Reassessing Repentance In Judges

By JoAnna Hoyt

[JoAnna Hoyt resides in Dallas, Texas.]

Traditionally Judges is viewed as depicting cycles of sin, judgment, repentance, and deliverance. Israel’s “cry” to the Lord in Judges is commonly understood as a cry of repentance, and God’s deliverance is His response to their repentance. However, a second look at the text shows that repentance is not the cornerstone of the book that many believe it to be.

To determine the theology of repentance in Judges the issues are complex and far exceed a simple word study on the type of “cry” (זָעַק) Israel gave. While lexical studies are important to the issue, the way the story is crafted also contributes to the meaning the author was communicating. Passages outside Judges, such as 1 Samuel 12:9-11, add complexity to the issue, for they are understood by many as supporting the view that Israel did indeed repent in each cycle.

Lexical Components

The Turning (Or Returning) Of Israel

Twice Israel is said to have “turned” (שׁוב) to foreign gods. The first occurrence is in the introduction (Judg. 2:19), and the second is at the end of the Gideon narrative (8:33). Both occurrences use the qal stem of שׁוב, which generally denotes physical movement, such as turning, turning around, or returning. It can indicate the act of doing something again or becoming something again. When used with people, the verb indicates that they will again arrive at their initial point of departure, and it focuses on the return to a specific point.[1]

The idea of Israel’s “turning” in Judges is traditionally associated with repentance,[2] though both occurrences in Judges (2:19 and 8:33) indicate turning to false gods. This turning is seen as an indication that Israel had at one time turned away from the false gods; otherwise they could not have returned to them.

Interestingly the Israelites are never said to have turned to God.[3] The Book of Judges never answers the question of why the Israelites turned away from the foreign gods in the first place, to what degree they turned away from the foreign gods, or even if they turned away. This raises the question of whether they truly turned away from the foreign gods. Were the Israelites truly repentant, or was this a kind of “foxhole conversion”?

The Groaning Of Israel

In 2:18 the oppression and affliction of the Israelites resulted in their groaning. This word for “groan” (נאקה) is used only three other times in the Old Testament. Two of the occurrences are Exodus 2:24 and 6:5, and both refer to Israel’s groaning while they were in slavery in Egypt. These groans were associated not with repentance but with the pain of oppression. The third use is in Ezekiel 30:24, which describes the groans of a wounded man. These three uses indicate that groans arise from pain or oppression, not from repentance.

The Crying Out Of Israel

In the introduction to Judges the Israelites groaned because of their oppression, but in the cycles they cried out (זעק or צעק). This description is used in all but the last of the cycles, the Samson cycle. The word describes a loud and agonized cry from someone in acute distress, a cry that comes from a “disturbed heart.”[4] This word is used in legal contexts when a person does not receive his due justice under the law, and so he cries out to God, asking that He might bring justice.[5] This is not limited to a reaction of pain; it is a plea for someone to help alleviate the pain.[6] The cry is directed to the one who can bring relief from oppression.

Several verses indicate that God will not listen to their “cry” (זעק) when people reject God (1 Sam. 8:18; cf. vv. 7-8), pervert the Law (Mic. 3:4), worship false gods (Jer. 11:10), or break the covenant (Jer. 11:10; Hos. 8:1-2), that is, when they do not cry out to Him from their heart (Hos. 7:14).[7] Though God does say He will not hear their cry if they are far from Him, He is a God of mercy who relents.[8]

As stated earlier, the first occurrence of “cry out” (זעק) in Scripture is in Exodus 2:23, in which the cry was from distress, not from an acknowledgement of sin. When a person cries out in repentance, the same verb may be used, but it is used with an explicit statement of repentance. In Exodus 2:23 no such statement is included.[9] This word occurs with an accompanying statement only once in the Judges cycles (10:10), which allows for the possibility that at least in that one place the Israelites clearly did repent, but the verse does not demand such an understanding.

