And he lifted up his eyes, and saw …: Coming from the fields and arriving in the town square, the old man (he) looks around and sees the group of travelers. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces the next action, but many versions omit it (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). New International Version prefers to cast this clause as a dependent clause, saying “When he looked and saw…” (similarly NET Bible). He lifted up his eyes, and saw renders a well-known Hebrew idiom, which if translated literally, would be unnatural in most languages. Translators can use some natural equivalent, for example, “he caught sight of” or simply “he saw.”

The wayfarer in the open square of the city: The wayfarer is literally “the man, the traveling one,” which refers to the Levite. Here the Hebrew word for “man” (ʾish) appears yet again, as it does throughout this section. In most languages the wayfarer may be translated “the traveler” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “the stranger.” The text does not say how the old man recognized the Levite as a stranger but this was probably obvious from his clothes, his donkeys, and so on. Also, the fact that the Levite was sitting in the open square of the city (see verse 19.15) waiting for help may have indicated that he was a foreigner. Obviously the old man sees not just the Levite but the whole group.

And the old man said: Naturally in this culture, he would have addressed the husband, rather than the concubine or the servant. The old man may be rendered simply “the man” or “he” (New Living Translation) if this is more natural in the target language. In many languages it will be necessary to first say the man approached the Levite and his group before speaking, so translators might say “and he went up to them, and he said.” In this context the general verb said may be translated “asked.”

Where are you going? and whence do you come?: These two questions are the old man’s polite way of beginning a conversation with the Levite. However, in many languages an initial word such as “Welcome” might be necessary. These questions are similar to those which the angel of the LORD asks Hagar in Gen 16.8. Here as there, they are questions of information, not rhetorical questions, and the Levite immediately answers them. Where are you going? asks for the Levite’s final destination, while whence do you come? asks for his starting point. In many languages it will be more natural to put these questions in reverse order. Whence is an old English word meaning “from where.” The second question may be rendered “Where are you coming from?” or “Where have you come from?” The Hebrew pronoun for you is singular, but in many languages it will be better to use a plural “you.” We might say “Where have you [all] come from? And where are you headed?” For those languages that prefer indirect speech here, see the second model below.

Translation models for this verse are:

• And when he saw the travelers in the town square, he approached them and said, “Greetings, friends. Where have you come from? And where are you going?”

• As he was coming, the old man saw the stranger waiting in the middle of the town and asked him where he had come from and where he was going.

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 people, the men of Israel, took courage …: But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction here. Despite what happened, the Israelites were not discouraged. They continued fighting. The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) is often used to refer to the people of Israel (see verse 2.4). Its use reminds the audience of all that Yahweh has done up to now for his people. The narrator quickly qualifies this word by adding the men of Israel, which refers more specifically to “the Israelite army” (Good News Translation). This phrase includes all the people except the Benjaminites. The Hebrew verb rendered took courage is literally “strengthened themselves” (see verse 7.11, where a different form of the verb is used). This verb describes the moral character of the Israelites. Instead of giving up after the huge defeat, they “rallied” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). We might also say they “did not lose courage” or “did not give up.” New International Version‘s “encouraged one another” does not seem strong enough to explain their determination at this point.

And again formed the battle line in the same place where they had formed it on the first day: The Israelites regrouped to fight again. They decided to go back to the same place and go into the same formation as the previous day. The audience will certainly wonder if this was a good strategy, in view of the previous day’s defeat. This detail may show how courageous and determined they were. Again formed the battle line is literally “they added to arrange [for] battle.” The Hebrew verb here is the same one rendered “drew up [the battle] line” in verse 20.20 (see comments there). The same verb is repeated in the next clause as well.

In the same place where they had formed it on the first day is literally “in the place that they arranged there on the first day.” This clause may be translated “in the same place they had lined up for battle the day before.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Despite that, the Israelites renewed their courage and once again lined up for battle in the same place where they had stood on the first day.

• Nevertheless, the Israelite soldiers were courageous and took position in the same place as the previous day to fight [the Benjaminites] once again.

