The Benjaminites not only rejected the request of the other Israelites, but they actually prepared to attack Israel. There was solidarity among all the Benjaminites as they came from throughout their tribal territory to Gibeah in support of the people of that town.

And the Benjaminites came together out of the cities to Gibe-ah: All the Benjaminites rallied to defend the inhabitants of Gibeah. And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, but it is clear that the Benjaminites were defiant, so this conjunction is better rendered “On the contrary,” “Not only that,” or simply “But.” New Living Translation uses “Instead.” Once again the Benjaminites is literally “the sons [or, children] of Benjamin.” There is more irony as the Hebrew verb for came together is the same one used to describe the Israelites coming together in response to the Levite’s call (see verse 20.11). Out of the cities is literally “from the cities,” referring to the other towns in the Benjaminite territory.

To go out to battle against the people of Israel: The irony continues as the verb go out renders the same Hebrew verb (yatsaʾ) used by the men of Gibeah when they demanded that the old Ephraimite “Bring out” the Levite, so they could have sex with him (verse 19.22). To battle against the people of Israel is literally “for the battle with the sons [or, children] of Israel.” Since the Benjaminites were Israelites, the Hebrew preposition for “with” could at first be understood to mean that the Benjaminites and the other tribes would be fighting together against a common enemy, but it is clear from the context that the Benjaminites would be fighting against the rest of the tribes.

Translation models for this verse are:

• On the contrary, the Benjaminites from the other towns rallied to Gibeah to go to battle against the Israelites.

• Not only that, the sons of Benjamin from the other towns came together at Gibeah to fight against the sons of Israel.

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 .

And the men of Israel turned back against the Benjaminites is literally “And the men of Israel returned to the sons [or, children] of Benjamin.” The Israelites gave up the idea of chasing down and killing the remaining 600 Benjaminite soldiers hiding at Rimmon Rock, so they turned around and attacked other Benjaminites. Certainly, the 600 Benjaminites would be hard to capture, since they were hiding in rock formations, with empty, deserted land all around. Here the narrator comes back to the main story line. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And might be translated “Then,” “Meanwhile” (New Revised Standard Version), or “In the meantime.” Turned back renders the key Hebrew verb shuv. Despite this verb’s many meanings, here it means “return” or “go back” (see verse 2.19). The Benjaminites refers to those who did not make it to Rimmon Rock. Good News Translation calls them “the rest of the Benjaminites.” We might say “Then the Israelites went back to attack the rest of the Benjaminites.”

And smote them with the edge of the sword is a typical description of killing people during battle (see verse 1.8), using the same Hebrew verb meaning “strike down” in verse 20.45.

Men and beasts and all that they found: This phrase expresses the widespread destruction that the Israelites carried out. The Hebrew is somewhat difficult here, seeming to say literally “from [the] whole city to [the] animal[s] up to all those who were found.” This is certainly an idiomatic expression meaning “every person and every animal they found.” Revised English Bible says “the people in the towns and the cattle, every creature that they found.” Contemporary English Version is similar with “all the people and the animals.” We might say “They slaughtered all the people and animals in sight.”

And all the towns which they found they set on fire: Burning down captured towns was standard practice in those days (see verse 1.8). This could be a sign of vengeance, but it may also have been carried out to prevent the people from reconstructing and seeking revenge themselves. All the towns which they found refers to all the Benjaminite towns the Israelite soldiers came across. The verb found occurs twice in quick succession. The Israelite soldiers are described as scattering out and killing every living thing they see and destroying any Benjaminite town they find. Set on fire (literally “send forth with [the] fire”) uses the key Hebrew verb shalach, which is often found in passages dealing with the defeat of an enemy (see comments on verse 3.15). This sentence may be rendered “and every remaining town was set on fire” or “and every town they came across they set ablaze.”

There is a chiastic structure here which marks the end of this section.

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 .

There is a change in scene here, perhaps warranting a new paragraph. However, there is no full noun subject, such as “Judah” or “the men of Judah,” so another possibility is to link this verse directly to what precedes.

From there they went against is literally “And he went from there against.” The singular “he” refers collectively to the men of Judah. From there assumes Hebron as their point of departure. For went against, see verse 1.10.

