Judges 21:16

Analysis & Commentary

Then the elders of the congregation said, How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing the women are destroyed out of Benjamin? The elders' question reveals their dilemma: the women are destroyed out of Benjamin (nishmadah ishah miBinyamin, נִשְׁמְדָה אִשָּׁה מִבִּנְיָמִן). Israel's scorched-earth campaign against Benjamin (20:48) had killed women and children, leaving no Benjamite brides for the 600 surviving men. Combined with their oath forbidding giving their own daughters to Benjamin (21:1), they faced an apparently insoluble problem of their own making.

From a Reformed perspective, this verse demonstrates how human pride and rash decisions create moral tangles requiring increasingly compromised solutions. The elders should have recognized their oath as sinful—God never commanded refusing reconciliation with a repentant brother tribe. Leviticus 5:4-6 provided procedures for rash oaths, allowing confession and atonement. Instead, they sought loopholes to keep their foolish vow while "solving" the problem through violence against Jabesh-gilead and Shiloh.

The question How shall we do (mah na'aseh, מַה נַּעֲשֶׂה) echoes Israel's repeated pattern of seeking human solutions to spiritual problems. Rather than genuine repentance, seeking God's wisdom, and making restitution, they pursued pragmatic schemes. This warns against the casuistry that evades moral principles through technical compliance while violating the spirit of God's law (compare Jesus's condemnation of Pharisaic oath-keeping in Matthew 23:16-22).

Historical Context

The destruction of Benjamin's women and children during the civil war followed the practice of herem (חֵרֶם, devoted destruction) that God had commanded against Canaanite cities (Deuteronomy 7:2, 20:16-18). However, applying herem to a fellow Israelite tribe was a profound perversion of this command's purpose—eliminating pagan influence to preserve covenant purity. Instead, Israel nearly eliminated an entire covenant tribe, creating the very breach in God's people that herem was meant to prevent.

The elders' deliberation reflects ancient Near Eastern council procedures where tribal leaders convened to address communal crises. However, their focus on preserving their oath rather than seeking God's will through the high priest (using Urim and Thummim) demonstrates reliance on human wisdom. The subsequent schemes—destroying Jabesh-gilead and condoning kidnapping from Shiloh—reveal moral bankruptcy where technical oath-keeping justified egregious injustice.

Questions for Reflection

• What rash commitments have you made that now require compromised solutions rather than honest confession and restitution?
• How does legalistic adherence to the letter of commitments sometimes violate the spirit of righteousness and mercy?
• When have you sought loopholes to avoid admitting error rather than humbly confessing sin and seeking God's forgiveness?