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 gives a summary of the Israelite advance into the Promised Land. The LORD gives the Israelites victory, but they are unable to do as he instructed, that is, they are unable to drive the inhabitants out of the land.

The Hebrew expression wayehi (literally “And it was”), rendered here as And, shows that a new episode is beginning. Some versions take this expression to be the verb for the following clause, and so do not render it in their translation. But it is more likely this expression is a discourse marker introducing the important fact that the LORD was with the people of Judah. Translators should look for a good transition word or expression to mark this important comment.

The LORD was with Judah is literally “YHWH with Judah,” a common expression in the Old Testament, indicating that the LORD was alongside the people, helping them. As elsewhere, the singular Judah refers to “the people of Judah” or even “the army of Judah.” Good News Translation has “The LORD helped the people of Judah,” and Contemporary English Version is similar with “The LORD helped the army of Judah.”

And he took possession of the hill country explains what the army from Judah was able to do with God’s help. In some languages the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and can thus be translated “so.” Yahweh enabled these warriors to capture the mountainous regions. Once again the singular pronoun he refers collectively to the men of Judah. Took possession of renders a key Hebrew verb (yarash) in this unit. Its repetition underlines the contrast between the Israelites’ victories and their failures. Revised English Bible says “occupied,” while New Jerusalem Bible has “made himself master of,” but we might also simply say “took” or “captured.” For the hill country, see verse 1.9.

But he could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain: This clause introduces the first negative note in the book. From this point on, there will be victories, but these will all be tarnished by various shortcomings and defeat. But renders the Hebrew conjunction ki, which normally means “since” or “for.” However, most see a contrast or counter-expectation here, so but is a good rendering. New Jerusalem Bible is similar with “however.”

The pronoun he refers once again to Judah’s army. In Hebrew the verb rendered drive out is the same yarash, but here it is an infinitive form preceded by the negative marker, rendered in many versions as “dispossess” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), that is, make people leave a place by force. This is the second of seventeen occurrences of this verb in Judges, most of them appearing in the first part of the book (verse 1.19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33; verse 2.21, 23). It also occurs three times in verse 11.23-24. Contemporary English Version says here “Judah was not able to make them leave or to take their land.” We might also say “they could not chase the inhabitants away.” For inhabitants see verse 1.11.

The Hebrew word for plain refers to a valley or low point. In Israel the plain is mostly on the coast. It was good for farming and therefore much desired. Some languages may find this a difficult term to render. We could say “flat land,” “good farming land,” or even “land by the coast.”

Because they had chariots of iron: This clause gives a brief explanation of why the warriors of Judah were unsuccessful in their attack. Because is a good rendering of the Hebrew particle ki, which could also be translated “for” or “since.” The pronoun they refers to the inhabitants of the plain, the Philistines. Some languages will need to specify “the inhabitants of that place.” The Philistines had a monopoly on the production of iron (see verse 1 Sam 13.19-22), so they had stronger weapons, including chariots of iron.

Chariots were small vehicles, as big as carriages or carts, pulled by horses. They were used mainly for war, and usually carried one or two soldiers. Most languages will not have a word for chariot, but some may say “car of war” or “war cart.”

Iron is one of the strongest metals known and its use revolutionized the peoples who had access to it, since their weapons were stronger and more effective. Most languages should have a term for this metal. Today scholars note that these chariots could not have been made entirely out of iron, because they would have been too heavy to move. Probably the expression chariots of iron means that the rims of the wheels of the chariots were covered with iron strips. Thus the chariots could be driven quickly over all kinds of terrain and last longer. Most translations say chariots of iron, but some may prefer to say “chariots with iron-rimmed wheels” or “chariots strengthened with iron.”

If necessary, the clauses in this second half of the verse can be reversed, as in the following model:

• The people who lived on the coast had chariots made strong with iron, so the people of Judah were not able to chase/drive them out of the land.

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 repetitive verse sets the pattern for the judges’ episodes that follow. It makes clear that the LORD hears the cries of his people and has pity on them. He therefore raises up a leader or judge to save Israel. The important Hebrew root sh-f-t (“judge”) occurs three times here.