The inhabitants of Debir: Inhabitants renders a Hebrew participle of a verb meaning “reside” or “dwell” (see verse 1.9). Debir was a walled town located to the southwest of. The attack on Hebron involved a military conquest in the higher mountains, while Debir represents their advance into the lower regions or foothills.

The name of Debir was formerly Kiriath-sepher: Like Hebron, Debir also had an earlier name. The name Debir seems derived from the Hebrew root d-b-r, meaning “word” or “to speak,” while its former name Kiriath-sepher seems related, meaning “the town of [the] book.” These names probably indicate the town was an important cultural center. Like Hebron, its capture was significant enough to be recorded here. This time Revised Standard Version does not put the historical note in parentheses. Translators should use the strategies of their own language to present such comments, but probably the related comments should be treated in the same way. For formerly see verse 1.10.

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 .

With the death of Joshua, there is a shift of focus to the people of Joshua’s generation and the generation to follow. This verse, which tells of the death of all the members of Joshua’s generation, is linked back to what precedes by the word also. Good News Translation puts this verse together with 2.6-9, while others, including Contemporary English Version, link it to the following paragraph. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh divides the verse in two, linking the first clause with 2.6-9, and beginning a new paragraph at and there arose. Translators will need to decide what is most logical in their language.

And all that generation also were gathered to their fathers: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may indicate an indefinite time lapse, so we might say “Then.” But if this clause is seen as a summary statement, we might say “And” or omit the conjunction.

All that generation refers to all those who lived at the same time as Joshua. The Hebrew word for generation (dor) is common in the Old Testament, as in the famous passage in Eccl 1.4: “A generation goes, and a generation comes.” The word occurs only rarely in this book, twice in this verse and once in verse 3.2. Many languages have a word to refer to a group of people belonging to the same age-group. If such a word does not exist, it is possible to render all that generation as “all the people who lived at the same time as Joshua” or “all the people who belonged to Joshua’s age-group.” This is the fourth and last time the word all occurs in this section. See verse 2.7 for the other occurrences.

Were gathered to their fathers is a euphemistic way of saying someone died, used especially in the context of important historical figures. The Hebrew verb rendered gathered is used for people coming together. Their fathers refers to the ancestors, that is, all those who have “gone on before.” All languages have euphemisms to speak of death, but translators should try to find one that fits not only the solemn tone, but also the social status of this respected group of people. One African language says “went to light the fire of their fathers.” This is a respectful way of saying these people died. If no figures of speech exist, we might have to simply say “died and were buried.”

And there arose another generation after them: Here the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and has a sequential meaning, which can be expressed by “Then.” This clause marks an important step in the history of Israel. The generation that had experienced firsthand all the things Yahweh did for the people has now passed on, and a new generation arises. The repetitive use of the word generation seems to link this section to Eccl 1.4, quoted above. However, the most outstanding feature of this verse is the use of the Hebrew verb rendered arose (qum), which will be used repeatedly each time a hero or deliverer of Israel is presented in this book. In these instances (verse 2.16; verse 3.9; verse 5.7; verse 10.1, 3), it is often rendered “raised up” with the LORD as agent: “Yahweh raised a deliverer.” But in this context arose means that these people were born or “grew up” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version). Some languages may say “emerged” or “came [on the scene].” Contemporary English Version omits the verb arose, but given its importance throughout the book, it is better to find a way to express it here and elsewhere. After its use to introduce Israel’s heroes, later in the book, it will be used in an ironic way to mock those who should have been but are certainly not heroes. For another generation, Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version use the common expression “the next generation.” Other languages may speak of “the following generation” or “the generation to come.” We might also say “the children of those who died grew up” or “another generation was born and grew up.”

Who did not know the LORD or the work which he had done for Israel describes this new generation. Here there are two things the people are said to not know: Yahweh and the things he had done for Israel.

