131

Speaking Out: God’s Justice for the Woman Violated

a study on Judges 19:1-30 by Yong Ting Jin

                                                                         

 


Locating the text in Judges

 

Judges chapter 19 has been regarded conclusively as a text of terror and wantonness. To understand it more fully, it is important to locate chapter 19 [as well as chapters 20-21] within the historical background and context of the book of Judges. Though it requires a deeper study, a brief look into the background does bring to light the social, economic and political conditions of its time in history.

 

A Brief Overview of the Book of Judges

 

The book tells the story of the Israelite tribes in transition when the age of the great leaders like Miriam, Moses and Joshua were gone. In about 1200 B.C.E. Joshua led the Hebrews or Israelites who came out of Egypt and were in fact a group of escaped slaves into Canaan [Josh. 1-12]. Some oppressed Canaanites like Rahab and her family [Josh. 2:8-21; 6:25] assisted Joshua and his army in the overthrow of the Canaanite ruling powers. And many of these Canaanites joined with the Israelites as a new society was set up in Canaan [Josh. 13-22].

 

Hence the book shows the emergence and creation of a new community and society was a tremendous struggle. The author or scribe of Judges was not merely passing on information about the transition period before the

 

132

 

Monarchy was established. He wrote as a theological interpreter of the past with a message for his contemporaries as well as for readers of later ages including ours.

 

Judges is a large collection of stories and events that were composed during the late 7th and early 6th centuries B.C.E. But these stories and events had taken place about 1150 – 1000 B.C.E. [12th century], some 500 years apart before they were written. Also they occurred after the death of Joshua.

 

Judges 3: 7- 16: 31 are dramatic narratives of twelve liberator Judges. Chapters 17 to 21 were days after the 12 Judges. The author presented Chaps 19 to 21 as the lowest moral point at that point of life in Israelite history [19:30]. However, it was a time of economic prosperity: there was no lack of anything (19:19); food and drinks were plentiful (verses 4-6, 8, 22), and crops bountiful (21:19-20).

    

But it was also a time of great social chaos and anarchy as indicated in the beginning by the Narrator/Scribe in 19:1 “In those days, when there was no king in Israel…” This was repeated several times and added to it “In those days there was no king; all the people did what was right in their own eyes” [Judg. 17: 6b; 21:25b].

 

Judges 19:1-30 is set against this historical and socio-political backdrop: A time when leaders were lacking, and there was no king, God seldom appeared, chaos reigned among the Israelite tribes. Internal anarchy produces violence and vengeance, as demonstrated by the tribe of Benjamin in the narratives of chaps 19 to 21. It is also in this context that the covenant was violated and thus highlighted because it was a crucial foundation for the existence of a faith community and people of God. 

 

Covenant: God and Israel

 

This Covenant is given a distinctive emphasis in the book of Judges. The Covenant teachings and relationship occupied a central place in the lives of

 

133

 

the people of Israel. The Covenant is the basis of this special relationship with “the God of Israel” [5:3; 6:8-9]. They believed they were the chosen people of God with a unique mission identity to fulfil a divine purpose in the land of Canaan – the Promised Land – where there is space for freedom and a place of security.

 

It is of crucial importance to understand the Covenant relationship within the community and history of “the tribes of Israel  [Judg. 18:1; 20:2, 10-12; 21:15; cf. Josh. 24:1]. They were bonded by a common faith based on the Covenant relationship between them as people of Israel and Yahweh the Lord God. They were slaves who came out of Egypt. Added to this core group were the oppressed groups of people who were Canaanites [debt slaves, sharecroppers, landless farmers, artisans] alienated from the city-state system. Together they joined the tribes of Israel and pledged to serve Yahweh the Lord God following the Covenant relationship they had entered.

 

Understanding Judges 19: 1-30

If we look at the map[1] of Israel in Canaan [during the settlement of Israel and the period of the Judges] we can spot these places mentioned in the chapter, which may help us to visualize the events unfolding: Ephraim, Bethlehem, Jebus in Jerusalem, Gibeah of Benjamin, Jabesh in Gilead, Mizpah in Gilead and Shiloh.

