скачать книгу бесплатно
(iii) Supplication to the Lord
(iv) Salvation by a deliverer
3. Inevitable corruption (17–21)
(i) Idolatry in the north – Dan
(ii) Immorality in the south – Benjamin
In Section 2, the four stages of the cycle are repeated seven times. The book finishes with a statement that has actually been the refrain throughout: ‘There was no king in those days, every man did what was right in his own eyes.’
1. Inexcusable compromise
(I) ALLOWANCES – VULNERABLE VALLEYS
God sent Israel into the land to destroy the inhabitants totally. Archaeology confirms the wicked practices of the Canaanite people – sexual diseases were rife. Those who question the justice of this extermination forget God’s Word to Abraham about the future of his descendants. He was told that the Jews would stay in Egypt for centuries until the wickedness of the Amorites reached its ‘full measure’. God was tolerant of their wickedness, but they finally overstepped the mark and he used Israel as the instrument of his judgement on a most perverted society.
Instead of following God’s commands, however, Israel were selective in their punishment. They captured the hills and mountains but allowed many of the peoples to remain, especially those living in the valleys. Israel thus became divided into three groups: northern, central and southern. Communication between the tribes was difficult and they were unable to respond speedily and unitedly when external threats arose. Furthermore, the valleys provided routes for invaders, who were only too keen to exploit such internal weakness.
(II) ALLIANCES – MIXED MARRIAGES
The lax standards of the valleys were too great a temptation for many Israelite men, and before long Israelites had married outside their faith in clear defiance of God’s law which forbade ‘mixed marriages’. This affected the spiritual life of Israel. If you marry a child of the devil you are bound to have problems with your father-in-law! Any designs on holy living were dashed and many Israelites in unequal marriages ended up serving Canaanite gods. The spiritual influence of the non-believer tends to be stronger in a mixed marriage, even today. The service of Canaanite gods led inevitably to immorality, for wrong belief always leads to wrong behaviour.
2. Incorrigible conduct
The bulk of the book of Judges consists of a series of cycles. With almost monotonous regularity the people of God repeat the same pattern.
Supplication: It starts with Israel crying out to the Lord because they are facing oppression of some kind.
Liberation: God sends a deliverer (e.g. Gideon, Samson) to rescue the people.
Violation: In spite of their deliverance, the people slip back into sin.
Occupation: God therefore sends a hostile people (e.g. Midianites, Philistines) to overpower Israel. Israel becomes a vassal state in a land they should have been freely owning.
Supplication: In view of the hardship of the situation, they cry out to the Lord again and so the cycle continues. It seems they only pray when they are in trouble. It is hard to tell whether they are truly repentant or merely regretting the consequences of their behaviour. Clearly many were unaware that the oppression was their fault.
The cycle does not just apply to the whole nation: individuals also live in a similar routine of sin and forgiveness and further sin. It is not simply an endless cycle either, but a spiral going downwards. Things get steadily worse.
3. Inevitable corruption
The last part of the book of Judges is a most unedifying account of what happened to the people. There were two situations, one in the north in the territory of Dan and one in the south in the territory of Benjamin. On both occasions, the people of God were misled by a priest. It is a perfect illustration of the maxim mentioned earlier, that idolatry (wrong belief) leads to immorality (wrong behaviour).
(I) IDOLATRY IN THE NORTH – DAN
The story starts with a son, Micah from Ephraim, stealing 1,100 shekels from his own mother. He returns the money to her and she is so delighted that she uses it to make an idol which she gives to Micah for the private shrine he has set up in his home.
A young Levite comes to Micah’s house in search of lodgings and is offered the opportunity to be his father and priest for a regular income, clothing and food. He accepts. Later the tribes of Dan, who failed to take the land God allocated to them in the south, migrate north. When their leaders lodge in this house with the idols and the priest, they offer the priest the chance to officiate for their whole tribe, for more money, and he accepts.
In clear violation of the law of God, therefore, the tribe of Dan slips into idolatry. Just as Judas Iscariot, one of the 12 disciples, went missing after his great sin, the tribe of Dan is missing in the book of Revelation. The sin starts with a man who steals money from his mother, then it is carried over to a Levite who becomes a private chaplain, first to a family and then to a whole tribe – without any proper appointment or authorisation.
