성경 주석서

이 장은 여호수아가 죽은 뒤 이스라엘의 여러 지파가 가나안 정복을 얼마나 진척시켰는지를 구체적으로 서술한다. 여호수아는 이 큰 과업의 가장 어려운 고비를 넘기고, 백성이 스스로 의무를 저버리지만 않았다면 적절한 때에 쉽게 완수할 수 있는 상태까지 이끌어 놓았다. 이제 그들이 이를 위해 무엇을 행했으며 어디에서 미치지 못했는지가 제시된다. I. 연합한 유다 지파와 시므온 지파는 용감하게 행동했다. 1. 하나님은 유다에게 먼저 나아가라고 명하셨다(삿 1:1,2). 2. 유다는 시므온과 연합하여 행동했다(삿 1:3). 3. 그들은 베섹(삿 1:4-7), 예루살렘(삿 1:8), 헤브론과 드빌(삿 1:9-15), 호르마와 가사 및 그 밖의 지역(삿 1:17-19)을 치는 일에서 성공했다. 4. 그러나 철 병거가 있는 곳에서는 마음이 약해졌다(삿 1:19). 겐 족속이 그들 가운데 정착한 일도 언급된다(삿 1:16). II. 이에 비해 다른 지파들은 비겁하게 행동했다. 1. 베냐민은 실패했다(삿 1:21). 2. 요셉의 집은 벧엘을 치는 일에서는 잘했으나(삿 1:22-26), 다른 곳에서는 유리한 형편을 충분히 활용하지 않았다. 므낫세도 그러했고(삿 1:27,28), 에브라임도 그러했다(삿 1:29). 3. 스불론은 가나안 족속을 살려 두었다(삿 1:30). 4. 아셀은 어느 지파보다도 심하게 가나안 족속에게 굴복했다(삿 1:31,32). 5. 납달리는 여러 성읍을 온전히 차지하지 못했다(삿 1:33). 6. 단은 아모리 족속에게 압박을 받았다(삿 1:34). 잇사갈과 요단 건너편의 두 지파 반에 대해서는 아무 기록도 없다.

사사기 서론

사사기는 구약의 다른 역사서들과 마찬가지로, 주로 다루는 주제에서 그 이름을 얻었다. 곧 여호수아가 죽은 때부터 사무엘이 등장하기까지의 시기에 이스라엘을 다스린 사사들의 업적이 그것이다. 룻 1:1에서 말하는 이 제한된 의미의 사사들의 통치는 하나의 뚜렷한 경륜이었다. 그것은 모세와 여호수아의 지도 체제와도 구별되고, 대제사장 엘리의 보다 정규적인 우위와도 구별되며, 사무엘에 의해 시작된 예언자적 경륜과도 구별된다(삼상 3:19-21; 행 3:24).

이 책은 세 부분으로 이루어진다. (1) 서문, 삿 3:6까지 포함한다. (2) 본 서사, 삿 3:7-16:31. (3) 부록, 두 개의 분리된 서사를 담고 있다. (가) 삿 17:1-13. (나) 삿 18-21장. 여기에 룻기도 더할 수 있다. 룻기는 또 하나의 분리된 서사를 담고 있으며, 고대에는 사사기라는 제목 아래 포함되었다. 첫 절은 룻기가 본래 이 책에 속한다는 것을 보여 준다.

(1) 서문의 일반적 목적은 뒤따르는 서사를 위한 토대를 마련하는 데 있다. 곧 가나안의 이교 민족들이 어떻게 여전히 그토록 강력했는지, 또 이스라엘 사람들이 왜 원수들에 대항할 하나님의 도움과 보호를 그토록 결핍하게 되었는지를 설명하는 것이다. 또한 이스라엘 사람들이 하나님을 버리고 우상들을 섬겼는지, 아니면 회개와 믿음과 기도로 그분께 돌아왔는지에 따라 반복적으로 종살이와 구원을 겪게 된 데서 드러나는 하나님의 의로운 심판의 두드러진 교훈을 이끌어 내는 것이다. 전체적으로 모세의 책들에 있는 위협과 약속이 언급된다(삿 2:15, 20 등). 이는 이스라엘의 하나님 여호와의 능력과 신실하심을 변호하고, 이 책이 교훈을 주기 위해 기록된 후대 세대들에게 경고를 제시하기 위한 것이다. 저자가 교회에 제시하도록 영감을 받은 관점에서 보면, 피상적인 관찰자에게는 하나님의 역사하심이 완전히 멈춘 것처럼 보일 때야말로, 하나님께서 자기 백성의 일들과 관련하여 가장 분주히 역사하신 때였다. 다른 한편 저자는 이스라엘을 위해 그토록 놀라운 구원을 이룬 영웅들이 자기 힘으로 그 일을 한 것이 아니라, 하나님께 사명을 받고, 용기와 힘과 승리를 하나님께 부여받았다는 사실에 주의를 기울이게 한다. 서문의 저자는 또한 이 역사를 읽는 이들의 생각을, 구약 경륜의 주요 목적 가운데 하나가 그리스도께서 오실 때까지 세상 가운데 살아 있게 하려 했던 핵심 교리, 곧 하나님의 유일성으로 이끈다. 그가 이제 서술하려는 모든 재앙은 우상숭배의 열매이자 결과였다. “너희 자신을 우상에게서 지키라”는 것이 사사기의 역사가 가르치려 한 주된 교훈이었다.

서문은 서로 매우 다른 두 부분으로 이루어진다. 여호수아가 죽기 전과 그 죽음에 이르기까지의 사건들을 다시 요약하는 부분(삿 1-2:9)과, 이제 서술될 역사에 대한 성찰 부분(삿 2:10-3:6)이다.

(2) 본 서사는 통일된 백성 이스라엘의 연속적인 연대기가 아니라, 때로는 이 지파들의 한 부분을, 때로는 다른 부분을 보여 주는 일련의 선명하고 인상적인 장면들이다. 어떤 시대에 대해서는 세밀한 사항들이 주어지지만, 다른 여덟 해나 열 해의 기간, 아니 스무 해, 마흔 해, 여든 해의 기간도 네다섯 단어로 처리된다. 생생한 묘사와 정확한 세부 사항을 발견하는 역사들에서는, 서술된 사건들과 동시대의 이야기들, 아마도 그 사건들을 직접 본 목격자들과 참여자들의 이야기들이 우리에게 보존되어 있음이 분명하다. 에훗, 바락과 드보라, 기드온, 입다, 삼손의 역사는 각각 모압, 야빈, 미디안, 암몬, 블레셋의 침입이 그 역사를 기록한 이들의 기억 속에 살아 있는 현실이던 시대의 산물이다. 이 책의 편찬자는 자기 시대에 남아 있던 고대 이야기들을 거의 그대로 자기 역사 속에 삽입한 것으로 보인다. 독자의 생각이 열두 사사의 여러 업적에서 사무엘로, 사무엘에서 다윗으로, 다윗에서 다윗의 아들로 차례차례 인도될 때, 사람의 구속을 위한 하나의 신적 계획이 작용하고 있음을 알아보지 않을 수 없다. 또한 사사들과 예언자들과 왕들이 성령의 은사 중 얼마를 부여받은 것은, 하나님의 충만이 몸으로 거하실 분, 그리고 그를 통하여 하나님께 나아오는 모든 이를 온전히 구원하실 분이 세상에 오시는 일을 준비하기 위한 것이었음을 이해하게 된다.

이스라엘 사람들의 이 영웅 시대와 그리스 및 다른 이방 나라들의 영웅 시대 사이에는 몇 가지 흥미로운 유사점이 지적되어 왔다. 여기서도 저기서도, 영웅들의 덕성과 용맹은 새 땅에 처음 정착하고 그것을 차지하는 과정에서, 또 옛 민족들과 충돌하는 가운데 발달한다. 여기서도 저기서도, 덕과 악덕이 기묘하게 뒤섞이고, 위대하고 고상한 자질과 가장 찬란한 행위가 잔혹함과 무지, 방종과 야만성과 혼합되는 경우가 많다. 그러나 거룩한 영웅들과 이교 영웅들을 비교하면, 전자에게서는 하나님을 향한 믿음과 종교적 목적을 발견하는데, 이교 세계에서는 그 흔적을 찾을 수 없다. 거룩한 영웅들의 업적은 인류의 가장 높은 유익을 진전시켰고, 가증하고 불결한 미신의 전복과, 그리스도께서 오실 때까지 세상 가운데 참된 종교의 빛을 보존하는 일에 사용되었다.

(3) 부록은 “사사들이 다스리던 때”에 일어난 몇몇 사건을 기록하지만, 사사들의 어떤 업적과도 연결되어 있지 않다. 책 끝에 놓여 있기는 하지만, 두 이야기는 모두 연대상 분명히 책의 시작 부분에 속한다. 그 위치가 선택된 이유는 아마 삿 17:1 주석에서 제시된 이유일 것이다.

정확한 연대기는 이 책의 계획에 속하지 않는다. 연대기의 유일한 길잡이는 그 기간을 가로지르는 족보들에서 찾을 수 있다. 그리고 이 족보들의 증거는 가나안 입성부터 다윗 통치의 시작까지 평균 일곱에서 여덟 세대 사이를 배정한다는 점에서 일치한다. 이는 240년에서 260년 정도가 된다. 여호수아에게 30년, 사무엘에게 30년, 사울의 통치에 40년(행 13:21), 모두 100년을 빼면, 사사기에 기록된 사건들에는 140년에서 160년이 남는다. 물론 짧은 기간이지만, 거기에 기록된 많은 “안식”과 “종살이”(삿 3:8 주석)가 서로 연속적이지 않고 동시에 일어났다는 점을 기억하면 충분한 기간이다. 또한 역사적 개연성과 조화를 이루지 않을 때 반복적으로 나타나는 80년, 40년, 20년이라는 수치에 큰 의존을 둘 수 없다는 점도 고려해야 한다.

동시대적으로 겹쳐 있었을 가능성이 가장 강하게 보이는 이야기들은 다음과 같다. 18년 동안 지속되었고 블레셋의 침입과 밀접하게 연결된 모압, 암몬, 아말렉의 종살이(삿 3:12-30; 삿 3:31), 역시 18년 동안 지속되었고 블레셋의 침입과 밀접하게 연결된 암몬의 종살이(삿 10:7-8), 그리고 7년 동안 지속된 미디안과 아말렉의 종살이(삿 6:1)이다. 이 세 사건은 각각 베냐민 사람들, 므낫세 사람들과 북쪽 지파들, 그리고 요단 건너편 지파들을 이끈 에훗, 입다, 기드온이라는 세 지도자에 의해 원수들이 완전히 쫓겨나고 파멸되는 것으로 끝났다. 삿 8:1과 삿 12:1에 기록된 에브라임 사람들의 행동도 기드온과 입다의 두 이야기 사이에 매우 강한 유사성을 더해 주는 특징이다. 삿 13:1에 언급된 블레셋의 40년 종살이는 엘리 사사직의 마지막 20년과 사무엘의 처음 20년을 포함하고, 사무엘이 에벤에셀에서 거둔 승리로 끝난 것으로 보인다. 그렇다면 삼손의 20년 사사직도 사무엘의 사역과 부분적으로 겹쳤다. 옷니엘, 바락, 에훗의 승리 뒤에 이어졌다고 말해지는 40년과 80년의 긴 안식도 전체적으로나 부분적으로 겹쳤을 가능성이 매우 크다. 그러나 이 책의 연대기가 여전히 불확실한 문제라는 점은 부인할 수 없다.

이 책의 편찬 시기와, 그 구성 부분들이 현재의 형태와 성경 역사서 연속체 안에서 현재의 연결 관계로 최종 배열된 시기는, 가장 개연성 있게는 같은 계획 안에 포함된 유대 왕정 후기로 돌릴 수 있다. 덧붙여 말하면, 에스라서는 열왕기의 계속이 아니라 역대기의 계속이다. 사사기에는 바빌론 포로에 대한 아주 작은 암시도 없다. 가나안 민족들과 그 문맥에 관해서는 삿 3:5-6만 에스라 9:1-2와 비교될 수 있다. 사사기의 언어도 같은 결론을 가리킨다. 그것은 순수하고 좋은 히브리어이며, 후대의 책들처럼 아람어적 표현이나 페르시아어 형태로 오염되어 있지 않다.

이런 유사점들과 그 밖의 비슷한 증거들이 이끄는 추론은, 사사기의 편찬이 사무엘서와 열왕기의 편찬과 거의 같은 시대에 속하며, 실제로 같은 손의 작업일 가능성도 있다는 것이다. 그러나 절대적 확실성에 이를 수는 없다.

신약에서 이 책을 주로 암시하는 곳은 히 11:32 이하와 행 13:20이다. 그러나 시편과 예언서에는 이 책에 담긴 역사들에 대한 언급이 자주 나타난다. 시 78:56 이하; 시 83:9-11; 시 106:34-45 이하; 사 9:4; 사 10:26; 느 9:27 이하를 보라. 또한 삼상 12:9-11; 삼하 11:21도 보라. 이 책이 참조하는 다른 책들은 창세기, 출애굽기, 레위기, 민수기, 신명기, 여호수아이다. 삿 1장; 삿 2:1-3, 6-10, 15, 20-23; 삿 4:11; 삿 6:8, 13; 삿 10:11; 삿 11:13-26; 삿 13:5; 삿 16:17; 삿 18:30; 삿 19:23-24; 삿 20:26-27 등의 난외 참조들을 보라.

여호수아가 죽은 뒤 이스라엘 사람들은 남아 있는 가나안 사람들을 공격하기로 결심하고, 유다 지파가 먼저 올라가라는 지시를 받는다(삿 1:1, 삿 1:2). 유다와 시므온이 연합하여 가나안 사람들과 브리스 사람들을 공격하고, 그들 만 명을 죽이며, 아도니 베섹을 사로잡아 그의 엄지손가락과 엄지발가락을 자르고 예루살렘으로 데려오니, 거기서 그가 죽는다(삿 1:3-7). 예루살렘이 정복된다(삿 1:8). 갈렙의 지휘 아래 가나안 사람들과 새 전쟁이 벌어진다(삿 1:9-11). 옷니엘이 기럇 세벨을 점령하고, 그 보상으로 갈렙의 딸 악사와 그와 함께 남방 땅과 샘들을 받는다(삿 1:12-15). 겐 사람들이 그 백성 가운데 거주한다(삿 1:16). 유다와 시므온이 스밧, 가사 등지의 가나안 사람들을 진멸한다(삿 1:17-19). 헤브론이 갈렙에게 주어진다(삿 1:20). 베냐민 사람들, 요셉의 집, 므낫세 지파 등에 관한 기록(삿 1:21-27). 이스라엘 사람들이 가나안 사람들에게 조공을 바치게 한다(삿 1:28). 에브라임, 스불론, 아셀, 납달리 지파에 관한 기록(삿 1:29-33). 아모리 사람들이 단 자손을 산지로 몰아넣는다(삿 1:34-36).

사사기 서론

이 책의 히브리어 사본에 붙은 제목은 세페르 쇼프팀(Sepher Shophetim), 곧 사사기(the Book of Judges)이다. 그러나 시리아어 역자와 아랍어 역자는 이 책을,

"이스라엘 자손의 사사들의 책"

이라고 부르며, 칠십인역은 단지 "사사기"라고만 부른다. 이렇게 불린 것은 사사들이 이 책을 기록했기 때문이 아니다. 어떤 이들은 이 책이 사사들이 남긴 연대기와 일지에서 편집되었다고 생각하지만, 이 책은 오직 한 사람의 작품으로 보인다. 이 이름의 참된 이유는 이 책이 이스라엘의 사사들을 다루면서 그들의 생애와 행적, 특히 그들의 직무와 관련된 일들을 서술하기 때문이다. 그 직무는 왕의 직무와 달랐고, 상시적인 것이 아니라 그때그때 필요에 따라 주어진 것으로 보인다. 그 직무는 주로 백성이 원수들에게 압제당하거나 곤경에 처하거나 사로잡혔을 때 그 손에서 백성을 건져내는 데 있었고, 백성이 자기 나라와 권리와 자유를 누리도록 보호하는 데 있었으며, 필요할 때에 군대를 이끌고 원수들을 치러 나가는 데 있었고, 분쟁을 해결하고 송사를 재판하며 공의를 시행하는 데 있었다. 그들의 시대에 이 나라의 통치는 신정(theocracy)이었다. 이 책의 기록자가 누구인지는 확실하지 않다. 어떤 이들은 히스기야 왕에게 돌리고 다른 이들은 에스라에게 돌린다. 그러나 유대인 저자들(a)은 대체로 사무엘이 기록했다고 보며, 이것이 가장 개연성이 높다. 사무엘은 사사들 가운데 마지막 사람이었다. 또 이 책은 분명히 다윗의 시대 이전에 기록된 것으로 보이는데, 이는 요압의 말에서 드러나고(2 Samuel 11:21), Psalm 68:8 의 몇몇 구절에서도 드러난다. 그 구절들은 Judges 5:4 을 가리키거나 암시하는 듯하다. 또한 예루살렘이 여부스라고 불린 데서도 드러나는데, 이는 이 책의 기록자 당시에 그곳에 여부스 사람들이 거주하고 있었음을 보여준다. 반면 다윗은 그들의 손에서 그곳을 빼앗았다. 게다가 사무엘 자신이 이 책의 기록을 언급한다(1 Samuel 12:9). 이러한 증언들과 신약의 다른 증언들에 비추어 볼 때, 이 책이 진정하고 정경적이며 하나님의 영감으로 기록되었다는 데에는 의심의 여지가 없다. 사도 바울과 히브리서 기자가 이 책을 사용한 데서 그것이 분명히 드러난다(Acts 13:20). 이 책은 역사서로서 유익하며, 이 책이 없다면 이스라엘 백성의 역사는 완전하지 못할 것이다. 이 책은 마지막 두 사람인 엘리와 사무엘을 제외한 모든 사사에 대한 기록을 담고 있는데, 그 두 사람에 대한 기록은 이어지는 책들에 실려 있다. 또한 그 시대에 부수적으로 일어난 몇 가지 일들, 곧 미가의 우상과 베냐민 전쟁에 관한 일들이 이 책 끝의 부록에 서술되어 있다. 그리고 이 책은 하나님께서 자기 백성 이스라엘 가운데 있는 죄를 기뻐하지 않으심과 그에 대한 징계에 관하여, 또 그들이 곤경에 처했을 때 구원자들을 일으켜 주심으로 그들을 섭리적으로 돌보신 일에 관하여 유익한 도덕적 교훈을 많이 제공하며, 아울러 위대하고 선한 사람들에게서 본받을 만한 여러 덕과 탁월함을 가리켜 보인다. 피스카토르(Piscator)와 라이트풋(Lightfoot) 박사를 비롯한 이들에 따르면 이 책은 이백구십구 년의 역사를 담고 있다.

사사기 1장 서론

여호수아가 죽은 후에 이스라엘 자손이 남아 있는 가나안 사람들을 치러 어느 지파가 먼저 올라가야 할지 여호와께 묻자, 유다가 올라가라는 명을 받고 시므온과 함께 올라간다(Judges 1:1). 그들은 아도니베섹 휘하의 가나안 사람들을 쳐서 승리하고 그를 예루살렘으로 끌고 왔으며(Judges 1:4), 헤브론과 드빌과 스밧과 호르마와 가사와 아스글론과 에그론의 가나안 사람들도 쳐서 승리하였다(Judges 1:9). 베냐민 사람들은 예루살렘의 여부스 사람들에 대하여 유다만큼 좋은 성과를 거두지 못하였고(Judges 1:21), 요셉 집안이 벧엘에 대하여 거둔 것과 같은 성과도 거두지 못하였다(Judges 1:22). 므낫세와 에브라임과 스불론과 아셀과 납달리 지파도 자기들에게 속한 여러 곳에서 가나안 사람들을 쫓아내지 못하였고, 다만 그들 가운데 많은 이들이 이스라엘에게 조공을 바치는 자가 되었다(Judges 1:27). 아모리 사람들로 말하자면 그들은 단 지파가 감당하기에 너무 강하였으나, 그들 가운데 일부는 요셉 집안에 조공을 바치는 자가 되었다(Judges 1:34).(a) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 14. 2.

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

Judges.

BY

THE VERY REV. F. W. FARRAR, D.D. FRS.,

Late Dean of Canterbury.

INTRODUCTION

TO

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

Name of the Book.—The English name “Judges” corresponds with the Hebrew Shophetim, as with the Greek Kritaí, and the Latin Liber judicum. A similar magistracy (suffetes) existed among the Phœnicians. Officers of this title are mentioned in Numbers 25:5, Deuteronomy 1:16; Deuteronomy 16:18, &c., but they were only appointed for subordinate civil functions, whereas the judges whose history is recorded in this book were chiefly summoned to their great work by Divine appointment (Judges 3:15; Judges 4:6; Judges 6:12, &c.), and were “deliverers” from foreign bondage (Judges 3:9; Judges 18:28) rather than civil rulers. (See note on Judges 2:16.) In fact, the very necessity for their call and their deeds arose from the anarchy which rendered all ordinary functions unavailing against the prevalent corruption and misery. The most remarkable of their number were national heroes rather than civil or religious guides.

Plan.—The Book of Judges falls into five well-marked sections, namely:—

I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION (Judges 1:1 to Judges 2:5).—In the note on Judges 1:1 reasons will be given for believing that this section is entirely retrospective. It furnishes a sketch of the imperfect conquest of the land previous to the death of Joshua, in order to show the want of faithfulness and obedience which was the cause of all subsequent troubles. It ends with the solemn reproach addressed by God’s messenger to the assembled people at Bochim.

II. SECOND INTRODUCTION (Judges 2:6 to Judges 3:6).—It is the object of this section to show that the neglect which had begun before the great conqueror passed away continued after his death, and that it was the cause of deep religious degeneracy. The people even sank into idolatry, and provoked the Divine retribution, from which they were delivered by successive judges. In spite of this, they constantly relapsed when the judgment was removed. In this section the moral purpose of the book is most distinctly sketched in outline. It shows that the presence of the Canaanites and the revival of their dominion were alike the cause and the consequence of the troubles of Israel, while, at the same time, God was so far from having utterly forsaken His people that even their sins and sufferings were made to subserve the purposes of their Divine education, and were overruled for their ultimate advantage. (See Judges 2:22; Judges 3:1-4.)

III. MAIN SECTION OF THE BOOK (Judges 3:7 to Judges 16:31).—This section contains notices of the history of twelve judges. The heroic deeds of six of these deliverers are related in detail, and six are mentioned with brief allusion. The episode of Abimelech’s usurpation is given at length, partly perhaps—as in the later story of Eli—to point the lesson of the perils which result from imperfect paternal control, but mainly to warn the people of the perilous and abortive character of a royalty unsanctioned by Jehovah (Deuteronomy 17:15).

The sub-sections are:—

1. The servitude to Cushan-rishathaim, and the judgeship of Othniel (Judges 3:5-11).

2. The servitude to Eglon, and the deliverance wrought by Ehud (Judges 3:12-30). Brief reference to Shamgar (Judges 3:31).

3. The servitude to Jabin, and the deliverance wrought by Deborah and Barak (Judges 4, 5).

4. The oppression of the Midianites, and the deliverance wrought by Gideon (Judges 6-8). Episode of Abimelech, the bramble-king (Judges 9). Brief notices of Tola and Jair (Judges 10:1-5).

5. The oppression of the Ammonites, and the deliverance wrought by Jephthah (Judges 10:6 to Judges 12:13), with the sequel of Jephthah’s history (Judges 11:34 to Judges 12:7). Brief notices of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon (Judges 12:8-15).

6. The servitude to the Philistines, and the deeds of Samson (Judges 13-16).

IV. APPENDIX I.—The story of Micah’s idolatry; of Jonathan, grandson of Moses; and of the conquest of Laish by the Danites (Judges 17, 18).

V. APPENDIX II.—The story of the deed of Gibeah, and the vengeance inflicted on Benjamin, with the means taken to save that tribe from extirpation.

It is clear that the Book of Judges is formed on one general plan, because it is intended to illustrate definite moral facts, and to narrate the providence of God as shown continuously in a long series of different events. The arrangement is not strictly chronological, for (as will be seen by the notes on Judges 17-21) the appendices belong to an epoch antecedent to the earliest judge. Nor, again, is the arrangement intended to be geographical, for the earlier notices of the book refer mainly to the south of Palestine; the story of Deborah takes us to the north, and that of Gideon to the central region; that of Jephthah to the west, and that of Samson once more to the south. Three of the chief judges—Othniel, Ehud, Samson—were southrons; two—Barak, Gideon—belong to the north; one—Jephthah—to western Palestine.

Unity.—The subordination of all the incidents of the history to the inculcation of definite religious lessons shows that the book, in its present form, was arranged by one person. On the other hand, it is nearly certain that he performed the functions of a compiler rather than those of author. For it seems clear that he not only consulted various sources of information, but that he actually incorporated several documents, such as the words of the Divine messenger at Bochim (Judges 2:1-5), the song of Deborah (Judges 5), the parable of Jotham (Judges 9:8-16), and various traditional fragments of Samson’s festive words (Judges 14:14; Judges 15:16). But further than this, the style points to the conclusion that the body of the book (Judges 3:7 to Judges 16:31) is not by the same author as the appendices (Judges 16, 17, 18-21), and that the author of these two memorable narratives is the same as the author of the preface (Jdg 1:1 to Jdg 3:6). The preface and appendices, referring as they do to the same epoch, present special points of view, and abound in identical phrases, which are not found in the main narrative. Thus Judah (Judges 1, Judges 20:18) and places in Judah (Bethlehem, Jerusalem) are prominent in these sections, and are hardly alluded to in the rest of the book; the migration of Dan is also touched upon in both these sections (Judges 1:34; Judges 1:18). The general aspect of society and government is also alike in both sections (Judges 1:1-2; Judges 2:4; Judges 20:26-28), and both allude to the twelve tribes (Judges 1:1-36; Judges 19:29; Judges 20:1; Judges 21:3). For resemblance of phrases, compare Judges 1:8; Judges 20:48; Judges 1:21; Judges 19:30; Judges 1:12; Judges 21:14; Judges 1:1; Judges 20:23; Judges 1:23; Judges 18:2; Judges 1:11, &c., Judges 18:29. (See note on Judges 1:1.) In the appendices “judges” are not once mentioned; while the characteristic phrase which occurs again and again, “In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6; Judges 18:1; Judges 19:1; Judges 21:25), is not once used in the body of the book. On the other hand, the characteristic phrases of the main narrative, “The anger of the Lord was hot against Israel . . . and He sold them into the hands of their enemies” (Judges 2:14; Judges 3:8; Judges 4:2; Judges 10:7), and “The Spirit of the Lord came upon” (Judges 6:34; Judges 11:29; Judges 14:6; Judges 14:19; Judges 15:14), do not occur in the other parts.[16]

[16] See Ewald, 1:186, seq.

We are, therefore, naturally led to infer that the main section of the book is a homogeneous narrative, which has, however, been compiled with a free incorporation of older documents; and that the two prefaces and two appendices, which come from a different hand, were added to it, with the Book of Ruth as a third appendix, by some early editor, or perhaps by the author himself. The efforts to trace parallel Jehovistic and Elohistic documents, even in the history of Gideon, much more in other parts of the book, fail to establish any probable result.

Date.—The freshness, vividness, and minuteness of the details with which some of the stories of the judges abound show that the writer was in possession of almost contemporaneous records, or had access to very early traditions. There is an Homeric plainness in the description of many of the events, as well as in the clear delineation of the leading characters. The character and the circumstance of each hero are completely different from those of all the rest. Ehud first acts independently, and then arms the people; Barak stands at the head of a confederacy; Gideon at first only invites the aid of his immediate neighbours; Jeph-thah is a chief of freebooters; Abimelech avails himself of Canaanite jealousies against Israel, and Ephraimite jealousies against Manasseh; Samson only engages in a series of personal adventures. Local traditions and records have evidently been utilised. The style is inimitably graphic in its very simplicity. We smile at the grim humour which alludes to the “fatness” of Eglon and his Moabites; we hear the shrill accents of the daughter of Caleb; we see the very flash of Ehud’s dagger; even the rough jests of Samson, and the trenchant irony of the Danites, and the shadows cast by the troops of Abimelech, and the female vanity of the ladies of Sisera’s harem are, with many other minute incidents, immortalised in a few strokes. Again, the picture of the manners prevalent at the epoch described is such as could not have been delineated so naturally at a later period. In its primitive hospitality, its awful degradation, and its terrible savagery, it recalls some of the earliest annals of the Scripture history. (Comp. Judges 6:19 with Genesis 18:1-8; Judges 6:21 with Genesis 15:17; Judges 19 with Genesis 19; Judges 8:16; Judges 9:38 with Genesis 34, &c.)

