Judging the Judges: Searching for Value in these Problematic Characters

 

⁶ Neither the Scripture index nor the subject index in John Wesley, The Works of John Wesley (14 vols.; Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1958), XIV, pp. 367-532, contains any reference to the book of Judges.

⁷ C. F. Burney, The Book of Judges, with Introduction and Notes (London: Rivingtons, 1918), p. cxxi. While pre-critical writers and holiness interpreters have struggled primarily with the personal immorality of the judges, it is the violence in Judges that offends many contemporary interpreters.

⁸ See ch. 1 of Martin, The Unheard Voice of God.

⁹ E.g., Walter Brueggemann, ‘Social Criticism and Social Vision in the Deuteronomic Formula of the Judges’, in Patrick D. Miller (ed.), A Social Reading of the Old Testament: Prophetic Approaches to Israel’s Communal Life (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1981), p. 73-90; McCann, Judges, pp. 14-20; and Bruce C. Birch et al., A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1999), pp. 181-89.

¹⁰ Kimberly F. Baker, ‘Hebrews 11—The Promise of Faith’, Review & Expositor 94, no. 3 (1997), p. 439, writes that the purpose of Hebrews is ‘to call believers to remain steadfast and to take courage’. Cf. David A. Renwick, ‘Hebrews 11:29-12:2’, Interpretation 57, no. 3 (2003), p. 300-301. See also Harold W. Attridge, ‘Paraenesis in a Homily (λόγος παρακλήσεως): The Possible Location of, and Socialization in, the “Epistle to the Hebrews”’, Semeia no. 50 (1990), p. 217; William L. Lane, Hebrews: A Call to Commitment (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), pp. 472-75; and Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), p. 58.

¹¹ Although the genitives υποστολης and πιστεως are often translated as if they were plural participles (e.g. ‘we are not of those who shrink back . . . but of those who believe’ [NIV]), they are in fact singular nouns, translated literally, ‘we are not of hesitation . . . but of faith’. As genitives of relationship, their function is to describe the subject and could be paraphrased, ‘we are not characterized by hesitation . . . but by faith’ (Cf. BDF, §162).

¹² Baker, ‘Hebrews 11—The Promise of Faith’, p. 440.

¹³ Steven M. Baugh, ‘The Cloud of Witnesses in Hebrews 11’, Westminster Theological Journal 68, no. 1 (2006), p. 119.

¹⁴ Baker, ‘Hebrews 11—The Promise of Faith’, p. 440. Discussions regarding the Christian content of faith within the epistle are not directly germane to my argument; nevertheless, cf. Michael R. Cosby, The Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11: In Light of Example Lists in Antiquity (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1988), pp. 34-40; and Pamela Michelle Eisenbaum, The Jewish Heroes of Christian History: Hebrews 11 in Literary Context (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1997), p. 144, note 43 for a list of works that address πίστις in Hebrews. Eisenbaum agrees (as do I) with the leading view that ‘Hebrews is continuous with the Jewish understanding of faith as fidelity, firmness, and trust in God’ (p. 144), a view that in my mind does not exclude Jesus as the object of saving faith for NT believers. So also, Victor Rhee, ‘Christology and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 5:11-6:20’, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43, no. 1 (2000), p. 93.

¹⁵ On the rhetorical significance of the anaphoric use of ‘by faith’, see Michael R. Cosby, ‘The Rhetorical Composition of Hebrews 11’, Journal of Biblical Literature 107, no. 2 (1988), pp. 258-61; and idem, Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11, pp. 41-55.

¹⁶ Baugh, ‘The Cloud of Witnesses in Hebrews 11’, pp. 118-21. Regarding the function of Hebrews 11, Baugh argues that the heroes are not so much examples whose faith ‘we are to emulate’ as they are ‘recipients of divine testimony to the coming eschatological realities, and thence by faith they became participants in and witnesses to the world to come’ (p. 113). Although I am unconvinced of Baugh’s primary thesis, he offers a number of helpful observations. E.g., he argues for the cruciality of the repeated motif of seeing the unseen (pp. 121-22), a motif that I also emphasized when I suggested that the faith of Hebrews 11 can ‘See the Invisible’, ‘Obey the Incomprehensible’, ‘Accomplish the Impossible’, and ‘Endure the Intolerable’ (Lee Roy Martin, ‘What Faith Can Do’ (Sermon, Cleveland, TN: Prospect Church of God, 28 Jan. 1996). Baugh’s argument is weakened by the fact that he limits his detailed study to only Abel, Enoch, Noah, and Abraham.