(II) IMMORALITY IN THE SOUTH – BENJAMIN
This story is even worse. Another Levite from the tribe of Ephraim takes a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. She leaves him and returns to her family home. After four months the Levite arrives in Bethlehem to seek her return. The father keeps urging the Levite to stay at his home before finally letting her go. They set off too late in the day and only get as far as Jerusalem, a pagan city at that time. The Levite refuses to stay with ‘pagans’, so they travel north to the tribe of Benjamin, arriving at Gibeah by nightfall. They are offered hospitality by an old man who welcomes them into his home. However, while they are eating, they are interrupted by ‘wicked men of the city’ who demand that the newcomer be given to them for sex. The old man refuses, but offers instead his daughter. Eventually the Levite gives them his concubine. The next morning the concubine lies dead on the doorstep, having been gang-raped through the night.
The Levite cuts his concubine up into 12 pieces and sends them to the other tribes of Israel. When the Israelites discover that men of the tribe of Benjamin committed the crime, they seek revenge on the perpetrators. The Benjaminites are offended by the accusation and refuse to hand the men over.
A civil war results which almost wipes out the tribe – only 600 men are left. Their towns are destroyed and all the women and children are slaughtered. The other tribes had vowed not to give their daughters in marriage to the tribe of Benjamin, but now the tribe is on the brink of extinction and the Israelites have pity on them and take action to prevent this happening. They find 400 virgins from Jabesh Gilead as wives for the Benjaminites, but they need more. They then concoct a clever plan. They hold a festival at Shiloh and allow the Benjaminites to kidnap their daughters – thus not technically ‘giving’ them away and so fulfilling the letter if not the spirit of their previous oath.
It is a dreadful tale in all aspects and, alongside the story of the tribe of Dan, it makes a depressing end to the book of Judges.
Theological or eternal purpose
After such a gloomy story we turn to a more uplifting subject: a consideration of the theological purpose of the book. Ultimately Bible history is not a human record but a record of what God has said and done, showing us who he is.
We have noted already that God is the judge or deliverer of the people, since he is the only person to whom the noun ‘judge’ is applied in the book. He is the real hero, and success is achieved when the human leaders co-operate with him.
However, when we ask the question, ‘Who drove the Canaanites from the land, Israel or God?’ we must reply, ‘Both!’ We can sum up the situation like this: Without him they could not; without them he would not. On the one hand God declared that he would give them the land and drive out the inhabitants, but on the other hand he needed Israel to respond to his direction.
Furthermore, we read that in some cases God did not drive out the opposition, but left them in the land to test Israel and teach them to fight. We learn from Amos that just as God brought Israel out of Egypt, he brought the Philistines from Crete as neighbours, to inflict injury on Israel.
Within the book of Judges, therefore, we find that God chastises his people. He delivers them to evil, demonstrating his justice, as well as from evil, showing his mercy.
This principle is also seen in the New Testament. There is, of course, the line in the Lord’s Prayer: ‘Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.’ The power of the Holy Spirit can heal the sick, but it can also bring disease; it can give sight to the blind, but it can also prevent good eyes from seeing; it can raise the dead, but it brings death too, as with Ananias and Sapphira. The ultimate sanction in church discipline is to hand over erring members to Satan, whose destructive power over the body may bring them to their senses and save their souls on the day of judgement.
Yet at the same time God hears the prayers of Israel and responds. He is grieved by their misery, he is patient and faithful, in spite of the people’s repeated disobedience. So we read how God answered prayer, sending anointed leaders and directing operations, for example with Gideon and Barak. We see a dynamic relationship between God and man, each affecting the other.
Noting this important dynamic still does not explain the purpose of the book, however, but this will not become truly clear until we have looked at Ruth as well. At this stage all we see is the unedifying cycle of Israel getting into and out of trouble. We do not yet know where it is going.