Who did not know the LORD is an extremely important statement, giving the backdrop of most of the events in the book of Judges. The initial shortcomings of Israel (verse 1.16-36), their on-and-off failures (chapters verse 3–16), and the final disasters in this book (chapters verse 17–21) can all be traced back to the fact that this generation did not know the LORD. The verb rendered know (yadaʿ) has many meanings in Hebrew. It can refer to knowing a fact (verse 6.37), but can also mean experiencing something, such as war (verse 3.1). It is also used to refer to knowing a person, in either an informal or intimate way, including sexual relations (Gen 4.1; verse 29.5). Here the word speaks of the deep relationship between God and his people and of the lifestyle that such knowledge produces (compare Hosea 6.6). Though they had heard of him, the new generation did not know the LORD. They had not experienced what it means to be in a covenant relationship with him. Given the importance of this expression, translators should try to find an adequate expression that will be used throughout Scripture. Some languages can render this expression rather literally, as many versions do (see Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version). This is perhaps the best solution if the meaning is clear. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “had not experienced [the deliverance of] the LORD.” Bible en français courant has “had no personal knowledge of the Lord.” Good News Translation says “forgot the LORD,” which seems to imply a one-time event and does not express the depth of the statement here.

Or the work which he had done for Israel: Or renders two Hebrew words meaning “and also,” the same two words that begin this verse. Any appropriate conjunction can be used, which in English might be “nor” or “neither.” The elided verb know can be made explicit here by saying “and they did not know [either] the things he did for Israel.” However, translators may need two separate words for knowing a person and knowing about events. If a different verb must be used, we might say “did not see/experience/witness” here (see verse 2.7). Unlike the old generation, this new one had not experienced what Yahweh had done when he led the people from Egypt into the Promised Land.

For work which he had done for Israel, see verse 2.7. It is inconceivable that the next generation could grow up without at least having heard about the Israelites’ deliverance from slavery and their wandering in the desert, but this younger generation did not live through these events, and so could not appreciate fully what God had done for his people.

Some translation examples for this verse are:

• Then, all those who lived in Joshua’s time died and a new generation of people arose. But they did not really know Yahweh. Neither had they experienced what he had done for Israel.

• After all the people in Joshua’s generation died, another generation came on the scene. But they did not know the LORD and they had not witnessed the wonderful things he had done for the Israelites.

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 .

The significance of Ehud’s left-handedness and his carefully crafted and hidden dagger now become obvious. Ehud has gained the king’s confidence. King Eglon was tricked both by Ehud’s words as well as by his clever plan. Once again these numerous details slow down the narrative, thus heightening the suspense.

And Ehud reached with his left hand: The connector And conveys the quickness of the action. Translators should find a conjunction that will fit this context. Once again two important words come to the forefront: reached and hand. Reached renders the Hebrew verb for “send” (shalach), which has already appeared twice in this story, when the Israelites “sent” the taxes to Eglon (verse 3.15) and when Ehud “sent” his men away (verse 3.18). Translators will need to use a verb that fits this context. With his left hand repeats the keyword hand, used here with its primary meaning. While earlier there was an idiomatic Hebrew expression for being left-handed (verse 3.15), here the simple phrase for “left hand” is used. However, in many languages the same expression may need to be used in both places. Though it is not clear from the text, it is quite possible that one of the themes here is that an unclean king has been killed by a blow from an unclean hand.

Took the sword from his right thigh means Ehud drew the dagger that he had secretly hidden under his clothes. For took translators can use a verb such as “pulled out” or “took out.” The text does not say whether the action was swift or slow, but probably the former. The sword or dagger was carefully hidden on his right side. Thigh refers to the outer part of the leg where the sword was hidden. Many versions prefer to render from his right thigh as “from his right side” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). These details show how intelligent this hero was. If the deliverer had been right-handed, he would have placed the dagger on his left side. For more discussion of sword and right thigh, see verse 3.16.