Whenever the LORD raised up judges for them is a time clause meaning “Every time the LORD….” The emphasis is on Yahweh initiating the action. For raised up, see the discussion at verse 2.16. Judges is a plural noun referring to the heroes or leaders God appoints and sends to deliver his people (see comments on verse 2.16). The pronoun them refers to the Israelites, and can be made explicit if need be.

The LORD was with the judge: The name of the LORD, Yahweh, appears three times in this verse, making clear that it is the LORD and he alone who saves Israel. Here he is said to be with the judge. This phrase is used often in the Old Testament, for example, for Joseph (Gen 39.23), and in this book, for Judah (verse 1.19). It means more than just being with a person. It implies that the LORD is enabling and giving power to a person for a specific task. Good News Translation translates “the LORD would help that leader.” Another solution might be to say “Yahweh gave the leader power.” While the first occurrence speaks of judges in the plural, here there is a singular form judge, which surely means “each judge.”

And he saved them from the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge: Whereas in verse 2.14 the Israelites were “sold … into the power [hand] of their enemies,” here they are saved … from the hand of their enemies (see comments on verse 2.14 and verse 2.16). The pronoun he seems ambiguous, since it could refer to the LORD or to the judge he raised up. However, Yahweh is the subject of the preceding clause, so it is more likely that he is the one who is acting here. Thus the majority of English versions take the subject of saved to be Yahweh (Good News Translation, New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), while Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version remain ambiguous. Contemporary English Version, however, takes a different position, seeing the judge as the one who delivers the people: “He would choose a judge and help that judge rescue Israel from its enemies.” Translators will have to make a choice here as to which interpretation to follow.

All the days of the judge suggests that during the lifetime of the particular judge, the Israelites were safe from further attack from their enemies. Thus the verb saved seems to also carry an idea of protection. For all the days, see verse 2.7. Since this phrase often refers to the life of a person, we can render all the days of the judge as “throughout the life of the one serving as judge,” “throughout the lifetime of that leader,” or perhaps “as long as that leader lived.”

This first half of the verse may be rendered as follows:

• Each time the LORD sent Israel a leader, the LORD helped that leader and saved the people from their enemies. They were safe as long as that leader was alive.

For the LORD was moved to pity by their groaning: In the episodes that follow, before the LORD raises up a judge, there is usually a statement that says the people “cried to the LORD” (verse 3.9, 15; verse 4.3; verse 6.7; verse 10.10). Here this information comes as an explanation introduced by the conjunction for, rendering the Hebrew particle ki. Versions treat this particle differently. While some take this as a causal conjunction, introducing the reason the LORD had pity on the people (Revised Standard Version, New International Version, English Standard Version), it is omitted in others (Good News Translation, NET Bible). Some reorder the elements to conform to chronological order: “the people groaned and the LORD had pity on them” (so Contemporary English Version).

Was moved to pity is an English idiom, meaning “had compassion [on them]” or “felt sorry [for them].” The Hebrew root of the verb here (n-ch-m) expresses the reaction of an outside party to a person’s unfortunate situation. Translators are free to use idiomatic expressions in their language, for example, “[their] pity hit [the LORD]” or “pity entered into [the LORD].” In this book the LORD’s anger and his pity are two dominant themes.

By their groaning (literally “from their groaning”) shows what sparked God’s reaction. In English it is more natural to say “because they groaned,” as in Good News Translation. Groaning is a cry or other sound expressing agony and suffering. The Hebrew term for groaning is rare, occurring only here in this book and only three other times in the Old Testament. However, it seems significant that is also used to describe the people’s groaning during the time they were in slavery in Egypt (Exo 2.24). A possible translation is “their cry of agony caused the LORD to feel pity for them.” In some languages it may be necessary to make explicit that the LORD heard their groaning prior to having pity, for example, “when the LORD heard their cries of suffering, he had pity on them.”

