Judges 18

III. THE RESULTS OF ISRAEL’S APOSTASY CHS. 17-21

The following two extended incidents (ch. 17-21) differ from the records of the judges just completed (chs. 3-16). They are not accounts of the activities of any of Israel’s judges. They are the record of events that took place during the period of the judges that throw light on conditions in Israel during this era. The purpose behind their inclusion seems to have been to illustrate even more clearly ". . . the low moral standards, . . . the debased religious conceptions and . . . the disordered social structure" in Israel. [Note: Cundall and Morris, p. 182.]

"As was the case in the earlier chapters of the Book of Judges [Judges 1:1 to Judges 3:6], these chapters deal with the subject of spiritual apostasy and its effects upon the nation of Israel." [Note: Davis and Whitcomb, p. 143.]

Philip Satterthwaite concluded, from studying the allusions to former similar events in Israel’s history, that all these allusions "have a similar effect, that is, they suggest the theme of ’something going wrong in Israel.’" [Note: Philip Satterthwaite, "’No King in Israel’: Narrative Criticism and Judges 17-21," Tyndale Bulletin 44 (1993):85.]

Whereas chapters 3-16 record Israel’s struggles with her external enemies, chapters 17-21 document the internal conditions of the nation that made her so weak. In chapters 17-18 we see Israel abandoning God, and in chapters 19-21 we see her destroying herself.

The town of Bethlehem features in each of three stories. These stories are Micah and the Danites (chs. 17-18), the Levite and the Benjamites (chs. 19-21), and the story of Ruth and the Judahites in the Book of Ruth. Therefore some scholars refer to this section of Scripture as the "Bethlehem trilogy." These stories also share other themes and motifs.

"They concern individuals in more or less private settings whose identities and activities are nevertheless inseparable from and crucial to a full understanding of the Davidic monarchy which followed them. Accounts of actual events that transpired in the days of the judges, they are included in the sacred record for the purpose of tracing the roots of the Davidic dynasty and justifying its existence in opposition to Saul." [Note: Merrill, Kingdom of . . ., pp. 178-79.]

If the writer intended these chapters as a setup for the Davidic line or the monarchy in general, we cannot help but remember that the monarchy ended in chaos as well. The kings also "did what was right in their own eyes." In spite of the form of government and the rulers under which the Israelites lived, they consistently fell short of God’s standard for them.

The first incident in Judges (chs. 17-18) describes the fate of the Danites, and the second (chs. 19-21) the fate of the Benjamites. Both tribes received land in Israel’s heartland, between Judah and Ephraim, the tribes that would, after the monarchy divided, lead the Southern and Northern Kingdoms respectively. By selecting incidents from these tribes, the narrator showed that the degenerating tendency in Israel was not just a problem in the fringe territories. Canaanite influence had infected the heart of the nation.

Both Dan and Benjamin found themselves in dire straits but for different reasons. The Danites could not settle into their allotted inheritance because of Canaanite influence, and the Benjamites could not remain in theirs because of their hostile Israelite brethren. In both instances, a nameless Levite with Bethlehem (Judges 17:7-8; Judges 19:1-2) and Mt. Ephraim (Judges 17:1; Judges 19:1) connections, precipitated the crisis. Both accounts include priestly characters inquiring of God concerning the outcome of a proposed course of action (Judges 18:5-6; Judges 20:27-28), and both conclude with a reference to Shiloh (Judges 18:31; Judges 21:19-24). In both accounts military contingents of 800 men play a crucial role (Judges 18:11; Judges 18:16; Judges 18:25; Judges 20:47; Judges 21:7; Judges 21:12; Judges 21:14; Judges 21:16-17; Judges 21:23), and both contain references to the absence of a king in Israel (Judges 17:6; Judges 18:1; Judges 19:1; Judges 21:25). These parallel phenomena have the effect of making the reader conclude that the Canaanization of Israel had become complete. [Note: Block, Judges . . ., pp. 474-76.]

A. The idolatry of Micah and the Danites chs. 17-18

God undoubtedly included the story of Micah and the Danites in the sacred record because it relates the establishment of image worship in Israel. This was a new and catastrophic departure from Yahweh for the Israelites. Image worship continued, grew, and became an increasing snare to the Israelites from this time on in their history until the Babylonian Captivity. Consequently this incident exposes the extent of the spiritual apostasy of Israel.

The events recorded in these two chapters evidently took place while the Philistines were putting pressure on the tribes of Dan, Judah, and Benjamin. Perhaps the writer included them here because of their connection with the arena of Samson’s activities that he just related (chs. 13-16). Another connection is the mention of "1,100 . . . of silver" (Judges 16:5; Judges 17:2). Shekels of silver are evidently in view. Eleven hundred shekels weighed about 28 pounds. Riches played a significant role in Samson’s downfall, and they played a major part in Micah’s defection. As mentioned previously, the writers of the Old Testament frequently connected events and laws that were similar or had a logical relationship to one another, rather than following a strict chronological sequence. However, this chapter also records another downward step, lower than Samson’s, that the Israelites took in their departure from the Lord. Probably the writer placed this incident before chapters 19-21 because it indicates a basic problem, namely, spiritual apostasy, and chapters 19-21 record the resultant political and social conditions.

It is difficult to determine exactly when during the amphictyony this incident may have occurred. Jonathan, the Levite in the story, was evidently a descendant of Moses (Judges 18:30). The English texts call him the "son" of Gershom the "son" of Moses (Judges 18:30). However the Hebrew word translated "son" (ben) frequently means "descendant" in the Old Testament. If Jonathan was the grandson of Moses, he probably would have been a "young man" (Judges 17:7; et al.) during the wilderness wanderings. So it appears that Jonathan was a later descendant of Moses and that this event occurred many years after the conquest of the land, but how much later is hard to say.