And thrust it into his belly: This is one of the high points of the story, as Ehud thrusts his knife into the king’s stomach. The Hebrew verb rendered thrust (taqaʿ) should be expressed by a word that communicates the swiftness of the action as well as the emotion of the moment. In English “plunged” and “drove” are effective verbs. This Hebrew verb will be used with various meaning many times in the text that follows, especially as part of an expression for “give a blast” on the ram’s horn (verse 3.27; verse 4.21; verse 6.34; verse 7.18, 19, 20, 22), as well as when Jael “drives in” the tent peg into the enemy’s head (verse 4.21). All these uses occur in the context of Israel’s victories, while the final occurrence of this verb describes an aspect of Israel’s defeat, when Delilah tricks Samson (verse 16.14)! The pronoun it refers to the sword or knife that Ehud had made especially for this mission. In many languages pronouns figure prominently at the climax of the story. At this point, hearers or readers know whose belly is being pierced. But if this is not clear, his belly may be rendered “Eglon’s [or, the king’s] belly.” In English the word belly implies a fat stomach, so Revised Standard Version‘s rendering is correct. Translators can use various words, for example, “stomach” or perhaps even “guts.” We might say “and he plunged the knife deep into the king’s stomach” or “and he shoved it far into Eglon’s stomach” (similarly Contemporary English Version).

The narrator does not say immediately that the king has died, as more gruesome details are to appear first.

Some possible models for the translation of this verse are:

• With his left hand, Ehud pulled out the dagger placed on his right side, and plunged it into Eglon’s stomach.

• Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword hidden on his right side, and drove it far into the king’s belly.

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 .

The summary statement continues here, giving the final outcome. It is hard to tell if 4.24 is presenting a new event in the story (in which case neither the battle with Sisera’s troops nor the execution of Sisera completely wiped out or subdued King Jabin) or whether this is merely an insistence of the defeat. If the latter interpretation is adopted, the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And can be omitted in the translation. If translators think there are two events, then this conjunction could be rendered “After this.”

The hand of the people of Israel bore harder and harder on Jabin the king of Canaan: The keyword hand, which has occurred many times already in this story (see especially verse 4.21), is used here to refer to the strength and power of the Israelites. For the people of Israel, see verse 1.1. The hand … bore harder and harder on Jabin (literally “the hand … went going and severe/fierce on Jabin”) renders a very emphatic idiomatic clause in Hebrew expressing the increased pressure Israel put on King Jabin. We could say “The Israelites increasingly pressured/pressed Jabin” or “Israel put more and more pressure on Jabin.”

Jabin the king of Canaan refers of course not just to the king but to the king and his people. This phrase is repeated twice in the verse certainly to emphasize the defeat but also to close out the unit (see comments on verse 4.23). However, if the repetition is not acceptable in the target language, it can be reduced.

Until they destroyed Jabin king of Canaan: The pronoun they refers to the Israelites. Destroyed is literally “cut off.” Some versions think this clause means that the Israelites finally managed to kill King Jabin. However, it probably refers more generally to the fact that the Israelites were able to subjugate or completely dominate the population and territories Jabin ruled over.

A translation model for his verse is:

• The Israelites increasingly gained power over Jabin king of Canaan until they utterly destroyed him and his people.

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 .

6.1-2 sets the scene for the introduction to the Gideon story. The phrases The people of Israel and the hand of Midian are repeated in these verses.

The people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the LORD repeats the key clause found in verse 2.11; verse 3.7, 12; verse 4.1. Throughout this book “doing what Yahweh considered evil” was the reason for all Israel’s troubles. As usual, this episode begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction, which Revised Standard Version does not render. Contemporary English Version begins with “Then once again” (similarly Good News Translation) to make a smooth transition between the end of the story of Deborah and this new literary unit. An appropriate transition word or time phrase can be added if necessary.

The people of Israel (literally “the sons/children of Israel”) once again refers to Israel as a unified nation (see comments on verse 1.1). However, as with the other judges’ stories, this one seems to concern one tribal group (in this case, Manasseh). Later in time, these stories became part of Israel’s national memory. Translators can continue to use general expressions such as “the Israelites” or “the Israelite people,” but they should avoid expressions such as “the country of Israel” or “the nation of Israel,” since at the time being depicted, Israel was not unified. Did what was evil in the sight of the LORD puts emphasis on Yahweh’s point of view (see comments on verse 2.11). This whole clause may be rendered “The Israelites did what Yahweh considered evil” or “… displeased Yahweh by doing evil.” Contemporary English Version has “Then once again the Israelites started disobeying the LORD.” Translators should try to be consistent in their rendering of this key clause, thus preserving the literary links in the book.

