And the chiefs of all the people, of all the tribes of Israel …: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And begins this verse, but many versions omit it (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). Again strong emphasis is placed on the fact that all the Israelites were in agreement to fight their brothers, the Benjaminites. Along with the repetition of the word all, the word people also appears twice. In this context the Hebrew word for chiefs refers to the leaders of the tribes of Israel. This word is literally “corners,” used figuratively here for leaders (see verse 1 Sam 14.38; Isa 19.13). The phrases all the people and all the tribes of Israel refer to the same set of people, with the second expression modifying or making more specific the first one. Translators need to ensure that readers do not understand there are two groups. This repetition emphasizes the unity of the people in coming forward to address the issue at hand. We might say “The chiefs [or, leaders] of all the people from each of the Israelite tribes….”

Presented themselves in the assembly of the people of God: For presented themselves, New International Version‘s “took their places” is closer to the Hebrew than Good News Translation‘s “were present.” The Hebrew verb here is the same one used when Moses is told to meet Pharaoh (Exo 8.20). It suggests a purposeful action. Assembly renders a general Hebrew word (qahal) that can refer to gatherings to prepare for war or for worship. As the story unfolds, it becomes clear that the Israelites met here to decide what to do about the tragedy that had occurred. The people of God (literally “people of the God”) renders an unusual phrase in Hebrew, referring to the Israelites, who belonged to, or were in a covenant relationship with God. Good News Translation translates the assembly of the people of God as “this gathering of God’s people,” which is a good model to follow.

Four hundred thousand men on foot that drew the sword renders an independent clause in Hebrew, so we might say “and there were…” (Good News Translation). Though certainly many different members of the community came to the assembly, these words specifically mention soldiers. This is probably another touch of irony, because normally an assembly would come to discuss what to do, but here it would appear many have already decided on war. Given the times, four hundred thousand is an enormous number of soldiers. It may be easier to use the numeral “400,000” (Good News Translation) instead of words, since in many languages such figures are extremely long. The Hebrew word for thousand can designate 1,000 soldiers or a group of soldiers (see verse 1.4), so four hundred thousand men may be rendered “400,000 soldiers” or “400 contingents of soldiers.” What is clear is that the number of Israelite soldiers far exceeded that of the Benjaminites. Men on foot refers to infantry soldiers, as opposed to soldiers who might be on horseback or in chariots. Men on foot who drew the sword refers literally to soldiers who were capable of drawing a sword from its scabbard and using it, but this is clearly a figurative expression to refer to armed, competent soldiers ready for battle (see verse 8.10). We might say “There were 400,000 foot soldiers, all armed for battle” or “There were 400,000 soldiers on foot, all fighting men.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• The leaders of all the Israelite tribes met together in the assembly of God’s people. Four hundred groups of infantry gathered there as well, all armed with swords.

• The chiefs of each tribe in Israel were present at the gathering of the people of God. Altogether there were four hundred thousand (400,000) soldiers, all with their swords, prepared to fight.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In 20.36b the narrator comments on the trust the Israelite army had in those they set in ambush. The description now turns to the ambushers themselves. While the armies of Israel and Benjamin were engaged in battle, the ambushers attacked the town of Gibeah.

The sentences of this verse are quite poetic, with the final phrase expressing the dramatic capture of Gibeah. They read literally:

And the ambusher they hurried and they rushed upon Gibeah.
And he spread out the ambusher and he struck all the city to the mouth of the sword.

Throughout this subsection singular subjects are often used with plural verbs, which is not so unusual in some Hebrew narratives. Here the word “ambusher” is repeated twice and is presented in a chiastic structure, adding to the emphasis on the great victory.

And the men in ambush made haste and rushed upon Gibe-ah: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” (New Living Translation) or left untranslated, as in New Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. For the men in ambush (literally “the ambusher”), see verse 20.29. The verbs made haste and rushed describe the initial attack on the town of Gibeah. The Hebrew verb for made haste means “hurry.” The ambushers acted quickly. The Hebrew verb for rushed refers to a quick and violent action (see verse 9.33). This sentence paints a picture of a swift and sudden attack. In many languages these two verbs can be combined. For example, New Revised Standard Version says “The troops in ambush rushed quickly upon Gibeah,” and New International Version, “The men who had been in ambush made a sudden dash into Gibeah.”

