'They Behaved Even Worse than their Ancestors': Reconsidering the Deuteronomistic Origin of Judges 2:11-19 (original) (raw)
Related papers
History And Prophecy In The Book Of Judges
Between Evidence and Ideology
In introductory courses to the Old Testament modern teachers usually find it helpful to confront the student with the old Jewish tradition which reckons the book of Judges together with Joshua, Samuel and Kings to the part of the canon called the Former Prophets. This can be regarded as a useful contribution to the discussion about the right view upon this and other books which are in the Christian tradition called the historical books and interpreted as giving an accurate historical picture of the situations they describe. The name 'Former Prophets' would indicate that what we find written in these books is, as formulated by L.C. Allen in a standard introduction, 'not history as modern historians might write it. Rather it is history from a prophetic point of view'. 1 Allen gives three reasons why the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings are called prophetic: '() There is a focus on prophetic messengers, especially Samuel, Nathan, Elijah, and Elisha and their role in history. () There is an anti-establishment perspective, like that of the preexilic prophets in the Latter Prophets. Failure and shortcomings in the leadership of Israelite society are continually exposed. () Events are analyzed in the light of the prophetic truth that yhwh is sovereign in history, both foretelling and fulfilling his prophetic word. ' In this contribution I want to evaluate the arguments for this commonly accepted characterization of the book of Judges. To this I shall add a discussion of the different ways in which scholars nevertheless try to reconstruct the historical facts behind the stories told about the judges, because, as Allen hastens to add: 'To make such a statement, however, is not to denigrate the historical value of the biblical books'. 1 W.S. LaSor et al., Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form and Background of the Old Testament (second edition), Grand Rapids , .
History, Folklore, and Myth in the Book of Judges
Melita Theologica, 2019
I am wary of drawing more precise connections. Some cite the 12th-century Babylonian "Weidner Chronicle" as a parallel to the so-called Deuteronomistic History, since it presents cycles of good and bad kings to help contemporary rulers avoid the fate of Naram-Sin, whose sins are anachronistic, since Babylon was not built in his lifetime. So, supposedly, 1 Kings 13-14 and 2 Kings 17 are parallel, propagandistic for Josiah as the "Weidner" was for Nebuchadnezzar. But the "Weidner Chronicle's" line of causality reaches back beyond history to the divine realm, while the Deuteronomistic History's reaches back to a moment in history; and unlike Yahweh's Law, Marduk's divine will that is outed was that he wanted more sh. e Mesha Stela is a much closer parallel to the Bible, not only because of its Deuteronomistic language and theology but also in its geographical, non-chronological arrangement.; Bill T.
Framework and Discourse in the Book of Judges. (p. 687-702)
2009
The period of the judges is depicted as a desperate time calling for exceptional leaders. It is a time dominated by conflicts. A lasting peace, almost reached at the end of Joshua, is again far away. The stories of the central figures, the judges, offer a diverse portrayal. There is no image of an ideal judge but several individual characters sharing only one activity: they fight for their people. The judges are presented as heroes, although not without flaws, but they do not achieve sustained success. Hence the book ends with an even stronger desire for exceptional leaders.
The Book of Judges: An Analysis
Judges sets the stage for monarchical rule in Israel by condemning the anarchy and disobedience of Israel as the fruit of a season in history when ‘Israel had no king’ (Jgs 21:25). In examining the narrators overarching purpose and editorial comments, Biblical scholarship concludes that Judges serves as a low-key apologetic for the ideal future Davidic monarch. Via the testimony of ‘judges’ such as Gideon and Abimelech, among others, we can learn much about the responsibilities and motives that are required of any future Israelite king. Judges instructs us as to the pivotal nature of Godly leadership, faithful to both Yahweh and his covenant.
Sources and Composition in the List of Minor Judges, 2019
In sum, the account of the five minor judges is a post-Deuteronomistic and post-Priestly composition whose author worked in elements of the sources available to him—in particular the Song of Deborah and the Priestly tribal genealogies—to supplement details that he conceived missing in the Deuteronomistic scroll of Judges. He organized his work according to a pattern he devised and combined details drawn from his sources with others drawn from his creative imagination. His approach somewhat resembles that of the author of the Book of Chronicles; hence, his work should be dated quite late, possibly to the late Persian period. Whether the scroll of Judges available to the late editor included the introduction to the Book of Judges (Judg 1:1-2:10), the story cycle of Samson (Judg 13-16), and the so-called Appendix to the Book of Judges (chapters 17-21) requires extensive discussion and far exceeds the limited scope of this article.
Judges 1:1-2:5, The Double Intention of the Deuteronomistic Redactor
Judges 1:2-2:5 is generally considered as a later addition to the main body of the book of Judges. Since the stories of the judges (3:7-16:31) have a Deuteronomistic introduction in Judg. 2:6-3:6, Judg. 1:1-2:5 is somehow dangled between Joshua and Judges. The approximate repetition of Josh 24:28-31 in Judg. 2:6-9 also forms a Wiederaufnahme, a common device for inserting additional material. Then, we can ask, why does the redactor place Judg. 1:1-2:5 there? What is the function of this additional material? Scholarly research has been threefold. First, some regard Judg. 1:1-2:5 as pro-Judahite redactional material. They approach the text from the perspective of the broad context of the Deuteronomistic History. Second, literary critics attempt to read the text within the direct context of Judges and to set literary or thematic connections between Judg. 1:1-2:5 and the rest of the book. Third, some understand Judg. 1:1-2:5 as transitional material between Joshua and Judges. While critically interacting with the previous scholarship, I will propose a new way to understand Judg. 1:1-2:5: ‘the double intention of an exilic Deuteronomistic redactor.’ Artificially composing Judg.1:1-2:5 based on the old and new materials, the redactor not only promotes the relatively positive image of Judah, but also provides a smooth transition from the overall positive portrayal of the Israelite conquest in Joshua to the negative evaluation of the failure of Israelites’ conquest at the beginning of Judges (2:6-3:6). The best socio-historical setting of the redactor is the exilic period in which, while both of the Israelite kingdoms are failed to remain in the land, hope still remains in the lineage of Judahite kingship.