Essentials of Faith

040The Judgeship of Jephthah

Download 040the_judgeship_of_jephthah_copy_copy.pdf

040The Judgeship of Jephthah

The Judgeship of Jephthah: Judges 11.29-12.7

In our concluding session of Jephthah’s judgeship we will review his victory over the Ammonites and his legacy. Two things in particular will mark this session – Yahweh will cease to be a passive witness and Jephthah will make a vow that makes no sense and will bring about the sacrificial death of his own daughter. There is much to learn here.

Jephthah’s Vow and the Defeat of the Ammonites—11:29–33

Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. (v29)

In v.29, we see Yahweh reaching out in mercy and empowering an Israelite leader to pursue Yahweh’s agenda. Jephthah may not realize his empowerment is of God as he begins to go on his recruitment campaign throughout the Transjordan region, building an army to engage the Ammonites, but it seems clear that the Spirit of God is the motivating force behind the recruiting campaign.  The writer gives us only the briefest summary of this tour. Jephthah leaves “the Israelite military base at Mizpah of Gilead (10:17), he traveled through Gilead (across the Jabbok River), into the territory of Manasseh, and then back home to Mizpah of Gilead. From here he went on to the area where the Ammonites were camped and engaged them in battle.” Immediately, upon completing his recruiting effort, instead of waiting for the Ammonites to strike, Jephthah seized the initiative, and struck first, without warning.

The writer does not tell us what Jephthah did on this tour, or how he went about recruiting fighting men from the tribes. We are not told how many men responded to his recruiting efforts, and unlike Gideon, we are not told of there being a reduction of forces so that it is clear that victory belongs to Yahweh. The writer is interested only in Jephthah’s movements.

 

Verses 11:30-31 are unique in the Bible. Block points out that “Verse 30 records the first and only time in which the man speaks directly to God himself.” Jephthah was successful in negotiating the terms of his leadership over Gilead, but he was unsuccessful in his negotiations with the Ammonites to settle their issues peacefully. Perhaps the vow is an attempt by Jephthah to negotiate or manipulate God. Perhaps the vow was an attempt “to secure victory from God with words.” The vow, at a minimum, shows us that Jephthah was “manipulating God and seeking to wrest concessions and favors from him like he had from the Gileadites and Ammonites.” But as has been previously suggested we have portrayed before us a picture of Jephthah’s declining success as a negotiator. The writer offers us this vow to Yahweh but the writer doesn’t even indicate that God heard Jephthah’s vow let alone his response to it. Whatever we may think of the vow, one thing is clear, Jephthah is still more concerned, more motivated, by his personal success and “personal agenda” than he is about what happens to Israel in all of this.

 

Jephthah’s vow is similar to four other vows found in the Old Testament: 1) Jacob’s vow in Gen 28:20-22; Israel’s vow in Num 21:2; Hannah’s vow in 1 Sam 1:11; and Absalom’s vow in 2 Sam 15:7-8. The vow of Jephthah expresses his inability to bring about victory over the Ammonites. The phrase “If you give the Ammonites into my hands,” indicates that Jephthah recognizes that he will lose everything he has gained “if God should abandon him.”

 

It is clear what Jephthah expected from Yahweh, victory over the Ammonites and his safe return from the battle, but what is less clear, is what did Jephthah promise God in return for his success in battle? There are several questions we might ask. First, what did Jephthah vow to present to Yahweh?  Did Jephthah think he would be offering an animal or a person? The NIV’s translation “whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me,” is as ambiguous as the original Hebrew. Arguments could be made for either an animal or a person. If we choose an animal then we could support our argument by suggesting that in the Old Testament, the phrase “sacrifice it as a burnt offering” would usually be used in conjunction with an animal sacrifice. We would also state the fact that throughout the Old Testament we find an “intense abhorrence of human sacrifices.” Following this line of thinking, “whatever comes out of the door of my house” should be understood in general terms to “mean anything in Jephthah’s possession that comes out to meet him.” This has been the historical, politically correct view held by many. For those holding this view, Jephthah’s vow “may be interpreted like many others: a pious expression, adding force to a prayer, by making a contract with God.”

 

However the politically correct view raises additional questions. For example, if it was indeed an animal sacrifice that was envisioned by Jephthah in his vow, then how should we explain his “extreme grief at being greeted by his daughter (v. 34)?” While contradicting the customarily held view of human sacrifice, the politically correct view also paints a picture that gives too much credit to Jephthah. The picture that seems to be in keeping with the purpose of the writer of Judges would be to understand Jephthah and his actions, as not a vote for animal sacrifice, nor to understand the vow as just being “rash and hastily worded,” but rather to see this vow as “another attempt to manipulate circumstances to his own advantage.” It is best to view Jephthah’s actions not through the lens of being an Israelite worshipping Yahweh, but rather to understand his actions as being those of pagan, a man of the times, where leaders were known to sacrifice children in attempts to manipulate the gods (2 Kgs 3.27). Vows made promising to sacrifice children “were not rash or impulsive but deadly serious expressions of devotion.”

 

The question, we must answer is: Was Jephthah was so determined to achieve victory over the Ammonites that he was willing to sacrifice his own child to gain a divine guarantee? At the time of the vow, we are not aware Jephthah has only the one child and that by putting her life at risk he also risks harm to himself. In another one of those ironies of Judges we realize the while perhaps securing his own victory with his vow, it is with the same vow that “he sentences his lineage to death.” For Jephthah, the most important thing was to gain military victory over the Ammonites and the cause of that victory could easily include the sacrifice of his own child to gain a divine guarantee.

 

Verses11:32-33 follow the pattern of earlier accounts. Verses 32 to 33 describe the war, beginning with a summary and followed by the details. The summary, in verse 32, identifies human and divine actions or roles: Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. The writer is quick to give credit where credit is deserved “the Lord gave them into his hands.” Verse 33 provides the details. He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.

 

The Lord gave the enemy into Jephthah’s hands. It was Yahweh who devastated the twenty enemy towns with an extremely great slaughter, causing the Ammonites to be subdued before the Israelites. The writer highlights the scope of the victory by defining it in geographic terms: “from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim.” While it is difficult to clearly identify the locations, what is clear is that these three locations along with the other twenty towns established a clear border between the Israelites and the Ammonites. “Unlike Gideon, Jephthah appears not to have pursued the Ammonites into their own heartland. But by destroying their border fortifications he eliminated the pressure they were applying to his people.”

 

Jephthah’s Fulfillment of the Vow—11:34–40

Verse 34 describes Jephthah’s unfortunate circumstance: When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter.