 

According to Trible[2], the story begins with an introduction - 19:1-2; followed by 2 main scenes and an interlude, as structured in this manner:

 

Introduction - 19:1-2

Scene One  - 19: 3-10

Bethlehem in Judah

Interlude -19:11-15A

Jebus of Jerusalem (foreign city)

Distance in time between Scenes 1&2

Scene Two –19:15b-28

Gibeah in Benjamin

Conclusion –19:28-30

 

134

 

Trible has regarded this chapter as a text of terror where it tells the story of an unnamed woman when the extravagance of violence was done against her. Her husband, the Levite, the old man, the men of Gibeah and the tribes of Israel were all named as guilty in participating in those multiple acts of violence which spills over from chapter 19 into chapters 20 and 21 as well. The preceding paragraphs on the background history of Israel during the time of the Judges, the issue of the Covenant relationship and its specific laws are important linking factors in understanding chapters 19 to 21. Hence, crucial to one’s understanding within the Covenant is the emphasis on a particular kind of covenant breaking related to the code of sexual relations that leads to a series of acts of violence, rape and murder. We now look into the various divisions and scenarios of the text as an attempt to understand this story of terror.

 

Introduction - 19:1-2

 

The Levite is a sojourner from the remote hill country of Ephraim. The woman [girl] comes from Bethlehem in Judah. 

 

In the previous narrative of chapters 17 and 18, Hamlin[3] has written substantial notes about the role of the Levites. In view of the negative picture, the Levite does not have a good reputation during this period. Hence in the first two verses of chapter 19, we read of this negative view being repeated as in the relationship between the Levite and his concubine, his wife. She “became angry with him” and left him for 4 months due to some untold problem. At a glance in the order of patriarchy, the concubine does not seem very submissive to her master. But verse 25 gives us a clue how she is regarded and hence treated.

 

There are two important scenes which demand attention:

 

135

 

Scene One  - 19: 3-10

Bethlehem in Judah

 

Following immediately after the introduction, three incidents happened in Scene One.

 

 i) 19:3abc The  master goes to Bethlehem in Judah

There appears a swift change of heart in the story. The Levite decides to go to his father-in-law’s house. He intends to persuade his wife, speak to her heart and bring her back from her father’s house. Here the term "girl" (19:3,4) indicates that she is a young woman.

 

ii) 19:3d – 9  Visit in the father’s house

When the Levite arrives, his father-in-law greets him with joy and the two men unite. Notice the power relations between them. But the woman who brings them together disappears from the scene; unnoticed, in silence or without voice.

What about the power relations between the master and his concubine? In Jewish culture, the woman is regarded as property. The master is the subject, and the woman the object. He owns her as his property.  As a concubine the girl has a lower inferior status like a slave. She has no legal and social standing like other women though they belong to men. 

 

Throughout the visit the girl’s father offers and extends his hospitality four times to his son-in-law to stay on, eat and drink, till the fifth day when the Levite is determined to move on!

 

iii) 19:10 – Departure of the master/Levite

Finally, the Levite is determined to go on the fifth day though the father-in-law tries to retain him again!

 

The extent of oriental hospitality seems to be an exercise in male bonding and merriment.  Since he arrived, there is no mention that he did speak to her heart, which was his decision and purpose of the trip.

 

136

 

Interlude – 19: 11-15a

Jebus of Jerusalem was a foreign city

Note the distance in time between scenes 1 and 2.

Upon arrival at Jebus, the Levite insists to move on though it was getting dark. Jebus is a Canaanite city of foreigners who are not part of the Israelite people. The Levite considers them dangerous as they would not be governed by the Covenant Teachings and hence could not be trusted.

 

But in the beginning in 1:21, the Scribe has narrated that the Benjaminites and Jebusites lived there side by side.  The implication is that the Benjaminites had learned to 'do as they do in the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:3; cf. Ps. 106:35-39). It was the continued association of Benjaminites with the ‘foreigners’ in Jerusalem and their “foreign gods” [cf. Judg. 10:16; Deut. 31:16] that alienated them from their fellow Israelites as narrated in the last three chapters of Judges [Judg. 19:30; 20:6; 21:1].

 

Scene Two - 19:15b-28

Gibeah in Benjamin

 

In this scene there are 2 incidents/events to be noted.

 

1st incident -19:15b – 21

-Covenant Teachings defied

There is a two-fold irony in the Scribe’s [or narrator’s] description of Jerusalem earlier:

1st, the foreigners/people of Jebus could not be trusted and they were dangerous people.

2nd, what the Levite feared most in the midst of "foreigners" actually did happen in Gibeah of Benjamin (Judg. 19:14) instead of in Jebus.

