rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_d5a9778b-135f-5dbc-ab5e-e25be9f64ecd">151. Thus we come up with an inexplicable relationship between cause and effect: the Israelites’ role in not removing the nations (1:1–36) was itself the cause of God not removing the nations (2:6–23). How divine sovereignty is linked to human responsibility is a question far beyond the capacity of any human’s portfolio. Nevertheless, considering a cyclical sequence might help give this some sense: God in his foreknowledge keeps enemies in the land in Joshua’s time (2:23); Israelites fail to drive them out (1:1—2:5); they cohabit with them and fall into apostasy (2:6–19); God refuses to drive out the nations any further (2:20—3:6), etc.
152. This business of serving false gods gets progressively worse as one proceeds through Judges: there is suspicion about idols in Ehud’s day (3:19, 26); Gideon’s father had an altar to Baal and an installation to Asherah that he sponsored (6:25); Gideon himself created an ephod, causing Israel to succumb to the lures of false gods (8:27); the situation was horrible in the time of Jephthah with a pantheon of gods in Israel’s cupboard (10:6–8). And of the nefarious affairs of Micah, his mother, his Levite, and the Danites (in Judges 17–18), the less said, the better!
153. Chisholm, Judges and Ruth, 162.
154. Webb, Judges, 150.
155. Ibid., 154.
156. Othniel is simply labeled the son of Caleb’s “brother” in Josh 15:17.
157. Butler, Judges, 56–57.
158. Or perhaps Othniel’s “deficiency” is that he was the son of a “younger brother” (1:13; 3:9). “In a society strongly influenced by primogeniture, the likelihood that the offspring of a younger (literally ‘smaller’ with implications of ‘unimportant’) brother will become the leader of the elder’s descendants warrants attention” (Klein, The Triumph of Irony, 34).
159. Younger, Judges, Ruth, 100.
160. Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist, 156.
161. Chisholm, Judges and Ruth, 168–69.
162. “Cushan-rishathaim” is likely to have been a pseudonym, for it could mean “Cushan-the-Twice-Wicked” (~yIt'['v.rI, rish‘atayim, being the dual form of [vr, rsh‘, “wickedness”).
163. However, this does not necessarily reflect on the particular judge’s uprightness or the moral probity of his subsequent actions, Samson being a case in point.
164. Butler, Judges, 66.
165. Hamilton, Handbook on the Historical Books, 113.
166. In the view of preaching espoused in this commentary, the exposition of the theology of the pericope (represented as a statement by the “Theological Focus”), with all the power and potency of the text, is the critical task of the homiletician. Needless to say, the preacher must also provide the congregation with specifics on how the theological thrust of each pericope may be put into practice so that lives are conformed to Christlikeness in the power of the Spirit, for the glory of God.
167. That God is pleased with the obedience and righteousness of his people is an essential biblical concept. See Kuruvilla, Privilege the Text! 253–58.
Pericope 3
Ehud (and Shamgar)
Judges 3:12–31
[Ehud’s Lack of Integrity; Shamgar the Foil]
REVIEW, SUMMARY, PREVIEW
Review of Pericope 2: In Jdg 2:6—3:11 (Prologue II and the Othniel story), the religious decline of the Israelites is detailed—the infidelity of the post-Joshua generation of Israelites. Things spiral from bad to worse, creating a paradigm that reflects this descent in each of the subsequent judge stories. Othniel, the first judge, however, is a parade example of a godly leader, whose story follows the paradigm precisely. With divine aid, he becomes Israel’s deliverer.
Summary of Pericope 3: The third pericope of Judges (3:12–31) depicts the second major judge in the series, Ehud. His duplicitous words and deceptive actions are subtly deprecated in his story: his left-handedness is suspect; his meticulously planned skullduggery is disfavored; he is equated to Joab, and with excrement. And, finally, the cameo of Shamgar makes this minor judge a foil for the major judge who lacks integrity. With the implicit disapproval of Ehud’s actions and the approval of Shamgar’s, integrity in leadership forms the thrust of this pericope.
Preview of Pericope 4: The next pericope, Jdg 4:1–24, is the story of Barak. Raised up by God’s representative, Deborah, he refuses to fulfill his commission unless she go with him into battle, despite God’s unambiguous promise of triumph. As a result of his faithless fear, Barak loses out on the honor of victory and the capture of the enemy general, Sisera, being preempted in the latter’s execution by another woman, a non-Israelite, Jael.
3. Judges 3:12–31
| THEOLOGICAL FOCUS OF PERICOPE 3 | ||
| 3 | Integrity in life, driven by reverence for God and reliance upon him, receives divine approbation (3:12–31). | |
| 3.1 | God who remains ever faithful to his people is worthy of their reverence. | |
| 3.2 | Unilateral, self-reliant strategies show a lack of dependence upon deity. | |
| 3.3 | Duplicity in life, demonstrating a lack of integrity, receives God’s disapprobation. | |
| 3.4 | God uses those who avoid self-reliance, duplicity, and disdain for deity. |
OVERVIEW
This pericope follows the standard paradigm of 2:11–19 and simulates the ideal model of Othniel (3:7–11), though with some critical differences (see below).
Pericope 3 is carefully structured, centered on the assassination of Eglon by Ehud168:
In this story, there is plenty of suspense, tension, intrigue, caricature, and “scatological humor.”169 Block calls it “a literary cartoon” that is “polemical and coarse.”170
3. Judges 3:12–31
| THEOLOGICAL FOCUS 3 | ||
| 3 | Integrity in life, driven by reverence for God and reliance upon him, receives divine approbation (3:12–31). | |
| 3.1 | God who remains ever faithful to his people
|
