BOOK OF JUDGES: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Judges 1:1a Why does this chapter start out saying “after Joshua died” when Chapter 2 is where his death actually occurs?

“After the death of Joshua” is taken by some to be a title for the whole book with everything in chronological order from that point on. Another view is that 2:10 begins the actual sequel to the events in the Book of Joshua.

Judges 1:1b-2 When we see the direct communication from God to groups of people such as the Israelites, do we assume someone is a conduit, or that God is speaking directly?

Probably it is something like the use of the urim and thummin in this particular case. But in 2:1-5, it is more likely communicated through a prophet.

Judges 1:8 Why burn Jerusalem if they wanted to live there?

See verse 17, which indicates that Jerusalem was not devoted to destruction. There was probably a temporary capture of the city followed by an immediate recapture by the Jebusites (see v. 21).

Judges 1:26 This verse says “that was its name to this day.” How much longer after the fact was this written?

No one knows for sure. “In those days there was no king in Israel” means that it was finished no earlier than David's time, perhaps during Solomon's reign (ca. 950 BC). Source critics treat Chapter 1 as written by the “Deuteronomist” (about 500-600 BC), added to an earlier document, and then further edited at later date to its final form.

Judges 1:28 So after escaping bondage themselves, the Israelites enslave the Canaanites?

Yes, but there were strict rules governing the treatment of slaves, and in many ways they were to be treated the same as the Jews. We should not think that slavery under the Jews was equivalent to the treatment of African slaves in America.

Judges 2:10 How did they not know the Lord; did their parents fail?

It has been said that the world is always one generation away from being completely pagan unless the faith is passed on. They also did not know his works. In other words, they had not experienced them first-hand. The word “know” denotes a close personal relationship, not just facts about.

Judges 10:4 says “He had thirty sons, who rode thirty donkeys,” and Judges 12:14 says “He had forty sons and thirty grandsons, who rode on seventy donkeys.” What was being conveyed? Why was it important that the number of sons/grandsons matched the number of donkeys?

The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (p. 215) cautions that “we must take care not to read our own attitudes toward the donkey into the biblical materials.” Thus, possessing or riding on a donkey denoted that one had a certain amount of prestige in the community; it was even regarded as a sign of kingship at times. The fact that the number of sons or grandsons matched the number of donkeys merely indicates that the judge was wealthy enough to afford one donkey for each of his offspring.

“The reference to his 30 sons riding on 30 donkeys and owning 30 towns suggests the peacefulness of the times and the prosperity and prestige enjoyed by the judge [Jair]. It also hints at the unpreparedness of the Gileadites for the disaster about to fall on them. Jair's pampered sons will be of little use when the Ammonites invade!” (Barry Webb, The Book of Judges, p. 298-9)

From a literary point of view, the mention of thirty sons of Jair (and their donkeys) is matched by the thirty sons and daughters of Izban and the thirty grandsons of Abdon (and their donkeys). Satterthwaite sees a deliberate contrast between these minor judges and their progeny with the situation of the central character in the cycle, Jephthah, and the loss of his only child. (Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, p. 588)

Judges 20:8-11 “We’ll go up against it as the lot directs.” This may not be the best example, but there are numerous passages where it seems that people cast lots to determine the will of God (Urim & Thummin? Also I Samuel 14:40-45). Does the Bible present casting lots as a God-ordained or God-sanctioned method of determining His will? If so, is this just something that was practiced in certain specific circumstances by certain people or something that could potentially even be practiced today?

In reading I Samuel 30:1-8,  I wondered about the ephod, "...bring me the ephod...David inquired of The

Lord...He answered..."  I believe there have been previous references to David using the ephod & 

inquiring of The Lord. This almost seems like divination...can you explain?

Both of these questions relate to the same method used by Israel's leaders to discern God's will during 

special circumstances of importance to the nation. This was the only God-ordained form of divination 

allowed, and was recommended by Moses for use by the people to determine God's will after his death 

(Numbers 27:21).  It was not needed during the period of the prophets, but there are hints that the

 practice was revived after the return from exile (Ezra 2:63; Nehemiah 7:65).

The best educated guess regarding the procedure is as follows:  The high priest was summoned, wearing 

his special upper garment (ephod) to which was attached a breastplate containing two flat stones called 

the Urim and Thummin.  After appropriate ceremonies and prayer, a yes-no question was asked of God, 

and the high priest would cast the two stones in the air. Two “heads” would indicate yes; two “tails 

would mean no; and one head and one tail would indicate that God declined to answer their question. 

This last situation explains why I Samuel 28:6 states that God did not answer Saul by the Urim.

Can or should similar methods be used today by Christians?  I can't give a definite “no” answer, but the 

following negative factors should be kept in mind:
1. The method did not work unless a high priest was involved (Again, look at the Ezra and Nehemiah 

passages above). 

2. Its use was reserved for major questions involving the whole nation, not for individual concerns.
3. Its use was superseded when more direct forms of communication from God were available.

Sometimes cited in favor of using forms of divination today are two biblical passages: Gideon casting a 

fleece (Judges 6) and the casting of lots by the eleven Apostles to find a replacement for Judas (Acts 1).
Concerning the first passage, Gideon's activities are actually proof of his great lack of faith in what God 

had already clearly revealed to him orally. Also, the two castings of fleece were used as a means of 

confirming a supernatural event. There is no correlation between this incident and the popular practice 

of “casting a fleece” used among some charismatic groups whereby a person will direct the future course

of their life dependent upon whether some random event (a stoplight being red or green at a particular 

intersection, for example) will occur.

The Acts 1 incident seemingly provides more justification for a modern form of divination by Christians.

Again there are several caveats to keep in mind: 
    1. As in the case of the Urim and Thummin, only a specially God-appointed group indulged in the 

practice, and the decision was one of importance to the whole community. 

     2. This event took place before the Day of Pentacost when the Holy Spirit descended on all the 

believers. 

     3. The apostles only resorted to divination after much thought and prayer regarding the merits of the 

two candidates. 

     4. There is no further positive mention of any form of divination in the New Testament. However, 

group church decisions such as occurred at the so-called Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15) can still be 

consulted profitably today as good examples of how to go about it.

In closing, for those more interested in the subject of discerning God's will for their personal life, I 

would highly recommend Gary Friesen's Decision Making and the Will of God.