 

Gibeah of Benjamin was in fact a city where the faithful would feel like "aliens" and strangers (Ps. 69:8). Contrary to his expectation, the Levite is not welcomed to stay in Gibeah. The law of kindness or hospitality related to the Covenant Teachings is not observed as "no one took them in to spend the night" (v 15).

 

Being one of his own, the old man finally puts him up, and his “posses-

 

137

 

sions”. Then it’s followed by the old man's caution "do not spend the night in the square" (v.20).

 

Hospitality prevails at the end, from the public square to the house in Gibeah. It begins with safety for the men inside the house. They eat and drink as in the father-in-law’s house. Again it’s a conversation between males and male bonding between the two, who came from the same hill country of Ephraim.

 

2nd incident: 19: 22-28

– a night of violence, terror and further extreme violence

 

19: 22-25b

While we read that the master is safe inside the house, the woman is not! Hospitality prevails in the house. Yet safety within the house cannot control danger outside the house! Between the house, door or doorway marks the borderline between hospitality and hostility, between safety and violence.

 

Verse 22 describes the men of Gibeah as “base fellows”[RSV] or “scoundrels” [NJB - New Jerusalem Bible]. Translated from the Hebrew word “beliya'al” as “the sons of wickedness”, they are perceived as godless men who draw people from the Covenant God.

They shout and demand that the old man bring out his visitor. And they wish to violate the visitor [Levite] sexually.

 

Verse 23 – the old man refuses to hand over his guest.

As the demand is persistently pursued, we see male power confronts male power and they clash. In Verse 23, the old man refuses to hand over his guest. He forbids them saying “do not act so wickedly…do not do this vile thing”, which is also translated to mean public dishonour “infamy” [NJB].

 

According to Hamlin[4], the most important Hebrew word “nebalah” or “vile thing[RSV and New RSV] is used four times and translated as “vile thing"

 

138

 

(Judg. 19:23-24), "wantonness" (20:6), or "wanton crime" (20:10). Here “nebalah” is used with two meanings: to describe the intention and then the act of the men. These men’s intention is a "vile thing" (19:23-24) because it violates both the law of kindness to the Levite (Deut. 26:13) and the law of not doing any wrong or harm to strangers when they sojourn "in your land" (Lev. 19:33).

 

To describe a specific covenant law in relation to the code of sexual relations, the Hebrew word “Nebalah”, wanton crime, is most commonly used. Hamlin[5] cites several instances which describe the premarital sexual relations of a bride (Deut. 22:20-21), Shechem's affair with Dinah (Gen. 34:7), Amnon's forcing his half-sister Tamar (2 Sam. 13:12), and the adultery of the two prophets in Babylonia with their neighbors' wives (Jer 29:23). It is this particular example of covenant breaking that is the subject of this narrative in Judges 19-21.

 

Therefore, in those days it was a common way of treating a stranger. To do him a “vile thing” means sexual assault or abuse between man to man. It is also “vile” because it is an intentional insult and extreme humiliation of sexual assault on a male stranger.

 

However, Hamlin asserts further that “The “wanton crime” which is in fact committed is the gang-rape murder of the Levite's concubine. Since the woman/female is a property of her father or husband, the law of kindness does not apply to the concubine in that patriarchal society, even though she is a guest of the old man.

 

Verses 24 to 25 - acts of terror and violence

Trible[6] expounds on the two verses 24-25 including her understanding of the Hebrew text as well. 

 

139

 

Verse 24

The old man offers 2 female objects to protect a male from a group of wicked “brothers”. As far as he is concerned, his property, virgin daughter, and the other seasoned and experienced property of the Levite, his guest can both satisfy a wide range of heterosexual preferences, making both the  women expendable to the demands of wicked men. The old man then says, “ravish them and do whatever you want to them; but against this man do not do such a vile thing.”[RSV and NRSV]. There are no restrictions placed on the wicked men. Instead, the old man gives them license to rape the two women.

 

In comparing this to the Hebrew Bible, Trible[7] says “If done to a man it is an act of wickedness/vile thing; if done to women, it is ‘the good’ [RSV] in the eyes of men”.  She further comments: “No male is to be violated. All males, even wicked ones, are to be granted their wishes. Conflict among them can be solved by the sacrifice of females.”