God’s Sympathy

Judges 2:18 states that God was “sorry” or “relented” (niphal of נחם) because of their groaning.[10] This is the only time Judges has this word נחם in reference to God.[11] Yet since it is used in the introduction’s survey of the cycles, it plays an important role. The niphal use of this word usually signifies that pain is felt or something is regretted. When God is the subject, the idea is not of a sorrowful resignation, but instead it is related to “concrete consequences.”[12] However, it does not indicate forgiveness. And when this word is used of man’s actions toward God, it indicates that man is sorry for his wrongdoing.[13] Yet this word is not used in Judges to describe the Israelites; it is used only of God.

God’s compassion (נחם) caused Him to deliver His people, but this makes no explicit reference to forgiveness of sin.[14] His compassion was because of their groans (נאקה), not because of their repentance. In the following cycles God’s reason for delivering Israel and His response to Israel’s cry are not stated. The verses simply state that He raised up judges. God was “moved to pity” because of Israel’s distress under oppression.[15] This pity is much the same as one would have for a wounded man groaning in pain. The compassion (or pity) of God is an acknowledgment of human frailty.[16]

To Add Or To Continue To Do Evil

Four times in Judges the Israelites are described as “adding” or “continuing” (hiphil of יסף) to do evil. When this word is followed by an infinitive construct, as it is here, it is translated “to continue to do something,” or “to do something again.”[17] These two options present problems for determining the theology of repentance in Judges. If the word means “to add” or “do again,” then this indicates that Israel started sinning again. Thus they must have previously stopped, and it is assumed that their stopping was because of repentance. But if it means “to continue,” then this indicates that Israel did not repent. To add complexity to the issue, it is used only in four of the six cycles, and as with “cry out” (זעק) it is not included in the introduction.

This short survey of “to add/continue” offers no solution to the question, since the verb may be translated either way. The decision on how to translate this word is directly impacted by one’s theology of repentance in Judges. For example Greenspahn translates this word as “to continue to do evil,” since there is no specific mention of repentance in the majority of the book. This then means the period was a time of uninterrupted sinfulness.[18] However, it may also be argued that it should be translated “again” because there is repentance in Judges.

Narrative Structure

Biblical narrative, by nature, leaves many questions unanswered. Narrative is designed in such a way as to present only some of the truth while leaving clues throughout the story for the audience to draw inferences in order to arrive at the “whole truth.” Since every detail cannot be mentioned, the truth told by the narrative is always “contextually relevant truth” that allows readers to fill in some gaps. Thus the elements of Judges are shaped to “contribute to the integrity and significance of the whole.”[19] To understand a narrative properly one must determine what was omitted for the sake of interest and what was omitted for lack of interest.[20]

Repetition

Repetition is used not only to organize a story but also to present and emphasize certain features. In the Old Testament repetition shows the narrative structure, signals key themes, and emphasizes the central ideas.[21] Repetition changes everyday occurrences into significant events. In Judges the repetition in the cycles draws attention to the relationship between cause and effect.[22]

In the traditional view repeated features in Judges reveal that abandoning God and then returning to Him can bring about change. The repeated cycles thus become a sign to the people of God[23] that they can always repent and He will forgive them.

An opposing view states that Judges is not so much presenting cycles as it is showing a plunge that took Israel farther away from God.[24] The repetition is used to emphasize the downward trajectory. In each cycle the nation sank deeper and deeper. Their cries were not cries of repentance, and their deliverance never brought them back to the type of relationship with God they originally had. Each time they “did evil” the result was more destructive than the one before until they sank to the level of the Canaanites who surrounded them.[25] The downward spiral of sin seen throughout the book culminates with the statement in the last verse, “everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”[26]

