Outline of Chapter 4:

         vv.     1–3           Israel is oppressed by Jabin, a king of the Canaanites

         vv.     4–10         Deborah calls for Barak; they go out to war against the Canaanites

         vv.    11–12         Heber the Kenite

         vv.    13–16         The battle between Barak and Sisera

         vv.    17–22         Jael, the wife of Heber, kills Sisera

         vv.    23–24         Israel is victorious over Jabin

Charts, Maps and Short Doctrines:

         Introduction         Matthew Henry Outlines Judges 4

         Introduction         The Three Kedesh’s

         Introduction         Maps of the Correct and Incorrect Locations of the Various Kedesh’s

         Introduction         How Did Israel so Easily Fall into Idolatry?

         Introduction         Authorship Summary of Judges 4 and 5

         v.       1              The Five Cycles of Discipline

         v.       4              The Doctrine of a Prophetess

         v.       8              Judges 4:8c Text from the Greek Septuagint (not found in MT)

         v.       8              What is Wrong with Barak Asking Deborah to Accompany him in Battle?

         v.      11              The Kishon River and Mount Tabor (A Map)

         v.      11              Why Does the Bible Tell Us that Heber the Kenite Lives Here?

         v.      12              Mount Tabor

         v.      14              Deborah says, “This is the Day!”

         v.      15              Commentators on the Battle between Barak and Sisera

         v.      17              Commentators on the Kenites

         v.      19              Thirst in Scripture

         v.      21              Commentators Weigh in on Jael’s Act

         v.      21              Summary Points on Jael and Personal Application

         v.      21              Clarke’s False Premises and False Conclusion

         v.      21              Principles which we Use to Interpret this Passage and Jael’s Actions

         v.      24              A Comparison between Barak’s Battle and Israel’s War

         v.      24              A Complete Translation of Judges 4

I ntroduction: Judges 4 takes place after the death of Ehud and introduces, Deborah, one of the very few female leaders to be found in the Bible. In fact, not only is she a judge, but she is also a prophetess, which is, in general, a true rarity in Scripture. Barak was to be the man of the hour, but he had to be led and guided by Deborah. The two villains in this chapter are Jabin, a king of the Canaanites, and Sisera, who was the commander-in-chief of Jabin’s army. Israel, at least northern Israel, is in subjection to Jabin and Sisera, and Deborah and Barak will lead Israel in war against the Canaanites. This is the general subject matter of the next two chapters of the book of Judges. Judges 4 is an historical account; and Judges 5 is a poetic account.

This chapter begins again the pattern established in the previous chapter: Israel does evil in the sight of God, and God allows a non-Jewish ruler (Jabin, king of the Canaanites) to oppress them for 20 years (vv. 1–3). Deborah, one of the few legitimate prophetesses in the Bible, calls upon Barak to lead Israel out of slavery (vv. 4–7). Barak agrees to this, only if Deborah will go up with him to war (v. 8). Deborah agrees, but warns Barak that he will receive limited glory for his actions (v. 9). Barak gathers men from Zebulun and Naphtali and they will gather and defeat Jabin and his general Sisera (vv. 10, 12–16). Sisera will escape the battle on foot and go to neutral territory (vv. 11, 17). He will be met by a woman, Jael, who encourages him to come into her tent to rest and hide out (vv. 18–19). Sisera instructs her to stand guard while he apparently falls asleep; and once he is asleep, she kills Sisera (vv. 20–21). By this time, Barak arrives, and Jael leads him to Sisera dying (v. 22). This chapter is summarized in vv. 23–24.

We can guess at the time period that this battle takes place. Megiddo was completely destroyed in the middle of the 12^th century and uninhabited until about 1100 b.c. The subsequent inhabitants appear to be Israelites. Megiddo is never mentioned as a city in this chapter or the next, although the waters of Megiddo will be mentioned in Judges 5:19. This suggests that there is no city of Megiddo (otherwise, the battle would have taken place at Taanach near Megiddo, rather than at Taanach near the waters of Megiddo). Archeological evidence indicates that Taanach and Megiddo were but five miles apart, but not simultaneously occupied, as does the Biblical record. ZPEB tells us: The convergence of historical, archeological, and literary evidence has made a date c. 1125 b.c. virtually certain. This places the dates given in The Narrated Bible, which I lean upon for a rough outline of time, about a century off (they give a date of 1224 b.c.).

