|
The Theme of the Book of Judges
as an Ethical Farce
The theme of the book of Judges is given at least four times: “In those
days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.” (Judges 17:6;
Judges 21:25.) “In those days Israel had no king . . .” (Judges 18:1;
Judges 19:1.)
While it is fully God’s Word, infallibly given by the Holy Spirit,
without error, the book of Judges is also a fully human book. As such, it
functions as a kind of monarchist tract, and all of its “heroes” and
“heroines” are deeply flawed, their great deeds being done by faith in
God, (Hebrews 11:32ff.) rather than flowing out of their virtue or the
consistency of their character. One is compelled to see that the book as a
whole was written to illustrate what happens when “every man” does “that
which” is “right in his own eyes.” (Judges 17:6; 21:25, KJV.) Not a
pretty sight! Therefore, it not only prepares the way for the coming of
the King of Kings, David’s greater Son, but it also serves as a double
warning to us: first, to remember what we are still capable of in spite of
all that God has done for us and in us, if we begin to ignore the Word of
God; and secondly, when God uses us to do something for his glory, to
remind us that it is simply his grace working in us and through us—“for
it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good
purpose.” (Philippians 2:13.)
The people of Judges are not altogether unlike us: they were part of the
Covenant Community, struggled with sin and unbelief, and sometimes failed
grievously to please God. Yet, in spite of their manifold flaws, they
were, nevertheless, mightily used of God to do extraordinary things
through their faith. (Hebrews 11:32ff.) The Spirit of God came upon
Othniel, Gideon, Jephthah and Samson, as men anointed with the Holy
Spirit. (Judges 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14.) As we run our
race, many of them are there in the heavenly grandstands, cheering us on
in the good contest of faith. (Hebrews 12:1.) Of course, they were on the
other side of the Cross from us, and so they lacked a measure of the “fullness,
evidence and spiritual efficacy” in the means of their Spiritual nurture
that we now enjoy under the New Testament. (Westminster Confession of
Faith, VII, vi.) But many of them truly knew and loved God. They are
the saints of God, but of course, not necessarily all of them, but they
were part of the Covenant Community.
Here we meet the sinister assassin, Saint Ehud, (Judges 3:15ff.) and the
only woman in history given the same title as the Virgin Mary, Saint Jael,
who betrayed one of the most fundamental codes of the ancient Near East,
when she “nailed” the hapless Sisera, who had secured sanctuary in her
home. (Judges 4:17ff.) There is also the cowardly Saint Barak, who hid
behind the skirts of the prophetess, Saint Deborah. (Judges 4:8.) Reading
on we discover that “great man of faith,” Saint Gideon, who had to
have his faith bolstered up by no less than four miracles before he would
do what he was told to do and attack Midian. (Judges 6:11-23, 38, 40;
7:9-15.) After his great victory, Saint Gideon accepted “seventeen
hundred shekels” of gold from the plunder, and he “made the gold into
an ephod, which he placed in Ophrah, his town. All Israel prostituted
themselves by worshiping it there, and it became a snare to Gideon and his
family.” (Judges 8:27.)
After Jephthah, we encounter the whore-loving, Saint Samson, (Judges
16:1.) who in spite of being a very witty fellow, has to go down in
history as the man most easily fooled by evil women. (Judges 14:15-18;
16:5ff. 10ff., 13ff., and 15ff.) Except for one incident, Saint Samson was
most scrupulous to follow the religious ceremonies of his “order,”
(Judges 13:3-5; 16:17.) but his lust drove him utterly to disregard God’s
solemn prohibition regarding Canaanite women. (Exodus 34:16; Deuteronomy
7:1ff.)
After Saint Samson, we come to Saint Micah and his devout mother (Judges
17:1ff.), these pious folk went to great lengths to please God, even
securing their own, personal Levite to be their “father and priest” to
conduct divine worship before their pious representation of their Lord.
(Judges 17:10.) However, when a larger congregation came along, probably
offering better “terms of call,” the Holy Father left Micah to join
the Danites to be their “father and priest.” (Judges 18:19.) The pious
Danites (Genesis 49:17.) “Went on to Laish, against a peaceful and
unsuspecting people. They attacked them with the sword and burned down
their city.” (Judges 18:27.)
Then we come to that wonderful example of male chivalry, the Levite from
Ephraim, who spent the night in Gibeah of Benjamin. The next morning, the
Levite spoke to his beloved after she had been gang-raped all night, “Get
up; let’s go.” (He really knew how to treat a woman!) When he realized
she was dead, he demonstrated his mastery of the art of butchering,
chopping her up into twelve pieces. (Judges 19:28-30.) It is also in
Judges that we encounter the first casuists, the predecessors of Saint
Ignatius of Loyola. Faced with the dilemma of a solemn vow, on the one
hand, and the loss of a whole tribe, on the other, they concoct a plan to
allow the daughters of Israel to be stolen from their parents at a big
dance. (Judges 21:15-23.)
The Vow of Jephthah Considered
Within this Ethical Farce
It is in this context that we read the story of Saint Jephthah, the son of
a prostitute. ‘And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD: “If you give the
Ammonites into my hands, whatever comes out of the door of my house to
meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the LORD’S,
and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”’ (Judges 11:30, 31.)
‘When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to
meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! She was an
only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. When he saw
her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh! My daughter! You have made me
miserable and wretched, because I have made a vow to the LORD that I
cannot break.”’ (Judges 11:34, 35.)
The holy child, instead of telling Saint Jephthah to break his rash and
sinful vow, submits: ‘”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. But grant me this one
request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep
with my friends, because I will never marry.”’ (Judges 11:36, 37.) Her
lamentation is not that she will live a long, cloistered life of celibacy;
it is that she will be put to death without ever having married, because
marriage, the delights of conjugal love and bearing children are the
universal ideal of the Old Testament. Her “celibacy” lasted only two
months: ‘”You may go,” he said. And he let her go for two months.
She and the girls went into the hills and wept because she would never
marry. After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her
as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.’ (Judges 11:38, 39.)
“He did to her as he had vowed:” “Whatever comes out of the door of
my house to meet me . . . will be the LORD’S, and I will sacrifice it as
a burnt offering.” Saint Jephthah “devoted” his “ever virgin”
daughter to the LORD by offering her up to him as a burnt offering.
Jephthah the Henotheist
Some have questioned the fact that Jephthah actually, literally kept his
vow to God. But Jephthah, perhaps more than any of the other Judges, was
influenced by the pagan religion around him. His words may only indicate
that Jephthah is a henotheist rather than an out and out polytheist, but
pagan syncretism oozes from Judges 11:24, “Do you not possess what
Chemosh your god gives you to possess? So whatever Yahweh our God has
driven out before us, we will possess it.” I’ve kept the
capitalization distinct out of respect for my God, but Jephthah uses the
identical Hebrew word to describe both Chemosh and Yahweh, the only
difference being the pronominal suffixes.
Would any person who follows biblical revelation say the following to a
Muslim? “Do you not possess what Allah your god gives you to possess?”
Imagine what his response might be should certain folks’ fears prove
correct: “Yes, Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate. Mohammad is his
Prophet, blessed be his name. Washington, D.C., is lovely this time of
year with the cherry blossoms surrounding the White Caliphate at 1600
Pennsylvania Avenue.” There is at least henotheism underlying this
remark of Jephthah.
Virginity not an Ethical Ideal in the Old Testament
Some have supposed that Jephthah never intended to offer up anything as a
burnt offering and that he only meant his vow figuratively: that he only
intended to give one of his servants up to serve God in the Tabernacle, as
some kind of Israelite, Vestal Virgin. However, in the one case of a
parent giving up a child for service in the Tabernacle, Hannah’s gift of
Samuel, perpetual virginity is utterly foreign: little Samuel grew up,
married and had children. (1 Samuel 8:1.) On the contrary, the universal
witness of the Old Testament is that marriage is the pattern for godly
living, and sex between married people is very good and pleasing to God.
To be sure, under the New Testament, the Holy Spirit gifts some people
with a single life, removing all sexual desire, but Spirit filled men are
also those who are exhilarated always with love for their wives and are
satisfied with their wife’s breasts. (Proverbs 5:19.) And the idea of
somebody forcing another person into a life of celibacy is clearly
demonic. (1 Timothy 4:1-5.)
No Intention of Human Sacrifice in Jephthah’s Vow
Someone may suppose that sacrificial animals were never kept in houses.
But that flies in the face of the evidence of anyone who is fond of pets.
My wife’s cat won’t give me the time of day unless he’s hungry, but
our two dogs, Hamilton and Ralphie, scratch at the front door when they
hear the key in the lock. They love to be with us and even sneak into the
car when we’re not looking, whenever they think that we’re about to
drive off. Deep down, going back to Original Sin, all of us have a latent
need to be worshipped. When I’m feeling particularly neurotic and
insecure, almost nothing makes me feel better than my dogs groveling in
adoration. Nobody really appreciates me but my dogs: they revere me even
when I’ve got bad breath or have said something ugly. Everybody needs a
dog.
Maybe Jephthah didn’t have a dog; maybe he had a pet lamb instead.
Nathan told King David the story of a poor man, who “had nothing except
one little ewe lamb he had bought. He raised it, and it grew up with him
and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in
his arms. It was like a daughter to him.” (2 Samuel 12:3.) Perhaps
having animals in the house was not so uncommon, after all.
Sadly, the book of Judges is full of incredible things that well meaning,
sincere people did, when they did that which was “right in their own
eyes.” One must presume all kinds of situations and read them back into
the text in order to get around the obvious: Jephthah killed his own
daughter, because this was “right in his own eyes.”
Pagan Syncretism, Human Sacrifice and the Religion of Ancient Israel
Furthermore, the idea of human sacrifice was not completely unthinkable in
the world of the ancient Near East, even among the Hebrew people, until
after the Babylonian Captivity. When Yahweh ordered Abraham to offer up
Isaac as a burnt offering, he unhesitatingly obeyed, stopping only when
Yahweh’s angel intervened. (Genesis 22:11.) The example of Abraham
illustrates that child sacrifice was not immediately ruled out of Abraham’s
mind, in part, at least, because the practice was rather widespread at
times in the ancient Near East. That he trusted God for divine
intervention afterwards, because he had a specific promise from God, does
not take away from the fact that Abraham did not immediately dismiss the
divine demand as perverse. Of course, this was prior to a completed Torah.
(Leviticus 20:1-5.) But even with a completed Torah, Israel was, as I
said, continually bedeviled by pagan syncretism, leading them to disregard
the Second Commandment and sometimes even the First.
“Ahaz . . . burned his sons in fire, according to the abominations of
the nations whom the LORD had driven out before the sons of Israel.” (2
Chronicles 28:1-3.)
“The people of Judah have done evil in my eyes, declares the LORD. They
have set up their detestable idols in the house that bears my Name and
have defiled it. They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley
of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I
did not command, nor did it enter my mind.” (Jeremiah 7:30, 31.)
Even “Saint” (he eventually became one, 2 Chronicles 33:12ff.)
Manasseh indulged in the practice: “Manasseh . . . made his son pass
through the fire, practiced witchcraft and used divination, and dealt with
mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the sight of the LORD
provoking Him to anger.” (2 Kings 21:1-7.)
These examples demonstrate that Israelite religion was rarely observed
strictly according to the Law, but was, rather, a syncretistic blend of
biblical and pagan elements, and the all too common practice of their
pagan neighbors of killing children to appease the gods crept in at
different times in Israel’s history.
The history of Israel before the return from the Babylonian Captivity is a
long litany of neglect of the Word of God.
“The Passover had not been observed like this in Israel since the days
of the prophet Samuel; and none of the kings of Israel had ever celebrated
such a Passover as did Josiah, with the priests, the Levites and all Judah
and Israel who were there with the people of Jerusalem. This Passover was
celebrated in the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign.” (2 Chronicles
35:18, 19.) That is a span of roughly six hundred years.
“And they found written in the law how the LORD had commanded through
Moses that the sons of Israel should live in booths during the feast of
the seventh month . . . And the entire assembly of those who had returned
from the captivity made booths and lived in them. The sons of Israel had
indeed not done so from the days of Joshua the son of Nun to that day. And
there was great rejoicing.” (Nehemiah 8:14-17.) This is almost a
millennium!
After the Babylonian Captivity, Israel became more zealous for the Law of
God, but their zeal soon degenerated into the kind of legalism that sired
Pharisaism. We must give thanks to God, who sent the Holy Spirit at
Pentecost, to write the Law of God on our hearts.
Concern for the Second Commandment
In the story of Jephthah one must keep in mind that the theme of the book
is not heroic men and women of sterling moral character; it is a gracious
God who overrules our flawed obedience for his glory and the ultimate
welfare of his people, even in times when biblical revelation is being
ignored. As we read the book in light of its theme, we see the actions of
people who sometimes may actually vigorously hold to the First
Commandment, while utterly ignoring the principles of the Second. God isn’t
interested only in being worshipped; he’s concerned about how we worship
him, too. Until after the Babylonian Captivity, Israel was constantly
bedeviled by pagan syncretism. We see it in the “pious” actions of
Saint David.
David was a man after God’s own heart and an unwavering, devout
worshipper of Yahweh, and he carefully followed the First Commandment all
the days of his life. (Acts 13:22; 1 Kings 15:5.) However, when David set
about to bring up the Ark of the Covenant, he violated the principles
behind the Second Commandment and caused Uzzah to lose his life. He
ignored God’s explicit command that the Ark be covered with the Veil of
the Holy of Holies and then be carried on the shoulders of the Levitical
sub tribe of Kohath. (Numbers 4:4-15; 1 Chronicles 15:11-15.) David put
the Ark on an ox-cart instead. From where did he get such an idea? The
answer is found in 1 Samuel 6:7ff. One can imagine David thinking, “If
the Philistines got away with moving the Ark this way, why can’t I? That
rule must not really be absolute—after all, nowhere does God directly
condemn this action of the Philistines.”
Not everything that person does can pass divine muster, even if he loves
God, as did David. That is the case even if certain of his actions are
mentioned in Scripture, in passing, without specific divine disapproval.
As cases in point, God approves of both Rahab’s protecting the Hebrew
spies and of the Hebrew midwives’ saving the lives of little Hebrew
boys. But that does not mean that God completely approved of their
methods.
God certainly approved of the Philistines returning his Ark, because he
stopped visiting them with the rodent-born plague and hemorrhoids. But
that doesn’t mean that God approved of their placing his Ark on an
ox-cart, nor that he was particularly pleased with their offering of five
gold hemorrhoids and rats. (1 Samuel 6:5.) (What archaeological finds
those would be!) However, nothing in the text specifically condemns their
doing these things, even though they got the idea from their demonically
inspired priests and diviners. My point is this: even though an action may
not be explicitly condemned at the point it takes place, does not mean
that the action is not opprobrious. God has given us the whole of
Scripture, and we should judge actions by the Law of God, rather than by
an historical narrative’s failure, tediously to remind us in minute
detail of what is explicitly condemned elsewhere.
However, in spite of Jephthah’s theological and practical errors, he is
still a man of faith. (Hebrews 11:32.) It was an imperfect faith, to be
sure, but it is the Object of our faith who saves us and not the
theological precision or strength of our faith. And so God in his grace
and mercy anointed Jephthah for the redemption of Israel: “Now the
Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, so that he passed through Gilead
and Manasseh; then he passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of
Gilead he went on to the sons of Ammon.” (Judges 11:29.)
“Spiritual” People and
Ethical Failure
Some have objected that a man on whom the Spirit of God had come could not
possibly do such a thing. But what does it mean that a man has the Holy
Spirit come upon him? Does it mean that he then becomes protected from
theological error or from committing sin? Consider the case of Saint
Peter, and man mightily used of God and full of the Spirit, yet Saint Paul
had to take him to task in public because of his gross error: “When
Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly
in the wrong.” (Galatians 2:11.)Furthermore, it is important to remember
that the text does not say that the Holy Spirit inspired Jephthah’s vow.
Judges 11:29 connects Jephthah’s anointing by the Spirit of Yahweh with
his strategic move against the enemy Ammonites: “Then the Spirit of the
LORD came upon Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through
Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites.” The
vow of verse 30 is simply Jephthah’s rash response once he faces the
enemy. Jephthah’s vow is sinful and foolish—even those who disagree
with me about Jephthah carrying it out literally or not agree on this
point. His vow is sinful because it is presumptive; Jephthah could not
know what would come out of his house. What if Jephthah’s neighbor had
been visiting his family while Jephthah was away? What could he have done?
His vow is rash and presumptive because he had no assurance from God that
he would have authority to perform it. The Westminster Confession of
Faith is correct when it affirms in XXII, vii:
“No man may vow to do anything forbidden in the Word of God, or what
would hinder any duty therein commanded, or which is not in his own power,
and for the performance whereof he hath no promise of ability from God. In
which respects, popish monastical vows of perpetual single life, professed
poverty, and regular obedience, are so far from being degrees of higher
perfection, that they are superstitious and sinful snares, in which no
Christian may entangle himself.”
Jephthah’s Holocaustic Vow
Furthermore, we must not get too far removed from what Jephthah explicitly
vowed to do: “I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.” The Hebrew
word is ’OLAH. It is found 287 times in the Masoretic text and
means a “sacrifice which is wholly burned.” The Septuagint translates ’OLAH,
at this point, with the Greek word from which we get the word “holocaust.”
But again, whether someone agrees with me about Jephthah’s doing this
literally or not, is not the big issue. Even if Jephthah simply kept his
daughter from marrying, it was still a perverse sacrifice: in the Old
Testament the fundamental earthly purpose of a woman’s life was
motherhood. For Jephthah’s daughter never to marry, have sexual
intercourse and bring children into the world would have been a kind of
living death.
This story warns us never to make rash vows, because once we’ve made
them, we should keep them. But if we discover that those vows are contrary
to the written Word of God or that they would hinder us from any duty set
forth in Scripture, we should repent for having taken such vows, renounce
them and then trust that the Lord Jesus has set us free from the curse of
broken vows when biblical duty demands that we break them. (Galatians
3:13.)
Bob
Vincent |
|