Cycles And Patterns

The cycles do not present a straight repetition of the stages given in the introduction (sin, punishment, deliverance). Instead they present variations of the stages. These changes do not negate the general pattern given in the introduction, nor do they cancel the cyclical nature. Instead once the cyclical nature is set in the introduction the progression throughout the book builds on the basic structure and its variations. The arrangement of Judges into this cyclical framework serves a rhetorical effect in which the audience is able to follow in a short time the progression that covers a span of time and is able to see that the events were not random.[27]

As the story moves between judges, the cyclical paradigm begins to break down, which confirms the downward spiral mentioned in 2:19, “When the judge died . . . they would turn back and act more corruptly than their fathers.” Each of the six cycles is introduced with a preterite clause stating that Israel had done evil in the eyes of the Lord. Cycles one and four say Israel “did evil” (עשה), and in cycles two, three, five, and six Israel “added [or continued, יסף, to do] evil.” This pattern of יסף and עשה divides the cycles into two units of three judges each.[28]

Length of oppression. In the first unit—with the judges Othniel, Ehud, and Deborah—the length of oppression became longer before each judge was raised up: eight years, then eighteen years, then twenty years. The second unit of judges—Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson—also has an escalation in the length of oppression, but the escalation extends from seven to eighteen to forty years. Each unit shows similarities in phrase structure and in length of oppression. The pattern of 8, 18, 20 and 7, 18, 40 does not appear to be random. Rather the similarities are quite striking. The first and fourth cycles begin with similar lengths of oppression (one year less for cycle four). The second cycle of each unit is the same (eighteen years), while the last cycle is doubled in the second unit (forty rather than twenty). The similarities, repetition, and drastic changes seem to suggest that before God raised up Samson He was quite angry with Israel and allowed them to suffer longer than before. Also of interest is the fact that Israel went forty years, twice as long as before, without crying out. And there is no record that they cried out even after forty years.

Length of rest. At this point the units begin to differ. The lengths of rest (שקט) in the first unit with Othniel, Ehud, and Deborah are forty, eighty, and forty years, respectively; but in the second cycle only Gideon’s leadership is followed by a period of rest and that of forty years. The narrative does not say that the Jephthah and Samson cycles brought rest. It simply states that the judges judged for a set number of years (Jephthah for six and Samson for twenty). The only rest in the second unit, brought by Gideon, was followed by a time of upheaval. This then was followed by Abimelech, who was a self-proclaimed ruler, not a judge, and who was a picture of the depravity of Israel.[29]

The absence of rest in the narrative is a sign that God was losing patience with Israel, even though He still provided a deliverer. This raises a question about repentance. If Israel had repented in each cycle, why were the last two judges not followed by rest?

Differences between the units. The second unit is also characterized by features absent in the first unit. At the start of the Gideon narrative the Israelites cried out, but before God raised up a deliverer He sent a prophet to rebuke them (6:8-10). The Jephthah account has a similar variation, except that this time God Himself rebuked the people. And there is no statement about God raising up a deliverer. Instead the people chose a ruler, and no statement is made that they sought God’s will in the matter.[30] The last cycle, that of Samson, reveals a sharp contrast because the people did not cry out. There is only an account of oppression and then a prophecy of a coming deliverer.

In 8:33, just before Abimelech’s rule, a preterite clause describes the Israelites turning to the foreign gods, “The Israelites turned and played the harlot after the Baals” (author’s translation). This is the second use of “turn” (שוב) in Judges. This word is used here after God sent a prophet to rebuke the people (6:8-10) and after Gideon’s leadership (8:33). The next time Israel cried out, God Himself rebuked them (10:10-17). Thus the placement of this use of “turn” between these two critical events seems to have a significant purpose in this second unit. During the cycles of Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson the degraded nature of Israel reached a peak. The statement here that Israel “turned” to the foreign gods strengthens the view that Israel had not truly repented.