The geography of this is problematic for some—but only for those who have an incomplete understanding of the geography. We have the city of Kedesh-Naphtali mentioned in v. 6, which is where Barak is from. Then, throughout this narrative, we have mention of the city of Kedesh. Now, Kedesh-Naphtali is in north central Naphtali, 20 miles north of the Sea of Chinnereth (later known as the Sea of Galilee) in the foothills of Mount Naphtali. However, we continually hear about this Kedesh which appears to be near the River Kishon, which is southwest of the Sea of Chinnereth. No way are these Kedesh’s the same. You may want to refer to the Doctrine of the Three Kedesh’s in Joshua 12:22. However, to give you a brief run-down: Barak was born in Kedesh-Naphtali, which is pretty far away from the action which takes place. There is the River Kishon, which runs between Issachar and Manasseh, near Mount Tabor, where most of the action of this and the next chapter takes place. All of this is about forty miles south of Kedesh-Naphtali. Now along the River Kishon is a city known both as Kishion and as Kedesh (compare Joshua 19:20 21:28 1Chron. 6:72). This is the Kedesh referred to throughout most of this passage, which is quite different from the Kedesh where Barak was from. We will, near the end of this chapter, have Sisera make a running escape to the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh. Sisera’s run is less than ten miles. He does not make some 40 mile run north. As long as you understand the location of these two different Kedesh’s, then the geography of this passage makes perfect sense.

Maps of the Correct and Incorrect Locations of the Various Kedesh’s
Correct Locations	Incorrect Locations
From http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:1759_ map_Holy_Land_and_12_Tribes.jpg and edited. I added the three Kedesh’s.	From The MacMillan Bible Atlas; 3rd Edition; Aharoni, Avi-Yonah, Rainey, and Safrai; MacMillan; ©1993 by Carta; p. 67. Only a portion of the map is shown.

It is in these differences that we can develop a better grasp of the correct understanding of the oral tradition. The mistaken understanding is that the oral tradition of the Jews preserved Scripture orally for centuries until someone decided to write it down. Part of this theory was based upon Scripture (where the Jews were told to tell their children about the great acts of God) and part of this theory was based upon faulty historical presumptions—specifically, that early man did not have the ability/means/desire to record things in writing. When it comes to truth, it is not unusual for a false idea, based upon a faulty premise, to remain, even after the faulty premise has been shown to be clearly false. This simple reason for this is that “...men love darkness rather than light.” (John 3:19b). Now even though we have archeological proof that very ancient men were able to record whatever they wanted to in writing, still remains the idea that early books of Scripture (like the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges and Job) were kept alive orally and finally written down much later in history than when they occurred. As we have studied these writings, this contradicts what we find recorded in the writings themselves; it defies explanation to think that men, who had the ability to write things down, chose, instead, to repeat them orally for century after century and then suddenly decide, Hey, why not write all this stuff down? And then his buddy cried, Brilliant idea! It sounds stupid, I realize, but some scholars hold to this idea. So, even though the faulty premise is shown to be faulty; and even though the idea is preposterous, still men hold to the idea that Scripture was written long after the fact (and, in radically different writing styles, to boot; the writing style and vocabulary of Moses and Joshua are not at all similar; the writing style and vocabulary of Judges appears to change with almost every chapter). Oh, and I forgot: this goofy concept of the oral tradition is considered to be the more scholarly view (along with the idea that several people and groups of people wrote the books of Moses after the fact). This is taught in many seminaries and carefully refuted by Josh McDowell in More Evidence that Demands a Verdict Part Two.

