But (as a rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction) seems too strong at this point. “And so” may be more appropriate. Other possibilities are “Thus” (Revised English Bible) and “So” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

The Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: Here there is yet another example of the “bad to worse” scenario so typical of this book. In the preceding verses the Canaanites are said to live among the Israelites, but here the situation is reversed, with the Asherites said to be dwelling among the Canaanites! This way of expressing things could also reflect the fact that the descendants of Asher were very few in number. Whatever the explanation, the storyteller has shifted viewpoints and this tribe seems worse off than the others. The order of presentation highlights the fact that it is the Canaanites, and not the Asherites, who are the inhabitants of the land—the land that was supposedly promised to this tribe of Israel. The long list of cities cited in the previous verse also emphasizes the fact that these people have consistently failed to do what God requested of them. For the Canaanites, see verse 1.1; for inhabitants see verse 1.11. Contemporary English Version‘s translation “and the Asher tribe lived with Canaanites all around them” is particularly effective.

For they did not drive them out is repeated from the beginning of verse 1.31, enclosing this short unit in an inclusio. The Hebrew particle ki rendered for introduces the reason the two peoples are living together, though this particle could also be taken as an emphatic marker, rendered “Indeed.” For did not drive … out, see verse 1.19.

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 people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the LORD repeats the clause from verse 2.11 (see comments there). Since this clause begins a new section, the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be omitted, or it can be rendered by a paragraph opener, such as “Now.” This new section begins with the full phrase the people of Israel (literally “the sons/children of Israel”) and the name YHWH, the LORD (see comments on verse 1.1 for both these expressions).

Forgetting the LORD their God, and serving the Baals and the Asheroth: These clauses describe the evil the Israelites committed. The words rendered forgetting and serving occur as the verbs of independent clauses in the Hebrew text, literally, “and they forgot Yahweh their God and they served the Baals and the Asheroth.” In many languages it will be more natural to follow the Hebrew forms rather than those in Revised Standard Version. In the introductory part of this book, Israel “forsook the LORD” (verse 2.13). Here a different phrase, forgetting the LORD, expresses the same idea. It does not mean that Israel did not or could not remember the LORD or what he did. Rather, this is a figurative way of saying the Israelites deliberately ignored what the LORD had done for them. There is an element of rejection implied here. In Deut 6.12; verse 8.11, 14, 19, and elsewhere the LORD had warned Israel against forgetting him and worshiping other gods. Many English versions retain the word “forget,” and in many languages the verb will have the same meaning as in Hebrew. However, if this verb cannot be used, translators could say “ignored” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “rejected,” “forsook,” or even “turned their back on.”

The LORD their God is similar to but shorter than the expression in verse 2.12, “the LORD, the God of their fathers.” The pronoun their refers to the Israelites. The LORD is the God they worship, adore, and serve. God renders the generic Hebrew word ʾelohim. In some languages using a possessive pronoun such as their can imply that God belonged exclusively to the Israelites. If so, it may be necessary to say “Yahweh, the God they worshiped” or “the LORD, the God they served.”

As in Deuteronomy, forgetting the LORD is linked with serving or worshiping foreign gods. For serving see verse 2.7 and verse 2.11. Baals and Asheroth render plural words in Hebrew. For Baals see verse 2.11. Asheroth is the plural of “Asherah,” the partner of the god Baal and mother of the Canaanite divine family. She is represented in art form as the “tree of life,” and at her worship centers by a wooden pole. She is not the same goddess as Ashtoreth/Astartes in verse 2.13. Good News Translation renders the Baals and the Asheroth as “the idols of Baal and Asherah,” which may serve as a good model.

Good News Translation rearranges the material here, bringing the idea of forgetting the LORD to the beginning of the verse. This may seem more logical in English, but in Hebrew, the more general statement introduces the problem, and then examples of Israel’s sin are given. This Hebrew order may be appreciated in many target languages.

Models for translation of this verse are:

• The people of Israel sinned against Yahweh their God and put him out of their mind. Instead, they served the Canaanite gods, the Baals and the Asherahs.