 

Trible also notes a similar case as in Lot and the city of Sodom [Gen.19:1-29]. Amazingly, she observes that the words uttered by the two hosts in Gen 19:7 and Judg. 19:23-24 are identical!

 

Gen 19:7– and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly…” [Continued to verse 8].

 

Judg. 19: 23  “And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Since this man is my guest, do not do this vile thing…” [Continued to v.24].

 

In these 2 accounts, Trible draws the analysis that they both show the rules of hospitality in Israel that protect only males. The concubine, female guest of the old man, is not protected by his hospitality. Hence, she is obviously a free and vulnerable choice for the desire and abuse of the males.

 

140

 

Hamlin notes that during that time, if a man offered his own daughter, it would make her a harlot and the land would be "full of wickedness" (Lev. 19:29). In this incident, the old man included his visitor's wife as well.

 

Verse 25a-b

Immediately the master pushes her to the men outside on hearing that they refuse the old man’s offer. Here the master acts immediately to save his own life! The Levite "seizes" his wife and pushes her out to the men (Judg. 19:25), forcing her to be a part of  nebalah” in Israel (Deut. 22:21).

 

But note that when he explains this to the assembly of the tribal leaders and elders, he presents it as an emergency measure to save his own life (Judg. 20:5). However, the narrative implicates him in the crime.

 

Verses 25c–26

– multiple acts of violence

In expounding the verses, Trible[8] relies on the Hebrew translation and is thus able to arrive at the meaning of certain important actions and words.

 

Verse 25d reads “And they raped her and tortured her all night until morning”.

 

Verse 25e reads  “And they let her go as the dawn came up”.

 

Trible offers a feminist perspective that the brevity of these 2 verses is in sharp contrast with the lengthy description of the male merrymaking and other deliberations by men. She views “Such elaborate attention to men intensifies the terror perpetrated upon the woman.”[9].

 

It was not a single crime but multiple acts of violence done against the woman, as Trible puts it aptly “Raped, tortured, and released: brevity of speech discloses the extravagance of violence.”[10].

 

141

 

In just two short verses, the woman was gang-raped and finished! Horror and wantonness occurred swiftly while the narrative of hospitality expands itself again and again. Even the attendant servant of the master had a voice. But the woman of Bethlehem [and virgin daughter] was silent and silenced!

 

Verse 26

“For the first time since the beginning of the story, the sole female is the subject of active verbs. Sadly, though she is no longer a subject with power to act.” [Trible, p. 77].

 

When she was alive, she was an object of her master, a violated property betrayed by her master. First she left this man, then the master “reclaimed her only to deliver her into the hands of other men… she remained an object only to be subjected to the power of the man to do whatever he did to her …” [Trible, p. 77]. 

 

The master who initiated this atrocity is guilty of the crime. But soon discovery of the crime leads to further violence against the woman.

 


Verses 27-28

 

Verse 27 tells us that the master got up and “went out to go on his way”. It seems to imply that he intends to depart alone without regard for anyone else. Though the men of Gibeah gang-raped his wife all night, he plans to leave “in the morning”.

 

Trible[11] asserts that the phrase “having fallen at the doorway of the house” depicts the pain and powerlessness of the woman. Also the story begins with the woman leaving and ends with her leaving forever. 

 

142

 

Conclusion: 19: 29-30

 

Verse 29

Though dead, she is still subjected to the power of her master. For her body was cut into 12 pieces and sent to the whole of Israel, each to the 12 tribes. In the tribal tradition, the ritual uncleanness of the severed limbs of the dead body would symbolise pollution of Israelite land. If it was not cleansed away or acted upon, it would cause utter disaster to the land. The Levite’s politics is loud and clear. The tribes of Israel must act.

 

Dead or alive, the woman does not seem to matter anymore. She had no name, no identity, no speech, no power and no dignity. She had no help, no support from anyone when she was alive.  There was no one to mourn her death. Her broken body cries out for peace with justice throughout the land of Israel.

 

Even God appears silent and absent!  Why?

 

Verse 30

3 important words are spoken here:

1.                  “Consider it” [RSV]. In the Hebrew idiom and understanding, Trible[12] gives the meaning “direct your heart” to the woman.

2.                  “Take counsel” [NRSV] or “put your mind to this [New Jewish Version, Trible].