The second unit also elaborates on the description of Israel’s sin. The first unit describes the sin in only the first introductory cycle: “they forsook the Lord and served Baal and the Ashtaroth” (2:13). But in the second unit the first two cycles of judges have long descriptions of the sins (8:33-35; 10:6), which highlights the downward spiral of Israel.[31]

While these two units follow the same structure introduced in chapter 2, they also have several points of contrast. These contrasts highlight the condition of the hearts of the Israelites. They were in a worse condition in the second unit compared to the first. If the Israelites truly repented in each cycle, why did each cycle of sin become progressively worse?

Repentance

Repentance In The Introduction (2:11-19)?

Presented as a summary, Judges 2:11-19 provides the outline for the following cycles.[32] Only three stages are mentioned: sin, punishment, and deliverance. In the introduction to the cycles there is a tension: God delivered His people into the hands of their enemies and He also delivered them from the hand of their enemies.[33]

The lack of mention of “crying out” in this introduction to the cycles may be a clue that their cries during the cycles did not involve repentance, and it may emphasize God’s grace in providing deliverance in spite of the lack of repentance. This is seen again in Judges 10 where the Israelites cried out to God and then turned right around and appointed a leader without consulting God.[34]

Others have suggested that the “crying out” stage was perhaps omitted in chapter 2 by a scribal error because of the similarity with the following phrase.[35] However, there is no manuscript evidence for such an error. Others have suggested that since the Israelites cried out in the cycles, such crying out should be understood as implied in the introductory framework.[36] However, reading a feature backwards into the summary goes against narrative structure, since an introductory summary sets the stage for what follows. Also the use of “cry” (זעק) is replaced in the introduction (2:18) with “groan” (נאקה).[37] And “groan” is stated as background information, not as a stage within the cycles.

The introduction to the cycles states that each successive generation acted “more corruptly” than those before (2:19). Such a statement is not found again in Judges. This leads Boling to suggest that this assessment may be an exilic updating of the text.[38] But why would a later editor compile the text in such a way as to imply that this feature was a part of all the cycles if it was not?

A Clear Case Of Repentance (10:10-16)?

One possible explicit reference to repentance is in Judges 10. The sin of Israel expanded from a general evil or serving of Baals to serving five other specific gods (v. 6). And following the cyclical pattern God is then described as becoming angry with them, and He sold them into the hands of the Philistines for eighteen years. Israel then cried out, and the narrator recorded that they confessed their sin and admitted that the punishment was just. In verse 10 the use of “our” in “our God” shows that the people at least recognized their special connection with Him. Though the confession seems genuine, there is an absence of any specific appeal for forgiveness or grace; there is only an appeal for deliverance from oppression.[39]

After their cry in verse 10 God scolded them with sarcasm and irony. In verse 13 He told them, “You have forsaken me and served other gods.” It is at least possible that the perfect and preterite verbs in that phrase are characteristic present perfects, stating that the forsaking and serving were characteristic of how the Israelites had acted throughout the cycles in Judges.

God told them He would not deliver them and that they should take up their crying with the foreign gods whom they served (v. 14). This response seems to indicate that God saw their cry as an attempt at manipulation and utilitarianism or perhaps just not sincere. God saw that they were trying to use Him, and He saw past their words to what was truly in their hearts.[40]

Israel did not give up. They confessed again and told God that He could do to them whatever He wanted, but they added, “Please deliver us this day” (v. 15). Only at this point did the narrator state that Israel put away the foreign gods and served (עבד) God (v. 16a). Then finally there was relief when God relented (v. 16b). Many translations understand verse 16b as saying that God grew tired of seeing Israel suffer, or that “He could bear the misery of Israel no longer.” Others suggest He was grieved on account of the misery of Israel, and that He delivered them because of His compassion. However, this clause is used three other times (Num. 21:4; Judg. 16:16; Zech. 11:8), and in each of these situations it refers to impatience or annoyance. This may indicate that here in Judges God delivered Israel because He was irritated with them.