¹⁷ For Jesus as an example of endurance, see Victor Rhee, ‘Chiasm and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 11’, Bibliotheca Sacra 155 (Jul.-Sept.1998), p. 274-75.

¹⁸ A contextual factor that is recognized by R. Alan Culpepper, ‘A Superior Faith: Hebrews 10:19-12:2’, Review & Expositor 82, no. 3 (1985), pp. 375-80; and Eisenbaum, Jewish Heroes, p. 137. This bracketing is not appreciated by Robert L. Brawley, ‘Discoursive Structure and the Unseen in Hebrews 2:8 and 11:1 : A Neglected Aspect of the Context’, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 55, no. 1 (1993), pp. 81-98, whose emphasis ironically is on the context of Heb. 11. Cosby, Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11, pp. 40, 85-89, notes the introductory function of 10.35-39 but does not observe the concluding function of 12.1-3.

¹⁹ Furthermore, in Heb. 11, ‘faith and hope are immediately linked’, declares Baker (‘Hebrews 11—The Promise of Faith’, p. 440). Gerhard Dautzenberg, ‘Der Glaube im Hebräerbrief’, Biblische Zeitschrift, no. 17 (1973), pp. 167-68, goes so far as to assert that in Hebrews, faith and hope are interchangeable.

²⁰ Assurance is desperately needed by the intended hearers, argues Renwick, who writes, ‘Their strength had been so sapped that the community as a whole could not help its members meet their present difficulties with any enthusiasm, let alone with any longing to persevere’ (‘Hebrews 11:29-12:2’, p. 300).

²¹ Renwick, ‘Hebrews 11:29-12:2’, p. 301. Eisenbaum concludes, ‘Calling on the names of so many great biblical individuals and describing their accomplishments is intended as inspiration as well as argumentation’ (Jewish Heroes, p. 136).

²² The rhetorical features of Heb. 11.32-34 are detailed by Cosby, Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11, pp. 57-71.

²³ Surprisingly, the Greek phrases in Heb. 11.32-34 have no verbal parallels in the LXX. Words like ‘lion’, ‘righteousness’, ‘fire’, ‘sword’, and ‘armies’ are found in the OT, but not in combination with the verbs used in Heb. 11.

²⁴ On the hermeneutics of the writer of Hebrews, see Luke Timothy Johnson, ‘The Scriptural World of Hebrews’, Interpretation 57, no. 3 (2003), pp. 237-50. See also Eisenbaum, Jewish Heroes, pp. 89-134, who argues that, as a reinterpretation of Jewish history for a Christian audience, Heb. 11 displays these attributes: 1. Heb. 11 removes the nationalism from the OT story; 2. The exploits of the characters in Heb. 11 are diminished so that their fame will not challenge that of Jesus; and 3. Characters in Heb. 11 are praised for actions that differ from the actions for which they are praised in the OT. Eisenbaum’s is a helpful study, but her selective use and misinterpretation of evidence make her conclusions applicable only to a few of the persons named in Heb. 11, while her arguments are unconvincing when applied to the whole list. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New International Commentary on the New Testament, 58; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1964), pp. 318-21, explicates what he considers to be evidence of faith in Barak, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson. However, my purpose in this paper is not to show explicit correspondence between Hebrews and Judges.

²⁵ The Greek word επαγγελλία is found 14 times in Hebrews (4:1; 6:12, 15, 17; 7:6; 8:6; 9:15; 10:36; 11:9, 13, 17, 33, 39).

²⁶ Cf. BAGD, s.v. εργάζομαι.

²⁷ Among many texts, cf. 2 Sam. 8.15; 1 Ki. 10.9; Isa. 9.7; and Jer. 23.5. On this point I am indebted to my friend and colleague William Lyons.