 

11:34 continues the story of Jephthah’s vow. In v30-31 Jephthah was apparently concerned with his negotiation with Yahweh, here in verses 34-39 we see the focus of Jephthah shift to the relationship with his daughter.  As Block points out, the writer “creates suspense by opening with the scene of the conquering hero returning from battle to his house at Mizpah.” But the writer does not allow our attention to stay on the conquering hero, but the writer, deftly turns our attention to the person coming out of the door to greet him.

 

As we have seen previously with other women in Judges, the picture of this girl is also very flattering. This nameless child is portrayed as possessing a character unlike her “ambitious and calculating father.”  Jephthah’s daughter possesses a code of honor which guides her life. “When she saw her father approaching, with natural childlike exuberance she picked up her timbrels and danced out to greet him. The victory over the Ammonites may have made him a military hero to the Transjordanian Israelites, but to this young girl he was a hero simply because he was her father.”  The writer, by use of the redundant circumstantial clause in v. 34b, communicates that this girl was no ordinary child in her father’s eyes, she was his only child. The key issue was that Jephthah had no other children.  If his daughter died childless, Jephthah would have no descendants. This was viewed as a terrible curse in biblical times—to die without leaving any descendants to continue the line.

 

Dainel Block offers us an interesting insight into this story of the vow. He suggests that “with the expression “only child,” the narrator intentionally links this account with the account of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac as a whole burnt offering in Genesis 22, where Isaac is identified as Abraham’s son and “only child.””

 

The story of the vow is another of the ironies that the writer of Judges is so adept at using. With the death of the young girl, her father has become a tragic figure, who the writer presents as “a pathetic picture of stupidity, brutality, ambition, and self-centeredness.” The irony here is that the man who would have been the master of his own fate “has become a victim of his own rash word.”  The mighty warrior of Tob, the conquering hero of the Ammonites, has been reduced to being “a captive in his own house.”  How pitiful are Jephthah’s responses to the circumstances resulting from his rash vow?

 

Even in apparent concern over the fate of his daughter, because of his vow, Jephthah still sees things as being all about him. Verse 35 says: When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, Oh My daughter you have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.” Notice that Jephthah’s grief does not appear to be for his daughter but for himself, he seemingly even goes so far as to accuse her as being responsible for his ruin. Here we are given the irony of a man who sought to manipulate God for his success being “doomed by the very person he was willing to sacrifice for his own well-being.”

 

Another lesson to be learned is from the resignation of Jephthah that he could not retract the words that he had so rashly uttered to God. The man who used words to become ruler of Israel, was brought down by his own words, he was “a victim of his own vow and of his daughter.”‘

 

Verse 11:36, offers us the picture of the despicable behavior of the hero in Israel being contrasted with the sensitivity and submissiveness of the child. The logic of the child was simple and accepting: “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. In the words of a young girl, the writer takes the opportunity to declare Yahweh’s answer to Jephthah’s declaration of 11.27: “Let the Lord, the Judge, decide the dispute this day between the Israelites and the Ammonites.”

The outcome of the battle reflects the fact that Yahweh had indeed rendered judgment between the Israelites and the Ammonites.

 

In 11:37, the girl, with great courage and sense of duty, tells her father to do to her what he had vowed. She attempts to soften the blow by asking her father to give her two months time in which she can spend with her friends weeping over the fact that she would never know a man.

 

In perhaps another picture of irony by the writer, we are invited to compare the lives of father and daughter. Her father, Jephthah, was thrown out of his house and he took to living in the hills surrounding Gilead with his worthless companions, while his daughter spends her final two months in the hills, with her friends, bemoaning the fact that she would die a virgin. “In the end the nameless girl’s friends wept with and for her, but Jephthah wept only for himself.”

 

There are also sexual implications of these two scenes that we should consider.  “Jephthah was expelled from home and sentenced to a life in the hills because he was the child of an illicit affair; this young girl chooses this sentence because she had had no children.” The Old Testament perspective is “that parents live on in their children.”  The thought of death without children “was considered terrible fate.” And again we are left with the conclusion that Jephthah made his vow in an attempt to secure present success, only to learn that it was because of his vow that he ends up sacrificing his future. 

 

This story brought to a quick conclusion in verse 38-39a.. Jephthah grants his daughter’s request to go off with her friends for two months. She spends her last days in the mountains, sorrowful for the fact that she will die a virgin, never having known the joys of sexual intimacy, and most importantly, she will have died without continuing the family line. With the death of his daughter, Jephthah’s family line also dies. With words that have reverberated across the Old Testament, the writer tells us simply: “he did to her as he had vowed.” It is these words that have caused such debate about whether or not an Israelite could do the unspeakable: sacrifice a child to Yahweh as a burnt offering.

 

The story of Jephthah’s vow and his daughter ends in 11.39b-40. We are reminded that despite his daughter’s mourning, her condition did not change. And as her condition did not change, the fate of her father, a man who so greatly desired security in this life, also did not change. The final verse is telling. “No memorials were erected for Jephthah, but the memory of his daughter was immortalized in a festival celebrated in her honor.”

The issue for most readers is this: Did Jephthah offer his daughter up as a human sacrifice? Or was she dedicated to serve the Lord as a virgin for the rest of her life?

 

Once Jephthah cast his vow, and Yahweh produced the result requested, Jephthah was left with three options regarding what he could do next.  First, Jephthah could have left his portion of the vow unfulfilled. This may have brought a curse upon his head but it would have spared his daughter and by sparing his daughter it would have provided the possibility of securing his own future by her producing children.

 

A second option was to have simply “paid twenty shekels to the priest at the central shrine as compensation for the life of his daughter.” Leviticus 27:1-8 provides the regulations for cases in which one person devotes another person to the “sanctuary for sacred service and then for reasons unspecified finds it impossible or impractical to fulfill the vow.”

 

Lastly, Jephthah could have done as he did: fulfill the vow to the letter. We are not given any hints that Jephthah even gave a thought to exercising a different option. This begs the question: “If the author found this act so abhorrent, why does he not express his revulsion at this outrage?”  As Block notes, the answer is, he does. The writer’s revulsion can be seen by his “location of the Jephthah cycle within the “Book of Deliverers.”

 

First, remembering principle held by the writer in 2:18-20 of the downward spiral effect, and noting that the story of Jephthah is placed after the Gideon story, which concluded “with the construction of the paganized ephod,” it is easy to conclude that Jephthah’s conduct is to be understood “as a further illustration of Israel’s increasingly Canaanized character.” And second, by following immediately after the story of Abimelech, the writer is inviting a comparison between Abimelech and Jephthah.  “Abimelech had sacrificed his Israelite half-brothers at the altar of his own ambition so he could rule over his Canaanite half-brothers. Jephthah did one better-he sacrificed his own daughter so that he might rule over a tribe of his Israelite half-brothers.”

 

Jephthah’s sacrifice of his daughter represents the ultimate in human abuse. “He not only violated the human race by eliminating one of its members, an image of God with inherent dignity equal to his own, but he also violated his own flesh and blood. If homicidal crimes may be classified, pedicide must rank among the most heinous.” 

The inclusion of this episode in the Jephthah narrative reminds us of one of the “Greek Tragedies.” Jephthah’s life can be summarized as “a man who overcame the abuses of his own past to become the foremost military general in his time and the ruler of the Transjordanian tribes. With the eventual support of his country folk and empowered by the Spirit of God, he possessed tremendous potential for greatness. Tragically and ironically the man whose basic gift was facility with words falls prey to his own foolish utterance.” But the tragedy does not end with Jephthah but also includes his daughter. Her father’s vow renders her both childless and dead. The reader is left to grapple with the question: Where is God? Yahweh remains disturbingly silent. 

:

 War with Ephraim—12:1–6

Verse 1 records the complaint of Ephraim. The men of Ephraim crossed over the Jordan River and confronted Jephthah in the town of Zaphon (Jos 13.27). Upon their arrival, Ephraim confronts Jephthah with their complaint that Jephthah had the audacity of going to war against the Ammonites without calling upon them for help. Possessing an undue high opinion of themselves, the Ephraimites took this as a deliberate insult. They threaten to kill Jephthah by burning his house with him in it. It is easy to see the tribesmen of Ephraim as complainers. When Joshua divided the Land, they were not happy with what they received (Josh. 17:14–16) and earlier in this book (Judges 8:1), they were offended by Gideon because they were not invited earlier to help fight the Midianites, and here they find fault with Jephthah. Earlier, Gideon pacified them; but Jephthah did not pacify them; he instead killed 42,000 Ephraimites (12:6).

 

Judges 12:2–3 provides Jephthah’s response to Ephraim. In verse 2, he clarifies the situation by saying that he did indeed ask for their help and that when they didn’t respond he took action without them. Then he makes this victory statement: And the Lord gave me victory over them.” Jephthah concludes by asking them why they have come to him looking for a fight.

 

In verse 4, tribal war breaks out between the Gileadites and the Ephraimites. The Gileadites, motivated by the insults and taunts of the Ephraimites, wreak great vengeance on the Ephraimites.

 

In verses 5 to 6 we are told of the slaughter of the Ephraimite fugitives. It begins with the Gileadites capturing the crossing points of the Jordan River. The purpose was to cut off the escape of the remnants of the Army of Ephraim that had escaped the field of battle. The irony is that, under Gideon, the Ephraimites captured the fords of the Jordan against the Midianites; now the same tactic is used against the fugitives of Ephraim.  Now it is the Ephraimites who have become fugitives; the very term they used with such contempt against Jephthah and the Gileadites now became applicable to them. If they denied being an Ephraimite, there was a test. If one failed the test, he was killed by the Gileadites at the fords of the Jordan. The total Ephraimites killed in the battle is recorded as being 42,000. The Ephraimites are never again viewed as making such arrogant claims or being a tribe worthy of respect. Ephraim was indeed taught a bloody lesson.

 

Judgeship of Jephthah—12:7

“Jephthah led Israel six years. Then Jephthah the Gileadite died and was buried in a town in Gilead.” Three statements are given in this verse to sum up Jephthah’s judgeship; duration of leadership, his death, and his burial.

The Hebrew reads in the cities of Gilead, and not in “one” of the cities of Gilead. This reading gave rise to a rather unique rabbinic interpretation. The Midrash to Genesis 24:13–14 states, “Because he was stricken with leprosy as a punishment, his death was lingering, and his limbs fell off one by one, and were buried in different cities where they happened to drop off.” Ralbag states that the different parts of his body were, at his own request, buried in different cities where he had achieved victory over the Ammonites; and his purpose was to leave behind a memorial of his deeds, seeing that he had no children to perpetuate his memory. This is a sad commentary, on the end of a sad figure of a judge in Israel – Jephthah, the Negotiator- pagan or Israelite?

039Jephthah: The Negotiator

Download 039jephthah_the_negotiator.pdf

039Jephthah: The Negotiator

Jephthah: The Negotiator 10.17-11.29

The Agent of Deliverance 10.17-11.11

As we will see later in this cycle, Yahweh will empower Jephthah with His spirit (11.29), and the writer will recognize Yahweh as the author of victory over the Ammonites, but here Yahweh is given no role in Jephthah’s rise as leader and deliverer of Israel. In this section, we will look at Israel’s need for a deliverer (10.17-18), the emergence of Jephthah as the candidate (11.1-3) and Jephthah’s selection as Israel’s next deliverer (11.4-11).

Israel’s Need for a Deliverer 10.17-18

Verse 17 describes two armies, the army of Ammon, the Ammonites, who gathered and encamped in Gilead and the army of Israel, which was gathered and encamped in Mizpah.  In verse 18, this confrontation led to the search for a leader.  Ammon’s entry into the heart of Transjordan Israel crystallizes Israel’s lack of leadership and the need for a deliverer. Here again, the possibility of a king is raised within this book. These two verses serve as the introduction to Jephthah.

The threat of the Ammonites is focused on the Gileadites and so it falls to the elders of Gilead to take action in trying to find someone to drive the enemy from their midst. As an incentive to apply for the position, the elders offer the office of ruler of the Gileadites to the man who will lead them against Ammon. This should be understood for what it is a call for a volunteer with the inducement of being made ruler over the Gileadites.

The writer creates the sense that there is little, if any order in Gilead. We are presented with, at best, a loose-knit organization that haphazardly recognizes the need for a leader, brought about by the imminent threat of an enemy army perched in the middle of their land and offers whatever it takes to get someone to step up and assume responsibility for the defense of Gilead, and at worst, a failed bureaucracy led by little men who didn’t have the nerve or courage to deal with life-threatening situations. There is, more importantly no thought offered of the people turning to Yahweh and seeking his leadership on this matter.  The writer shows this as an example of the Canaanization of the Gileadites, as they seek answers in their own power, while Yahweh’s silence is deafening.

As we saw in the narrative of Abimelech, failure and death seem to follow leaders who are motivated by personal ambition and power rather than leaders who are “servant leaders,” motivated by a call to serve the needs of others rather than their own needs. The Jephthah cycle will bear similar fruit. Jephthah is another bramble, in the tradition of Abimelech, and like Abimelech, Jephthah was a bramble that “would not be long in sprouting.”