The word often translated as Israel’s “suffering” or “misery” (עמל) can also mean “trouble,” “labor,” or “mischief.”[41] The traditional view takes this as a reference to Israel’s oppression.[42] However, Block suggests this refers to Israel’s attempts to gain God’s favor. God’s response then indicates that He was tired of their hypocrisy.[43] Another option is that “suffering” (עמל) has a moral or ethical dimension, in which case the continual evil of Israel was in view, not their hypocrisy.[44] God grew tired of their “suffering” or “labor” right after the narrator stated that Israel had put away her foreign gods and served (עבד) God. While “serving” God may indicate that they had truly turned back to Him, His response was not prompted by their service to Him. He got tired of or irritated with their “suffering” or “labor.”

There no indication that God forgave the people; yet Israel was still delivered from their oppression.[45] While Israel was delivered there is a conspicuous lack of rest (שקט) following the deliverance. Again, if Israel had repented, why would they not be granted rest? If the Israelites did repent in each cycle, that fact has been withheld in all but one of the cycles for literary reasons.[46] This raises the question as to what literary reasons the author of Judges could have had for leaving out a statement of Israel’s repentance elsewhere but including it in chapter 10. Of interest is the fact that this is the one time that repentance is possibly mentioned and it is not received well by God. The focus is on His response. If repentance were in view, such a rebuke by God would destroy its significance.

Outside References

1 Samuel 12:9-11

In an address to Israel Samuel recounted Israel’s history as a warning not to turn away from God now that they had a king. He began with the Exodus (1 Sam. 12:6-8), reminding them that God had heard the cries of their forefathers while they were oppressed in Egypt and had delivered them. Then Samuel reminded them of the time of the judges (vv. 9-11). He stated that during that time the people forgot (שכח) the Lord, so He sold them to their enemies, then the people cried out (זעק), and God sent judges to deliver them. Samuel presented a four-stage cycle, while the introduction to Judges (in 2:11-19) gives only three stages (it does not include the “crying out” stage).[47] Some understand that the broader context of Judges in light of 1 Samuel 12 indicates that repentance was at the heart of the Israelites’ cry each time they cried.[48] However, the issue is not so clear.

There are two problems with this retelling of the Judges story. First, the list of judges in 1 Samuel (Jerubbaal, Bedan, Jephthah, and Samuel) is not consistent with what is presented in Judges. In the list in 1 Samuel only two names are without question, Jerubaal and Jephthah, while Bedan and Samuel are not so certain.[49] The identity of Bedan is the most debated. Options for his identity include Barak,[50] Jephthah,[51] Abdon,[52] Jair, and Samson.[53]

Several options have been proposed on how to understand this discrepancy. Since Judges preserves in all other ways the history of the nation in the time of the Judges, it is not likely that Bedan refers to an unknown judge.[54] Others believe that the occurrence of Bedan indicates that this is not a literal and accurate portrayal of Judges. However, such variation seems to be a prerogative of narrative storytelling, as can be seen in the Deuteronomic reports of the events at Sinai (Deut. 5:9-10), which diverge from the narrative account in Exodus 19-24 with major and minor deletions and additions, with even the alteration of the order of the Ten Commandments.[55] Another option is that since Samuel attributes the origin of kingship to the Ammonite crises at Jabesh-Gilead, this passage presents Samuel’s biased view.[56]

A second problem with this retelling is the recorded confession. In Judges 10:10 the people said, “We have sinned against You, for indeed, we have forsaken our God and served the Baals.” After God rebuked them (vv. 11-14), the people replied, “We have sinned, do to us whatever seems good to You; only please deliver us this day” (v. 15). So they put away the foreign gods and served God.