And the men in ambush moved out: New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh sees two ambushes in this verse, but no other version adopts this interpretation. The men in ambush is simply repeated for emphasis. The Hebrew verb rendered moved out often means “drag out” or “drag off,” but in this context it can mean “deploy” or “spread out” (Good News Translation). After the ambushers rushed into the town, they moved throughout it.

And smote all the city with the edge of the sword means the ambushers killed everyone who remained in Gibeah. For smote … with the edge of the sword, see verse 1.8. All the city refers to the inhabitants of Gibeah.

There is much repetition in this verse, and some languages will prefer to describe what happened in briefer terms. Two models that do this are:

• Those waiting in ambush then rushed out and attacked Gibeah, killing everyone in that city.

• The ambushers rushed into the city of Gibeah, and spread out, putting to death everyone there.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse anticipates the reaction of the fathers and brothers of the captured young women of Shiloh.

And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us: And when is literally “And it will happen when.” This expression introduces a temporal clause in Hebrew, but many treat it as a conditional clause by beginning with “If” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). Another possible way to begin this verse is “And if it should happen that….” Their fathers and their brothers refer to the male relatives of the captured young women. In Hebrew the word for fathers includes uncles, and the word for brothers includes male cousins. Mentioning them reflects the cultural situation of that time, since it was the men of the family who were responsible for protecting the women, especially the unmarried girls (see Gen 34). The Hebrew verb rendered complain (riv) can mean “dispute” or even “accuse,” as in a legal setting (see verse 6.31, where it is rendered “contend”). Good News Translation uses the verb “protest,” which fits well here. The pronoun us in the Hebrew text refers to the Israelites. The Septuagint replaces this pronoun with “you,” referring to the Benjaminites. Though most versions stay with the Hebrew text, Good News Translation adopts the ver Septuagintver* reading. However, Hebrew Old Testament Text Project recommends following the Hebrew text. Translators should indicate in a footnote if they opt for another reading than the Hebrew text.

We will say to them: The pronoun we refers to Israelites, and the pronoun them points to the male relatives of the captured young women. This clause seems to confirm that the pronoun us rather than the pronoun “you” should be used in the previous clause. Good News Translation changes this clause to read “you can tell them,” a reading that Hebrew Old Testament Text Project does not recommend.

Grant them graciously to us renders a Hebrew text that says “Be gracious [or, Show favor] to them for/to us.” The Septuagint omits the words to us, but Hebrew Old Testament Text Project recommends keeping them. The pronoun them refers to the Benjaminites, and pronoun us points to the Israelites leaders. The Israelites ask the men of Shiloh to forgive the Benjaminites for capturing the young women on their behalf. They want them to allow the Benjaminites to keep the women they have captured. Thus New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “Be generous to them for our sake,” and New International Version has “Do us a kindness by helping them.” Translators may also say “Be gracious to them on our account [or, for our sake].”

Because we did not take each man of them his wife in battle explains why the men of Shiloh should be gracious to the Benjaminites. During the attack on Jabesh-gilead, the Israelites were not able to obtain enough wives for all the surviving Benjaminites. Because renders well the Hebrew particle ki. The pronoun we refers logically back to the Israelite leaders, who did not physically carry out the act of “taking” the young women from Jabesh, but who are taking responsibility. The pronouns them and him refer to the Benjaminites. New International Version says “because we did not get wives for them during the war.” Contemporary English Version is similar with “After all, we couldn’t get enough wives for all the men of Benjamin in the battle at Jabesh.”

Neither did you give them to them is literally “for you, you did not give to them,” which seeks to explain why the men of Shiloh are not at fault. Normally a wrong would have been committed if they had willingly given their daughters in marriage to Benjaminite men, as specified in verse 21.1. However, the Israelites argue that in this case, the vow is not really being broken, since the daughters had not been “given.” This clause begins with the Hebrew particle ki, which could be rendered “because” (Contemporary English Version), “since” (Good News Translation, New International Version), or “for.” The men of Shiloh (you) did not willingly give their daughters (the first them) to the Benjaminites (the second them). Translators may make these pronouns explicit if necessary (see first model below).