Because of those who afflicted and oppressed them: Because of is literally “from the face of,” which introduces the source of the suffering, leading to these groans. Because of or “caused by” fit the context well. Those who afflicted and oppressed them renders two Hebrew verbs that describe how the enemies of the Israelites treated them. The first verb rendered afflicted means literally “to press” or “to squeeze.” It is used, for example, when Balaam’s donkey has to squeeze through a tight place (Num 22.25), and to describe figuratively the oppression of the Egyptians in Exo 3.9. It is also used in this book in verse 1.34, where it refers to the enemy pushing back the Danites into the mountains. The second verb translated oppressed is a rarer verb, meaning “to crowd,” as in Joel 2.8, describing the jostling of soldiers. Both Hebrew verbs are participles here, describing those who afflicted the Israelites. However, the emphasis seems to be rather on the people undergoing the suffering rather than on those who did the oppressing. So for this clause we might say “because they were oppressed and suffering.” If the language does not have two distinct verbs for afflicted and oppressed, one verb can be used with a modifier, for example, “because they were greatly oppressed” or “because their enemies oppressed them terribly.” Good News Translation ties this clause to the Israelites’ groaning, saying “because they groaned under their suffering and oppression,” which provides another model.

Contemporary English Version switches the order of certain elements here, giving a very clear rendering: “When enemies made life miserable for the Israelites, the LORD would feel sorry for them.” This adjustment puts the reason before the result and so makes the sentence easier to understand, though “made life miserable” seems slightly weaker than the notion of “oppression.” Another possible model is:

• The LORD felt sorry for them when he heard their cries of suffering and saw the affliction and oppression they endured.

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 he said to them: Ehud addresses his troops, the Israelites, and more specifically the people of Ephraim. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And does not necessarily introduce a new event here, so it could be omitted. He could have said these words at any time during this rallying period. If 3.27-28 is taken to reflect a strict chronological order, Ehud first rallied his troops with the call from the ram’s horn and then speaks to them. But these could have been simultaneous actions as well. Though the verb for said appears in Hebrew, some versions are more specific. For example, New International Version says “ordered,” and Contemporary English Version has “shouted.”

Follow after me: The Hebrew verb rendered Follow can mean “chase” or “pursue” in some contexts. For this reason some scholars think that this verb should be emended (with the omission of one letter) to read “Come down.” However, the text is understandable without this change. Translators can say “Follow me!” or “Come after me!”

For the LORD has given your enemies the Moabites into your hand: The call to the troops is justified, since their victory is sure. Ehud tells the soldiers that God will give, or indeed, has already given them the victory. Revised Standard Version renders the Hebrew rather literally here. For translates the Hebrew conjunction ki, which can introduce a reason or an emphatic statement. Either interpretation is possible here. Some versions leave the word untranslated, but the majority retain the connector for. Other possibilities are “since” and “because” (New Jerusalem Bible).

This clause gives the first overt reference to the role of the LORD in saving the people through Ehud. Revised Standard Version correctly renders the Hebrew perfect verb form here as has given. In many languages a similar form is used to refer to a future act that is sure or is “as good as done.” If this is the case, that form can be used here. For the idiom has given … into your hand, see verse 1.2. The pronoun your refers to the Israelites, but in some languages this pronoun will have to be changed to an inclusive “our” with Ehud being part of the group. The enemies are immediately identified as the Moabites. The Hebrew has the singular “Moab,” but Revised Standard Version gives a more natural rendering here. For enemies see the discussion at verse 2.14. Translators should try to communicate the encouragement in the voice of Ehud as he shouts “Follow me! The LORD is giving you the victory over your enemies the Moabites” or “… The LORD will certainly give us victory over the Moabite enemy!”

So they went down after him: The people heard what Ehud had said, put their confidence in him, and moved out to follow him into battle. So correctly renders the Hebrew waw conjunction to introduce the response of the people. Once again, went down can refer to going down the mountains, but also going to battle, as in verse 3.27. After him means they followed Ehud, as he had asked them to do.