²⁸ By no means, however, should this detract from the numerous ethical injunctions in Hebrews, e.g., ‘Pursue peace with everyone, and holiness without which no one will see the Lord’ (12.14).

²⁹ Of all the characters in Heb. 11, only Abel, Enoch, and Moses’ parents are without fault in the OT narrative.

³⁰ However, we might point to Moses, who chooses suffering instead of ‘transitory sinful pleasure’ (11.25).

³¹ For examples of how interpreters have failed to let stand the tension between Judges and Hebrews 11, see Gunn, Judges, pp. 134, 169, and 171.

³² We could expand the conversation to include famous leaders throughout Christian history. The divisive argument between Barnabus and Paul in Acts 15 does not erase their praiseworthy and sacrificial accomplishments of the previous chapters. The hypocrisy of Peter (Gal. 2.11) does not diminish his role in the inclusion of the Gentile believers (Acts 10-11). Martin Luther’s anti-Semitism does not eliminate his courage and steadfastness in leading the Reformation; and the smoke that arises from the burning of Michael Servetus does not blot out the light that shines from John Calvin’s commentaries.

³³ Outside of Hebrews 11, however, OT characters can serve negatively as warnings; cf. the Israelites (Heb. 3.7-19) and Esau (Heb. 12.16).

³⁴ On the suitability of narrative to display subtle theological tensions, see ch. 7 of Martin, The Unheard Voice of God.

³⁵ Gunn, Judges, pp. 106-109, shows how popular character studies have downplayed the flaws of the judges.

³⁶ It might be argued that Hebrews 11 has already identified the value of the judges—their value is in their faith. Such an argument has merit; but as I pointed out above, the writer of Hebrews characterizes the judges in a way that advances the argument of Hebrews. I hope to discern the value of the judges as they are portrayed in the book of Judges. I accept, with some limitations, the contention of Robby Waddell, The Spirit of the Book of Revelation (JPTS, 30; Blandford Forum: Deo Publishing, 2006), p. 78, that the intertextual reading of an interpretive text (Hebrews) will cause us to reconsider and revise our readings of the interpreted text (Judges).

³⁷ The variations are charted in detail by Robert H. O’Connell, The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges (VTSup, 63; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996), pp. 22-25.

³⁸ Cf. Walter Beyerlin, ‘Gattung und Herkunft des Rahmens im Richterbuch’, in Ernst Würthwein and Otto Kaiser (eds.), Tradition und Situation: Studien zur alttestamentlichen Prophetie. Artur Weiser zum 70 Geburtstag (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), pp. 1-29; and Brueggemann, ‘Social Criticism’, pp. 73-90. See also, Lee Roy Martin, ‘Yahweh Conflicted: Unresolved Theological Tension in the Cycle of Judges’; Old Testament Essays 22.2 (2009), pp. 356-72.

³⁹ The book of Judges uses the term yisrael or benay yisrael, ‘Israelites’ (154 times) even when only one or two tribes are in view (E.g., Abimelech rules Shechem only, but the narrative says he ‘ruled Israel’ [9.22], and Jephthah leads Gilead alone, but the text says he ‘judged Israel’ [12.7]). Although the judges and their battles may be limited in scope, the narrative (by using ‘Israelites’) invests each episode with national significance, a feature observed as well by Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (2 vols.; New York: Harper, 1962), I, pp. 331-32; Norman K. Gottwald, The Tribes of Yahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1979), p. 149; Pietro Alberto Kaswalder, ‘Le Tribù in Gdc 1,1-2,5 e in Gdc 4-5’, Liber annuus 43 (1993), p. 89; John Goldingay, Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), pp. 531-33. Cf. J. Ayodeji Adewuya, Holiness and Community in 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1: Paul’s View of Communal Holiness in the Corinthian Correspondence (New York: Peter Lang, 2001), whose work is an important challenge to the Church’s rampant individualism.

⁴⁰ J. P. U. Lilley, ‘A Literary Appreciation of the Book of Judges’, Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967), pp. 98-99.

