Judges, The Book of

Judges, The Book of

The seventh book of the Old Testament, second of the Early Prophets of the Hebrew canon.

I. TITLE

The Hebrew name of the book was transliterated by Origen Safateím, and by St. Jerome Sophtim; it was translated by Melito and Origen Kritaí, by the Septuagint ì tôn kritôn bíblos or tôn kritôn, so, too, by the Greek Fathers; the Latins translated liber Judicum or Judicum.

The Hebrew verb meant originally “to act as a Divine judge”, and was applied to God (Genesis 18:25), and to Moses acting as the specially inspired lawgiver and judge of Israel (Exodus 18:13, 16). In time the elders of the people became the “judges” (vv. 25, 26). In this book the term judges (shôphatîm) is applied to the leaders of Israel, and would seem to indicate that their right was Divine (Judges 10:2, 3). The office of judge differed from that of king only in the absence of hereditary succession (xii, 7-15). It is worth noting that the Phoenicians, according to Livy, called their chief magistrate suffetes (XXVIII, xxxvii), and gave to the suffetes of Carthage a power analogous to that of the Roman consul (XXX, vii; XXXIV, lxi).

II. CONTENTS

(1) Introduction (i-xx, 5). A summary of the conquest of Chanaan (i, 1-36). The angel of Jahweh reproves the tribes that made league with the stranger (ii, 1-5). (2) The history of Israel under the judges (ii, 6-xvi), introduced by a summary of its contents — Israel’s forsaking of Jahweh, turning to Baal and Astaroth, defeat by her enemies, and deliverance by Jahweh (ii, 6-iii, 6). Then follow the wonderful deeds of the judges, of whom Gedeon and Samson are the chief heroes; to them are devoted seven chapters. (3) Two more stories of the times of the judges — the migration of Dan and their idolatrous worship of the idol of Michas (xvii-xviii), the crime of the Benjamites and their punishment by Israel (xix-xxi). For fuller analysis see Cornely, “Introd. Spec. in Hist. V. T. Lib.”, I, Paris, 1887, 109-14.

III. CANONICITY

The Book of Judges is admitted by all to belong to the canons of the Jews of Palestine, the Jews of the Dispersion (the Alexandrian canon), and the Christians. Only the authority of the infallible Church can determine the canon of Sacred Scripture, and define the inspired meaning of the Books. Hence Catholics may not go the way of Rationalists and of Protestants in the matter of the so-called late and manifold redaction of Judges.

IV. AUTHENTICITY

The chief arguments for the authenticity of Judges are given below under Historicity and Sources. We now appeal to:

The canonizing of the book by Jews and Christians as an authentic narrative of part of Israel’s history; the life-like style of the work; the minute and accurate details of the narrative; the evident purpose of the narrator to give a history of the things whereof he knows.

V. PURPOSE

Although the purpose of the narrator is evidently to give a history of the events that took place in Israel between the days of Josue and of Samuel, yet that purpose is rather epic and didactic than historical in the modern sense of the word.

(1) The narrator does not purpose history in the modern sense; he does not narrate in historical order all the important events of the period. This fact is clear from the appendixes (xvii-xxi), which give very important events outside their proper historical order.

(2) The historian of Judges has an epic purpose, as early historians (e.g. Herodotus) often had. The epos, or theme, of the historian of Judges is evolved in the summary (ii, 6-iii, 6), wherewith he introduces the history proper; he has it ever in mind to unfold why Jahweh allowed the foe to abide so long in the promised land, and even to defeat the chosen people, and why He raised up the judges. The idolatry of Israel is the reason.

(3) The didactic purpose of the book is to teach Israel that the commandments of Jahweh should be obeyed (iii, 4). When Israel leaves Jahweh, Jahweh leaves Israel, at least for the while; the foes of Israel triumph (cf. Aug., “De Civ. Dei”, xvi, 43).

VI. SOURCES

The problem is complicated. Most contradictory theories have been proposed. According to Moore (see “Internat. Crit. Comm.” on “Judges”, also art. in “Encycl. Bibl.”), the body of the book (ii, 6-xvi, 33) is Deuteronomistic; the general setting of the stories and the purpose of that setting show characteristics of the seventh and sixth centuries, the influence of Deuteronomy and of the great Prophets Jeremias and Ezechiel. The stories of the book, out of their setting and apart from their set purpose in the Book of Judges, are pre-Deuteronomic; they show no Deuteronomic traces except in the introductions and the links that chain the various stories together. Indeed, Moore would have it that this redaction and unification of the sources was the work of a pre­Deuteronomic editor; this editor is not admitted by Kittel. To sum up, then, the opinion of Moore, one of the most eminent Protestant students of Judges, the book itself (i.e. ii, 6-xvi, 31) is made up of two strands (J and E), united not later than 621 B.C. by a pre­Deuteronomic redactor (RJE), and re­edited shortly thereafter, during the Deuteronomic reform of Josias and the influence of Jeremias, by the Deuteronomic editor of the Hexateuch (D). Many critics refuse to assign any strata of Judges to the Hexateuchal fictions — J, E, JH, P or R, and D, even though they postulate many and late sources for the book in its present state. Among Catholic scholars a few, who wrote before the Biblical Commission issued its decrees about the Pentateuch, have accepted the late redaction. Most Catholic scholars, however, are unanimous against these few who have left the traditional positions of Catholic Bible-study. In the matter of historical criticism of Judges, as of the Pentateuch, Catholic scholars do not deny the use of various sources by the inspired writer, but postulate that these documents shall have been written and put together very much earlier than the Rationalists wish. There is no proof whatsoever of the late and manifold redactions of these documents in our present book. Cornely (loc. cit., 214-22) and Hummelauer (In Lib. Jud. et Ruth, 27) both consider that the writer of Judges was probably Samuel; and both admit that the work shows signs of the use of pre-existing documents. Such is the opinion also of Kaulen (“Einleitung in die heilige Schrift”, 3rd ed., Freiburg, 1890, 181).

(1) Judges, in its present state, cannot have been written before Israel had a king. Only in the time of a king could the writer have said: “In those days there was no king in Israel, but every one did that which seemed right to himself” (xvii, 6; cf. xviii, 1; xxi, 24). These words appear only in the appendix (xvii-xxi), which we admit to be later than some of the sources used by the sacred writer; this apendix is generally admitted to be part of the work done by the last editor of Judges. This editor, then, wrote while Israel had a king.

(2) The book was not written after Solomon had done evil. The writer deems the lack of a king to be the explanation of the idolatry of the Danites and the misdeeds of the tribe of Benjamin. Such an explanation would have been out of the question had the writer known either of the idolatry brought in by Jeroboam and encouraged by Solomon or of the separation of Juda from Israel.

(3) This last editor must have written before David had reigned seven years. For Jerusalem was still called Jebus and was occupied by the Jebusites (xix, 11); whereas, in the seventh year of his reign, David took the citadel of Sion, called it the city of David, and destroyed the Jebusites (2 Samuel 5).

(4) Finally, it is likely that Judges antedates even the first seven years of David’s reign and the last years of Saul’s. The book purposes to keep the children of Israel from idolatry and from the Divine punishments thereof. In the beginning of David’s and the end of Saul’s reign there was no need of such purpose: Saul had “rooted out the magicians and soothsayers from the land” (1 Samuel 28:9). Moreover, in that period the writer would have seen that even a “king in Israel” did not prevent the tribal and internal dissensions of the days of the judges.

(5) Since, then, Judges was most likely written in the first years of Saul’s reign, there is no more probable writer thereof than Samuel. He had yielded to Israel’s clamours, and set up Saul as king. A new war was impending. There was none in Israel more likely to make the people ready for that war by driving home to them the thesis of Judges — that fidelity to Jahweh meant success against the foe of Israel.

(6) The use of previous documents by Samuel sufficiently explains the varied literary style on account of which the Rationalists frame their various hypotheses. The song of Debbora (v) is archaic by contrast with the language of its setting. The story of Gedeon is originally from a different hand than that of the first writer of Samson’s history. spirit of God clothed [xxxxxx] Gedeon” (vi, 34), may be admitted not to have been identical with him who conceived that “the spirit of the Lord rushed [xxxxxx] upon Samson” (xiv, 6, 19; xv, 14). –>

Catholic commentators of old assigned the Book of Judges to many hands. So Maldonatus (Comm. in Matt., ii, 23), Pineda (In Job, præf., iii), Clair (p. 10), and many others. Hummebauer (In Jud., 27) argues that the longer narratives — those of Aod (iii, 15-30), Barac (iv and v), Gedeon (avi-viii), Abimelech (ix), Jephte (xi, 1-xii, 7), and Samson (xiii-xvi) — are distinct accounts, written by separate authors, who were contemporary or almost contemporary with the events they narrated. These varied narratives Samuel incorporated much as he found them; he drew from tradition for the minor details which he gives about the lesser judges. While setting these stories together, Samuel was inspired in regard to the complete thoughts he culled from others, as well as the introductions, links, and remarks he superadded.

VII. HISTORICITY

(1) Internal Evidence

The writer of Judges was contemporary with some of the events which he narrated; used documents written by those who were contemporary, or all but contemporary, with the deeds they told; and shows every sign of sincerity, care, and truth. The very concern of the writer to give the truth explains the manifold literary style of the book. He has preserved to us unchanged the style of the song of Debbora and that of the fable of Joatham. He has transmitted sayings peculiar to place and to person (ii, 5; iv, 5; vi, 24, 32; xv, 19; xviii, 12, 29). The nationalistic objections to the miraculous in the stories of Gedeon and Samson are generally accepted by Protestant writers, who look upon these portions of Judges as legendary; to Catholics these are as historical as any other portion of the work. The enemies to the historicity of the book in vain insist that these stories are set down as legends to please the Israelites. The writer of Judges so berates the Israelites for idolatry and inter-tribal dissension that it is unscientific to accuse him of truckling to their pride in their heroes.

(2) External Evidence

(a) Catholic tradition is clear. The Fathers look upon the narrative of Judges as fact-narrative; their unanimity is admitted by all who deem that unanimity worth consideration.

(b) O.-T. testimony is manifold. The opening summary (i, 1-ii, 5) gives details the historical value of which is attested by Josue: Juda’s siege of Dabir (1:10-15; Joshua 15:14-19), the Jebusites in Jerusalem (1:21; Joshua 15:63), the Chanaanite in Gazer along with Ephraim (1:29; Joshua 16:10), the Chanaanite dwelling with Manasses (1:27; Joshua 17:11). Like details are the death of Josue (2:6-9; Joshua 24:28-31), the capture of Lesem by Dan (17:18; Joshua 19:47). The Books of Kings tell us as facts much that we read in Judges. Israel’s forgetfulness of Jahweh, her defeat by the foe and salvation by the judges (1 Samuel 12:9-11); the death of Abimelech, son of Gedeon (9:53; 2 Samuel 11:21). The Psalms dwell proudly on the deeds of the judges: the fate of Sisara, Jabin, Oreb, Zeb, Zebee, and Salmana (vii, 22, 25; iv, 15; viii, 21; Ps. lxxxii, 10-12); the entire history of Judges in outline (Ps. cv, 34-46). The Prophets refer to real facts given in Judges: the defeat of Madian by Gedeon (Isaiah 9:4; 10:26); the crime at Gabaa (Hosea 9:9; 10:9).

(c) In the N. T., St. Paul mentions the judges in their proper place between Josue and Samuel (Acts 13:20); praises some of the judges along with certain kings (Hebrews 11:32).

VIII. TEXT

(1) Hebrew. Kittel’s edition shows that the Masoretic text is in very good condition. “It is better preserved than any other of the historical books” (Moore, “Judges”, 43). The only serious difficulties are in the song of Debbora.

(2) Greek. We have two distinct Septuagint forms (cf. Lagarde, “Septuaginta-Studien”, 1892, 1-72): one is seen in the Alexandrinus (A), Coislinianus (P), Basiliano­Vaticanus (V), and many cursives; the other version is represented by the Vatican (B), and a considerable number of cursives.

(3) Latin. St. Jerome’s version is one of his most careful efforts at translation of the Masorah, and is of the greatest exegetical importance.

———————————–

Fathers: THEODORET, Quæstiones in Librum Judicorum in P.G., LXXX, 485; PROCOPIUS OF GAZA, Comm. in Judices in P.G., LXXXVII, 1041; ST. AUGUSTINE, Quæstiones in Heptateuchium in P.L., XXXIV, ;701. Modern commentators mentioned in the body of the article. See also BONFRÈRE, <iComm. in Jos., Jud., et Ruth (Paris, 1631); SERARIUS, Jud. et Ruth explanati (Mainz, 1609); CLAIR, Les Juges et Ruth (Paris, 1878). Protestant commentators of worth are MOORE, KEIL, BUDDE, BERTHEAU.

WALTER DRUM
Transcribed by WGKofron
With thanks to St. Mary’s Church, Akron, Ohio

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIII
Copyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton Company
Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight
Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor
Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia

Judges, The Book of

The time comprised extends from Joshua to Eli. Divisions:

(1) Introduction (Judges 1 – 3:6). Judges 1, Israel’s relations to Canaan, geographical and political, what the several tribes and houses achieved, or otherwise, in conquering the land; Judges 2 – 3:6, Israel’s relations religiously to the Lord, this second portion tells us the reason of Israel’s failure to drive out the Canaanite remnant and of their falling under oppressors, namely, apostasy; Jehovah leaving those nations in order to prove Israel whether they would obey Him. Hengstenberg suggests that Judges 1 presents the events before Joshua’s death, Judges 2 the death itself and the events following it. The general lessons of the book are summed up in Jdg 2:11 ff, namely, Israel’s high calling and yet apostasy, Jehovah’s chastening, and then raising up of judges because of His own pity for their groanings; then Israel’s relapse into idolatry upon each judge’s death.

(2) Jdg 3:7-16. The opening formula (Jdg 3:7) is resumed from Jdg 2:11, “the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord,” etc. Political events are subordinated to spiritual. Of the 13 judges, the account of six (Ehud, Deborah and Barak, Gideon, Abimelech, Jephthah, Samson) is full, that of the remaining seven very brief. In Gideon’s case alone his sons’ history is detailed, because it illustrates the great lesson of the book. His sin in making the ephod issued in his family’s slaughter by Abimelech with the men of Shechem’s aid, these in turn mutually punishing one another. Abimelech’s was the first effort to substitute an earthly king for the Lord of the theocracy, Samson’s history illustrates Israel’s, whom he represents, strength and weakness, strength in separation to Jehovah, utter weakness when the consecration became severed, as Samson’s locks, by lust. Othniel is the only representative of Judah; the greater number of judges belonged to northern and eastern Israel.

(3) Judges 17-21. The appendix. It records:

(1) Micah’s idolatry in Mount Ephraim, and the Danite adoption of it in Laish, the conquest of which is narrated. A time “when there was no king in Israel” (Jdg 19:1), before Samson’s days (compare Jdg 13:25 margin with Jdg 18:12); also before Jabin, 150 years after Joshua, had established a strong Canaanite kingdom in the N., when Dan could not have taken Laish; perhaps shortly after Joshua’s death (Jdg 18:30). A comparison of Jdg 18:1 with Jdg 1:34; Jos 19:47, implies that this history occurred at the earliest part of the judges’ period. The Danites set up Micah’s graven image, and Jonathan’s sons were its “priests until the day of the captivity of the land,” i.e. the removal of the ark by the Philistines (compare Psa 78:59-64; Jer 7:12-14; 1Ch 16:34-35). Jehovah’s giving up His glory (the ark) into captivity was a virtual giving over of Israel to captivity, i.e. to their enemy’s power; for the sanctuary was the land’s “kernel and essence” (Hengstenberg), and the completeness of Israel’s prostration under the Philistines appears in 1Sa 13:19-23. No mention of the judges occurs in this appendix. The appendix records

(2) Gibeah’s awful wickedness and Benjamin’s countenancing it, and Israel’s unitedly punishing almost to extermination the sinning tribe. The unanimity of the tribes implies an early date; also the mention of Aaron’s grandson Phinehas (compare Jdg 20:28 with Jos 22:13; Jos 24:33). These two histories appended depict the spirit of the age morally and religiously.

HISTORIC TRUTH. The comparison with the heroic age of Greece is unwarrantable. Though the judges were heroes, it was an age preceded by the Mosaic legislation and the due settlement of the people by Joshua in their inheritance; not an age of lawless semi barbarism. Jahn (Hebrew Commonwealth) truly says the Book of Judges is a record of the exceptional diseases of the body politic, while the years of health are passed over in silence. The ability to write a description of the Succoth elders, 77 men, on the part of a young man taken at random implies it was no age of ignorance; contrast the Homeric age, in which only dubious traces of the existence of writing occur (Jdg 8:14, margin). Israel’s servitudes occupy 111 years, the time of peaceful independence 319 years (i.e. taking the whole period as 430). Hence, the oft recurring phrase, “the land had rest … years” (Jdg 3:11; Jdg 3:30; Jdg 5:31; Jdg 8:28). Hence too in the millennial future restoration of Israel Isaiah (Isa 1:26) announces from God, “I will restore thy judges as at the first,” as in Israel’s most peaceable days: Joshua, the judges, and Samuel (compare Isa 32:1; Mat 19:28).

The chequered history of Israel at this period is too modest to be the work of a forger to glorify Israel. The mention of the Canaanite chariots accords with the Egyptian accounts which make the Cheta chariots their main strength. A hieroglyphic inscription of Rameses II mentions Astert as the Cheta or Hittite divinity, so Jdg 2:11-13. The Shasous in Egyptian monuments resemble in habits the Midianites and Amalekites (Judges 6-8). Philistine power increases in Judges and 1 Samuel parallel with Egypt’s decline in the monuments. The usages, mutilation (Jdg 1:6-7), blood feuds (Jdg 8:19), the intermixture of ruling people and subject tribes (Jdg 1:19-36), the hiding of the oppressed in caves (Jdg 6:2), earrings worn by men (Jdg 8:24-26), women peeping through the lattice (Jdg 5:28), fables (Jdg 9:7), riddles (Jdg 14:12) to be solved at a forfeit, all accord with oriental usage, and occur so naturally and incidentally as to exclude suspicion of design.

DESIGN. The aim is not to give a continuous history of the period between Joshua and Samuel, but to illustrate in striking particular deliverances the divine principle of dealing with Israel laid down in Jdg 2:16-19. The judges imperfectly realize the ideal. Each only delivered one part of Israel: Shamgar the region toward Philistia; Deborah and Barak northern Israel (Jdg 4:10); so Gideon (Jdg 6:35), Jephthah, eastern Israel; Samson, Judah, Dan and the region adjoining Philistia. Gideon corrupted the worship of God, Samson yielded to lust, Jephthah made a rash vow and took revenge upon Ephraim. The possession of inspired gifts did not always ensure the right use of them, just as the miraculous gifts at Corinth were abused (1 Corinthians 14). This is analogous to God’s mode of dealing as to natural gifts; we are not judges of what God does, but learners from what He has done when He was pleased to create free agents. The time was one of transition before the kingly era.

As yet Israel developed itself freely under the Mosaic law and theocracy, which are taken for granted; each did what was “right in his own eyes” (Jdg 17:6), thus giving scope, as a common central government could less do, to the operation of that particular providence which gave prosperity or adversity according to the obedience or disobedience, not only of the nation but of each tribe and family (Jdg 1:1-19; Jdg 1:21-33). The judges were God’s vice-gerents in carrying out part of that particular providence which distinguished Israel’s God from the idols of the pagan around. Historical facts not subserving the Spirit’s design are passed by, as Ephraim’s victory over Oreb and Zeeb (Jdg 8:3; Isa 10:26). Eli and Samuel are not included, because Eli was high priest, and as such was officially judge, not, as the rest, especially called to be judges. Samuel was the Lord’s prophet, delivering Israel, not by the sword, but by the word and by prayer (1Sa 7:3-10). Samson was the last extraordinary judge.

Samson was born during Eli’s high priesthood, for before his birth the Philistines ruled Israel (Jdg 13:5); “he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.” Samuel completed Israel’s deliverance from them which Samson began. Throughout the inspired writer views Israel’s history in the light of God’s law. Israel’s unfaithfulness punished by the foe’s oppression, and Jehovah’s faithfulness in raising up judges to deliver them at their cry, are the two hinges upon which the history turns (Keil). Only the tribes oppressed at a particular time are noticed; the rest walking according to the law, and therefore at peace, do not come under consideration. Intermarriages with pagan neighbours, Gentile associations, the beauty of the Canaanite women, the pomp, gaiety, and voluptuousness of their rites, the hope of learning the future by idolatrous divination, superstitious fears of the alleged gods of the locality where they settled, inclined Israel to add to Jehovah’s worship the pagan idolatries (for they had too strong proofs of the divine law to renounce it wholly).

Extraordinary judges, following severe chastisement from those very nations whose sin they copied, were just the discipline they needed and God raised. Thrice Jehovah threatened Israel with oppression for apostasy: at Bochim (Jdg 2:1-4), at the Midianite invasion (Jdg 6:7-10), at the Ammonite and Philistine oppression (Jdg 10:10-14). He fulfilled His threats in the ever deepening oppression of the foe, the Philistine crowning all, and in the internal disunion of the nation’s tribes.

Under Othniel and Ehud all Israel rose against the foe; under Barak Reuben, Gilead, Dan, and Asher took no part (Jdg 5:15-17). Gideon scarcely appeased Ephraim’s jealousy. Abimelech’s usurpation of the kingship of Shechem illustrates further the national decay. Ephraim fought with Jephthah and the eastern tribes to its own sore loss. The men of Judah were so degenerate as to seek to give up Samson, their deliverer, to the Philistines (Jdg 15:9-14). The Angel of Jehovah, the Son of God, at the call of Moses appeared to him, then the Spirit of Jehovah qualified him (Exo 3:1-6; Exo 13:21). So the divine Angel four times appears, the Spirit following to qualify the judge for delivering Israel:

(1) Jdg 2:1-5; Jdg 3:10;

(2) Jdg 6:11; Jdg 6:34;

(3) Jdg 10:10-16, compare Isa 63:8-9; Jdg 11:29;

(4) Jdg 13:3-25. The servitudes increase in length successively for the most part: Chushan Rishathaim 8 years, Eglon 18, Jabin 20; also in the humiliation

(1) a distant king,

(2) a neighbouring king,

(3) a king in Canaan itself.

The three first servitudes brought Israel under the nations destined to scourge it in after history: Moab, Philistia, Mesopotamia or Babylon. Jabin disarmed (as in 1Sa 13:22 the Philistines are stated to have done) and brought them into union with Canaan by constraining them to worship his idols (Jdg 4:3; Jdg 5:8). Or rather, “Israel chose new gods”; therefore in penal retribution from God “war was in their gates,” and among the 40,000 (see Jos 4:13) Israelites fit for war no shield nor spear was to be seen wielded against the enemy. The fourth (Midian), fifth (Ammon), and sixth (Philistines) servitudes rise in progressive severity for 7, 18, and 40 years respectively. Jair’s time is one of those peaceful intervals of which it is said, a people is happiest when it has least to record; the allusion in Jdg 10:4 is to the happy days of the conquest under Moses (Num 32:41). But the great decline of Israel necessitated the kingdom, which followed, as better for a carnal people than the theocracy of which they showed themselves unworthy.

CHRONOLOGY and UNITY. (On the length of the period of the judges (See CHRONOLOGY, probably 430 or else 450 years). The period between the division of the land and Jephthah was 300 years (Jdg 11:26), which alone disproves the view of the Speaker’s Commentary as to the period of the judges being only 160 or 140 years. The book, as we have seen, carries out the design with which it set out. At the close, as repeated declensions leave the guilty, in spite of revivals, lower than at the first, Samson is left by the degraded people, single-handed, to resist the foe, and in his death accomplishes under God what previous judges failed to effect by their lives. The appended histories are placed at the end not to interrupt the historical sequence of judges according to the plan stated at the first, also chiefly because these histories are not isolated facts but permanent influences for evil (Jdg 18:30-31); Gibeah’s evil was not eradicated by Benjamin’s terrible punishment, but must have affected the tribes generally, as their sore chastisement at first proves; and Hosea testifies the evil continued ever afterward (Jdg 9:9; Jdg 10:9).

DATE, AUTHOR. It must be not earlier than the end of that servitude to the Philistines which Samson “began” (Jdg 13:5) to deliver Israel out of, and from which Samuel completed their deliverance (1Sa 7:9-14). And it must have been before David’s capture of Zion from the Jebusites, for they had dwelt with the Benjamites in Jerusalem to the time of writing Judges (Jdg 1:21; compare 2Sa 5:6). Tyre is not mentioned, but Zidon oppressed Israel (Jdg 10:12), and was the protector to whom the neighbouring Canaanites looked up (Jdg 18:7). Tyre on the contrary took the lead in David’s time; moreover Tyre and Sidon were his allies, not enemies. But royalty was already set up, and the blessing of organized government was realized, as appears from Jdg 18:1; “in those days when there was no king in Israel; but every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (compare Deu 12:8): Jdg 17:6; Jdg 18:1; Jdg 19:1.

This points to Saul’s reign, or the very beginning of David’s reign. Either Samuel or one of his school of prophets probably wrote it. The words (Jdg 18:30-31), “until the day of the captivity of the land … they set up Micah’s image … all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh” (awful perversity! in the face of divine light close to them) imply that the book was written after the Philistine capture of the ark, and after its return and setting up at, Nob in Saul’s reign (1 Samuel 21); it remained at Shiloh only until its capture at Eli’s death (1Sa 1:3; 1Sa 3:21; 1Sa 4:3), in David’s reign the tabernacle was at Gibeon (1Ch 16:39; 1Ch 21:29). The connection of Judges with Joshua, of which it is the sequel, appears in the reference to Joshua’s death, Jdg 2:6-9 (compare the same words from which Judges draws them, Jos 24:28-31), which verses resume the narrative suspended from Jdg 1:1, “now after the death of Joshua,” by Judges 1 – 2:5.

Also compare passages common to both: Jdg 1:10-15; Jdg 1:20-21; Jdg 1:27; Jdg 1:29, with Jos 15:14-19; Jos 15:13; Jos 15:63; Jos 17:12; Jos 16:10; Judges 18, with Jos 19:47. Again the Spirit links Judges with the books of Samuel and Kings which follow; thus Jdg 1:28; Jdg 1:30; Jdg 1:33; Jdg 1:35 accords with the tributary condition subsequently of the Canaanite remnant under Solomon (1Ki 9:18-22). So Jdg 1:16 accounts for Saul’s and David’s subsequent kindness to the Kenites (1Sa 15:6; 1Sa 30:29). Judges 9 records Abimelech’s mode of death, alluded to 2Sa 11:21.

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

Judges, The Book of

Judges, The Book of. The Book of Judges of which the book of Ruth formed originally a part, contains a history from Joshua to Samson. The book may be divided into two parts: —

I. Chapters 1-16. We may observe in general on this portion of the book that it is almost entirely a history of the wars of deliverance.

II. Chapters 17-21. This part has no formal connection with the preceding, and is often called an appendix.

The period to which the narrative relates is simply marked by the expression, “when there was no king in Israel.” Jdg 19:1; Jdg 18:1. It records —

(a) The conquest of Laish by a portion of the tribe of Dan, and the establishment there of the idolatrous worship of Jehovah already instituted by Micah in Mount Ephraim.

(b) The almost total extinction of the tribe of Benjamin. Chapters 17-21 are inserted both as an illustration of the sin of Israel during the time of the judges and as presenting a contrast with the better order prevailing in the time of the kings. The time commonly assigned to the period contained in this book is 299 years. The dates given in the last article amount to 410 years, without the 40 years of Eli; but in 1Ki 6:1 the whole period from the Exodus to the building of the Temple is stated as 480 years. But probably some of the judges were contemporary, so that their total period is 299 years instead of 410. Mr. Smith in his Old Testament history gives the following approximate dates:

Periods…Years — Ending about B.C.:

1. From the Exodus to the passage of Jordan…40 — 1451.

2. To the death of Joshua and the surviving elders…[40] — 1411.

3. Judgeship of Othniel…40 — 1371.

4, 5. Judgeship of Ehud (Shamgar included)…80 — 1291.

6. Judgeship of Deborah and Barak…40 — 1251.

7. Judgeship of Gideon…40 — 1211.

8, 9. Abimelech to Abdon, total…[80] — 1131.

10. Oppression of the Philistines, contemporary with the judgeships of Eli, Samson (and Samuel?)…40 — 1091.

11. Reign of Saul (including perhaps Samuel)…40 — 1051.

12. Reign of David…40 — 1011. Total…480.

On the whole, it seems safer to give up the attempt to ascertain the chronology exactly.

Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary