Twenty years ago, K. Lawson Younger wrote an excellent commentary on the books of Judges and Ruth. I never got to read that volume, so I’m happy I was able to get my hands on this revised edition. Why a revised edition? Younger writes that tremendous changes in the world and society and an increased demand for training church leaders call for a revised edition. As well, Younger was able to incorporate new insights that have been gleaned over the last twenty years.
According to Younger, the judges functioned as deliverers and leaders rather than judicial figures. These “judges” were tribal rulers, intended to save Israel from their oppressors and were meant to guide them in “spiritual/moral matters in conjunction with the covenant” (24). The book of Judges is anonymous and was likely finalized during or after the Babylonian captivity (Judg 18:30).
What is the book of Judges about? As Younger writes, “The book of Judges has a coherent message concerning the consequences of disobedience to God with the resultant moral degeneration that characterized the history of this period” (26). He agrees with Daniel Block that the central theme of the book is “the Canaanization of Israel,” highlighting what happens to God’s people when they disobey his law and turn to other gods.
Judges has two introductions. Judges 1:1–2:5 represents a historical/military perspective, and Judges 2:6–3:6 a religious perspective. The religious perspective is traced out in the individual lives of the judges/tribal leaders in the cycles section (3:7–16:31). Accordingly, the final section of the book (17:1–21:25) “represents all three perspectives in terms of ‘the spheres of cultus, family, and nation’” (26).
According to Younger, the term herem can mean that something is a “devoted thing” to God and in other cases that Israel is to “totally destroy” something (the root meaning “to put under the ban; to devote to destruction”). Younger draws out the cultic vocabulary that Israel had, showing the nuances of herem. There is a difference between things that are dedicated and things that are devoted. Devoted things cannot be recalled or redeemed. The Canaanites were to be either killed or driven out of the land. Yet Israel does not do this, and, instead, at the end of the book the tribe of Dan herems the tribe of Benjamin! Younger offers a fuller, though not a complete, discussion here, providing more discussion throughout the commentary.
The Structure of Judges
A simple structure goes something like this
- A Foreign wars of subjugation with the herem being applied (1:1–2:5)
- B Difficulties with foreign religious idols (2:6–3:6)
- C The Cycles Section (3:7–16:31)
- B′ Difficulties with domestic religious idols (17:1–18:31)
- B Difficulties with foreign religious idols (2:6–3:6)
- A′ Domestic wars with the herem being applied (19:1–21:25)
Younger doesn’t believe the final section occurred at the same time chronologically as the introduction. Some argue that since Judges 18:30 refers to Jonathan, the grandson of Moses, then these events must have taken place at the same time as those in the introduction (perhaps during the generation that came after Joshua). This leads them to argue that the tribes have been wicked throughout the entire book of Judges. However, Younger believes the expression used for grandson “may simply be understood as the ‘descendant’ of Moses, so that the chronological time frame remains ambiguous” (428).
Interpretations
The Barak Cycle
Younger’s understanding of archaeology and warfare during the Israelite period gives necessary nuance when needed. In the Barak cycle, he notes that the ancient chariots were not like modern tanks used to break through enemy lines. They were used for pursuing and slaughtering a fleeing enemy on an open plain.
Younger takes a negative view of Barak. While Barak’s motive for wanting Deborah to accompany him in battle is not indicated in the narrative (which Younger acknowledges), he notes that “some interpreters see this as a sign of cowardice” (182). Barak requested Deborah to go with him even though, as she says, the Lord had already told Barak to go to war. Younger believes Barak was “denying Yahweh’s word. Barak is attempting to manipulate the outcome” (182). As well, his insistence to have Deborah, a woman, accompany him in war “instantly diminishes his heroic stature” (182). Jael’s killing of Sisera means Barak “has lost the honor to a woman. He can only stand and stare. It is his punishment for trying to manipulate Yahweh and his prophetess, Deborah (4:8)” (187). But, following Michelle Knight in her book, even the text of Judges isn’t that harsh on Barak. Just because he doesn’t get the honor doesn’t mean he gets shamed or that he was trying to manipulate Yahweh.
Jephthah’s Foolish Vow
Younger believes Jephthah’s vow was both rash and manipulative, and I agree. He tried to manipulate Yahweh (Judge 11:30) to help him win the battle, even though Yahweh had just filled him with his Spirit (11:29). Rash: Jephthah could have simply said, “I will offer a burnt offering [‘olah] to you when I return safe and secure from the Ammonites” (332). The problem is the qualification he gave when he added “whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites.” Younger observes, “In fact, the irony is stark. Jephthah delivers the Israelites from the Ammonites, who along with their neighbors sacrifice their children to their gods; then he sacrifices his daughter to Yahweh, who does not accept human sacrifice! In this way, Jephthah exhibits his ignorance of God’s law (torah) as he did in his disputation speech to the Ammonite king,” an ignorance that can be seen in Judges 11:14–27. Given the grammar of Jephthah’s Hebrew, he likely believed an animal would come out to greet him. He was clearly not expecting her when she greeted him (11:34).
Ruth
Ruth is set in the period of the judges and is a complete contrast from the chaos of that period. It “provides an antithesis to the incessantly negative message about the conditions in Israel during that time by underscoring God’s tremendous blessing in the midst of great familial distress” (483). Regarding the dating of composition, Younger believes the evidence suggests a late preexilic to early postexilic date, although he doesn’t state what that evidence is. After discussing the placement(s) of Ruth in the canon, Younger gives a very good discussion on a few important themes in the book: hesed (covenantal loyalty/faithfulness/compassion), the kinsman-redeemer (go’el), and levirate marriage. Property inheritance and redemption of the land are important factors here. Younger shows how pivotal it is to understand the Torah when we read narratives.
Younger sees these characters as real people. Some commentators have been hard on Naomi for her silence. She is silent after Ruth’s heart-melting comments in 1:16–17. Some believe Naomi is wrong for not acknowledging “Ruth’s presence to the women in Bethlehem as she [Naomi] rail[ed] against God at the end of chapter 1” (542). Yet Naomi is not faithless. Younger notes, “This widow has gone through the awful experience of burying her husband and both of her sons in a foreign land and understandably has virtually no hope for survival. Cut her some slack!” (542) And like Jeremiah and Job, she cries out to God. And because of her pain, she is blind to Ruth accompanying her, but her eyes will be opened soon enough.
Recommended?
This is a fantastic commentary. I never read the earlier edition, but from what I’ve read from others Younger has given a tighter commentary with even clearer explanations. This is probably one of the more academic volumes in the series, but it is worth it. Younger is both well educated and truly believes Judges and Ruth are part of God’s words to us, and they have benefit to us today.
Pair this with Davis, Block, and/or Boda/Conway.
Buy it on Amazon or from Zondervan Academic!
Lagniappe
- Author: K. Lawson Younger, Jr.
- Hardcover: 640 pages
- Publisher: Zondervan Academic (January 19, 2021)
Review Disclosure: I received this book free from Zondervan Academic. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/16cfr255_03.html.
Amazon Affiliate Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
spoiledmilks 