Emergence of Jephthah: 11.1-3

These three verses serve as a flashback, taking us to a time that chronologically is prior to the events of 10:17-18. In v1 we are introduced to the Jephthah the Gileadite, the son of a man named Gilead. In the Bible, Gilead is a place but it is also the name of a tribe, clan and family as well as a name given to a man. He comes from the place, Gilead, now suffering from the Ammonite oppression and is described as a mighty man of valor. In the Book of Judges, this term is only used of Jephthah and his predecessor, Gideon (6:12). The writer will portray Jephthah as a person who distinguishes “himself as a resourceful warrior, one without any hint of timidity.” Jephthah was the son of a harlot or a concubine. Some rabbis claim she was an innkeeper like Rahab, trying to avoid the status of a prostitute but the word used here mean prostitute.  We are not told whether his mother was an Israelite or a Canaanite and one was as likely as the other. Jephthah’s father was a man of nobility who also had sons from his true wife. Jephthah’s “mother’s profession, the father’s actions, the character of Jephthah’s half-brothers, and Jephthah’s own lifestyle all point to a thoroughly Canaanized environment.”

Judges 11:2 records how Jephthah’s half-brothers, motivated by greed and perhaps what they considered to be his social inferiority, drove him from Gilead, to keep him from inheriting Gilead’s wealth. This action taken by his brothers gives us a picture of the spiritual condition of Israel. By betraying their brother, they violated Israel’s laws for “care and compassion for the outcast (e.g., Deut 10:12-22), particularly injunctions commanding one to love one’s neighbor [let alone one’s brother] as oneself (Lev 19:33-34).” Israelite inheritance law depended on the father not the mother and while Jephthah’s birth by a prostitute gives them the excuse for expelling him, but this should require a legal decision by the court. There is no evidence that this took place which is why the actions of Jephthah’s brothers would be considered betrayal.

Verse 3 provides us with four insights into Jephthah and his career after he has been driven from home by his brothers.  First, it notes his being expelled by his family. Second, driven from his home, he fleas to the land of Tob, where third, he lives a life of brigand and bandit, surrounding himself with a group of outcasts such as himself. Lastly, we are told that he led raids into the towns and villages of Gilead, where they would have acquired some useful experience in fighting and perhaps military tactics.

Daniel Block sees the background of Jephthah as “another illustration of the moral degeneration, the Canaanization of Israelite society.” Israel was aware that Yahweh was not tolerant of sexual relations outside of marriage and that would include relations with prostitutes. “But according to official Israelite standards, for men to treat a girl as a prostitute was both an offense to family honor and a violation of the marriage covenant with one’s wife.” Earlier we looked at the fact that the writer does not identify the prostitute’s nationality. However, If she was an Israelite, then this is a direct violation of extramarital sexual relations, and a violation of the laws that prohibit a father from selling his daughter into prostitution (Lev 19:29), a practice still in operation today in the modern world in many countries. If she was a Canaanite, then this is a violation of the command against having intercourse with Canaanites (Ex 34.15-16; Deu 7.1-5). As Block says: “If she was a prostitute working in the service of a Canaanite cult center, the crime is worse still, for then Gilead has become a patron and contributor to the Canaanite religious establishment.” Despite the answers to these questions there is no denying that Jephthah’s later conduct, like Abimelech’s before him, follows “Canaanite patterns.”

The Call of Jephthah – 11.4-11

Verse 4 renews the primary plot of Jephthah’s story from 10:17, after this parenthetical interlude, and continues on with the recounting of the Ammonite oppression, as the children of Ammon make war against Israel. Up until now Israel suffered Ammonite oppression, but now the Ammonites launched a military campaign of expulsion that had to be resisted.

Judges 11.5-6 explains that the Gileadites had reached a point of desperation, no one had stepped forward to lead them against the Ammonites and the enemy was on their doorstep about to rollover Gilead. Desperate, Gilead sent a delegation of elders to Jephthah. Why Jephthah? It is likely that Jephthah reputation as a fearless and bold leader of his band of robbers had made him the only logical choice for the Gileadites. The emissaries to Jephthah were the elders of Gilead, and, as 11:7 shows, this would have included the head of the House of Jephthah’s father. The purpose of the emissaries was to fetch Jephthah out of the land of Tob to be Gilead’s leader so that they might fight the Ammonites.

As Block writes in his commentary: “The negotiations between the elders and Jephthah were hard-nosed and businesslike,” without appeal to “God and country,” the elders offered Jephthah the opportunity to lead them into battle against the Ammonites. Note that the elders did not offer Jephthah as much as they had in 10:18, to anyone who would volunteer to lead them in battle. In the first instance they offered rule overall the people, to Jephthah they only offered chieftainship in battle. In presenting Jephthah with a lesser role than they had made to any full citizen of Gilead, they were saying you are good enough to lead us into battle but not good enough to rule over us.

Jephthah’s bitter response to the elders is recorded in v7. Intentionally playing hard to get, Jephthah responds by recounting how he has been rejected in Gilead and driven from his father’s house. Among the group of elders that came to him were some who were actually members of his family who had actively engaged in disinheriting him, while the other elders were Gileadites who could have intervened and prevented Jephthah’s illegal disinheritance but chose to do nothing. Looking at the irony of the situation, Jephthah asks the elders that “since they did not help him in his distress; why should he help them in their distress?”

The response of the elders, in verse 8, continues the irony. With their backs against the wall, the elders responded with an admission that they need him now regardless of the history between them. They then sweeten the pot by promising that if he is victorious over the Ammonites that they will make him ruler over all of Gilead. 

In verse 9, Jephthah we see Jephthah demanding a firm guarantee that the leaders of Gilead will keep their word him and make him ruler if he is victorious in battle against the Ammonites. This is an example of what we would call opportunism. The writer creates a sense that Jephthah’s willingness to defend Gilead has less to do with a sense of duty than the opportunity to gain as much as he could from the situation. Jephthah’s response also promotes the feeling that he is still feeling alienated from these very people that he is about to agree to defend. Jephthah reminds us of Abimelech, driven by self-interest, without thought of more lofty aims. His appeal to Yahweh strikes the reader as an empty phrase, given without thought or meaning. It is similar to an unbeliever responding “God Bless” to a person who has sneezed.

Verses 10-11 records the agreement of the elders to Jephthah’s terms and Jephthah’s acceptance of the position as their military commander. The Hebrew word, in verse 10, that the NIV translates “witness,” means listening. “Yahweh shall be listening before us.” The meaning is that God is listening and will punish them if they do not keep their word to him.  “Left with no options, the elders of Gilead appealed to Yahweh as a witness to their good faith in promising to make him [Jephthah] their head.” In v11 we see the “coronation” of Jephthah as the military leader of Gilead but this event raises some questions.