• The Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD, the God they served. They forgot [or, rejected] him and began to worship the idols of Baal and Asherah.

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 is an “aside,” since it does not contribute directly to the current story line. Rather, it provides readers with background information on the movement of the Kenites and in particular, Heber, the husband of Jael, a main character in this story (verse 4.17). However, there is a link to the present story with the mention of Kedesh, Barak’s hometown. Most versions put this verse into a paragraph of its own.

Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites: Now translates the Hebrew waw conjunction. It would be good to use a connector that introduces a side statement, for example, “In the meantime” (Good News Translation) or “At this time” (Contemporary English Version). Heber is a name that is first mentioned in Gen 46.17 as belonging to a man from the tribe of Asher. Here it refers to an individual whose wife will play an important role in this story. For the Kenite, see verse 1.16.

Had separated from the Kenites indicates that Heber and his family decided to move away from their clan, the Kenites. The Hebrew verb rendered had separated means “divided,” as when a river divides into two parts. Thus Heber and his family “broke away” from their original group. The text does not give a reason for this separation, but this was a common occurrence when there were disputes or when the land was not suitable or big enough for a given group (see, for example, Gen 13.11). Separated may also be rendered “migrated” or “moved away.” Revised Standard Version uses the past anterior verb tense, had separated, to show this is background information.

From the Kenites is literally “from Qayin” (seemingly related to the name “Cain”), which may be a reference to a location in the south of Judah or to the people. However, the further description, the descendants of Hobab, makes it clear that the clan or people group is intended. In some languages it may be unusual to repeat Kenites, so we might rather say “At that time Heber and his family had separated off from his clan, the Kenites.”

The descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses: In Num 10.29 Hobab is referred to as the son of Reuel the Midianite, and as Moses’ father-in-law. This person is first mentioned in verse 1.16, but without his name.

And had pitched his tent …: Heber and his family moved into a new region. Pitched his tent renders an idiomatic Hebrew expression that means “settled” or “set up a home” in a given place. “Tents” were made of animal skins and were the traditional form of housing for a nomadic or semi-nomadic people. Heber and his clan migrated and set up their new home in this northern region. In many languages it will be better to use a functional equivalent for pitched his tent, such as “was living,” “moved his family,” or “installed himself and his family,” but this expression is certainly introduced here to set the scene for what follows, when Jael invites Sisera into her tent. Thus if possible, it is best to keep this word here. Revised Standard Version once again uses the past anterior tense, had pitched, to show that this event occurred before the present story.

As far away as the oak in Za-anannim: The Hebrew preposition for as far away as can be rendered “at” (New International Version), “near” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), or “by” (New American Bible). The oak in Za-anannim refers to what must have been a significant landmark, a large oak tree near to the town of Za-anannim (see verse 19.33). Some scholars assume this was a sacred tree. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh transliterates the entire place name as “at Elon-bezaanannim,” but it will be easier for readers if part of this long name is translated. For oak tree. Since many languages will not have a name for oak, this whole phrase may be rendered “near the big/great tree in the town of Zaanannim.”

Which is near Kedesh: Za-anannim was near the town of Kedesh in the north. By going to Kedesh, Heber moved a very long way from his tribal home. This town is first mentioned in verse 4.6.

Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version change the order of this verse by saying first that Heber lived near the oak tree and then stating that he had moved away from his clan. There is a lot of information in this verse, and translators should arrange this background material in a natural way in their language. Translation examples for this verse are:

• Now it so happened that Heber, a Kenite, from the clan of Hobab, Moses’ father-in-law, had left the rest of the tribe and migrated north, settling near the oak tree by the town of Zaanannim near Kedesh.

• Meanwhile a Kenite man by the name of Heber took his family and moved north toward Kedesh, away from the rest of the clan. They settled down in a place called Zaanannim close to the big tree there. Heber and his family were descendants of Hobab, who was the father-in-law of Moses.

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 kings came, they fought; then fought the kings of Canaan: These first two lines of the verse have a chiastic structure.

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 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 .