However, the confession of the people in 1 Samuel 12:10 is different. There the people stated, “We have sinned, because we have forsaken the Lord and we have served the Baals and the Ashtaroth; but now deliver us from the hand of our enemies, and we will serve You.” The imperative “deliver us” followed by the prefixed form (“serve”) shows purpose or result.[57] Thus Samuel revealed a people who in essence were trying to dangle a carrot in front of God. If He delivered them from their oppressors, then they would serve Him. While this may sound harsh, a similar concept is seen at other places in the Old Testament, where God was asked to deliver them so that they may praise Him.[58] The people in Samuel’s account did admit they sinned, as in Judges 10:10, but their service to God seems to have been conditioned on what God did for them, and there is no indication that they returned to God and served Him as part of their confession.

Nehemiah 9:26-29

Nehemiah 9:26-29 is another account of the time of the Judges (preceded by an account of the Exodus, as in 1 Samuel). In this recounting a four-stage cycle is presented (sin, judgment, cry, deliverance). The Israelites were rebellious and disregarded God’s Law, and so God gave them into the hands of their enemies. Nehemiah described the Israelites as crying (צעק) to God during their distress (צר). As in five of the six cycles in Judges, there is no indication that Israel’s cry included anything more than a cry of pain. Nehemiah did not state or even hint that the Israelites repented. The deliverance of Israel came not because of repentance on Israel’s part, but because of God’s compassion (רחם).

Nehemiah 9:28 describes the Israelites as “turning” or “returning” (שוב) to evil. This use of “turn” seems to indicate that there may have been repentance. Yet it is possible that while the Israelites “turned” or “returned” to doing evil, they had never truly repented.

Verse 29 states that God admonished the Israelites to turn back (שוב) to His Law. This response indicates a lack of repentance, for “they acted arrogantly and did not listen to Your commandments but sinned against Your ordinances.” So while Israel is described as “turning” to evil in verse 28, verse 29 says the people did not turn to God when He admonished them. Thus Nehemiah’s retelling of the time of the judges presents Israel as a stubborn and obstinate people who continued to turn to evil and did not turn to God. This is not a picture of a repentant people.

Psalm 106:34-46

In Psalm 106 the psalmist was seeking deliverance. After his introductory praise to God and confession of sin, he turned to Israel’s history and recounted how God had delivered His people in the past. As in 1 Samuel 12:9-11 and Nehemiah 9:26-29, the psalmist began by mentioning the Exodus (Ps. 106:7-12), and then followed this with a recounting of the time of the nation’s wilderness wandering (vv. 13-33). Beginning in verse 34 the psalmist recounted their time in the land, focusing on the sins of the people (vv. 34-39). Verse 40 echoes the repeated phrase in Judges of how the Lord’s anger burned against His people, strengthened here in poetic style by the parallel line, which states that God “abhorred” (תעב) His people. The psalmist also recounted how God gave the people into the hands of other nations (vv. 41-42).

In verses 43-46 God delivered His people “many times,” but they “were rebellious in their attitude and they sank in their iniquity” (author’s translation). The prefixed verbal form (“they were rebellious,” יַמְרוּ) indicates a customary action.[59] This customary action may indicate that during the time of the judges Israel continually rebelled, or it may indicate that they habitually rebelled during each cycle (but not continually). As a result of this customary action they sank lower and lower.[60]

In verse 44 the psalmist stated that God saw their distress (צר) and heard their cry (רנה). This line begins with a preterite and shows a contrast with the preceding line. While Israel was rebelling and sinking, God saw their distress and heard their cry for help. There is no indication that the psalmist understood the deliverance to have originated with a cry of repentance. Instead the psalmist understood that the deliverance came in spite of Israel’s rebellion. This is further strengthened by the following verse: “And He remembered His covenant for their sake, and relented [had compassion] according to the greatness of His lovingkindness.” Deliverance originated with God’s compassion and His covenant and not from or because of the cry of the Israelites.

Conclusion

The choice of words used in Judges is interesting, since it does not demand that Israel repented. It does allow for the possibility that Israel repented. Yet since the text does not state that point clearly, one is left to question whether Israel did in fact repent.