Else you would now be guilty is literally “at the time you would be guilty.” If the men of Shiloh had willingly given their daughters, they would have broken their vow and been guilty before Yahweh and deserved to die. But since their daughters are stolen, they are not guilty. For this clause and the previous one we might say “You did not give your daughters to the Benjaminites, so you are not really guilty” or “You did not really give your daughters to the Benjaminites. If you had, you would be guilty [but you are not].” New International Version reverses these clauses, saying “and you are innocent, since you did not give your daughters to them.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• If the young women’s fathers or brothers come to us to protest, we will say, ‘Be generous to the Benjaminites on our account, because we could not get enough wives for them during the battle [at Jabesh-gilead]. Since you did not actually give your daughters to the Benjaminites, you are not guilty of breaking your vow.’ ”

• If it happens that the girls’ male relatives come to complain, we will beg them to forgive you because we weren’t able to get enough wives for you from the battle. We will say to them, ‘You are innocent [in this matter], since you did not give your daughters to them—they stole them!’ ”

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But when the people of Israel cried to the LORD creates a smooth transition in English. However, Hebrew has an independent clause here, introduced by the waw conjunction, literally “And the sons [or, children] of Israel cried out to the LORD.” Some versions see the waw as introducing the next step, and thus render it “Then” (Good News Translation). Others, such as Revised Standard Version, see rather a note of unexpectedness here: “The LORD is furious, but when….” Translators should read their translation out loud to see which transition is most appropriate. In some languages subordinate clauses are used to introduce background information as in Revised Standard Version here. But since this clause describes an important step in the episode, many translators may prefer to follow the Hebrew and use an independent clause (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), for example, “Then the people of Israel cried to the LORD.”

This clause introduces a new element only hinted at earlier (verse 2.18), namely that the Israelites cried to the LORD. Many think this phrase refers to an overt demonstration of their inward regret or repentance over their acts. Others think that they were merely crying out for help, in light of their great suffering. Here cried does not mean that the people wept, but rather that they called out to the LORD. As the text does not say clearly what their motivation was, translators should not make this explicit. Keeping close to the text, we might say they “cried to the LORD for help” or somewhat generally, “in their suffering … they cried out to the LORD.”

The LORD raised up a deliverer for the people of Israel, who delivered them: While verse 2.16 describes this step in the general judges’ pattern, this is the first account of the LORD sending a particular deliverer. For raised up, see comments on verse 2.16, where the importance of this key verb is discussed. While some say “sent” (Good News Translation) or “chose” (Contemporary English Version), keeping a verb such as raised up would be ideal.

A deliverer is the person God sent to save Israel. The word deliverer renders a participle of the Hebrew verb (yashaʿ) meaning “save,” “rescue,” or “deliver.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “champion.” For more discussion of this verb, see comments on verse 2.16, where it is translated “saved.” The expression a deliverer … who delivered them is another emphatic construction where both the noun and the verb render the same Hebrew root (see verse 3.4). This expression thus marks a high point in the narrative. However, in many languages translating literally will be too repetitive. Some versions use two different words, for example, “a deliverer … who saved them” (New International Version). Good News Translation reduces the two words to one by saying “someone to free them.”

Othni-el the son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother: According to the arrangement of the book, Othni-el is the first of Israel’s judges. However, from the book of Joshua it would seem that he was a leader in Israel long before Joshua died. This highlights the fact that the book of Judges is more concerned with lessons that can be drawn from past events rather than their precise placement on a time line.

The name Othni-el and his family connections indicate that this is the same person who captured Debir and married Caleb’s daughter (verse 1.13; verse 15.17). It now becomes evident why this person was presented in the introductory material (verse 1.11-15). He appears as the first hero of Israel, and his life and his works constitute the pattern that the later judges will follow. It is not Othni-el, but Kenaz who is Caleb’s younger brother. This makes Othni-el the nephew of Caleb. See the discussion at verse 1.13.

Revised Standard Version follows the Hebrew word order and places the phrase concerning Othni-el quite far from the word deliverer. This sounds unnatural in English and may be unnatural in other languages. To remedy this, Good News Translation places this phrase in a new sentence, saying “This was Othniel, the son of Caleb’s younger brother Kenaz.” Another possible rendering is “His name was Othniel…” or “He was Othniel….” Yet another approach would be to introduce Othniel’s name earlier in the clause, for example, “he raised up Othniel, a deliverer to rescue Israel. He was the son of….”

Some translation models for this verse are:

• Then the Israelites called for the LORD to help, and he sent Othniel to rescue them. Othniel was the son of Caleb’s younger brother Kenaz.