And the LORD gave them into the hand of Midian seven years: This sentence explains how God reacted to Israel’s sin. This time he allowed the Midianites to attack and oppress them. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and introduces a consequence or result here, and thus may be translated “so” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). The LORD occurs twice in quick succession in this verse, emphasizing his determination to punish his people. If this repetition is not natural, a pronoun can be used to replace the LORD here. Gave them into the hand of is a recurring phrase in this book (see comments on verse 1.4 and verse 2.14).

This is the first time the people of Midian appear in this book. Midian was located east of the Jordan River and Dead Sea. Its territory extended far to the south into Arabia and the Sinai Peninsula. Though the Midianites are not mentioned in the introductory material of the book of Judges, there was a long history of interaction between the Israelites and these people. When Moses killed an Egyptian man during a dispute, he fled to Midian and ended up marrying the daughter of a priest living there (Exo 2.11–4.31; verse 18.1-27). But later, great conflicts arose between these two peoples (Num 25.1-18; verse 31.1-54). The Midianites used camels to travel far from their own desert territory to launch their attacks. In most languages it will be better to render the singular word Midian as “the people from Midian,” “the Midianite people,” or “the Midianites.”

The oppression of seven years here is shorter than the others mentioned so far. During the time of Othniel the oppression lasted eight years (verse 3.8), in the time of Ehud it was eighteen years (verse 3.14), and during the period of Deborah and Barak, twenty years (verse 4.3). The number seven often appears in the stories of Gideon: the bull to be offered in sacrifice is seven years old (verse 6.25), seventy-seven officials are punished at Succoth (verse 8.14), and Gideon has seventy sons (verse 8.30). Then, tragically, Gideon’s son, Abimelech, hires men for seventy pieces of silver to help him kill his seventy brothers (verse 9.4-5).

Translation models for this verse are:

• Yet again the Israelites started disobeying the LORD, so he allowed the Midianites to oppress them for seven years.

• Once again the Israelites did what Yahweh considered evil, so he handed them over to the Midianites for seven years.

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 .

And it was so (Hebrew wayehi ken) marks this as a high point in the story and may be a deliberate allusion to the creation story in Gen 1. In that account this clause occurs at the end of each day of God’s creative work (Gen 1.7, 9, 11, 15, 24, 30). Translators can follow Good News Translation‘s more dynamic rendering: “That is exactly what happened.” Or they can try to imitate the style of the original text by using the same clause used in Gen 1. Anyone reading or hearing this story will take note that the LORD did indeed do as Gideon requested.

When he rose early next morning renders an independent clause in Hebrew, which is literally “And he woke up the next day.” For the Hebrew verb rendered rose early, see the comments on verse 6.28.

And squeezed the fleece: In many languages Gideon will first have to “pick up the fleece” or “take the fleece in his hands” before he can squeeze it. Squeezed means “pressed down on.” Here this verb probably indicates that Gideon took the fleece in both hands and put pressure on it or twisted it until water came out.

He wrung enough dew from the fleece to fill a bowl with water: In Hebrew this clause begins with a waw conjunction, which can be rendered “and” (Good News Translation) or omitted as in Revised Standard Version here. The Hebrew verb rendered wrung means “drained [out of].” Some languages may only have one verb for squeezed and wrung, in which case one verb will suffice (so Contemporary English Version). To fill a bowl with water means the water that he squeezed out of the fleece could have filled a bowl, not that Gideon actually did this. For bowl see the comments on verse 5.25. The size of the bowl is not given but the point is that there was a significant amount of water, enough to convince Gideon that the LORD had intervened. Thus Gideon had proof that he was the one chosen by God to save Israel. Contemporary English Version serves as a good model here, saying “He squeezed out enough water to fill a bowl.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• And that is just what happened! Gideon got up the next morning, picked up the fleece, and squeezed out enough water to fill a whole bowl.

• And it was so. When Gideon got up the next morning, he squeezed the fleece and the water he pressed from it could have filled a whole bowl.

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 .