in the history in which their exploits and government are recorded, and partly from the absence of parallels in the history of other nations, by which our notions might be assisted. They may be briefly described as faithful men, who acted for the most part as agents of the Divine will, regents for the Invisible King of the chosen people; and who, holding their commission directly from Him, or with His sanction, would be more inclined to act as dependent vassals of Jehovah than kings, who, as members of royal dynasties, would come to reign with notions of independent rights and royal privileges, which would draw away their attention from their true place in the theocracy. In this greater dependence of the judges upon the Divine King we see the secret of their institution. The Israelites were disposed to rest upon their separate interests as tribes; and having thus allowed the standing general government to remain inoperative through disuse, they would in cases of emergency have been disposed to forget that Jehovah had taken upon Himself the function of their Supreme Ruler, and 'to make themselves a king like the nations,' had their attention not been directed to the appointment of officers whose authority could rest on no tangible right apart from character and services, which, with the temporary nature of their power, rendered their functions more accordant with the principles of the theocracy than those of any other public officers could be. And it is probably in this adaptation to the peculiar circumstances of the Hebrew theocracy that we shall discover the reason of our inability to find any similar office among other nations.
With regard to the nature of the office held by these judges, it is usual to consider them as commencing their career with military exploits to deliver Israel from foreign oppression; but this is by no means invariably the case. Eli and Samuel were not military men; Deborah judged Israel before she planned the war against Jabin; and of Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, it is at least uncertain whether they ever held any military command. The command of the army can therefore be scarcely considered the distinguishing characteristic of these men/ or military exploits the necessary introduction to the office. In many cases it is true that military achievements were the means by which they elevated themselves to the rank of judges; but in general the appointment may be said to have varied with the exigencies of the times, and with the particular circumstances which in times of trouble would draw the public attention to persons who appeared suited by their gifts or influence to advise in matters of general concernment, to decide in questions arising between tribe and tribe, to administer public affairs, and to appear as their recognized head in their intercourse with their neighbors and oppressors.
In nearly all the instances recorded the appointment seems to have been by the free unsolicited choice of the people. The only cases of direct Divine appointment are those of Gideon and Samson, and the last stood in the peculiar position of having been from before his birth ordained 'to begin to deliver Israel.' Deborah was called to deliver Israel, but was already a judge. Samuel was called by the Lord to be a prophet, but not a judge, which ensued from the high gifts which the people recognized as dwelling in him; and as to Eli, the office of judge seems to have devolved naturally, or rather ex-officio, upon him; and his case seems to be the only one in which the high-priest appears in the character which the theocratical institutions designed for him.
The following clear summary of their duties and privileges is given by Jahn:?'The office of judges or regents was held during life, but it was not hereditary, neither could they appoint their successors. Their authority was limited by the law alone; and in doubtful cases they were directed to consult the Divine King through the priest by Urim and Thummim (Num_27:21). They were not obliged in common cases to ask advice of the ordinary rulers; it was sufficient if these did not remonstrate against the measures of the judge. In important emergencies, however, they convoked a general assembly of the rulers, over which they presided and exerted a powerful influence. They could issue orders, but not enact laws; they could neither levy taxes nor appoint officers, except perhaps in the army. Their authority extended only over those tribes by whom they had been elected or acknowledged; for it is clear that several of the judges presided over separate tribes. There was no income attached to their office, nor was there any income appropriated to them, unless it might be a larger share in the spoils, and those presents which were made them as testimonials of respect (Jdg_8:24). They bore no external marks of dignity, and maintained no retinue of courtiers, though some of them were very opulent. They were not only simple in their manners, moderate in their desires, and free from avarice and ambition, but noble and magnanimous men, who felt that whatever they did for their country was above all reward, and could not be recompensed; who desired merely to promote the public good, and who chose rather to deserve well of their country than to be enriched by its wealth. This exalted patriotism, like everything else connected with politics in the theocratical state of the Hebrews, was partly of a religious character, and those regents always conducted themselves as the officers of God; in all their enterprises they relied upon Him, and their only care was, that their countrymen should acknowledge the authority of Jehovah, their invisible king (Jdg_8:22 sq.; comp. Hebrews 11). Still they were not without faults, neither are they so represented by their historians; they relate, on the contrary, with the utmost frankness, the great sins of which some of them were guilty. They were not merely deliverers of the state from a foreign yoke, but destroyers of idolatry, foes of pagan vices, promoters of the knowledge of God, of religion, and of morality; restorers of theocracy in the minds of the Hebrews, and powerful instruments of Divine providence in the promotion of the great design of preserving the Hebrew constitution, and, by that means, of rescuing the true religion from destruction.'
The times of the judges would certainly not be considered so turbulent and barbarous, much less would they be taken, contrary to the clearest evidence and to the analogy of all history, for a heroic age, if they were viewed without the prejudices of a preconceived hypothesis. It must never be forgotten that the book of Judges is by no means a complete history. This no impartial inquirer can ever deny. It is, in a manner, a mere register of diseases, from which, however, we have no right to conclude that there were no healthy men, much less that there were no healthy seasons; since the book itself, for the most part, mentions only a few tribes in which the epidemic prevailed, and notices long periods during which it had universally ceased. Whatever may be the result of more accurate investigation, it remains undeniable that the condition of the Hebrews during this period perfectly corresponds throughout to the sanctions of the law and they were always prosperous when they complied with the conditions on which prosperity was promised them; it remains undeniable that the government of God was clearly manifested, not only to the Hebrews, but to their heathen neighbors; that the fulfilling of the promises and threatenings of the law were so many sensible proofs of the universal dominion of the Divine King of the Hebrews; and, consequently, that all the various fortunes of that nation were so many means of preserving the knowledge of God on the earth. The Hebrews had no sufficient reason to desire a change in their constitution; all required was, that they should observe the conditions on which national prosperity was promised them.
The chronology of the period in which the judges ruled is beset with great and perhaps insuperable difficulties. There are intervals of time the extent of which is not specified; as, for instance, that from Joshua's death to the yoke of Chushan-rishathaim (Jdg_2:8); that of the rule of Shamgar (Jdg_3:31); that between Gideon's death and Abimelech's accession (Jdg_8:31-32); and that of Israel's renewal of idolatry previous to their oppression by the Ammonites (Jdg_10:6-7). Sometimes round numbers seem to have been given, as forty years for the rule of Othniel, forty years for that of Gideon, and forty years also for the duration of the oppression by the Philistines. Twenty years are given for the subjection to Jabin, and twenty years for the government of Samson; yet the latter never completely conquered the Philistines, who, on the contrary, succeeded in capturing him. Some judges, who are commonly considered to have been successive, were in all probability contemporaneous, and ruled over different districts. Under these circumstances, it is impossible to fix the date of each particular event in the book of Judges; but attempts have been made to settle its general chronology, of which we must in this place mention the most successful.
The whole period, of the judges, from Joshua to Eli, is usually estimated at 299 years, in order to meet the 480 years which (1Ki_6:1) are said to have elapsed from the departure of the Israelites from Egypt to the foundation of the temple by Solomon. But St. Paul says (Act_13:20), 'God gave unto the people of Israel judges about the space of 450 years until Samuel the prophet.' Again, if the number of years specified by the author of our book, in stating facts, is summed up, we have 410 years, exclusive of those years not specified for certain intervals of time above mentioned. In order to reduce these 410 years and upwards to 299, events and reigns must, in computing their years of duration, either be entirely passed over, or, in a most arbitrary way, included in other periods preceding or subsequent. This has been done by Archbishop Usher, whose system, here peculiarly faulty, has been adopted in the Authorized Version of the Scriptures. He excludes the repeated intervals during which the Hebrews were in subjection to their enemies, and reckons only the years of peace and rest which were assigned to the successive judges. For example, he passes over the eight years of servitude inflicted upon the Hebrews by Chushan-rishathaim, and, without any interruption, connects the peace obtained by the victories of Othniel with that which had been conferred on the land by the government of Joshua; and although the sacred historian relates in the plainest terms possible that the children of Israel served the king of Mesopotamia eight years, and were afterwards delivered by Othniel, who gave the land rest forty years, the archbishop maintains that the forty years now mentioned began, not after the successes of this judge, but immediately after the demise of Joshua. Nothing certainly can be more obvious than that in this case the years of tranquility and the years of oppression ought to be reckoned separately. Again, we are informed by the sacred writer, that after the death of Ehud the children of Israel were under the oppression of Jabin king of Hazor for twenty years, and that afterwards, when their deliverance was effected by Deborah and Barak, the land had rest forty years. Nothing can be clearer than this; yet Usher's system leads him to include the twenty years of oppression in the forty of peace, making both but forty years. All this arises from the obligation which Usher unfortunately conceived himself under of following the scheme adopted by the Masoretic Jews, who, as Dr. Hales remarks, have by a curious invention included the four first servitudes in the years of the judges who put an end to them, contrary to the express declarations of Scripture, which represents the administrations of the judges, not as synchronizing with the servitudes, but as succeeding them. The Rabbins were indeed forced to allow the fifth servitude to have been distinct from the administration of Jephthah, because it was too long to be included in that administration; but they deducted a year from the Scripture account of the servitude, making it only six instead of seven years. They sank entirely the sixth servitude of forty years under the Philistines, because it was too long to be contained in Samson's administration; and, to crown all, they reduced Saul's reign of forty years to two years only.
The necessity for all these tortuous operations has arisen from a desire to produce a conformity with the date in 1Ki_6:1, which, as already cited, gives a period of only 480 years from the Exode to the foundation of Solomon's temple. As this date is incompatible with the sum of the different numbers given in the book of Judges, and as it differs from the computation of Josephus and of all the ancient writers on the subject, whether Jewish or Christian, it is not unsatisfactory to find grounds which leave this text open to much doubt and suspicion. We cannot here enter into any lengthened proof; but that the text did not exist in the Hebrew and Greek copies of the Scripture till nearly three centuries after Christ, is evident from the absence of all reference to it in the works of the learned men who composed histories of the Jews from the materials supplied to them in the sacred books. This might be shown by reference to various authors, who, if the number specified in it had existed, could not fail to have adduced it.
It only remains to arrange the different systems of the chronology of this period so as to exhibit them in one view to the eye of the reader. It has been deemed right, for the better apprehension of the differences, to make the table embrace the whole period from the exode to the building of Solomon's temple. The headings are taken from Hales, simply because, from being the most copious, they can afford a framework within which all the explanations may be inserted.
The authorities for this table are: Josephus, Antiquities, v. 1-10; Theophilus, Bp. of Antioch (A.D. 330), Epist. ad Autolycum, iii.; Eusebius (A.D. 330), Praeparatio Evangelica, x. 14; Usher (1650), Chronologia Sacra, p. 71; Jackson (1752), Chronological Antiquities, p. 145; Hales (1811), Analysis of Chronology, i. 101; Russell (1827), Connection of Sacred and Profane History, i. 147.
 
Hales
Jackson
Russell
Josephus
Theophilus
Eusebius
Usher
Yrs.
B.C.
Years
B.C.
Yrs.
Yrs.
Yrs.
Years
Years
B.C.
Exodus to death of Moses
40
1648
40
1593
40
40
40
40
40
1491
Joshua (and the) Elders
26
1608
27
1553
25
25
27
27
..
1451
First Division of Lands
..
1602
 
 
 
 
 
 
Second Division of Lands
..
1596
..
..
..
..
6y. 4m.
1444
Anarchy or Interregnum
10
1582
2
 
 
 
 
 
I. Servitude, Mesopotamia
8
1572
8
1526
8
18
8
8
40
1413
1. Othniel
40
1564
40
1518
40
40
40
40
1405
II. Servitude, Moab
18
1524
18
1478
..
..
18
18
80
1343
2. Ehud (and)
80
1506
80
1460
80
80
80
80
1323
3. Shamgar
1
1
omitted
III. Servitude, Canaanite
20
1426
20
1380
20
20
20
20
40
1285
4. Deborah and Barak
40
1406
40
1360
40
40
40
40
1265
IV. Servitude, Midian
7
1368
7
1320
7
7
7
7
40
1252
5. Gideon
40
1359
40
1313
40
40
40
40
1245
6. Abimelech
3
1319
3
1273
3
3
3
3
9y. 2m.
1236
7. Tola
23
1316
22
1270
22
22
22
23
48
1232
8. Jair
22
1293
22
1248
22
22
22
22
1210
V. Servitude, Ammon
18
1271
18
1226
18
18
18
18
6
1206
9. Jephthah
6
1253
6
1208
6
6
6
6
1188
10. Ibzan
7
1247
7
1202
7
7
7
7
25
1182
11. Elon
10
1240
10
1195
10
10
10
10
1175
12. Abdon
8
1230
8
1185
8
8
8
1165
VI. Servitude, Philistine
20
40
1222
40
1177
40
40
40
40
40
 
13. Samson
20
20
20
20
 
Interregnum
..
..
20
..
..
..
40
 
 
14. Eli
30
40
1182
20
1137
20
40
20
40
1157
Samuel called as a prophet
10
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
VII. Servitude or Anarchy
20
1142
20
1117
20?
 
 
 
 
 
15. Samuel
12
1122
20
1097
12
12
..
..
21
1116
Samuel and Saul
18
40
1110
20
..
40
18
 
 
 
 
Saul
22
..
1077
..
2
20
40
40
1095
David
40
1073
40
1057
40
40
40
40
43
1055
Solomon to Foundation of the Temple
3
1030
3
1017
3
3
3
3
1014
Exode to Foundation of Temple
621
1027
579
1014
591?
592
612
600
478?
1012
The different Chronologies from Exodus to the Death of Moses
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores