In its details, Othniel’s account corresponds precisely with the paradigm set up in 2:11–19:
All of the stereotypical language is closely followed; there is no indication of any heroic personal action on the part of Othniel. Othniel’s account does not resemble a narrative as much as it does a “pattern-fulfillment description.”157 No other account will follow the paradigm of 2:11–19 as closely and as unambiguously as does the Othniel narrative, the shortest one of the stories of the major judges. Othniel is depicted as an ideal judge in a far-less-than-ideal age—when the post-Joshua generation did “what was evil in the sight of Yahweh” (3:7).
Othniel, as far as we are told, has no flaws, no character deficiencies, and no idiosyncrasies that cripple him, unlike the judges who follow. In the other judge accounts, there is always mention of a personal detail of the judge in question that appears to render that individual an unlikely choice for leader: Ehud’s left-handedness, Barak’s timidity, Gideon’s indecision, Jephthah’s pedigree, and Samson’s promiscuity. But not for Othniel—he, apparently, is blemishless, unless one counts his Kenizzite status: he is of foreign blood, but becomes firmly entrenched in the tribe of Judah.158 “[A]lthough for the first time there is a particular enemy and a particular judge, there are no plot expansions or developments: no dialogue, no reported speech of any kind, no dramatization of events, no scenic presentations, no descriptions of any character flaws, and so on. . . . Nothing distracts the reader from the clear message of God’s intervention through the deliverer . . . he raises up.”159 Thus any future deviation from the paradigm and its parade example, Othniel’s account, will be significant. “It is almost as if the narrative immediately presents us with an example of what the coming story about the judges will not look like.”160 So all we have in 3:1–7 is a verbally frugal, narrativally skeletal story of a man faithful to his God, bringing about good for his people. Perhaps that is the best kind of leader, the one without flashy pyrotechnics or glaring flaws. If only all the judges had been like Othniel, responsibly setting things straight, zealously striving for Yahweh, warring in the might of Yahweh’s Spirit, and bringing about rest for the land. But, alas, 3:12 shows us what happens after this worthy judge: “And the sons of Israel continued to do evil in Yahweh’s sight.” After Othniel, each judge account seems to be disintegrating, at least from the perspective of the paradigm, losing elements therefrom or, as in most cases, adding more insalubrious details of the evildoing of the Israelites, the turpitude of the judge, the oppression of the enemies, and the deplorable state at the demise of the particular leader.
Despite the strict adherence to the paradigm, 3:7 does introduce yet another new facet of the Israelites’ evildoing: “they forgot Yahweh their God.” This failure of memory, of which they had been warned in Deut 6:12 and 8:11, seems to have been the cause of all their transgressions—evildoing and serving Baals and the Asheroth (hinted also in Jdg 2:10–11: this new generation did not know Yahweh or his deeds, and that led them to evildoing and serving Baals). “To forget the Lord involves neglect of his covenant demands, ingratitude for his blessings, and a self-sufficient attitude. This in turn opens the door to idolatry.”161 It seems that forgetting Yahweh made them remember Baals! Because the Israelites “served” the Baals and Asheroth (3:7), they were made to “serve” the king of Mesopotamia, Cushan-rishathaim (3:8).162 The impact of his name and its etymology echoes in this brief narrative: “Cushan-rishathaim” occurs twice in 3:8 and twice in 3:10 (also repeated is “king of Mesopotamia,” 3:8, 10); “Othniel,” too, occurs only twice in the cameo (3:9, 11). But one notices that “Yahweh” occurs seven times in just five verses. So this narrative turns out to be primarily not about Othniel, but about Yahweh, himself. Indeed, in no other judge narrative is the role of God so clearly depicted; no other story does Yahweh permeate as fully as he does this one.
Yahweh’s support, an element of the paradigm, also shows up in an unusual way for the first time: “And Yahweh’s Spirit came upon him” (3:10). In the paradigm, this is reflected in the notice that “Yahweh was with the judge” (2:18), but the coming of the Spirit upon Othniel (and on some of the other judges) indicates a dramatic and dynamic involvement of Yahweh with his chosen deliverer.163 Underlining this support are textual clues: Othniel’s actions (in wayyiqtol verbs) is three times preceded by God’s primary action:
Othniel sets the standards by which all other judges must measure themselves. Othniel places the tribe of Judah at the head of the list of deliverers just as it stood at the head of the list of tribes who would go up to conquer for Yahweh (1:1–2). Othniel lets God remain in center stage. Othniel delivers Israel after only eight years of oppression. Othniel does nothing to intrude his own personality, his fears, his doubts, or his greed into the narrative. . . . The book of Judges should reflect a boring string of framework narratives like this. Instead it has to add the many stories of disobedience and ego.164
While the role of all the judges was to deliver their people (a notion introduced in the paradigm in 2:16, 18), only the first two judges, Othniel and Ehud actually are labeled “deliverers” (as a noun: 3:9, 15; the verb form is used of other judges, both major and minor: 3:31; 6:14, 15; 8:22; 10:1; 13:5). This sets these two apart from the ones who followed them. The unraveling has commenced!
The result of Othniel’s leadership is four decades of rest for the land—and this after a single-sentence report of a battle against one who was “doubly wicked”! The attainment of rest was a major goal of the conquest as Josh 11:23 and 14:15 indicate. But this is possible only when the leader is raised and empowered by God and aligns himself to divine purposes, eschewing self-aggrandizement, faithlessness, and fear. “Othniel, who lives in Israel after the death of Joshua and the elders who outlived Joshua, models true judgeship for all who follow him in that position. There never is another Joshua, a survivor of a faithless generation, and there never is another Othniel, a survivor of a faithful generation.”165 His faithful commitment to deity glorifies God and minimizes himself.
SERMON FOCUS AND OUTLINES166
| THEOLOGICAL FOCUS OF PERICOPE 2 FOR PREACHING44 | |
| 2 | Personal experience of God produces unwavering commitment to him and gives him glory (2:6—3:11). |
The negative side of “personal experience of God” is what is depicted in this pericope—the failure to experience God firsthand. Did the prior generation have a role in this? Were they negligent in some way? This pericope does not address the issue, but specific application could conceivably go in that direction: those who have experienced God firsthand are responsible to teach the next generation to do so themselves. Or the application could be an exhortation to the people of God to experience God personally, firsthand, themselves: perhaps this includes remembering the deeds of God in one’s own life (or in the corporate life of the church), etc.
Possible Preaching Outlines for Pericope 2
I. Forgetting God
Failure to experience God firsthand: new generation (2:6–10)
Missing the blessings of God: the cycle/spiral of failure (2:11–19)
Divine punishment (2:20—3:6)
Move-to-relevance: How God’s people forget him; the consequences
II.