• But the people of Israel cried out to the LORD to rescue them, and he sent them a deliverer named Othniel. He was the son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse begins with a Hebrew waw conjunction, which Revised Standard Version does not translate here. However, if 4.12 is rendered as an independent clause (as in the last example above), a connector such as “So” (New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “Then” would be appropriate.

Sisera called out all his chariots: The repetition of the name Sisera may indicate, as it does in some languages, that Sisera will be the loser in the conflict. However, in many languages this may prove too repetitive, in which case translators may use the pronoun “he” (Good News Translation). Called out renders the same Hebrew verb as the one translated “summoned” in verse 4.10. Just as Barak called out his troops, Sisera calls out his well-equipped army. New American Bible says “assembled,” and New International Version has “gathered together.” Here the emphasis is on the words all and chariots, both of which occur twice in this verse. Sisera is putting all his effort into this battle. We might say “Sisera ordered all his chariots into battle.”

Nine hundred chariots of iron: These chariots have already been mentioned in verse 4.3. In Hebrew this phrase reinforces the preceding clause. Some languages will prefer to combine them as Good News Translation does by saying “he called out his nine hundred chariots of iron.” However, this rendering loses some of the flavor of the original text, which may be expressed by saying “He called together his chariots of iron, all nine hundred of them!”

And all the men who were with him refers to Sisera’s own troops. Again the word all is significant. The Hebrew word rendered men (ʿam) is literally “people,” which seems yet another ironic use of this term (see verse 2.4). Though there are nine hundred chariots, there could have been many more soldiers. Some chariots could hold two or even three men, and that would not be counting the foot soldiers.

From Harosheth-ha-goiim indicates that Sisera’s men are marching from Harosheth-of-the-Gentiles. By repeating this name, the storyteller is emphasizing that these people are not Israelites. They do not know or follow Yahweh. For the meaning of this town name, see verse 4.2.

To the river Kishon: See the comments on verse 4.7. The area around the river Kishon is the scene of the coming battle. Revised Standard Version‘s rendering for this phrase and the previous one seems ambiguous, as if the army were assembled between the town and the river. In many languages it will be better to introduce another verb, as Good News Translation has done: “and sent them from Harosheth-of-the-Gentiles to the Kishon River.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Sisera called out his iron-wheeled chariots—all nine hundred of them—and all his soldiers from Harosheth-of-the-Gentiles to go into battle at the river of Kishon.

• Sisera ordered his nine hundred iron-wheeled chariots and all his troops to prepare for battle. They set out from Harosheth-ha-goiim and came to the wadi at Kishon.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse has two parts. The first two lines give more information about how the forces of nature worked in favor of Israel. The last line is another call, seemingly addressed by Deborah to herself. As is often the case in poetry, there are no conjunctions here.

The torrent Kishon swept them away: In the previous verse the stars fought. Now almost immediately the rivers begin to flood the area. Some scholars suggest these verses may reflect the belief that the stars did affect storms and rain. The torrent Kishon opens and closes the first two poetic lines, so this flooding river is in focus here. The Hebrew word for torrent (nachal) occurs three times in quick succession (see comments on verse 4.7, where it is rendered “river”). It is clear that something exceptional is happening, so translators should try to find a word that is different from a simple “river.” They may say “raging river” or “flood” (Good News Translation). Here this word is qualified by the proper name Kishon (see verse 4.7).

Swept them away pictures the raging waters of the Kishon River destroying the enemy army. This line provides a link back to another important victory of the LORD, when the waves swept away Pharaoh’s army and they drowned in the Sea of Reeds (Exo 14.28). Many languages will appreciate this kind of figurative language. Thus an expression such as “washed them away” would be better than saying “drowned them.” The pronoun them could refer to Sisera and his troops or more generally to all the Canaanite kings. If this pronoun poses a problem, it may be rendered “his troops,” “the army,” or even “the enemies.”

The onrushing torrent, the torrent Kishon: This line is an example of stairstep parallelism, since it builds on the previous line, adding the idea of onrushing. The Hebrew word for onrushing is not known elsewhere in the Old Testament. We might say “raging” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). In some languages an ideophone will be the best way to express this notion. However, many versions interpret the Hebrew root used here to mean “old.” For example, New Jerusalem Bible renders the onrushing torrent as “the torrent of old,” while New International Version speaks of the “the age-old river.” Contemporary English Version says “the ancient Kishon River.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives this reading a {B} rating. Some scholars believe there is a copyist’s error here. They make a small change to the Hebrew word for onrushing to read “overwhelmed them” (Boling). Translators will have to make a decision concerning the reading here and convey it in a poetic manner. Alternative readings can be put in a footnote.

Translators should try to find poetic ways to express the first two lines of this verse. Possible models are:

• The Kishon River flooded over,
and swept them all away.
Yes, swept them away completely!

• The raging Kishon River covered them over,
and washed them all away.

March on, my soul, with might!: This is another direct quote with no introductory speech formula, so translators should place a blank line between what precedes and this line. Most scholars believe these words reflect Deborah encouraging herself here to continue on in battle. But another possibility is that these words are addressed to Israel, being personified as one individual. However, the specific call to Deborah in verse 5.7 would indicate that the first interpretation is more likely.

March on renders a feminine imperative or jussive Hebrew verb form, issuing an order or calling for some action. The verb literally means “tread,” a verb that can be used in the context of wine-making or making a path. However, here it has a military meaning, which Revised Standard Version expresses well. It is not the same Hebrew verb rendered “down … marched” in verse 5.11. Translators can follow ver RSVver* or be more specific by saying “March on into battle.”

My soul renders the Hebrew word nefesh, which has many meanings, ranging from “throat” or “neck,” extending to a person in general and even beyond to life itself. In poetry this word is often used by the poet to refer to him or herself (see Psalm 103.1). NET Bible uses the sense of “neck” here by rendering this line as “Step on the necks of the strong,” but this translation seems unlikely. Most versions think Deborah is exhorting herself, a viewpoint supported by the feminine marking on the Hebrew imperative. The literal expression my soul (also New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) is not idiomatic in most languages, and often gives an incorrect meaning. In many languages it is more natural, though perhaps less poetic, to simply say “I” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). Bible en français courant interprets the singular “I” as a plural and has Deborah rallying the crowd around her by saying “Let’s go on with courage into the combat!”

In Hebrew this line is literally “you will march my soul might,” but like Revised Standard Version, most versions place a preposition before “might.” For example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “with courage.” However, several versions use an idiomatic expression, such as “be brave” in Contemporary English Version. Translators should use idiomatic expressions of encouragement in their own language.

Since the last line of this verse is a kind of battle cry, it can be separated from the first two lines and the following verse by blank lines (so Contemporary English Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Translation possibilities for this line are:

• “Be strong and march on!

• “I will march on and be brave.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But the LORD said to him: But is a good rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here, since it marks the contrast between the fear Gideon feels and the words of comfort the LORD is about to give. Translators should find an appropriate conjunction and verb of speaking for this context. For example, we might say “But the LORD reassured him, saying.”

Peace be to you is literally “Peace to you.” Yahweh assures Gideon all is well. Although these words are a standard form of greeting, here they take on added significance in view of the threat to his life that Gideon feels. We may say “You are safe” or even “Be calm” (New American Bible). The Hebrew word shalom rendered Peace refers to Gideon’s whole well-being here (see comments on verse 4.17). In some languages the word “Peace” alone will be sufficient (so Good News Translation). Contemporary English Version says “Calm down!” However, this rendering is another case of colloquial language that could even be interpreted as a reproach. Translators need to find an expression of total reassurance.

Do not fear is one of the most common commands in the Bible. It is often what the LORD says to those whom he calls to service (see, for example, Jer 42.11). It is generally followed by a promise of his presence and his help. In this case Yahweh promises Gideon that he will not die. There may be a play on words here, since the root for the Hebrew verb (raʾah) rendered “perceived” (verse 6.22) is very similar to the root for the verb translated fear (yareʾ). In some languages it may be more natural to put do not fear before Peace be to you, for example, “Don’t be afraid, you are safe.”

You shall not die: The LORD reassures Gideon that even though he has seen him face to face he will not suffer the penalty, which is normally death. Shall is a future marker but it sounds slightly archaic here. In colloquial English we would say “you aren’t going to die.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• But Yahweh said to Gideon, “Be at peace. Don’t worry. You will not die.”

• But the LORD said to him, “Don’t be afraid. You are safe. You won’t die.”

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .