In verse 6.17 Gideon requested that the angel provide a sign to confirm his identity. The sign is now given. Once again, there is a great deal of detail, building slowly up to the climax: and there sprang up fire….

Then the angel of the LORD reached out the tip of the staff that was in his hand and touched the meat and the unleavened cakes: Then is a good rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here, since it expresses consecutive action. When Gideon has placed his offering on the rock, then the angel reacts. This sentence contains two keywords in this book: the Hebrew verb (shalach) for reached out (literally “sent”) and the noun for hand. These same two words are used when Ehud used his left hand to kill the Israelite enemy, King Eglon (verse 3.21), and when Jael used her hands to kill Sisera (verse 5.26). Reached out may be rendered “extended.”

Staff renders a Hebrew word that most often refers to a walking stick or a shepherd’s staff. Though this word comes from a root meaning “lean on for support,” it can also be associated with royal authority. It is not the same word used for the staff that Moses and Aaron carried to perform their various deeds in front of Pharaoh. However, in many languages the same word will be used. The tip of the staff refers to the end of the stick. Since the staff has not been mentioned previously in the story, in some languages it may be necessary to present it as unknown information, for example, “The angel of the LORD held a walking stick in his hand, and he reached it out and touched … with the tip.”

Referring to the meat and the unleavened cakes shows once again the storyteller’s precision. In many languages these items can be referred to simply as “the food,” but translators can also try to imitate the Hebrew style here. The precision and detail here slow down the narration, as the suspense builds, and the audience wonders what will happen to this food placed on the rock.

We can render this sentence as:

• Then the angel of Yahweh reached out his hand and touched the meat and the bread with the tip of his walking stick.

• The LORD’s angel took his walking stick and reached out and touched the meat and bread with the tip.

And there sprang up fire from the rock is literally “and the fire went up from the rock.” Here the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and introduces the immediate result of the angel’s action. “Immediately” may be a good rendering here. Sprang renders the Hebrew verb whose primary sense is “go up” (ʿalah), a word that occurs repeatedly in this book with various meanings (see comments on verse 1.1). In other parts of the Old Testament, it is the normal verb used in connection with burnt offerings. Fire is often associated with God’s presence, for example, when God appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Exo 3.2). The Hebrew word rendered rock is not the same one used in the previous verse, but rather one used often in the Psalms (see, for example, Psalm 31.2; verse 62.7; verse 71.3) and elsewhere as a figure for God. Like Revised Standard Version, many translators will use the same word for rock in both verses. This clause may be rendered “Fire burst out of the rock.” Contemporary English Version renders the drama well with “Flames jumped from the rock.”

And consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes refers literally to the fire “eating” the food set out as a sacrifice. The burning of the offering shows that it was accepted by the LORD. Consumed may be rendered “completely burned” or “burned up” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). The Hebrew word for flesh is the same one rendered meat, and there is no real reason to have two variants in the translation. “Meat” would be a better rendering here. As earlier, unleavened cakes may be translated simply “bread.” This clause and the previous one are the climax of this episode, so translators should try to use appropriate markers in their language.

And the angel of the LORD vanished from his sight: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and is probably better translated “Then” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible) to indicate the sequence of events. However, since this is a quick action, we might also say “Suddenly.” Vanished from his sight is literally “went from his eyes.” Just as the LORD’s angel appeared, seemingly out of nowhere (verse 6.11), so he disappears. Most languages will have an idiomatic expression to convey this idea.

The last half of this verse may be rendered:

• Fire burst out of the rock and burned up the meat and bread. And suddenly the angel of the LORD disappeared from Gideon’s sight.

• Fire flared up from the rock, completely consuming the meat and bread. Then Yahweh’s angel vanished from his sight.

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 .

After giving directions to all the Israelite soldiers, Gideon moves out with his group of them toward the enemy camp. The mention of Gideon by name and the long phrase, the hundred men who were with him, seem to indicate a break in the narrative, so many versions begin a new paragraph here (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

So Gideon and the hundred men who were with him came to the outskirts of the camp …: So renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which many versions omit (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New International Version, Revised English Bible). The hundred men who were with him refers to one of the three military companies that Gideon formed (verse 7.16). Despite the fact that there is no definite marker here in Hebrew, most translations will use a definite article such as the, since this group has already been mentioned. The generic Hebrew word for men may be rendered “warriors” or “soldiers” here. As Gideon had done earlier (verse 7.11), he and his men came to the outskirts of the camp, to the edge of the Midianite camp (see verse 7.17).

At the beginning of the middle watch, when they had just set the watch: These words set the time when Gideon’s group arrived at the edge of the Midianite camp. The time is set according to the watch periods of the guards. Gideon’s men arrived at the beginning of the middle watch (literally “[at] the head of the middle watch”). Some scholars think the night was divided into three watch periods, while others think there were four. Speaking about a middle watch seems to suggest that there were three. Some think the first watch began at sunset, so the second one would begin around 10 P.M. Good News Translation renders at the beginning of the middle watch as “a while before midnight,” and Contemporary English Version says “a few hours after dark.” Since the exact time is not known, it may be best to keep closer to the text, as in Revised Standard Version. When they had just set the watch means that Gideon and his men arrived just as or just after the new guards had come on duty. The importance of this clause is that the guards were fresh, and so would be more vigilant than those who had been on duty a long time. Thus the danger for Gideon and his men was greater. The Hebrew for this clause is emphatic, literally “only setting they set the guards.” The pronoun they probably refers to the guards’ commanders or superiors. The causative form of the key Hebrew verb meaning “arise” (qum) occurs here twice, first as an infinitive and then as a finite verb, expressing emphasis. There may also be some irony here, since normally it is the heroes of Israel who “arise.” Here the enemies attempt to “arise,” but will fail. It will be difficult in most translations to convey all the nuances of the Hebrew here. Translators should try to find an expression that conveys the main idea, for example, “just after the guard had been changed” (Good News Translation) or “just after the new guards had come on duty” (Contemporary English Version). We may also say “The Midianites had just changed the guard.”

And they blew the trumpets: Here the pronoun they no longer refers to the Midianites, but to Gideon and his group. Earlier, Gideon said he and his group would be the first ones to blow their trumpets as a signal, and the other two groups were to follow their example (see verse 7.18). In the next verse the other groups follow their lead.

And smashed the jars that were in their hands: And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, so this action of smashing the jars could have taken place after the trumpets were blown, but it seems more likely that the two actions happened simultaneously. The text does not say how the Israelite soldiers smashed the jars. They could have smashed them on the ground or against their trumpets. Smashed may be rendered “shattered” or “caused to break in little pieces.” For jars see verse 7.16. This clause gives another example of the keyword hand being used at a time of victory for the Israelites. However, here it has a literal sense, not a figurative one.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Gideon and the hundred warriors who were in his group reached the edge of the Midianite camp just before midnight. The Midianites had just changed the guard. At his signal, Gideon and his men blew their trumpets and smashed the jars they held in their hands.

• Gideon and his hundred soldiers arrived at the outskirts of the enemy camp in the middle of the night, just after they had changed the guards. Then Gideon and his men blew their trumpets and smashed the jars each one held in his hand.

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 brief comment is a pivot verse between two major sections. The long noun phrase, Jerubbaal the son of Joash, could indicate that this verse is a conclusion to the Gideon story. At the same time it serves as an explanation of Gideon’s family situation, leading up to the presentation of the next important character in the book, Gideon’s son Abimelech (verse 8.31). Since a new unit begins at 8.30, it is better to consider this brief verse as the formal end of the Gideon story. It can be placed directly after 8.28, or it can be considered on its own as a simple concluding paragraph. This conclusion of the Gideon story is unusual, since verse 8.32 seems to provide yet another one. However, the account of Gideon’s death and burial in 8.32 is embedded in the beginning of the story of Abimelech, much like Joshua’s death provides background for the beginning of this book (verse 1.1).

Revised Standard Version does not translate the Hebrew waw conjunction at the beginning of this verse. Gideon’s return home certainly took place during the time of peace (verse 8.28). However, an appropriate connector might be “So” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Jerubbaal the son of Joash: This mention of Gideon’s new name, Jerubbaal (meaning “let Baal defend himself”), links this verse back to an earlier part of the story (verse 6.32). Its appearance here is very ironic, since Gideon has gone from destroying the worship of Baal to the installation of another system of worship that does not honor Yahweh. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version use the name “Gideon” instead of Jerubbaal, but this name is here for a reason, and so if possible, it should be kept. If readers are confused, both names can be used by saying “Jerubbaal—that is, Gideon—the son of Joash.”

Went and dwelt in his own house: Up to this point Gideon has traveled far and wide. He and his men have pursued and defeated the Midianite army. He has killed the two remaining Midianite kings and has finally gained peace for Israel. The verb went may be understood as Gideon’s definitive return to civilian life. Went and dwelt in his own house is a literal rendering of the Hebrew, which may be translated “returned home for good.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• So Jerubbaal, that is Gideon, son of Joash, went back home to live.

• So Gideon, also known as Jerubbaal, son of Joash, finally returned home.

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 .

Zebul advises Abimelech to take his followers under cover of darkness and prepare a secret attack on Gaal. The brevity of the clauses conveys the urgency of the situation.

Now therefore is literally “And now.” Good News Translation has “Now then,” but another possible connector is “So.” Contemporary English Version begins with “This is what I think you should do,” which also conveys the meaning well.

Go by night is literally “arise by night.” As we have seen throughout this book, the Hebrew verb meaning “arise” (qum) is an important one used to incite action, often in the case of a judge or deliverer (see comments on verse 2.10). If possible, translators should keep this verb since it an important feature of the book. If this is not possible, they may use other expressions, for example, “set out at night” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). By night is part of the plan, so that Abimelech and his men will not be seen. We may also say “while it is still dark.”

You and the men that are with you addresses Abimelech and his followers. The first Hebrew pronoun rendered you is quite emphatic. Men is literally “people” (Revised English Bible), but most versions say “men,” since they would be those who would fight. New Revised Standard Version has “troops,” which indicates a more organized militia. However, more general words such as “followers” or “people” would be more correct. In Hebrew this phrase occurs between two imperative verbs, but in many languages it will be more natural to put this vocative expression at the beginning of Zebul’s message by saying “You and your men, set off by night….” Another possible model is “While it is still dark, take your men and set out [for Shechem]….” The two imperatives are singular in Hebrew, which is not unusual since Abimelech is in the lead.

And lie in wait in the fields is the second command in this verse. Abimelech and his men are to hide in the countryside near Shechem in order to launch a surprise attack on Gaal and his men. The Hebrew verb rendered lie in wait is the same one translated “men in ambush” in verse 9.25 (see comments there). Good News Translation says “hide,” but another possible model is “prepare an ambush.” The Hebrew word for fields is singular, and in this context it refers to the countryside in general (compare verse 9.27).

Translation models for this verse are:

• This is what you should do: You and your men, set out in the middle of the night and set up an ambush in the fields [near Shechem].

• So, while it is still dark, lead your men out. Go and hide on the outskirts of the city.

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 LORD said to the people of Israel may be rendered simply “And the LORD replied” (similarly New International Version).

Did I not deliver you from the Egyptians and from the Amorites, from the Ammonites and from the Philistines?: This rhetorical question is meant to reproach or reprimand the Israelites for their behavior. The question assumes the answer is “Yes.” As elsewhere, this rhetorical question can be rendered as a question or expressed as a statement of fact. The reprimand here is very close to the ones given elsewhere by the LORD’s angel (verse 2.1) and the LORD’s prophet (verse 6.8-9). The phrase I … deliver you is not in the Hebrew text. Revised Standard Version anticipates it from the next verse. The LORD frequently reminded the Israelites of how he had rescued them from the Egyptians, bringing them out of slavery under Moses (see Exo 13–14 and the comments on verse 2.1). The LORD also saved his people in an early battle against the Amorites (see Num 21.21-31 and the comments on verse 1.34). The LORD then refers to his victories over their other enemies in Canaan, including the Ammonites (literally “the sons [or, children] of Ammon”; see verse 3.13) and the Philistines (verse 3.3).

Translation models for this verse are:

• And the LORD replied, “I saved you from the Egyptians, the Amorites, the Ammonites and the Philistines, didn’t I?

• Then Yahweh scolded them by saying, “You know very well that I rescued you from the Egyptians, the Amorites, the Ammonites, and the Philistines.

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 .

Despite the length and strength of Jephthah’s arguments, the Ammonite king refuses to give in to his point of view. This is not surprising, especially since all these negotiations took place through messengers!

But the king of the Ammonites did not heed the message of Jephthah: But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, since contrary to expectation, the king does not agree with Jephthah. Heed renders the Hebrew verb shamaʿ meaning “listen” or “obey” (see verse 2.17). It is not simply that the Ammonite king did not hear or listen to Jephthah’s message, but that he rejected it. Thus Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version say “paid no attention,” but a better rendering is “rejected.”

Which he sent to him: The pronoun he refers to Jephthah, and the pronoun him to the king. These pronouns will not pose any problem in most translations. If there is some difficulty, either or both referents may be made explicit. We may say “that Jephthah sent.” Another solution would be to render the whole verse as follows:

• But the king of the Ammonites rejected Jephthah’s message.

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 .

That the daughters of Israel went year by year …: This verse appears to be a closing statement that explains a custom in Israel which developed to commemorate this young woman’s tragedy. No conjunction is present in Hebrew here. In Hebrew this verse begins with a very rhythmic “from days to days” (miyyamim yamimah), which repeats several sounds, the consonants m and y and the vowels i and a. Translators can find a way of rendering some of the sadness and perhaps repetitiveness expressed here. It may appropriate to begin with an expression such as “And so” or “Thus.” The daughters of Israel refers to all the young women in Israel. The word daughters can refer to the inhabitants of a place in the Old Testament (see, for example, Psalm 48.11; verse 97.8), but here it refers to women (compare Song of Songs 1.5). Good News Translation says “the Israelite women,” and Contemporary English Version has “Israelite girls.” Went year by year is literally “from days to days they went.” The place they went to was probably “on the mountains” (see verse 11.37). The Hebrew phrase rendered year by year indicates this was an annual event (compare Exo 13.10). However, despite this claim, there is no other information about this custom in the Bible. Many languages will prefer to follow the Hebrew order here: “And so, every year the women of Israel went….”

To lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite: The Hebrew verb rendered lament is not the same one translated “bewail” in verse 11.37. This verb means “recount,” “celebrate” or “remember,” as in verse 5.11. New International Version and Revised English Bible say “commemorate,” which is a good model. It became a custom for Israelite women to commemorate what happened to this young woman and possibly her willingness to respect her father and the LORD. The narrator uses the full noun phrase Jephthah the Gileadite (see verse 11.1) as this episode comes to a close.

Four days in the year: This was the time period for the memorial. The four days were consecutive, not four days scattered throughout the year.

Translation models for this verse are:

• It became customary for the women of Israel to commemorate what happened to the daughter of Jephthah of Gilead four days every year.

• And so each year for four days, the women in Israel went out [on the mountains] to remember what happened to the daughter of Jephthah of Gilead.

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 serves as background and closes the episode concerning the angel of the LORD. Even though the verse begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction, the majority of versions omit it in this background verse.

The angel of the LORD appeared no more to Manoah and his wife is literally “And the angel of Yahweh did not add again to appear to….” After Yahweh’s messenger leaves Manoah and his wife, he does not reappear. For appeared see verse 13.3.

Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the LORD: Finally Manoah believes that the person he saw was Yahweh’s messenger. Manoah came to this belief because he saw the angel ascend in the fire, not because the angel appeared no more. To avoid misunderstanding concerning this, Good News Translation combines and rearranges verses 20-21. Then does not render the Hebrew waw conjunction, but the stronger connector ʾaz, which may be translated “finally” (New Living Translation). Interestingly, only Manoah is cited here as knowing that the man was Yahweh’s angel. It is impossible to know whether his wife already realized it or whether the mention of Manoah includes his wife. Knew in this context means “realized” or “understood” (see verse 13.16). The pronoun he refers to the man who was talking with Manoah. We might say “He finally realized that man was Yahweh’s messenger.”

A translation model that combines verses 20-21 is:

• While Manoah and his wife watched, flames went up skyward from the altar, and Yahweh’s messenger went up with them. The messenger did not reappear. But Manoah and his wife finally understood that the man was Yahweh’s messenger. They bowed low to the ground in awe.

If translators wish to retain the traditional numbering and not rearrange the events, a possible model for verse 21 alone is:

• Yahweh’s messenger did not appear again to Manoah and his wife. And now finally, Manoah understood that the man was Yahweh’s messenger.

Though some versions see 13.21-24 as a subsection, this background verse seems to close the section describing the second encounter with the angel.

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 .