The reasons for these problems within Israel can be explained in two ways:
1. SECOND-GENERATION MEMBERS
The people of Israel now occupying the Promised Land did not have the same knowledge of God and what he had done for them as the previous generation. They did not want to know God. Instead they did what was right in their own eyes, but wrong in his eyes. Everyone was a law to himself.
2. SECOND-GENERATION LEADERS
There was no seamless succession in the leadership. When a judge died, there was a gap before another judge appeared, and during this gap the people reverted to the type of behaviour which led to God’s punishment. The pattern of the cycle is indicated by phrases such as, ‘as long as the judge lived … but when the judge died…’ This was very different from the dynastic succession which prevailed in other nations, ensuring continuity and stability – and the judges only ruled over a limited group, not a united nation.
This question of kingship crops up a number of times.
1 Gideon is offered the throne by his followers following his victory over the Midianites. The people ask him to start a dynasty. Some argue that he should have accepted, but clearly this is not God’s time for a king to be chosen. Gideon tells the people their problem is that they have not looked to God as their king.
2 Following Gideon the leadership is in the hands of a number of people. Abimelech asks the people whether they would prefer his sole leadership to leadership by Gideon’s 70 sons as a group. He is duly installed and proceeds to murder his brothers. Things get steadily worse as his hunger for power demonstrates that he has little interest in the welfare of the people, and he is eventually killed in battle.
3 Throughout Judges we read the refrain, ‘There was no king in those days…’ and the suggestion is that things would have been much better if there had been one.
We will return to this theme later. For now the important point to note is that Judges tells us there is a desperate need for a king. As we turn to the book of Ruth we are faced with the more positive message that a king will be provided. Ruth starts to address the question, ‘Who will it be?’
Ruth
The book of Ruth was written at the same time as Judges but there could hardly be a greater contrast between the two.
Judges includes the stories of many people, Ruth just a few.
Judges is relatively large, while Ruth is one of the smallest Old Testament books.
Judges covers the whole of Israel, Ruth just one small town.
Judges spans 200 years, Ruth just one generation.
Ruth reads like a Thomas Hardy novel, with the sort of romance which would not be out of place in a magazine story. It is a breath of fresh air after Judges. In Judges we have mass killing, rape, a prostitute cut up into pieces, civil war, evil priests. It is just two miles from the Benjaminites’ territory to Judah where Ruth is located, but it is a totally different atmosphere.
Ruth is only four chapters long. The first two chapters are about two inseparable women, and the second two chapters are about two influential men. These four people form the main characters in the drama.
1 Mother-in-law’s loss
2 Daughter-in-law’s loyalty
3 Redeemer kinsman’s love
4 Royal king’s line
1. Mother-in-law’s loss
The story begins with a famine in Israel, which caused three men to leave for Moab. We can guess that the famine was a punishment from God, for this was a common sign of God’s displeasure, and it provides a contrast with the location of the main drama – Bethlehem means ‘house of bread’ in Hebrew.
If the family had learned the lessons from Israel’s history, they would have known that searching for food outside Israel always led to problems, as the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob testify, but there is no record that they prayed to God for food. So Naomi and her husband travelled east across the hills on the far side of the Dead Sea to Moab. As time passed each of their two sons married a Moabite woman. Things went from bad to worse. Naomi’s husband died and the two sons died also. The three widows were left alone. In those days a widow’s future was bleak. The whole drama started from the men’s refusal to rely on God. They sought a human solution to their situation instead of asking God what was happening and what they should do.
God would have told them that the famine was part of his punishment, and if only they would turn back to him they would have enough food again. But they did not even wait to ask him, let alone listen for an answer.
As a result of this crisis Naomi became bitter. Her name actually means ‘pleasure’, but when she returned to Israel she was unrecognizable to her old relatives and asked to be called ‘Mara’, meaning ‘bitter’, instead. She encouraged her two daughters-in-law to stay in Moab, knowing that returning to Judah would mean little prospect of remarrying. The men in Judah were not likely to marry outside their clan.
Orpah agreed and went back to Moab and is never heard of again. On the basis of her choice she had no more place in God’s purpose. Ruth, however, went with Naomi and her name has gone down in history as an ancestor of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
The story carries the reminder that much can hang on just one decision. It is the choices we take that make up our character, and Ruth made the right choice at the right time.
At last we see someone whose actions break out of the endless cycle. Ruth became part of God’s line instead. Her name is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew, despite the fact that she was both a Gentile and a woman.
2. Daughter-in-law’s loyalty
Ruth was a beautiful character, both inside and out. She was full of humility and yet she had the sort of boldness that men find attractive. She was loyal, with a serving spirit, but she was not passive or an underdog by any means.
She not only chose to stay with Naomi, but chose Naomi’s people and Naomi’s God. God was evidently real to her, even though she had seen him punishing his people. On four occasions she said ‘I will’ to Naomi. In being so loyal to Naomi she demonstrated her love for her. ‘Loyalty’ and ‘love’ are almost the same word in Hebrew. Love that is not loyal is not true love. Likewise, God’s covenant love for his people means that he sticks with them through thick and thin.
Furthermore, we read that Ruth found ‘favour’ in the eyes of the Lord. In Hebrew, ‘favour’ is the same word as ‘favourite’ – she became one of God’s favourites. It is clear from the story that Ruth became the talk of the town in Bethlehem, for the Lord did not stop showing his kindness to Ruth.
3. Redeemer kinsman’s love
The second half of the book includes two influential men, Boaz and the man who would become king.
Boaz was a man of great standing and great generosity. It was common for the poor to be allowed to collect any grain remaining in the field after harvest, but Boaz instructed his workers to make sure that Ruth especially received a large provision.
There are two other customs in the book of Ruth which we must appreciate in order to understand the unfolding drama. The first is the Levirate marriage. In the year of Jubilee, every 50 years, all the property was returned to the original family that owned it in the previous Jubilee year. It was imperative, therefore, that there was a male family representative to claim the property after 50 years. The Levirate law stated that if a woman’s husband died before she had a son to pass on her inheritance, her husband’s brother had to marry her and give her a son, thus keeping the property in the family. Ruth, of course, had been married to someone who was entitled to property, but now she had no husband or son, so a relative was under the obligation to marry her to keep her husband’s name and line going and reinherit the property when it became available in Jubilee year.
The second law to understand was a social custom. A girl could not propose marriage to a man in those days, but she was free to indicate that she would like to be married to someone and could do that in a number of ways. One was to warm the man’s feet! So when Ruth lay at Boaz’s feet and covered them with her cloak she was indicating that she would not mind being married to him. These two customs explain how Boaz married Ruth.
When Ruth lay at Boaz’s feet, it was a clear sign that she was interested. He was flattered that she had chosen him, as he was neither the oldest nor the youngest kinsman she could have chosen. However, his older brother was the one who should fulfil the legal duty, so he had to give him first option! His older brother gave his consent in the customary way, taking off his sandal and giving it to Boaz – the equivalent of shaking hands on a deal. Ruth and Boaz were free to marry.
4. Royal king’s line
It is a beautiful story – a lovely rural romance. But we must ask what God was doing behind all this, for it is unlikely that the story would be included in Scripture merely as a light interlude. It becomes clear that God was preparing a royal line for a king of Israel. Ruth’s right choice in joining with Naomi and returning to be part of her people was part of God’s right choice, for he had chosen her to be part of the royal line.
Indeed, although God is not directly identified as being involved in the drama, he is frequently mentioned in the book, as the characters ask him to bless others. Naomi asked the Lord to bless Ruth for being with her. The harvesters asked God to bless Boaz and he returned the blessing to them. Boaz asked the Lord to bless Ruth for choosing him. When they spoke of God they used God’s name, YAHWEH, a name which functions like ‘always’ in English – God is ‘always’ my provider, ‘always’ at my side, ‘always’ my healer.
It is interesting to note that Boaz was a direct descendent of Judah, one of the 12 sons of Jacob. He was also a descendant of Tamar, who had offspring after she was raped, which shows that God can use the most unlikely situations as part of his plan. Jacob gave a prophecy to Judah on his deathbed: ‘The sceptre will not depart from Judah nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet until he comes to whom it belongs.’ This was several centuries before they thought of having a king, and yet Jacob promised Judah that a royal line would come from his house.