But while there can be no doubt as to the antiquity of the documents utilised by the writer, it is not so easy to determine with precision the date at which the book was drawn up in its present form. The phrase “to this day” (Judges 1:21; Judges 19:30) shows that some years must have elapsed since the events recorded. That the appendices could not have been written earlier than the reign of Saul is clear from their constant formula: “In that day there was no king in Israel” (Judges 17:6, &c.). On the other hand, the absence of any allusion to the exploits of David confirms the decisive inference, suggested by Judges 1:21, that the book existed, in part at any rate, before his days; for in Judges 1:21, as well as in Judges 19:10-12, Jerusalem is still called Jebus, and is regarded as a city of the Canaanites, and as nominally belonging to Benjamin (Judges 1:21). The attempts to connect Judges 1:27-29 with events in the reign of Solomon (1Kings 4:7-19; 1Kings 9:16) are entirely futile. On the other hand, the expression in Judges 18:30, “until the captivity of the land,” would bring the date of the redaction of the book down to a very late period, if that phrase certainly referred to either the Assyrian or the Babylonian captivity. But even if we do not accept the very slight change in two Hebrew letters which will make it mean “to the captivity of the ark” (see note on Judges 18:30-31), it seems almost demonstrable that the allusion may be to that Philistine invasion which culminated in the massacre at Shiloh, of which the terrible incidents are preserved for us in Psalm 78:60-65. In Judges 21:12 we find the expression “Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan,” and this, too, has been pressed into an indication that the book is not earlier than the time of the exile. It is much more obvious to explain it by way of contrast to Jabesh-gilead, which was on the other side of Jordan; or possibly the phrase may point to the circumstance that after the sack and massacre of Shiloh the very site of the place seems to have sunk into an oblivion from which it has never since emerged. But if these phrases are of later origin, the evidences of antiquity which confront us on every page of this book would lead to the conclusion that a few expressions were merely added by way of glosses in the final edition of the sacred canon by Ezra and his school. The expressions and sentiments which are common to the Book of Judges, with the other historical books (see 1Samuel 13:6; 1Samuel 13:20; 2Kings 2:17; 2Kings 8:12; 2Kings 12:20; 2Kings 17:20; 2Kings 21:15; 2Kings 22:14; and especially comp. Judges 2:11-23 with 2Kings 17:7-23, and Judges 2:1-3 with 2Kings 17:35-39), may easily have been borrowed by the later from the earlier writers. The pure Hebrew of the Book of Judges is far too untainted with Chaldaisms and modernisms to allow any probability to the theory of its late authorship. Its many isolated expressions (hapax legomena, Judges 1:15; Judges 3:22; Judges 4:4-19; Judges 5:10-28; Judges 15:8; Judges 18:7) show the use of ancient records, and the Aramaisms which have been pointed out (e.g., the prefix שׁ in Judges 5:7; Judges 6:17, and expressions in Judges 17:2; Judges 19:1, &c), since they occur in those parts which are incontestably the oldest, are now generally admitted to be poetic forms, and forms peculiar to the idiom of Northern Palestine.

The general conclusion, then, as to the date of the book in its earlier shape is that it was compiled in the reign of Saul; and if there was any recorder (mazkir) in his primitive court, as there subsequently was at the court of David (2Samuel 8:16), these histories might have been drawn up from older sources by such an officer; or possibly even by the Prophet Samuel (see below). With this would agree very well the almost unbroken silence respecting Judah (which would otherwise be inexplicable); the prominence of Gibeah and of Benjamin, with the narrative which explained why it was “the smallest of the tribes” (1Samuel 9:21), and the tone of hostility towards Ephraim (Judges 8, 11, 12). With this hypothesis would also agree the absolutely unsacerdotal character of the book. In David’s reign the priesthood rose into great prominence and activity, whereas in the days of the judges and of Saul it seems to have sunk to the very nadir of inefficiency and neglect. Not once in the main narrative of the Book of Judges are priests appealed to. After Phinehas, they did not furnish one national hero from their ranks; nor did they once strike a blow for freedom or religion. The Levites shared in their decadence. The name of the wandering Levite of Bethlehem-Judah (Judges 19) has already been forgotten; and the other Levite, though no less a person than a grandson of Moses himself (see note on Judges 18:30), is content to serve a shrine of private idolatry for the reward of a few shillings a year.

The Author.—We have already seen sufficient to dispose of the fancy that the book was written by Ezra, although it is quite possible that he or his school may have added some trivial explanatory touches here and there. De Wette has entirely refuted[17] the conjecture of Stahelin that it is by the same author as the Book of Deuteronomy. Nor could it have been written by the author of the Book of Joshua, because it differs from that book not only in style, but in the two marked particulars that it barely makes any allusion to the Mosaic law, and that it abounds in moral utterances of a character which are not found in the previous book. The Rabbis generally follow the conjecture of the Talmud (Baba Bathra, f. 14, b) that it was written by the prophet Samuel. That is a sufficiently obvious conjecture; and though it can neither be proved nor disproved, it accords with many of the facts. From what we know of the character of Samuel, even in what seem to us to be its more dubious or less enlightened features, we see that there is a moral affinity between his views and those expressed in the Book of Judges. The man who so greatly disliked the establishment of royalty (1 Samuel 8) may well have written the story of Abimelech. The man who commanded the extermination of the Amalekites (1Samuel 15:3) was in that stage of as yet imperfect enlightenment (Matthew 5:38) which would have viewed without reprobation the vengeance inflicted by Israel on his enemies. The man who hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal (1Samuel 15:33) would have felt no difficulty in commending the deeds of Ehud, of Jael, and of Gideon. The book may have been drawn up by him, or in the school of the prophets of which he was the founder. That he was well acquainted with the incidents of this period we see from his appeal to them in his speech to the people (1Samuel 12:11). The mention of “Bedan” with Jerubbaal, Jephthah, and Samson[18] in this verse has always been a source of perplexity. The notion that Bedan can mean Samson, as though it were “in Dan,” is now abandoned. Perhaps “Barak” (as in the LXX., Syriac, and Arabic) is the true reading; but if “Bedan” be a corruption for “Abdon,” it would point to the possession on Samuel’s part of many particulars respecting the judges which are now quite lost to us.

[17] Einleitung, p. 142.

[18] In 1Samuel 12:11 “Samson,” not Samuel, is the much more probable reading of the Peshito.

There are other allusions to the judges in 2Samuel 11:21; Psalm 78:56-64; Psalm 83:7-11; Psalm 106:34-45; Isaiah 9:4; Isaiah 10:26; Hosea 10:9; Nehemiah 9:25-31.

Chronology.—The chronology of the Book of Judges offers immense difficulties, and the difficulties are increased by the uncertainties which affect both the reading and interpretation of the passages which bear upon it.

The elements of decision are briefly as follows:—

I. If the stories of the judges are taken to be consecutive, and the periods of forty or eighty years’ rest (Judges 3:11; Judges 3:30; Judges 5:31; Judges 8:28) are supposed to be stated accurately, and not in round numbers, then, adding up the separate totals, we get:—

Servitude under Cushan

8 years

Judges 3:8

Rest under Othniel

40 years

Judges 3:11

Servitude under Moab

18 years

Judges 3:14

Rest under Ehud

80 years

Judges 3:30

Servitude under Jabin

20 years

Judges 4:3

Rest under Deborah and Barak

40 years

Judges 5:31

Oppression of the Midianites

7 years

Judges 6:1

Rest under Gideon

40 years

Judges 8:28

Tyranny of Abimelech

3 years

Judges 9:22

Judgeship of Tola

23 years

Judges 10:2

Judgeship of Jair

22 years

Judges 10:3

Oppression of the Ammonites

18 years

Judges 10:8

Judgeship of Jephthah

6 years

Judges 12:7

Judgeship of Ibzan

7 years

Judges 12:9

Judgeship of Elon

19 years

Judges 12:11

Judgeship of Abdon

8 years

Judges 12:14

Oppression of the Philistines

40 years

Judges 13:1

Judgeship of Samson

20 years

Judges 15:20

410 years.

If to this 410 years we add 40 years for Saul’s reign, and 40 years for David’s, we get 490 years; and as (on this principle of consecutiveness) we must allow about 10 years for the events before Cushan’s tyranny (Judges 3:10) began, and 20 for the judgeship of Samuel, and 1 for Shamgar (Judges 3:31), we get at once at the traditional Jewish reckonings, which is the basis of much of our received chronology, and which assigns to the epoch between Joshua and Solomon a period of five centuries, in round numbers twelve generations.