And seized the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites: Seized indicates that the Israelites “took” or “captured” the fords. Fords renders a word derived from the Hebrew root meaning “pass/cross over” (ʿ-v-r), which has already occurred once in verse 3.26. The root appears twice in this verse. A “ford” refers to the place in the river where the water is shallow enough for people to cross over. Such places are very strategic from a military point of view. Therefore Ehud wisely seized the fords to prevent the Moabites from crossing over and pursuing his troops. Fords can be translated “river-crossings” or “places where people cross over the river.” The Jordan is a river that runs north and south, parallel to the seacoast, from the mountains of Lebanon to the Dead Sea. Most languages will prefer to make explicit “the Jordan River,” and some translators may want to add a map that shows these various important geographic locations.

Against the Moabites renders a Hebrew prepositional phrase that could have any one of several meanings. The Hebrew preposition l- can show possession, so it could mean “for” or “belonging to,” but the same preposition could also mean “at” or “toward” or “against.” In this context it is possible that Ehud and his men are trying to stop a Moabite attack coming from the east across the Jordan River (Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Following such an interpretation we might say “they took position against the Moabites at the Jordan River crossings” or “they stood guard at the places where the Moabites would cross the Jordan River.” However, several versions suggest that the Israelites were blocking the way leading to Moab, so Ehud and his men would be “taking possession of the fords of the Jordan that led to Moab” (New International Version). Contemporary English Version seems to take this approach, saying “they captured the places where people cross the river on the way to Moab.” Translators must choose between these different interpretations.

And allowed not a man to pass over: The subject here is still the Israelite soldiers under the leadership of Ehud. This clause in Hebrew is literally “and they did not give a man to pass over.” In this context “give” means “let,” “allow,” or “permit.” Not a man refers to the group just mentioned, that is, “not one of the Moabites,” “not a single Moabite,” or “none of the Moabites.” The Hebrew word for man (ʾish) occurs very frequently in this section, repeated three times in the next verse. The frequent reference to this word is another feature of this book, where it refers at times to certain individuals (verse 1.26), sometimes has the sense of “each” (verse 2.6), and at other times means “anyone,” as here.

Pass over renders the Hebrew verb ʿavar used in verse 3.26. As there, it is an important keyword, evoking Israel’s past victories. Here this verb may be rendered “cross” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “cross over” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version), or “go across” (Contemporary English Version). In many languages it will be necessary to provide an object for the verb, for example, “cross the river” or “cross the Jordan [River].”

A model for the translation of this verse is:

• Ehud shouted, “Follow me! The LORD has given us victory over the Moabite enemies.” So they [all] went out to battle and set up a guard at the river crossings of the Jordan against the Moabites. They would not let a single Moabite across.

If indirect speech is preferred, the following model may be used, though this form seems to tone down the liveliness of the passage:

• Ehud called them to join him in battle, telling them the LORD had already given them victory over their enemies, the Moabites. So they went with him, defending the places where the Moabites would try to cross the Jordan River. They did not allow even one Moabite to cross.

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 continues to describe how the Israelites were oppressed, using some very beautiful poetic lines. Even though Revised Standard Version proposes three lines for this verse, many versions have four as follows:

The peasantry ceased in Israel;
they ceased,
until you arose, Deborah,
arose as a mother in Israel.

This division is more likely since it clearly shows the stairstep parallelism in the text. The name Israel forms an envelope around this verse, while the verbs ceased and arose both occur twice in a stairstep pattern. The verb ceased ties back to the previous verse, while the verb arose obviously signals Deborah as one of the arising heroes.

The peasantry ceased in Israel, they ceased: These two lines pose several problems for interpreters and translators, resulting in a wide divergence of translations. One problem concerns the Hebrew word rendered peasantry (perazon), which may be translated “villagers” (Contemporary English Version) or “rural people.” This reading is supported by Hebrew Old Testament Text Project with an {A} rating. Instead of the word perazon, some Hebrew texts have the word perazot, which Good News Translation renders as “towns” and New Jerusalem Bible as “villages.” This reading is supported by the Targum and the Syriac version. With either of these readings, this would mean the towns were abandoned and all normal life had come to a halt. However, Revised English Bible believes the word perazon means “champions,” a view supported by some scholars and ver Septuagintver* manuscripts. Thus some translators propose “leading class” or “warriors.” Bible en français courant and several other French versions are similar with “chiefs.”

Another problem concerns the Hebrew verb rendered ceased. This verb probably has the same meaning as in verse 5.6. But there are other possibilities. Some commentators and translators suggest that it means “prospered.” For example, New Revised Standard Version says “The peasantry prospered in Israel, they grew fat on plunder.” However, given the entire context of the poem, and especially the information given in verse 5.8 about Israel lacking weapons, it would seem that the Israelites were weak and afraid. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh renders these lines as “Deliverance ceased, Ceased in Israel.” This is not the majority view, but would be a logical way to set the scene for the arrival of Deborah, the “savior-judge.”

Translators do not have an easy task here. They will need to choose an interpretation that fits the context. Depending on the audience and the type of translation being done, they may want to include footnotes giving the various possibilities.

Until you arose, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel: Translators should try to render the emotion of this verse, as the song moves from despair to triumph, a move signaled by the word until. New Jerusalem Bible repeats it by saying “until you arose, O Deborah, until you arose, mother of Israel.” New Revised Standard Version changes until you arose to read “because you arose,” which fits its interpretation of the verse, but does not seem correct here. The Hebrew preposition rendered until is often used in poetry to mark a turning point, as seems to be the case here.

The Masoretic Text has “I” instead of you as the subject of the verb arose. Along with Revised Standard Version, many English versions have followed the Septuagint by changing the first person pronoun to second person (so New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). However, New International Version, New American Bible, and some French versions retain the Hebrew original. Since Deborah is singing this song, the use of “I” does not seem out of place. Whichever form is chosen, it is possible to put the alternative in a footnote.

Arose renders the key Hebrew verb qum, which is used in conjunction with many of the deliverers of Israel (see comments on verse 2.16). In the narrative sections of this book, God “raises up” judges. Here Deborah sings that she arose. This is a point of climax in the song, as the deliverer emerges. If possible, the same verb should be used here as elsewhere in this book, so that readers can make the connection and associate Deborah with her role as liberator of Israel. Some may wish to make it clear that Deborah is arising to “save” or “deliver” Israel. The verb for arose is preceded both times in Hebrew by the relative marker sh-, which occurs frequently in old poetry and is not translated in RSV.

As a mother in Israel shows that not only was Deborah a “prophetess” and a “judge” (verse 4.4), she also was considered a mother for her people. In Hebrew the comparison as a mother in Israel does not occur. Rather, there is a direct metaphor: “[a] mother in Israel.” Exegetes and translators may need to reflect on which aspect of motherhood is being emphasized here. At least one aspect in view is a mother’s fierce protection of her children. Contemporary English Version makes this explicit by changing the metaphor into a comparison as follows:

Then Deborah took command,
protecting Israel as a mother
protects her children.

In Israel may be expressed in other ways, for example, “for Israel” (Good News Translation).

There is a lot of repetition in the four lines of this verse, which some translators may wish to reduce. However, many languages will appreciate the repetition and the slow buildup of these lines. Some possible models are:

• The villagers in Israel gave up hope,
they gave up hope!
But then, Mother Deborah,
you* came to deliver us.
* Hebrew has “I.” The Greek version of the Old Testament says “you.”

• The warriors* of Israel were powerless,
they were completely powerless,
until I, Deborah, arose,
until I arose as mother of Israel.
* The Hebrew text has a word that can mean “warriors” or “village 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 .

The LORD sent a prophet to the people of Israel: Revised Standard Version omits the Hebrew waw conjunction at the beginning of this clause. If the previous verse is rendered as an introductory logical or temporal clause, this conjunction can be omitted. But if the preceding clause is independent as in Good News Translation, the conjunction “and” or “so” would be a proper transition. The key Hebrew verb rendered sent (shalach) often occurs in accounts of the LORD’s deliverance (see, for example, verse 9.23). However, here he sent a prophet, not a deliverer, so the Hebrew verb meaning “raise up” (qum) is not used (see comments on verse 2.16). A prophet is literally “a man, a prophet,” a phrase found only here in the Old Testament. However, it is parallel to the phrase “a woman, a prophet” in verse 4.4, referring to Deborah. Like Revised Standard Version, many versions say simply “a prophet,” but there may be some merit to keep the longer expression. If a language makes a distinction between prophet and “prophetess,” the masculine form should of course be used here. For prophet see verse 4.4.

And he said to them: The pronoun he refers to the prophet, and the pronoun them refers to the Israelites.

Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel begins the prophet’s message. Thus says the LORD is an important expression often used to introduce prophetic speeches. Its function is to remind the people that what they are about to hear is not the opinion of the prophet, but the word of Yahweh. It establishes the authority of the prophet’s message. We might say “Hear what Yahweh … has to say” or “These are the words of the LORD….” New International Version has “This is what the LORD … says.” Good News Translation renders this expression indirectly by beginning the verse with “and he [the LORD] sent them a prophet who brought them this message from the LORD….” However, this rendering misses the strong impact in Hebrew. Contemporary English Version is very dynamic and serves as a possible model: “Then the LORD sent a prophet to them with this message: ‘I am the LORD…, so listen to what I say.’ ” The LORD, the God of Israel is a longer name of God, which is used here to underline the importance of this message and to reflect the special relationship between him and the Israelites (see comments on verse 4.6 and verse 5.3).

I led you up from Egypt, and brought you out of the house of bondage: These expressions occur frequently in the book of Deuteronomy (see, for example, verse 5.6; verse 6.12; verse 8.14; verse 13.5, 10), but only rarely in the book of Judges (see verse 2.1, verse 12). When the LORD speaks through a prophet, the form of speech is often poetic, as is the case here. These two parallel clauses are literally:

I myself brought you up from Egypt,
I brought you out from [a] house of slaves.

These repetitive clauses underline the importance of the LORD’s role in the past deliverance of the Israelites and his relationship with them.

The pronoun I, which refers to the LORD, occurs as an emphatic pronoun in Hebrew. Translators should seek a way to render this emphasis in the LORD’s speech. For the Hebrew phrase rendered led you up from Egypt, see the comments on verse 2.1, where it is translated “brought you up from Egypt.”

And brought you out of the house of bondage does not occur in God’s speech in verse 2.1-3. Brought you out is literally “caused you to come out.” The Hebrew verb here (ʿalah) plays a major role in this book (see comments on verse 1.24), but if this verb cannot be used in such a context, we might repeat “led you out” or even “delivered you from.” Out of the house of bondage is parallel to from Egypt in the preceding line, but adds the information that Egypt was a place of slavery. In most languages a literal rendering of this figurative expression will not be natural, but there are many possible ways to translate it, for example, “the land of slavery” (New International Version; similarly Revised English Bible), “the place of slavery” (New American Bible), “the place of slave-labour” (New Jerusalem Bible), and “the land where you were slaves.”

Good News Translation reduces the parallelism in these two clauses, saying simply “I brought you out of slavery in Egypt.” This may be an easier solution, but it loses some of the impact of the LORD’s forceful statement. Contemporary English Version reorganizes these two clauses, giving quite a dynamic (if not too poetic) rendering: “You were slaves in Egypt, but I set you free and led you out of Egypt into this land.” In most languages it will be better to retain the parallelism, since these are words coming from God through a prophet.

This verse contains a quote within a quote, so translators will need to decide how best to handle this issue. Some translation models are:

• So the LORD sent a prophet to speak to the Israelites. He said,
“Yahweh, the God of Israel, says to you:
‘It is I who led you out of Egypt,
I took you out of the place of slavery.

• and the LORD sent a man, a prophet, to speak to the Israelites, and he said,
“Hear what Yahweh, the God of Israel, says:
‘I myself brought you up from Egypt,
the land where you were slaves.

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 .