⁴¹ Cf. ch. 4 of Martin, The Unheard Voice of God. Cf. also J. Cheryl Exum, ‘The Centre Cannot Hold: Thematic and Textual Instabilities in Judges’, CBQ 52 (1990), pp. 410-31, who traces the pattern of decline through the book.

⁴² Cf. David M. Gunn, Judges, pp. 68-69.

⁴³ See my sections on Gideon in Martin, The Unheard Voice of God; and Lee Roy Martin, ‘Tongues of Angels, Words of Prophets: Means of Divine Communication in the Book of Judges’, in Steven J. Land, John Christopher Thomas, and Rickie D. Moore (eds.), Passover, Pentecost & Parousia: Studies in Celebration of the Life and Ministry of R. Hollis Gause (Blandford Forum: Deo Publishing, 2010), pp. 33-53.

⁴⁴ See my discussion of Samson in Martin, ‘Power to Save!?’: The Role of the Spirit of the Lord in the Book of Judges’, Journal of Pentecostal Theology 16, no. 2 (2008), 21-50.

⁴⁵ Cf. Barry G. Webb, The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading (JSOTSup, 46; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), p. 167; and Edward L. Greenstein, ‘The Riddle of Samson’, Prf 1/3 (1981), p. 252.

⁴⁶ That the story of Samson represents the story of Israel is argued convincingly by Greenstein, ‘The Riddle of Samson’, pp. 237-60.

⁴⁷ McCann, Judges, p. 19.

⁴⁸ Michael Welker, God the Spirit (trans. John F. Hoffmeyer; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), p. 52. It must be remembered that God, not the judge, is the hero of the story. Any reading of the Bible that attends to the roles of human characters to the exclusion of the role of God will be theologically deficient.

⁴⁹ The exodus is mentioned in nine verses of Judges (2.1, 12; 6.8, 9, 13; 10.11; 11.13, 16 and 19.30) and seems to be in the background of Judg. 5.5 and 21. On the importance of these references to the exodus, see Lee Roy Martin, ‘“Where are all his wonders?”: The Exodus Motif in the Book of Judges’ (paper presented to the annual meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, Minneapolis, MN, 4 March 2010).

⁵⁰ Welker, God the Spirit, p. 53; cf. p. 56.

⁵¹ See Lee Roy Martin, ‘Power to Save!?.

⁵² Birch et al., A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 122.

⁵³ Welker, God the Spirit, p. 53.

⁵⁴ It is not that we have lost our will to fight, but that we, like the Israelites at the end of Judges, fight among ourselves rather than fighting against the oppressor. We fight over ecclesiastical politics; we fight over budgets; we fight over recognition; we fight over personal rights; we fight over fine points of theology; we fight over church programs; we fight over denominational pride; we fight over music styles. Our energy is expended by internal strife, so that we have no strength to fight for the weak, the poor, and the disenfranchised. We should be treading on serpents and scorpions, casting out devils, and laying hands on the sick. If the Church serves Baal, who is left to offer hope to the alcoholic, the drug addict, the prostitute, the pornographer, the laid-off factory worker, the abandoned child, the widow, and the single mother?

⁵⁵ A vast literature has developed around the sociology of charismatic leadership; and while I appreciate the insights of sociology, I would argue that sociological studies do not account for the theological content of the biblical model of charismatic leadership. On charismatic leadership in Judges, see Timothy M. Willis, ‘The Nature of Jephthah’s Authority’, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997), pp. 33-44; Abraham Malamat, ‘Charismatic Leadership in the Book of Judges’, Community, Identity, and Ideology (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1996), pp. 293-310; Peter A. Munch, ‘The “Judges” of Ancient Israel: An Exploration in Charismatic Authority’, in W. Swatos (ed.), Time, Place, and Circumstance: Neo-Weberian Studies in Comparative Religious History (New York: Greenwood Press, 1990), pp. 57-69; Ze eb Weisman, ‘Charismatic Leaders in the Era of the Judges’, Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89 (1977), pp. 399-411.

 

Tags: characters, judges, judging, problematic, searching

Category: Biblical Studies, Fall 2010