The narrative structure does not answer the question of repentance, but it does provide a few clues. The cycles, patterns, and repetitions focus on the downward spiral of evil, and at the same time the narrator continually returned to the deliverance by God. Even Judges 10, which on the surface seems to describe a repentant people, focuses instead on God’s response to their confession. And even His response is prompted by their suffering and not by their confession. The outside references to the period of the Judges focus on the evil of Israel and the continual mercy and grace of God who delivered them over and over again.

When the whole of Judges is considered, repentance is not what the author wanted the audience to consider. In fact the lexical studies, narrative features, and outside references appear to suggest that Israel did not experience genuine repentance in this time in her history. Instead the theme of God’s judgment is held in tension with His compassion and grace. God is shown as the one who judges, but He also relented concerning the judgment when He saw Israel in pain. He is the God of His covenant and of lovingkindness. He remembered Israel and was kind to her.[61] So rather than leaving the audience with a theology of repentance, the author dismissed that aspect of the story (whether present or not) to convey the “contextually relevant truth,” namely, a theology of God’s lovingkindness and compassion.

Notes

1. J. A. Soggin, “שׁוב,” in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann, trans. Mark E. Biddle (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997), 3:1313-14.
2. Compare Isaiah 6:10; Jeremiah 3:7, 12; and Hosea 3:5, 11:5.
3. For example Deuteronomy 4:30, 30:2; 1 Samuel 7:3; and Ezekiel 14:6.
4. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody, 1980), 1:248.
5. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, trans. John T. Wallis (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 4:115.
6. Westermann and Jenni, Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, 3:1089.
7. Botterweck and Ringgren, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 4:121.
8. Exodus 32:14; Deuteronomy 32:36; 2 Samuel 24:16; Amos 7:3; Joel 2:13.
9. Dale Ralph Davis, Such a Great Salvation: Expositions of the Book of Judges (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 50. See 1 Samuel 5:10; Ezekiel 9:8; and Zechariah 6:8.
10. The Hebrew clause uses the preposition מן. “The Lord was sorry from (or because of) their groaning.”
11. The only other use is in Judges 21:6, which has נחם to describe the Israelites’ sorrow for what happened to the tribe of Benjamin.
12. Westermann and Jenni, Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, 2:738.
13. See Jeremiah 8:6.
14. Forgiveness is usually conveyed by the words סלח, נשא, and כפר.
15. Robert B. Chisholm, “A Commentary of the Book of Judges” (unpublished class notes, Dallas Theological Seminary, 2008), 133.
16. Botterweck and Ringgren, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 9:343.
17. Ibid., 6:125.
18. Frederick E. Greenspahn, “The Theology of the Framework of Judges,” Vetus Testamentum 36 (1986): 394.
19. Lillian R. Klein, The Triumph of Irony in the Book of Judges (Sheffield: Almond, 1988), 11.
20. Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985), 235-36.
21. Gale A. Yee, Judges and Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies (Minnea-polis: Fortress, 1995), 27.
22. Yaira Amit, The Book of Judges: The Art of Editing (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 36.
23. Ibid.
24. Davis, Such a Great Salvation, 135.
25. Paul Miller, “Moral Formation and the Book of Judges,” Evangelical Quarterly 75 (2003): 104.
26. Jacobus Marais, Representation in Old Testament Narrative Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 88.
27. Amit, The Book of Judges, 37.
28. See the chart at the end of this article.
29. While Abimelech ruled (שרר), there is no indication that he was in the same category as the judges. He is never referred to as a judge, and his rule was characterized by campaigning for the position, killing his own family members, and the absence of any indication that God raised him up.
30. While it is not said that Jephthah was raised up by God, some factors indicate that God used him (11:21, 29), and at his death he was given the same recognition as other judges: “Jephthah judged Israel six years” (12:7).
31. The last cycle, Samson’s cycle, merely states that the Israelites again did (or continued to do) evil in the eyes of God.
32. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 369.
33. Marais, Representation in Old Testament Narrative Texts, 88.
34. Bruce K. Waltke and Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical and Thematic Approach (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 619.
35. Moshe Weinfeld, “The Period of the Conquest and of the Judges as Seen by the Earlier and the Later Sources,” Vetus Testamentum 17 (1967): 207.
36. Gregory T. K. Wong, Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges: An Inductive, Rhetorical Study (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 181.
37. In Exodus 2:23-24 both נאקה and זעק are used to describe the pain of the Israelites under oppression.
38. Robert G. Boling, Judges, Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 76.
39. Daniel I. Block, Judges, Ruth, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1999), 346. Compare 1 Chronicles 21:8; Psalm 51:4-9; and Daniel 9:15-16.
40. Ibid., 347.
41. Chisholm, “A Commentary on the Book of Judges,” 305.
42. Compare Genesis 41:51 and Job 3:10.
43. Block, Judges, Ruth, 349.
44. Chisholm, “A Commentary on the Book of Judges,” 305.
45. Mark J. Boda and Gordon T. Smith, Repentance in Christian Theology (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 2006), 38.
46. Chisholm, “A Commentary on the Book of Judges,” 304.
47. Ralph W. Klein, 1 Samuel, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word, 1983), 116.
48. Francis, “They Cried Out to the Lord,” 11-12.
49. P. Kyle McCarter, 1 Samuel: A New Translation (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980), 211. Samson is included in the Septuagint–L and the Syriac, but the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint–BA have Samuel instead. Some critics believe that Samson was included in order to preserve the humility of Samuel. Samuel is a possible reading in light of 1 Samuel 7:3-17.
50. Howard Jacobson, “The Judge Bedan (1 Samuel XII 11),” Vetus Testamentum 42 (1992): 123. The Septuagint translated Bedan as “Barak.” This could be explained by a confusion of letters.
51. If the original was Bedan, then confusion remains. First Chronicles 7:17 mentions a Bedan who (like Jephthah) is a son of Gilead. Perhaps Bedan and Jephthah are two different names for the same person (Klein, 1 Samuel, 117). But a problem with associating Bedan with Jephthah is that Jephthah’s father was Gilead, whereas in 1 Chronicles 7:17 the father of Bedan is Ulam.
52. Ibid., 123-24. Ewald associates Bedan with Abdon in Judges 12:13-15, citing scribal confusion with the corrupted form of Bedan. Against this view is the point that the order would then not be chronological (which is not necessary) and that neither the rabbis nor the Septuagint translators made this connection. Also the account of Abdon in Judges is quite short (only one verse) and there is no indication that he fought against the enemies of Israel. However, a Midrashic text dating to the first to second centuries BC describes a war Abdon led against the Moabites.
53. Henry Smith, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Samuel (Edinburgh: Clark, 1899), 86. Rabbis have associated Bedan with Jair (10:3) and Samson.
54. Ibid.
55. Peter D. Quinn-Miscall, 1 Samuel: A Literary Reading (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1986), 74.
56. James S. Ackerman, “Who Can Stand before YHWH, This Holy God? A Reading of 1 Samuel 1-15,” Prooftexts 11 (1991): 14.
57. Bruce K. Waltke and Michael Patrick O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004), 577; and Robert B. Chisholm, From Exegesis to Exposition: A Practical Guide to Using Biblical Hebrew (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 110.
58. See Psalms 6:6-7, 51:14; and Isaiah 38:18.
59. Waltke and O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 502-3.
60. Ibid., 547-48.
61. This is not to say that Israel did not need to repent. Rather, God punished Israel repeatedly; yet God tempered that punishment with His grace. If Israel had truly repented by turning to God and obeying Him wholeheartedly (Deut. 30:2), God would have received their repentance and delivered them (v. 3). Repentance would have been met not with punishment tempered with grace, but with blessing.