3.                  “Speak”     

 

The New Jerusalem Bible says “Take this to heart, discuss it; then give your verdict”. This concluding note seems to give an imperative to respond… Consistent with the opening note by the Scribe, the man was supposed to speak to the heart of the woman, though he did not.   But now Israel must direct its heart toward her, take counsel, and speak.

 

143

 

The multiple acts of wanton crime end when the woman is found murdered. But that is not the end of violence. The wanton crime and violence continue to multiply in many hundred fold leading to the grabbing and raping of another 400 women and 200 virgins. The rape of one has become the rape of six hundred!

 

Chapters 20 to 21 tell us that the Benjaminites of Gibeah are condemned for they have committed brutal gang-rape murder. But at the same time we read that the narrative implicates also both the Levite and the old man of Ephraim.

 

Strangely the people of Israel assembled and acted in the name of Yahweh their Lord God, engaging intensely in the brutal killing of the Benjaminites of Gibeah as well as massacre of the population of Jabesh-Gilead, men, women and children!

 

The Levite’s formal charge

The wicked men of Benjamin have broken the covenant with Yahweh because they “intended to kill me, and they raped my concubine until she died. [21:5]. The body chopped into 12 pieces and sent each to all the 12 tribes was hard evidence produced by the Levite to the 12 tribes. Did he demand that justice be done to him? Or was it for his wife? Remember the pollution of the land…? If the tribal leaders and elders did not take action, disaster would fall on them. Such is the subtle politics of the Levite!

 

But the charge appeared as a wanton crime committed by these wicked men. They had broken their covenant with God by desiring to abuse the man sexually. They had defied the law of hospitality and kindness. More than that they were perceived as disobeying and perverting the code of law related to sexual relations with the male guest; hence truly an extreme insult and humiliation of his status, dignity and self-respect as a male, master and Levite in Israel.

 

144

 

Reflections, insights and perspective on Malaysian realities

 

Phyllis Trible says that “Our task is to make the journey alongside the concubine: to be her companion in a literary and hermeneutical enterprise”: what can we do and what more shall we do? What is the Christian response and responsibility to the injustices and violence done against women? Is God silent and silenced? The time is now to speak out God’s justice and justice for women.

 

The whole perspective of these narratives in Judges reflects the tribal politics played within the patriarchal and tribal system of Israel. It is consistent with the history of the patriarchs and “God of the fathers”. The conversations and interactions took place only between males. Consider the behaviour, attitude and perception of the men in the incident of violence and terror. The male-centred perspective of God misses out the way women perceive things and experience realities.

 

As I reflect on the story in the light of our present day realities in Malaysia and Asia at large, how appalling it is that such violence in varying degrees and different forms are still happening around us. Patriarchy runs deep at the heart of life and things, in the forms of social, cultural and religious conditionings it has taken root in men and women, male and female alike.

 

More than this, it is a covenant relationship only between God and men of Israel; and between man to man only. Think of the Ten Commandments and review them in the context of Jewish culture. The tenth commandment groups the wife as the man’s property together with his other possessions  - house, land and animals [Ex. 20: 17; Deut 5: 21]. Women are the property of men. The Ten Commandments were given to the community and yet it appeared like Yahweh the Lord God was seen to be addressing the men of Israel. Therefore, women have no voice and they are not heard. They are portrayed to be silent and absent in the relationship with God their Creator as if God does not speak or relate to them as beings created in God’s image. Women did not seem to be considered fully as a part of the cov-

 

145

 

enant community or they would appear at the lowest rung of the social ladder with no identity and significance. Men would be well protected by the Covenant laws and the legal system while women could be subjected to cultural subjugation and violence.

 

Consider the laws and legal system in Malaysia. Is it androcentric in perspective and practice, particularly laws that are gender biased for males or discriminatory in relation to females? How far do they protect girls and women in issues of rape, child abuse, sexual harassment, incest, domestic violence and other forms of violence? It took the women’s movement in Malaysia more than 10 years to push through the endorsement of the Domestic Violence Act. It takes a deeper and further change of mindset to amend the rape law in Malaysia.

 

Almost daily we read of girls and women being brutally raped in our newspapers. Early this year, several cases of violence were reported. A schoolgirl and one young workingwoman were brutally raped and murdered; and a five-year old girl was molested before being killed.

 

The number of reported cases in domestic violence in 2001 amounted to 1117. In the Selangor district alone, 356 rape cases were reported and in the whole of Malaysia, the figure reported for 2001 reached more than 1,400. 

 

Police statistics show that there were 2.4 rape cases being reported a day in 1993. In 1998, the number increased to 4.1 rape cases a day. A study reports that nine out of ten rape cases go unreported.

 

Laws related to rape are still inadequate. The current definition of rape is narrow. It ignores rape through penetration of objects into the private parts of rape survivors. Therefore the law has to change. So too the situation!

 

Several Women’s Groups are advocating for immediate amendments of effective laws related to rape, and for implementing policies and strategic actions to improve services for rape survivors. The Gender Equality Law that

 

146

 

was passed in Malaysia is a very positive sign for women in church and society. The Constitution Amendment Bill was passed on 2nd August 2001 by the Dewan Rakyat. Article 8 (2) of the Malaysian Constitution now reads “Except as expressly authorised by this constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent, gender, or place of birth in any law or in the appointment to any office or employment under a public authority or in the administration of any law relating to the acquisition holding or disposition of property or the establishment or carrying on of any trade or business, profession or vacation or employment”.

 

Though it is a big milestone achieved when gender discrimination is to be outlawed in the Malaysian Parliament, women’s groups have gathered to set up a monitoring system to document the use and display of sexist language and behaviour by Members of Parliament.

 

Women’s feelings and views are often not taken into account in a patriarchal society and culture. But women see things differently that has been missed out. God is made dead silent and is silenced during the rape and murder of the woman but God is seen to be urging and guiding in the battle of struggle for power in the next two chapters! God is portrayed and established as male, masculine, militaristic, leader of battles and wars, etc. God relates directly to men and gives them the Covenant teachings and laws. The same God who is used to justify their disputes and wars is seen to take sides. The politics of the male-centred tribal community and assembly is clear.

 

Generally as well as in many specific instances in our family and home, society and church today, female children and women are still treated as inferior and secondary. The girl child and woman have less value than the boy child and man. She has no identity of her own but is always seen in association with the male/man, father, brother and husband, etc. Though the situation of women in society has been changing over the years, the prevailing cultural attitudes and behaviour continue to be reinforced in the home and family, churches, religious institutions and their places of worship.

 

147

 

Similarly when it is written by a male scribe or narrator, it turns out there is the same male-biased perspective in re-telling the story. In many places in the Bible this seems to be the case. It is a history of the patriarchs. Today we are not spared from such similar androcentric perceptions and reports in our churches and society as far as women’s image, role and status are concerned.

 

How would you see it as women? Begin to feel the horror and disgust of that woman’s experience and the fatal destiny of the 600 women. The multiple acts of violence done against the woman of Bethlehem [and the 600 women] bring us close to home. Though   women of Israel and women of Malaysia/Asia are separated by a history of thousands of years, yet our common experiences under the reign of patriarchy can identify us together in many ways across cultures, ethnicity, race, class, societies and religions! The woman of Bethlehem is identified with the many named and unnamed women who have been victims of violence in the forms of rape and incest; sexual abuse and sexual harassment; domestic violence in our world today.

 

Though the Levite was sheltered and shielded from the “wicked men” of Gibeah the women were not.  What about the Levites of the religious institutions today?

 

Today women in Malaysia are vulnerable inside and outside of the house, in buildings, institutions or in the community. Her mobility and space are yet again restricted whether by day or night in light of the increasing violence against them in our society including religious institutions and places.

 

Our task has become multiple. Not only do we need to make the journey alongside the concubine but also alongside women in Malaysian churches and society, in Asia and the world over. God is speaking through us. God’s time is our time now: to speak out God’s justice and justice for women!

 



[1] Taken from J. Bright, History of Israel, 

[2] Trible, Phyllis, Texts Of Terror, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1984

[3] Hamlin, E. John, At Risk in the Promised Land: A Commentary on the Book of Judges; International  Theological Commentary, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Michigan, 1990.

[4] Hamlin, E. John, At Risk in the Promised Land: A Commentary on the Book of Judges; International  Theological Commentary, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Michigan, 1990; p. 164.

[5]  Ibid., p. 165

[6] Trible, Phyllis, Texts Of Terror, Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1984, p. 74.

[7] Ibid., p.74.

[8] Ibid., p.76.

[9] Ibid., p.76.

[10] Ibid., p.77.

[11] Ibid., p. 79.

[12] Ibid., pp. 81-82.