II. In 1Kings 6:1 we find that Solomon built the Temple “in the 480th year after the children of Israel were come out of Egypt.” It is doubtful whether the words are genuine, since they are omitted by Origen and other Fathers, were unknown to Josephus, and furnish the only Old Testament passage in which an era is taken as a starting-point. If genuine, there is no obvious way of reconciling them with the previous computation, though it has been suggested that “after the children of Israel came out of Egypt” may mean “after their settlement in Canaan.”

III. In Acts 13:20. St. Paul says that “the judges unto Samuel the prophet” occupied a period of 450 years. But here, again, the reading is not certain, and the order of the words seems to have been tampered with.

IV. In Judges 11:20. Jephthah says that Israel had lived in Heshbon and the coasts of Arnon 300 years. Now, doubtless, by a certain amount of ingenuity and manipulation, and by lengthening or curtailing those elements in the reckoning which are not specified—such as the length of Samuel’s judgeship, the interval between Joshua’s death and Cushan’s tyranny, &c.—we may give to these different data sufficient semblance of accordance to look plausible. But it is quite obvious that we can arrive at no certainty, and, in point of fact, scarcely two of the authors who have elaborately gone into the question come to the same conclusion. Further than this, these scattered data have to be reconciled with those which we gather from no less than ten genealogies—those of David, Zadok, Abiathar, Saul, Heman, Ahimoth, Asaph, Etham, Zabad, and the kings of Edom, which are found scattered chiefly in the Books of Chronicles, and of which some are repeated two, three, and even four times. Now it appears from every one of these genealogies, as they have been thoroughly examined by a former Bishop of Bath and Wells,[19] that seven and eight generations are assigned to the period between the conquest of Canaan and the accession of David.[20] The time allowed for a generation is usually thirty years, and this seems to show conclusively that the period covered by the judges was much shorter than that demanded by the received reckoning. For allowing even eight generations, this gives us 240 years, from which we have to subtract for the actual period covered in the Book of Judges, the reign of Saul, the judgeships of Eli and Samuel, and the latter years of Joshua. Now this curtailment of the period, though impossible to reconcile exactly and literally with 1Kings 6:1, Judges 11:20, and Acts 13:20 (in which, as we have seen, the reading may be wrong), does coincide remarkably with many indications of the Book of Judges itself. There is not the least warrant for supposing that the numbers 40 and 80 are meant to be stated with precision,[21] nor is there anything to bar the very reasonable hypothesis that parts both of the servitudes and the deliverances may have been synchronous in different parts of Israel: so that, for instance, the movements of Ehud, of Barak, and of Gideon may have taken place in the same fifty years. Thus no high priest is recorded in any genealogy or historical references between Phinehas and Eli, and Jewish legend says that Phinehas was deposed for having sanctioned the offering of Jephthah’s daughter. Similarly Boaz, in the Book of Ruth, is the son of Rahab, and the Levite of Judges 17, 18 is a grandson of Moses. By thus curtailing the period of the judges many serious difficulties are avoided, and the uncertain meaning and reading of the passages on which the received chronology is founded cannot for a moment be set against the distinct information derived from such a multitude of genealogies. The subject is, however, still involved in obscurity, as may be seen in the notes on Judges 3:10; Judges 4:2, &c. It is clear that many of the fifty schemes of chronology which have been proposed must be completely mistaken, and we must be content with the general conclusion that the whole period covered some 250 years.

[19] Lord Arthur Hervey, On the Genealogies.

[20] There are five generations between Moses and David in Ruth 4:18; and we may be sure that when there are so many genealogies, and so often repeated, there are no omissions.

[21] Reuss points out the curious circumstance that these round numbers added together—Othniel, 40; Ehud, 80; Jabin, 20; Barak, 40; Gideon, 40; Philistines, 40; Samson, 20—make 280, which is exactly the number required to make 480, if we add the Wanderings, 40; Joshua, 40; Eli, 40; Samuel and Saul, 40; David, 40 = 200(1Kings 6:1).

Characteristics of the Epoch.—The Book of Judges gives us an insight into a definite and well-marked epoch of Israelitish history, and we shall understand the book and its object better if we summarise the peculiarities of that age. We mark—

I. The deepening disunion between the tribes. While some of them pursued that agricultural mode of life which was specially fostered by the Mosaic institutions, others of them—as Dan, Asher, and the northern tribes—began to engage in navigation and commerce. This may have been one of the tendencies which led each tribe to act more and more as an independent body, while the fierce claim to the leading position advanced by Ephraim (Judges 8, 12) was only partially conceded, and at last entirely rejected. There were even separate towns—like Shechem—that could successfully assert their independence of the body of the nation, and choose their own rulers. Shechem thus stood at the head of a confederacy, like those of the German and Italian towns in the Middle Ages, under the protection of Baal-berith—the lord of the covenant—whose temple also served as a strong fortress (Judges 9).

II. This civil disunion resulted in part from the religious disintegration. There was, indeed, a central sanctuary at Shiloh, but the ark itself was at Bethel; and since in these wild times it became all but impossible to carry out the regulations of the Levitic law—which seems, indeed, to have fallen into absolute abeyance—all sorts of local sanctuaries and high places sprang up. Altars were freely raised at any place hallowed by Divine messages or providences, and the irregular and reprehensible, if not directly idolatrous, cult of ephods and teraphim (Judges 8:27; Judges 18:18) proved to be an irresistible temptation. A nation which had gone so far would be hardly likely to hold out against the manifold seductions and fascinations of the wild forms of nature-worship by which they were on every side surrounded. The sensual temptations of these

“Gay religions, full of pomp and gold,”

could only be effectually resisted by the influence of one religion, firmly established and faithfully obeyed.

III. Another element of degeneracy lay in the extreme depression of the priesthood and Levite-hood. The only priest of whom we hear is Phinehas (Judges 20:28). The grandson of Aaron towers immeasurably above the dreadful degeneracy of Jonathan, the grandson of Moses (Judges 18:30). It is with a positive sense of pity that we witness the pauperism and homelessness into which the near descendant of the great lawgiver had fallen (Judges 17:8-10). If for a mere pittance he could be induced to give his office and his life to the service of a private and semi-idolatrous chapel, we cannot but see that the salt of his order must have lost its savour. The splendid zeal which Phinehas had shown on former occasions (Numbers 25:11; Numbers 31:6; Psalm 106:30; Joshua 22:13) would have led us to expect from him the exertion of an influence which should have rendered impossible the state of degradation which marks the whole story of “the deed of Gibeah.” It is clear, however, that he had sunk into impotence or into apathy. We never hear of him after this time; and it is a mysterious and unexplained circumstance that the next high priest who is mentioned—Eli—does not even belong to the line of Eleazar and Phinehas, but to the younger line of Ithamar. The elder line was only restored to its rights in the reign of David, and in the person of Zadok.

IV. “Like people, like priest.” If the priests and Levites had not abnegated their true functions, the people could hardly have sunk to a moral standpoint so low as that which is involved in the conduct of the tribe of Benjamin, or in Jephthah’s vow; much less into the condition which left unpunished the hideous massacre by Abimelech of his father’s sons. Even Ehud and Samson, though they were redeemed into nobleness by the faith and patriotism which animated their deeds, adopted methods which are regarded by purer ages as deeply reprehensible.