First, this is the first mention of a sacred shrine dedicated to Yahweh located in Transjordanian Mizpah. Why now? Block speculates “that, like Jephthah’s reference to Yahweh in v. 9 and the elder’s appeal to him in v. 10, the entire ceremony represents a glib and calculated effort to manipulate Yahweh. In reality the witness Jephthah is concerned about is not Yahweh, but the army of Gilead, camped at Mizpah.”

Second, unlike God’s previous role in raising up judges, in this instance, Yahweh is limited to being a witness to an agreement “between a desperate people and an ambitious candidate.” Will Yahweh allow Himself to be used by the Gileadites and Jephthah as just a witness?

Lastly, what is Jephthah’s relationship with Yahweh? Does he have a sense of Yahweh’s presence and activity in his life? The question is perhaps simpler than that: Is Jephthah an Israelite of a Canaanite at heart?

The writer does not provide us with immediate answers to these questions. However, it does become clear that the writer, “regardless of Jephthah’s and the Gileadites’ views of the role of God,” recognizes that it was Yahweh who played the significant role in delivering Israel from Ammonite oppression. The result is the same when God acts as the deliverer of Israel but the accomplishing of this deliverance takes some interesting turns as we shall witness.

Negotiations with the Ammonites: 11.12-28

Jephthah immediately takes charge of the situation and tries to avoid war, or at least buy himself some time to prepare for it, by negotiating with the Ammonites. He begins by challenging the Ammonites about their purpose for the starting a war with the Gileadites. The question to the Amonnites was: “What do you want of me- that you are come to, me to fight against my land? In other words, he is claiming that the Ammonites were the aggressors in this war. There was a note of patriotism in his statement of “my land,” the same land that had earlier rejected him. Jephthah is seen here as acting remarkably kinglike as he dispatches envoys, negotiates directly with the king of Ammon, and deals with issues “as if they were personal between him and the Ammonite king,” while claiming the land as his own. He puts the burden on the Ammonites by accusing them of military aggression.

The Ammonite king responds, in verse 13 saying that Israel took away my land. This taking of the land took place when Israel came up out of Egypt. This king had no trouble believing in the Exodus, which happened three hundred years earlier, as he now accused Israel of taking away the land when they came from Egypt. The disputed territory included three directions: to the south: from the Arnon, which was the border between Moab to the south and Ammon to the north; to the north: even unto the Jabbok, which was the border between Ammon to the south and Gilead to the north; and to the east unto the Jordan. The king’s complaint was followed by a demand Jephthah and the Gileadites to restore those lands again peaceably. The truth was that the Ammonites had never held this territory, because the Arnon River served as the border between Moab and the Amorites. The king’s claim was due not only to a desire for more land on the part of the Ammonites, but also for a clearly marked border, which their control of these rivers would accomplish.

Jephthah responds to the Ammonite’s king by sending a lengthy, formal message. The message is remarkable for the style and sophistication of argument. The messengers deliver Jephthah’s message to the Ammonite king in v15-27.

The message begins with a statement, in v15, that Israel has never claimed title to any land that belonged to Ammon or even Moab. Thereafter, Jephthah disputes the Ammonites claims using arguments are based on historical fact (vv. 16-22), Yahweh’s will (vv. 23-24), personal indictment of the Ammonite king (v. 25), and chronology (v. 26). Jephthah expresses these arguments by the use of effective rhetorical questions. Verse 27 brings to a fitting end the argument begun in v. 15.

Jephthah begins his second message by denying the idea that Israel took away the land of Moab, in verse 15. This was a crucial statement because Moab had a stronger historical claim to the land than the Ammonites, yet they did not dispute Israel’s control. Moab lost the territory through the conquest by the Amorites, and Israel gained the territory by conquering the Amorites. In keeping with Numbers 21:24, Israel made no claim to Ammonite territory. This was in keeping with Deuteronomy 2:9, which told Israel to respect the borders of Moab, Edom, and Ammon. In laying out the historical circumstances that led to the Israelites’ occupation of Gilead, Jephthah sounds a bit like a modern-day politician as he conveniently mixes up facts with Israel’s encounters with the Moabites, Ammonites, and Amorites; yet he makes three key points.

Verse 16-18, Jephthah answers the Ammonites charge of Israel being the aggressor while painting Israel in a positive light, by highlighting the diplomatic steps Israel took some three hundred years earlier to secure permission to pass through the lands of Edom and Moab. With their request for permission denied, Israel chose to march through a desert rather than engage in military action. They did not enter Moab territory. Jephthah’s not including any reference to Ammon at this point was another subtle statement, that from Israel’s view, the Ammonites weren’t even in the area when Israel first settled in Gilead. Jephthah’s first point is that: “The Ammonites’ present claim is a fabrication based on a revisionist understanding of history.”

Then in Judges 11:19-21, Jephthah makes his second point as he reviews the history of Israel’s war with Sihon, king of the Amorites.  The point is that “originally Israel had no interest in the territory Ammon is claiming-they just wanted to pass through (vv. 19-21). The land came into Israel’s hands because Sihon denied them the permission they asked for to just pass through the land on their way to the Promised Land. Here again, Jephthah demonstrates that Israel is basically a peace loving people. They tried to deal diplomatically with Sihon but when that failed and they were attacked by Sihon and his army, Yahweh, the God of Israel, delivered the Amorites into Israel’s hands and they possessed all the border of the Amorites, from the Arnon (which was the southern border) even unto the Jabbok (which was the northern border), and from the wilderness (which was the eastern border) even unto the Jordan (which was the western border).

In 11:22, Jephthah makes his third point that Ammon has no historical claim to this land (v. 22). The land that Ammon is claiming as their’s, which lies between the Arnon and the Jabbok, the desert and the Jordan, “had previously belonged to the Amorites, not Ammon.”  Upon Israel’s defeat of the Amorites this land became the possession of Israel. “Accordingly, Israel has never claimed any land belonging Edom, Moab, or Ammon.” Thus the Ammonites had no historical claim to this land.

The Theological Argument is found in 11:23-24.  Jephthah uses two rhetorical questions to present his two theological arguments. First, since Yahweh drove the Amorites from the land, the land belongs to Israel; the Ammonites had no interest in it. Second, since Israel possesses whatever Yahweh gives them, then the Ammonites must be satisfied with whatever their god Chemosh gives them. In the ancient Near East it was understood that the god of each nation has a “duty and passion was to care for his people, which included providing them with a homeland.”