On the other hand, there was some truth to the oral tradition of the Jews. Even though it has been distorted into something other than what it was, there was a real oral tradition, and it is taught in Scripture. Because the average person did not have access to Scripture, what men observed in the deliverance of Israel at the Sea of Reeds, they were told to tell this to their sons and to their daughters (Deut. 4:5–14 6:20–25). Often, when God performed some great, seemingly supernatural act, a memorial would be set up, so that fathers would tell their sons the meaning of that memorial, so that the sons would tell their own sons (Joshua 4:1–7). Parts of the Law were to be carried on the person of a Jew, or written on the door frames, so that they would recall and then teach what is true (Deut. 6:6–9 11:18–20). Then, as now, there is nothing more important than knowing the Word of God and then teaching His Word. Recall what Moses said near the end of his life: “Take to your heart all the words with which I have warned you today, which you will command your sons to observe carefully—even all the words of this law. For it is not an idle word for you; indeed, it is your life. And by this word you will prolong your days in the land into which you are about to possess after crossing the Jordan.” (Deut. 32:44–47). In other words, the ancient Israelites taught their children about the character of God for the exact same reason that we study God’s Word today and teach it to our own children. Similarly, many fathers failed then to teach it to their children, as occurs today as well.

One of the false assumptions is that, this historical event was kept alive by the song which follows, and that someone, much later in history, wrote out Judges 4. Keil and Delitzsch deal with this assertion: This fresh oppression of the Israelites, and the glorious victory which they obtained over Sisera, Jabin's general, through the judge Deborah and the heroic warrior Barak, are so fully described in Deborah's triumphal song in Judg 5, that this song may be regarded as a poetical commentary upon that event. It by no means follows from this fact, however, that the historical account in Judg 4 was first of all founded upon the ode, and was merely intended to furnish an explanation of the song itself. Any such assumption is overthrown by the fact that the prose account in Judg 4, contains, as even Bertheau acknowledges, some historical details which we look for in vain in the song, and which are of great assistance in the interpretation of it.

In our lives, we have a lot fewer reasons for failure. We all have the Holy Spirit and possibly 95% of us (in the United States) have Bibles. We don’t have a lot of reason for failure. Furthermore, if we desire to know God’s Word, God will see to us that we are taught. Satan is certainly hard at work in the United States, however, we have overcome the evil one (Rom. 8:15 Col. 1:13a 1John 2:13)—if not in practice, then in position (Matt. 4:1–11 Rom. 8:16 Gal. 3:26 Col. 1:13–14) and by choice (1John 1:9 2:5).

With Deborah and Barak, we will see that there are two very different ways of looking at Barak. The common way people see Barak is as someone who has been told by God what to do, and then Deborah has to call him into her office and repeat what God has for him to do. That is the view which I held to for many years. However, the more that I examine this book, the more I have allowed for the possibility that the first time that Barak received direction from God was in this book at the mouth of Deborah. In any case, Barak did not show good judgment in asking Deborah to accompany him, and, for that reason, was told that his glory would be usurped by a woman (not by Deborah, but by Jael). Barak needs a woman to accompany him into battle; therefore, there is no reason that Barak should be remembered as the man who killed Sisera. This is God’s sense of irony.

This chapter, written in prose, will be paralleled by Judges 5, which is written in poetry. This is possibly a his and hers approach to this material. In this chapter, it is difficult determining who the writer was. We have a very detailed description of Jael and Sisera, the latter of whom dies at the end of this narrative, making him an unlikely candidate to record the narrative. The account is so vivid, however, that it had to be given at least via direct interview with Jael, if not recorded by Jael herself.

We have summary verses at the beginning, very similar to a summary written throughout, indicating that whoever added to the book was aware of a format that needed to be followed; or, more likely, that all of this material was pulled together later by an editor who would put in the filler, but wrote the information which was recorded directly from the records that he had at his disposal. What I am saying is that he did very little, if any, editing, as the style of writing from chapter to chapter is so different. My guess would be that Deborah wrote this and the next chapter (or Barak wrote Judges 4), but neither of them wrote the first few verses. However, even that is a difficult call, because there does not appear to be a separation between the introduction and the historical occurrences. That is, there is no clear break in the writing style or the topic where you could say, for instance, Samuel wrote the first three verses and then copied down the history which Barak or Deborah wrote after the introduction. Our third option is that the editor is very good and wrote in such a way as to preserve a seamless effect between what he inserted and what Deborah actually wrote. Believe it or not, that can be a tougher sell, as we will have an example in the middle of Judges 20 where an additional account of the events is given, and there is no smooth transition from one account to the other. However, if Samuel pieced this together (which is the popular view), Judges 20 could have already existed as a literary unit which he was loath to change (we find verses which were added in the surrounding chapters, but not in chapter 20).