V. Sin is weakness, and the spiritual degeneracy of the people reduced them to that state of feebleness which made them the easy prey of the Canaanites in the north, the Ammonites in the west, the Midianites and Amalekites whose hordes overran the Plain of Jezreel, and the Philistines in the south, who in course of time extended their authority beyond the confines of the tribe of Judah.

VI. And yet, amid all this distress and degeneracy, the sacred fire did not wholly die out from the hearts of the Israelites. Had it been otherwise, these hero-figures could hardly have risen among them, nor could such a burning song as the song of Deborah have been poured forth from the nation’s heart. So many lessons of Divine education could hardly have been in vain. Ten times over in the Book of Judges are repeated the formulæ, “the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord,” and each repetition is like the sound of a bell which tolls some approaching ruin. Ten times over recurs the formulæ, “the children of Israel cried unto the Lord,” and each time of its recurrence introduces a breathing-space of deliverance and of hope. As the years sped on, such lessons sank more and more deeply into the hearts of the people, until at last the time was ripe for reunion, the moral guidance of prophets, and the restoration of the national religious life.[22] In the hour of its worst peril and weakness Israel was preserved by the memory of its past, and was being prepared by a loving and guiding Providence for the grandeur of its future.

[22] See note on Judges 3:22.

Moral Characteristics.—In considering the moral characteristics of the Book of Judges. we must distinguish between its general purport and the details of its special narratives.

Its general purport, as the incomplete record of a transitional period, is to illustrate certain broad propositions, which are of the utmost importance to mankind. It is meant to prove that righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is the reproach of any people; that evil companionships ruin good dispositions; that moral degeneracy always brings with it national weakness; that the affairs of the chosen people were under the immediate care of Divine Providence; that national sin is never left unpunished; that the punishment which it involves is intended always to be educational, not vindictive; that the retribution is withdrawn when it has produced sincere repentance; that the deliverance never comes from unaided human efforts, but from the strength and enthusiasm inspired by the Spirit of God. These and similar lessons elevate the Book of Judges into the position of a sacred philosophy of history, which clearly explains the laws and the objects of a sacred Nemesis. They are summed up not only in the Book of Judges (especially in Judges 2:11-22), but also in other passages which have been suggested or deeply influenced by its teachings; such as Psalm 106:34-45; 2 Kings 17, 2Kings 24:2-4; 2Chronicles 26:11-21; Jeremiah 11:2-10; Nehemiah 9:16-38. The whole book may be regarded as an historical comment on the promises and threatenings of the Book of Deuteronomy.

But when we look from the general lessons to the special deeds even of heroes who were summoned by God’s calling to the work of deliverance, we see abundant traces of the imperfection of that moral enlightenment which God vouchsafed to the chosen people only by slow degrees as the result of ever deepening experiences. Both in its pathos and in its passion, the book is intensely human, and its heroes are the children of their own day, alike in their wrath and their tenderness, their laxity and their superstition. It must be now clear to every Christian that the exterminating wars of Joshua, the fearful and indiscriminate vengeance inflicted by Israel on the offending tribe of Benjamin, the treachery of Ehud and of Jael, the wild revenge of Samson, the blood-vengeance of Gideon, and other events herein narrated, are not to be quoted as examples for modern times. They are entirely alien to the whole drift of all that is best and highest in the moral teaching even of the Old Testament Scriptures, and still more alien to all the teachings of Christ. The view which we take of these actions will be found in the notes; and it will be seen that while no attempt is made to gild with imaginary sanction deeds which in themselves were due to times of ignorance and the passions of men on whose minds the full light had not yet dawned, yet, on the other hand, the faith and the courage by which these old heroes were animated receive their full recognition, and they are judged solely by the standard prevalent in their own age and country. In adopting this line of judgment we follow the example set us by Christ Himself (Matthew 5:38; Matthew 19:8, &c.). We recognise the nobleness and courage of these heroes of faith, while we guard against the dangerous error of admiring their ignorance or consecrating their imperfections.

Among the books consulted in writing the following commentary I may mention Josephus, Antiquities, bk. 5; Rosenmüller’s Scholia; Ewald, Gesch. d. Volkes Israel; Eisenlohr’s Das Volk Israel; Stanley’s Jewish Church and Sinai and Palestine; Reuss, Hist. des Israelites; Bertheau, Das Buch der Richter (Kurzgef. Exeget. Handbuch); Keil and Delitsch; Prof. Cassel in Lange’s Bibelwerk; Lord Arthur Hervey, On the Genealogies, and in the Speaker’s Commentary; Bishop “Wordsworth’s Commentary; Davidson’s Introd. to the Old Testament; articles in Dr. Smith’s Bible Dictionary; Kitto’s Bible Cyclopœdia; Herzog’s Real. Encyclop., &c.

THE BOOK OF JUDGES.

“And concerning the Judges, every one by name, whose heart went not a whoring, nor departed from the Lord, let their memory be blessed. Let their bones flourish out of their place, and let the name of them that were honoured be continued upon their children” (Ecclesiasticus 46:11-12).

“Temporibus Judicum, sicut se habebant peccata populi et misericordia Dei, alternabant prospera et adversa bellorum” (Aug. De Civ. Dei. xvi. 43).

1-8. Wars of Judah and Simeon. Defeat of Adoni-bezek. Temporary capture of Jerusalem. Judges 1:9-10. Judah and Caleb drive the Anakim out of Hebron. Judges 1:11-13. Debir conquered by Othniel. Judges 1:14-15. The request of Achsah. Judges 1:16. Notice of the Kenites. Judges 1:17-20. Further successes of Judah. Judges 1:21. Partial success of Benjamin at Jerusalem. Judges 1:22-26. Ephraim gains Bethel by treachery. Judges 1:27-36. Partial successes of Manasseh, Ephraim, Zebulon, Asher, Naphtali, and Dan.

PART I

Ch. Jdg 1:1 to Jdg 2:5. The settlement of the Israelite tribes in Canaan

Apparently the narrative intends us to think of Gilgal, on the plains of Jericho, W. of the Jordan, as the place which the Hebrew tribes had reached in the course of their immigration; it was a sanctuary marked by the presence of the Angel of the Lord (Jdg 2:1), and the chief encampment of the invaders. From Gilgal, therefore, we are led to infer that the tribes set out, either in small groups (Jdg 1:3; Jdg 1:16; Jdg 1:22) or singly (Jdg 1:30 ff.), to seek their fortunes in the land of Canaan. The language of Jdg 1:2-3 points to a previous allotment of territory which determined the general lines of the advance. Judah was the first to go up, with his allies the Simeonites; the minor clans of the Calebites and the Kenites also took part in the invasion. This group made their way into the Southern Highlands; but the Canaanites held Jerusalem and a line of strong towns running westwards to the coast, with the valleys and the plains; the Judahites were no match for them in regular warfare (Jdg 1:1 b – Jdg 1:3; Jdg 1:5-7; Jdg 1:19; Jdg 1:21; Jdg 1:20; Jdg 1:10 b, Jdg 1:11-17; note the order). The historian’s chief interest lies in Judah; he is less concerned with the exploits of the other tribes, or he had only scanty traditions at his disposal. When he comes to the house of Joseph, i.e. Ephraim and Manasseh, he records only the capture of Beth-el in the Central Highlands, and the names of the Canaanite cities which could not be taken (Jdg 1:22-29). Of the other tribes, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, who advanced into the country N. of the Great Plain, no positive successes are mentioned; apparently they barely managed to gain a footing; the Canaanites were too strong for them (Jdg 1:30-33). The Danites at first penetrated into the South West; but they were forced back into the hills between Judah and Ephraim (Jdg 1:34-35). In this manner the tribes entered Canaan: and the conclusion of the initial stage of the advance is marked by the going up of the Angel of the Lord from Gilgal to Beth-el (Jdg 2:1 a, n.); the religious centre is now transferred to a sanctuary in the heart of the land.

We gather, then, from this chapter that the invasion of Canaan was left to the individual enterprise of the different tribes, and that the request was only partially successful; in the plains and round the principal towns the Canaanites proved too strong to be dislodged. This version of the story is at variance with the account given in the Book of Joshua. It is true that in Joshua the broad features of the narrative (6–11, 14 ff.) indicate that the south of Canaan was the first part of the country to be occupied, while the northern tribes won their way only by slow degrees after the house of Joseph had settled in the centre; so far in agreement with the present chapter. Otherwise the contrast is strongly marked. Israel advances as a united nation under the leadership of Joshua, and defeats the Canaanites in two decisive battles, at Beth-horon and the waters of Merom (Joshua , 10, 11); the Canaanites are exterminated wholesale (Joshua 10:40 ff., Joshua 11:11; Joshua 11:14; Joshua 11:21); the entire country from Edom in the south to Hermon in the north (Joshua 11:16 f.) is appropriated without further effort, and divided by lot among the tribes, after, and not before, the conquest (14 ff.). There can be no doubt as to which of these two versions represents the actual course of history. The Song of Deborah alone is sufficient to prove that the Canaanites, so far from having been exterminated, continued to be Israel’s most dangerous neighbours (Jdg 5:6-7; Jdg 5:19). It was a long time before Israel became fully master of the land; the chief Canaanite cities were not conquered till the days of David and Solomon; in the end, after the lapse of centuries, the original inhabitants were not annihilated but absorbed. On the one hand Judges 1 has preserved a record of the isolation of the tribes and the successful resistance of the Canaanites, facts which explain much of the history in the subsequent period; on the other hand the picture given in the Book of Joshua is an ideal one, drawn by the religious and patriotic fancy of a far later age.

At what period are we to place the events narrated in Judges 1? The question seems to be answered by the opening clause, ‘after the death of Joshua’; but this does not agree with Jdg 2:6, where Joshua is still alive. The true sequel of Joshua 24:28 is Jdg 2:6-10; Jdg 1:1 b – Jdg 2:5 must have been added after Jdg 2:6 to Jdg 16:31, the Book of Judges proper, had assumed its present form. In order to connect this inserted narrative with the period of the Judges the final editor prefaced it with a remark of his own, which, however, is historically inaccurate. The natural place for a history of Israel’s invasion of Canaan would be after the account of the tribes’ entry into the land and the fall of Jericho (Joshua 6); historically, therefore, Jdg 1:1 b – Jdg 2:5 is parallel, and not subsequent, to the Book of Joshua. And in fact about a third of this section actually occurs in Joshua, sometimes in almost identical terms: thus Joshua 15:13-19 = Jdg 1:10 b – Jdg 1:15; Jdg 1:20; Joshua 15:63 = Jdg 1:21; Josh, Joshua 17:11-13 = Jdg 1:27-28; Joshua 16:10 = Jdg 1:29. In Joshua these passages are clearly not in harmony with their context, and appear to be extracts from some special source. They can hardly have been copied from Judges, for in several cases Joshua has preserved a more original text (e.g. Joshua 15:13 f., 63) from which Judges has been altered; most probably, therefore, both drew independently upon a common document. This, we may suppose, was none other than the story of the conquest as given by J, the Jehovist or Judaic document of the Pentateuch; for not only does the language of the extracts in Joshua agree with the J passages in Joshua 1-9, but in Judges 1 we find the characteristic usages and treatment of this document, e.g. the resort to the oracle, Canaanites as the term for the original inhabitants, the prominence given to Judah, the Angel of the Lord, the whole tone of the narrative, which betrays nothing of the later theocratic bias. Judges 1 indeed contains little of the picturesque writing which usually distinguishes J, but this is accounted for by the fact that the editor has considerably abridged, altered, and re-arranged the original source; see notes on Jdg 1:4; Jdg 1:7; Jdg 1:10; Jdg 1:19; Jdg 1:21 etc. It is probable that other fragments of the same ancient document are preserved in Joshua 17:14-18; Numbers 32:39; Numbers 32:41-42; Joshua 13:13; Joshua 19:47 (LXX).

Among the tribes mentioned in this chapter Issachar, Levi, Reuben, Gad do not appear. It is curious that Issachar should be left out, because Jdg 5:15 shews that the tribe soon became numerous and important; the omission was perhaps accidental. Levi had probably sunk into insignificance (see Genesis 34:25-29; Genesis 49:5-7); Reuben and Gad being settled on the E. of the Jordan were not concerned with the conquest of the West. The original source probably did not mention Benjamin where the name now appears; see on Jdg 1:21. But in spite of alterations and omissions we have in Judges 1 an historical document of the utmost value. The reason why it was introduced here, outside the Book of Judges proper, may be found in the words which the editor puts into the mouth of the Angel, Jdg 2:1 b – Jdg 2:5 a. According to the original source the tribes did not completely conquer the land because they were inferior to the Canaanites in battle; according to the author of Jdg 2:1 ff. it was because they were unfaithful to Jehovah. A belief had grown up that Jehovah had originally decreed a policy of extermination (cf. Exodus 34:11-16 J, Deuteronomy 7:1-5 etc.); this had not been carried out; hence the Canaanites remained as a standing menace and punishment. Such is the moral read into this piece of ancient history; and from this point of view the narrative is placed suitably at the outset of the story of the Judges.

삿 1:1-3.

유다와 시므온의 행적.

1. 여호수아가 죽은 후에--아마 그리 오래 지난 뒤는 아니었을 것이다. 가나안 사람들은 이 사건을 기회로 삼아 잃어버린 지위를 회복하려 한 듯하며, 이스라엘 사람들은 전쟁을 다시 시작할 수밖에 없었다.

이스라엘 자손이 여호와께 물어 이르되--이 경우에도 다른 때와 마찬가지로, 신적 지시는 대제사장에게 나아가 우림과 둠밈으로 구하였다. 요세푸스에 따르면 그 대제사장은 비느하스였다.

우리 중 누가 먼저 올라가서 가나안 사람과 싸우리이까 하니--각 지파 안에서 통치를 맡던 장로들은 중대한 원정에 착수할 때 하나님께서 임명하신 지도자가 있어야 한다고 바르게 판단하였다. 그들이 신탁에 문의한 것은, 질문의 목적이 한 개인 지휘관의 선택이었든 지파들 사이의 선봉권이라는 영예였든, 신중한 처사였다.

여호수아가 죽은 후에 - 그러나 삿 1:1부터 삿 2:9까지는 여호수아의 죽음으로 끝나는 연속 서사이다. 그러므로 이 장의 사건들과 삿 2:1-6의 사건들은 여호수아 생전에 속한 것으로 보아야 한다. 삿 2:11 주석을 보라.

여호와께 여쭈어 이르되 - 이 표현은 사사기와 사무엘서에서만 발견된다. 민정 지도자는 대제사장에게 나아가 자기 문제에 관해 우림과 둠밈으로 물을 특권을 가졌다(난외 참조). 수 14:1; 수 18:1, 10; 수 19:51과 비교하라. 여기서 이스라엘 자손이 “누가”, 더 정확히는 “우리 가운데 어느 지파가 올라갈 것인가”를 물은 것은, 요세푸스가 이 사건들을 여호수아의 죽음 뒤에 두면서 결론지은 것처럼 비느하스를 통하여서가 아니라, 엘르아살을 통하여서였다.