Jephthah’s contempt for the Ammonites contributes to the Ammonites ignoring his speech, but Jephthah also displays contempt for his own theological traditions. Traditionally, Israel acknowledged only Yahweh, who was also Israel’s covenant Lord. It was Yahweh who determined the boundaries of the nations. It was also part of Israel’s tradition to credit “Yahweh with giving the Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites the land they now occupy.” “Despite Jephthah’s pious reference to “the Lord our God” in v. 24, his theology is fundamentally syncretistic, so ideological compromises like this are not surprising.”

In verse 25, Jephthah presents his third argument, the personal argument. He begins with more rhetorical questions: “Are you better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab?” He follows that question with a second. “Did he ever quarrel with Israel or fight with them?” The answer to both questions was “no.” Jephthah’s point was that if the Moabite king, at the time of Israel’s occupation of the Land, made no claim on the land that was formerly his then how could the Ammonites think that they had any claim to the land now? And if Balak didn’t go to war against Israel, then why would the Ammonites, who were weaker than Balak and the Moabites, dare to attempt what the stronger Moabites would not? In reality, Balak did resist Israel (Nu 22.24), but it was not over land but rather fear. Israel’s strength and their recent victory over the Amorite kings, Sihon and Og, caused the Moabites to fear “the power and presence of this newly arrived people.”

Jephthah’s last argument, the chronological argument, is found in v26. If Israel had occupied this land for more than three hundred years and the Ammonites had done nothing, then, why now? If there was a basis to Ammon’s claim then why did they wait all this time to exercise it? “A figure like three hundred years was intended to make an impression on the Ammonites.”

11:27 Jephthah concluded his speech (v. 27) with a declaration of his personal innocence and a direct accusation of wrongdoing on the part of the Ammonites for their military aggression against Israel. He also announced his resignation of the case to Yahweh, the divine Judge. He obviously had no intention of peacefully turning this region of Gilead over to the Ammonites, as the latter had requested (v. 13).

We learn how Jephthah’s finely crafted argument affected the King of Ammon in v28. The king of Ammon refused to listen to Jephthah’s message.  The Ammonite king was eager for a fight and to have an opportunity to make his mark in the region.

The picture we have of Jephthah at the end of this section is one filled with ambiguity.  Jephthah recognizes Yahweh’s role and gives Him credit in defeating the Amorites (v. 21) and Jephthah concludes his argument by seemingly allowing Yahweh to be the final judge in determining who has the proper claim on the land. Yet, as Block suggests: “the Gileadite leader’s negotiations with the Ammonites betray a practical Yahwist. He is the sort of man whom we wonder if God will use but who has no reservations about manipulating God for his own use.” We will see how this plays out in our next session.

038Jephthah: Introduction

Download 038jephthah_introduction.pdf

038Jephthah: Introduction

Before we turn to look at our next major judge or deliverer, Jephthah, in the Book of Judges, we must look briefly at governorships of two lesser judges, Tola and Jair (10.1-5). 

Prelude
 
Tola (10.1-2), is one of the judges for whom there is not a great deal of detail. Verse1 tells us that Tola arose to save Israel. This is a role similar to that of judges that had gone before him, Othniel, Ehud, Barak, and Gideon.  We can only speculate why Israel needs deliverance, or from whom they needed deliverance because the writer gives us no details as to whom he saved Israel from. Daniel Block, in his commentary on the Book of Judges, suggests: "It is curious, however, that the nation is in need of deliverance after the death of Abimelech. This probably reflects the seriousness of the chaos produced in the wake of Abimelech’s rampages."

The name: Tola means “worm.” His family was: the son of Puah, the son of Dodo, a man of Issachar, which means that he and his father were named after the two sons of Issachar (Gen. 46:13; Num. 26:23). He is the only judge whose father’s and grandfather’s name is given. This implies something significant about his family or clan, but no details are given.

Verse 2 tells us that Tola’s judgeship lasted for twenty-three years and that he apparently lived, ruled and was buried in Shamir, which was located in Ephraim. Shamir's exact location has been lost but the fact that the next judge to follow after Abimelech's aborted reign, came from a place said to be located a short distance across the border from Shechem is likely no accident. Later in the days of David, the Clan of Tola would be known for its valor (I Chron. 7:1–2). He died and was buried in his own hometown, in Shamir. The message that the writer is portraying is that Tola live, governed, died and was buried, and he restored order and stability to the "office of Judge."

The writer prepares the way for the following Jephthah cycle by characterizing Jair (10.3-5), the second “secondary” judge, “by geography rather than by lineage.” He, like Tola, is another judge about which we have little information. In verse 3, the name of the judge, Jair, the Gileadite, shows he was of the Tribe of Manasseh (Num. 32:41; Deut. 3:14; I Kg. 4:13). The fact that he was a Gileadite shows that he came from Eastern Manasseh in the Trans-Jordan. The length of his judgeship of Israel was twenty-two years.

Verse 4 describes Jair’s family wealth and status. As to his family and wealth, he had thirty sons that rode on thirty ass colts. That he had thirty sons shows that he was likely a polygamist, having several wives. That he had thirty ass colts shows his rank and affluence. Asses were highly esteemed as riding animals and often carried special recognition (cf. Judg. 1:14; I Sam. 25:20). As to his status, his family had thirty cities, which are called Havvoth-jair unto this day, which are in the land of Gilead. We are told of Jair’s death and burial in verse 5.

The writer's emphasis Jair was to focus the reader on peace and prosperity, in contrast to the insecurity and danger characterized in the days of Shamgar and Jael back in verses 6 to 10. However, in the next cycle, when this same territory was being threatened by the Amorites, none of these inhabitants could be called upon to lead a Jewish army, a situation that in turn led to the role of Jephthah. It is unlikely that this notice of Jair’s rule in Gilead is placed before the Jephthah narrative, which also takes place in the Transjordan. "The turmoil and distress that precipitates the rise of Jephthah contrasts with the order and tranquility of Jair’s rule. Apparently the Gileadites were unprepared for the coming emergency. When Jephthah appears, he must earn the authority to rule; it is neither an inherited nor a natural right." 

Background 

Prior to the Jephthah cycle there are some additional items we should consider. This cycle is sandwiched between two minor judges at the beginning of the cycle, Tola and Jair, and three minor judges immediately following the conclusion of the Jephthah cycle (12:7), Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon who follow (12.8-15).  The Jephthah cycle loosely follows the general pattern of previous accounts, particularly the steps of sin, punishment, and cry for relief. Yet there are certain steps of the general cycle that are missing in this cycle. There is no mention of Yahweh raising up a deliverer. In fact, the rise of Jephthah is presented as being a human event. Second, the writer does mention that Jephthah is empowered by the Spirit of God and that Yahweh gave the Ammonites over to him, but all of this is overshadowed by Jephthah’s vow. Third, there is no mention of a period of rest after Jephthah delivers his people. Similarly, to the summaries of the minor judges, the Jephthah cycle ends with a statement giving notice of the duration of his time of judgeship (six years), his death and burial. 

It is helpful to understand in addition to the basic cycle formula of sin, punishment, crying out, raising up a deliverer, victory, and rest, this cycle contains five episodes that involve a confrontation and a resolution. Block has identified these episodes as follows:

                   

Episode 1	Yahweh versus Israel (10:6–16)
Episode 2	Jephthah versus Gilead (10:17–11:11)
Episode 3	Jephthah versus Ammon (11:12–28)
Episode 4	Jephthah versus His Daughter (11:29–40)
Episode 5	Jephthah versus Ephraim (12:1–6)   

There are also several points of common ground between the Jephthah cycle and the Gideon cycle. Each cycle opens with a confrontation between God and Israel (6:7–10; 10:6–16). Jephthah and Gideon begin as men of no reputation and end as tyrants in Israel. Each is empowered by the Spirit of God marked by the rallying of the troops (6:34–35; 11:29). Jephthah and Gideon respond to being divinely empowered by expressions of doubt (6:36–40; 11:30–31). Each gains a victory over the enemy against the odds (7:19–25; 11:32–33). They each have a confrontation with jealous Ephraimites after the battle has been won (8:1–3; 12:1–6). They both slay their own countrymen (8:4–17; 12:4–6). 

Yet Jephthah is not to be understood as a clone of Gideon. In many respects he will remind us of Abimelech. Jephthah and Abimelech shared humble beginnings as their mothers were at best “secondary wives or concubines of non-Israelite lineage (8.31; 11.1). The men they have chosen to surround themselves with seemingly represent the worst type of “mercenary” soldiers, those without honor or respect for themselves or anyone else (9.4; 11.3). We will see that Jephthah and Abimelech were not raised to positions of leadership by Yahweh, but that each one took advantage of circumstances to leverage themselves into leadership (9.1-6; 11.4-11). Abimelech and Jephthah were inaugurated “king” in “a formal ceremony at a sacred shrine (9:6; 11:11).” The legacy of both of these men was to be remembered as brutal rulers, who wantonly slaughtered “their own relatives” (9:5; 11:34–40), fought against their countrymen (9:26–57; 12:1–6), dying as tragic figures (9.50-57; 11.34-35). While similar, one major difference separates these men: “Abimelech is nothing more than a destroyer; Jephthah is a deliverer.” 

A major focus in the Jephthah cycle is how the writer depicts the role of God. With Gideon, Yahweh was involved in the beginning (6:1-7:22), yet as the story continues the writer sees Yahweh’s involvement being more and more limited until when we reach the Abimelech cycle Yahweh’s role “is completely eclipsed. Yahweh’s role in the life of Israel is reflected as being parallel to His “decreasing involvement in the narrative.” As with Gideon, Yahweh is present in the beginning cycle of Jephthah but this is just to give us the theological reason for Yahweh being absence.  While Yahweh appears in the scene announcing Jephthah’s “spiritual empowerment in 11:29 and in the divine committal formula in 12:32,” the writer does not refer to Him again. And while in the story of Jephthah, as in Gideon, Yahweh’s name is mentioned and we are tempted to see this as an example of genuine devotion, the writer takes great pains to make sure that we recognize that any appearance of devotion is illusory. Any devotion “is belied by the fundamentally corrupted character of the man.” 

Canaanized: 10.6

The start of the Jephthah cycle begins with a statement about the rebellion of the children of Israel (10.6). The writer tells us exactly how the children of Israel did evil in the sight of Yahweh. “They served the Baals and the Ashtoreths, and the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites and the gods of the Philistines. And because the Israelites forsook the Lord and no longer served him.” Israel served the two main gods of Canaan, the Baalim and the Ashtaroth. They also served the gods of the neighboring countries, including the gods of Syria (Hadoth, Baal, Moath, and Anath), the gods of Sidon (same as previous gods plus the Phoenician Astarte of I Kings 11:5; the Sidonian religion also included syncretism), the gods of Moab, (Chemosh of I Kings 11:33), the gods of the children of Ammon, (Molech of I Kings 11:7 and 11:33), and the gods of the Philistines (Dagon and Baal of Judges 16:23). 

After forty-five years of peace under Tola and Jair, Israel rebels again and worships just about any god other than Yahweh. The Canaanization of Israel is alive, well and growing. The writer summarizes this: “the Israelites forsook the Lord and no longer served him.”

 Agents of Yahweh’s Punishment: 10.7-9 

Yahweh’s punishment of Israel is found in 10.7-9. The writer implies that the Canaanization of Israel is now coming to a climax, as he reveals that it is God’s anger that is behind His “selling” the Israelites into the hands of the enemy. God’s anger is such against Israel that He hands his people into the hands of two different nations, the Philistines and the Ammonites. This provides the background of the next two major judgeship cycles: that surrounding the judgeship of Jephthah, who will deal with the Ammonites on the east side of the Jordan; and that surrounding the judgeship of Samson, who will deal with the Philistines on the west side of the Jordan. The geographical relationship of these two enemies puts Israel in the middle of a pincer movement, where Israel can be attacked from both sides. 

The writer uses two verbs to describe what the agents of Yahweh, Ammon and Philistia did to Israel; they shattered and crushed them. In Hebrew, these two words are not frequently used but they sound very much the same and the writer was likely using them to draw attention to the destructiveness of what God intended for Israel. 

Verses 8b-9 focuses our attention on the Ammonite oppression. The Ammonites harassed the Israelites living east of the Jordan in the hill country of Gilead, which had been occupied by Amorites until the Israelites had arrived from Egypt, for eighteen years. Now, the Ammonites, under the leadership of Yahweh, crossed the Jordan and attacked Judah, Benjamin, and Ephraim, bringing the war from the borders to Israel’s heartland.

The Result of Israel’s Oppression 10.10-16 

Israel’s Confession: 10.10

 In v10, we read the report of the cry of the children of Israel followed by their confession that they have sinned against Yahweh. They include what they have done to sin against God as part of their confession “forsaking our God and serving the Baals.” We saw that in the Gideon cycle the writer provided us with the most complete description of the oppression of Israel (6:1b-6b), here the writer gives us the most complete account of Israel’s response. 

Previously, Yahweh had communicated this anger or displeasure with Israel through either a messenger/angel or a prophet, here Yahweh deals with Israel face to face. What we see in this “phase of the cycle is cast in the form of a confrontational dialogue between Yahweh and his people, framed on either side by the latter’s confession of sin.”

For the only time in book we see the writer expanding narrator on Israel’s cry of help. In conjunction with this first we are given another first, there a confession of sin from the Israelites. The confession is given as a simple statement, “We have sinned against you,” and a straight forward explanation, “We have forsaken our God and served the Baals.”  Note the writer used the phrase “our God.” This implies that the people are well aware that they have a special relationship with Yahweh. 

Israel has again violated the first commandment of the covenant, “You shall have no other gods before Me (Ex 20.3; Deu 5.7).” They have put all the gods of the surrounding countries before Yahweh. And while their confession may appear sincere, the writer does not include the asking of forgiveness or a begging for God’s mercy that we might expect in a “real” confession. “We must read on to find out whether or not this is more than a utilitarian manipulation of deity to be delivered from a painful situation or authentic heartfelt repentance.” 

Yahweh’s Response

 Yahweh’s response is almost predictable; He does not take Israel’s response seriously. Not only does Yahweh not take Israel’s confession seriously, His response is short, pointed and angry in tone. Yahweh’s response can be seen in three parts. 

First, in v11-12, God reminds Israel of seven previous times He has delivered Israel. “The Lord replied, When the Egyptians(Exodus), the Amorites(Nu 21.3), the Ammonites (Judges 3.12-14), the Philistines(Judges 3.31), the Sidonians(Judges 4-5; 18.7; and 18.28), the Amalekites (Ex 17.8-16; Judges 3.13; 6.3), and the Maonites (probably the Midianites who were defeated by Gideon in Judges 7-8) oppressed you and you cried to me for help, did I not save you from their hands?” Some scholars believe that the nations listed here are arranged in order to coincide with the pagan deities of v6. 

So now, once again, Israel cries out for help, but what will they do with the gods and idols that they are worshipping? The point is that repentance must be followed by action. God has reminded them of seven great deliverances that the seven gods they worshipped could not deliver them from, and so they must put away their idols and their gods; for up until now, they had credited the seven deliverances to the other seven gods. The rabbinic view is that the seven deliverances are enumerated corresponding to the seven forms of idolatry associated with their worship (v6), and contextually this could be correct. 

Second, in Judges 10:13, God reminds them of Israel’s failure: “Yet, you have forsaken Me, and served other gods.” Then Yahweh responds: “Therefore I will no longer deliver you.” This is a conditional threat, depending upon how Israel will respond. Yahweh is reminding Israel of their nation’s previous ungrateful and treasonous responses (v. 13a). Yahweh is making the point that instead of answering His repeated deliverances with goodness and increased commitment to Him, the children of Israel have continued to seek the favor and worship of other gods. 

Third, in Judges 10:14, God concludes with a sarcastic challenge: “Go and cry out to the gods which you have chosen; let them deliver you in the time of your distress.” Yahweh is rejecting the confession of the people and while closing His ears to their cries for help. Perhaps Israel was anticipating that after Yahweh’s listing of His past rescues that He would promise of another act of deliverance, or, provide them with a deliverer, but instead He declares that because of their persistent infidelity He will rescue them no more. 

The irony of the situation should not be lost on us. Yahweh, in His grace, had chosen Israel as His people. Yet Israel, rather than showing their thanks with love, worship and obedience had instead responded by seeking after other gods, giving them their love, worship and obedience instead. Now Yahweh is saying “You made your choice now live with it! “ 

Yahweh’s response is a road sign for the reader pointing out the fact that He sees this cry to be like previous cries for help, Israel wanting to manipulate Him for their purpose.

Previously Yahweh has answered Israel’s pleas but without true repentance Yahweh will no longer hear their pleas. “Their confession sounds like true repentance, but God sees past their pious words to their treacherous and parasitic hearts.” 

Israel’s Surrender

 Verses 15-16a provides Israel’s response to God’s pronouncement in both word and deed. In verse 15, Israel responds in word by means of confession: “We have sinned;” and by means of surrender: “do to us whatever seems good to You.” This is followed by their request: “Only please deliver us this day.” In verse 16a the people put actions with their words: “So they put away the foreign gods from among them.” And with contrite hearts Israel: “served the Lord.” 

Israel’s repentance and plea for help results in God’s response in verse 16b: “And He could bear the misery of Israel no longer.” If Yahweh is grieved for Israel, divine intervention must shortly follow.

While this section regarding Israel’s surrender and Yahweh’s acceptance of it appears to be genuine and straight forward, there are some questions that arise. Is Israel’s response truly genuine or is it just more of the same? How should we understand their surrender being immediately followed by their demand for rescue? Do you sense that Israel was aware that based on Israel’s actions in the past, Yahweh had been justified in using their “enemies as His agents of judgment?” Has it escaped Israel that Yahweh had suspended the laws of what is right in favor of divine mercy when they have sought after other gods? What is the sincerity of Israel’s second confession? What is the true nature of Yahweh’s answer in v16b? 

The interpretation of Yahweh’s response to Israel’s second confession has recently raised issues among modern Bible scholars. Traditionally, it has been believed that Yahweh recognized the genuineness of Israel’s second confession and as on previous occasions repented of the disaster He was going to bring on Israel and deliver them instead. As we move forward keep the following questions in mind as they relate to the nature of God’s response in v16b. “Why is the word ‘repent’ absent from this text? Why is there no promise of deliverance to negate the statement in v.13? Why is God silent after v.16a? Why is Jephthah never described as having been ‘raised up’ or ‘strengthened’ by Yahweh? Why is God totally absent in the account of the rise of Jephthah to leadership in Israel?” 

Daniel Block suggests that a literal translation of v16b would be “and his soul/person was short because of the efforts of Israel.” There are many possible understandings of this verse but the key is determining the meaning of the phrase “the soul is short.” According to Block the phrase “expresses frustration, exasperation, and anger in the face of an intolerable situation.” But this begs the question “what is so intolerable?” What is so intolerable would seem to relate to Israel’s “confessional and sacrificial attempts to win divine favor.” Yahweh could be dismissing Israel’s latest confession as just another indication of Israel’s wicked heart. Can we hear rejection in Yahweh’s voice, as Block suggests? If so then what Yahweh’s response means is that Israel is still in full manipulation mode and that what we have here is what could be referred to as a “foxhole conversion,”  or as Block calls it “a conversion of convenience.” Without internal change, or true repentance Yahweh will no longer answer the cries of Israel. Yahweh will abandon Israel as Israel has abandoned Him; God is now acting on the “you get what you deserve” plan of justice.  We will see how this plays out in the rest of the Jephthah cycle.