We learn too that Boaz’s mother was not a Jew. Rahab the prostitute was the first Gentile in the land of Canaan to embrace the God of Israel. So we have a mixed family tree: Tamar was raped, Rahab was a Gentile and a prostitute, Ruth was a Moabite. And yet these are all ancestors of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Who wrote Judges and Ruth?
It is time now to examine why Judges and Ruth belong together, and also to answer the question: Who wrote them and why?
The end of a book of the Bible often reveals its purpose. The phrase, ‘There was no king in Israel in those days’ means that the book of Judges, and therefore Ruth as well, was written after they were led by a king. It is also obvious from the end of Ruth that David was not the king at the time of writing, for we read, ‘Jesse was the father of David,’ not ‘Jesse was the father of David the King.’
These two facts strongly suggest that the book was written when there was a king, but before David’s time. The only period when this was the case was when Saul was king, since David was king directly after Saul. So the book was written when Saul, the first king of Israel, was on the throne, the people’s choice. He was chosen for his height and his physical appearance – not for his character or ability.
If we know when the book was written, we can also ask who wrote it. The speeches of the prophet Samuel in the first book of Samuel have been found to be identical in language to the book of Judges and Ruth. And it was his style to teach from the history of his people. It is most likely, therefore, that Samuel wrote Judges and Ruth as one book, when Saul was king.
More of the purpose for writing can be discerned when we ask which tribe King Saul came from. The answer is Benjamin. The whole message of the two books is that Benjamin is bad stock, in contrast to Judah and those in Bethlehem. In other words, the two-volume work was written to prepare the people to switch from Saul to David. Samuel had secretly anointed David but needed to prepare the people to accept him as king rather than their own choice of Saul.
He asks his readers to compare the degraded men of Benjamin with the delightful people in Bethlehem. At the very end Samuel mentions that Jesse was the father of David, knowing that he was God’s appointed king and was going to change the whole situation.
This theory is backed up by a detail included in the first chapter of Judges. When the tribe of Judah entered the Promised Land the city of Jerusalem was assigned to the tribe of Benjamin. But the early part of Judges tells us that the city was in the hands of the Jebusites ‘to this day’, implying that Benjamin never conquered it. One of David’s first acts as king, recorded in 1 Samuel, was to capture the city. This provides further clarification for the date of the book and confirms the likelihood that its purpose was to encourage people to be pro-David. The position of Ruth alongside Judges brings two cities into view: Bethlehem, the ‘house of bread’, David’s home town, and Jerusalem, occupied by the Jebusites but soon to become the nation’s capital.
How can we use Judges and Ruth today?
In the New Testament the apostle Paul tells Timothy that all Scripture is God-breathed and able to make us ‘wise for salvation’. Jesus says that the Scriptures bear witness to him, so we must ask how a Christian should read Judges and Ruth.
Judges
Individual Christians can learn a great deal from the characters in the book of Judges. We can learn from the mistakes the judges made as well as from their correct choices. Each story has value to any believer. But we do not look to the judges to provide role models. Indeed, the New Testament discourages such a course. In Hebrews 12 we are told that those who have gone before, described in chapter 11 and including some of these judges, are watching to see how we run the race, looking to our only true model in Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, whose work of deliverance stands for all time.
The Church needs to study Judges because it could fall into the same spiral of anarchy today, doing what it feels is right in its own eyes. It could fall into error by looking for a visible ‘monarchy’, a human being whose viewpoint or leadership is valued more than that of Christ. Rule by democracy, oligarchy or autocracy depends on human leaders, but the Bible teaches that we should be led by a theocracy. Our leader is both human and divine; he was on earth and is now in heaven.
We must also remember that God is the same in character today as he was at the time of the events described in Judges and Ruth. He loves his people, and shows this by disciplining those who wander from his path. At the same time he works out his plans for our good. We need not be part of a cycle of despair. We can know real direction and follow God’s purposes.
Ruth