Let me explain what I mean by seamless. We begin by v. 1, which reads: But the sons of Israel continued to do evil in the eyes of Y^ehowah and Ehud died. This appears to be tied directly to the previous chapter. That is, the person who wrote it, was well-aware of the previous chapter. The next verse where the situation of the Israelites is described, where they are under the control of Jabin and Sisera, appears to be the next natural thing to say, expounding upon the general statement of v. 1. Then we have the cry of the sons of Israel to God in v. 3, a result of the oppression of v. 2. This is a formula which we have seen Judges 3:7–8 and 3:15, and which is repeated throughout most of the book of the Judges. Such a formula would suggest a final editor who would insert these transitional verses. However, the formula is not precise—that is, it does not appear as though the author of the book of Judges actually had a set thing that he said in between the various Judges. What this suggests to me is that this book was written like the book of Genesis. Someone would write a chapter or three, put it down, and then someone from several decades later would write in another few chapters, maintaining the general outline of the book by a catch-phrase (in the book of Genesis, it was, and these were the generations of...). Here, the catch-phrase is, And Israel did evil in the sight of Jehovah, and Jehovah delivered them into the hands of Bob, the electriclite, and they served Bob for twenty years. Then the children of Israel cried to Jehovah and he heard their cry. So, Jehovah raised up Rex, the judge. The more that I think about this, the more it appears as though this was written by several hands over the course of several hundred years and not necessarily by an editor who pulled the information together from various sources. What this does have, though, are implications that the book of Judges is a linearly-written book. That is, even though the episodes individually are not necessarily chronological (Judges 4 and 5 are concurrent), the overall book itself is chronological, which may cause us some dating problems. However, the styles are so different from chapter to chapter, it only seems reasonable that this is the product of several authors.

The portion of the chapter where Barak and Deborah speak to one another was likely written by either one of them. The battle seems to have been written from a high vantage point rather than from being in the midst of the action. Barak’s point of view in pursuing Sisera is almost non-existent. For this reason, the bulk of this chapter was probably written by Deborah, gathered in part from a report from Barak and Jael.

Israel Is Oppressed by Jabin, a King of the Canaanites

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so added sons of Israel to do the evil in eyes of Y^ehowah and Ehud had died.

Septuagint                              And the children of Israel continued to do evil against the Lord; and Aod was dead.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       After the death of Ehud, the Israelites again started disobeying the LORD.

The Message                         The People of Israel kept right on doing evil in GOD's sight. With Ehud dead,...

REB                                       After Ehud’s death the Israelites once again did what was wrong in the eyes of the Lord,...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         After Ehud died, the people of Israel again did what the LORD considered evil.

HCSB                                     The Israelites again did what was evil in the sight of the LORD after Ehud had died.

JPS (Tanakh)                         The Israelites again did what was offensive to the Lord—Ehud now being dead.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

WEB                                      The children of Israel again did that which was evil in the sight of Yahweh, when Ehud was dead.

Young's Literal Translation     And the sons of Israel add to do the evil thing in the eyes of Jehovah when Ehud is dead,.

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: But the sons of Israel continued to do evil in the eyes of Y^ehowah;... As we discussed in the introduction, Israel is on this low roller coaster ride and at this point, they are at the bottom again. Their doing evil is repeated in Judges 2:11, 19 3:7, 12 6:1 10:6. As long as the evil influence of the Canaanite was in the land, Israel would continue to do evil. The parallel is simple: as long as we possess an old sin nature and as long as Satan and his minions are in the land, we will continue to do evil. Rot occurs first on the inside then it is manifested on the out. Even though the enemies throughout most of the book of Judges actually attack Israel from the outside or from border areas, this always follows Israel’s internal degeneracy. In our country, there is nothing wrong with exhibiting a little paranoia when it comes to the Chinese Communists or to portions of the Russian states or to the some of various Arabic countries. But we will first fall to degeneracy within, then we will be attacked from without. We are in a period of time when we have a large number of believers, but none of them have a clue as to how to lead their lives—we’re not interested in God’s Word nor in the filling of the Spirit (which is not some powerful, ecstatic reaction).

Translation: ...also [lit., and] Ehud died. The last words of this verse (which I am mentioning, because most of your Bibles read when or after the death of Ehud), are the wâw conjunction, the proper noun Ehud, and the Qal perfect of the verb to die. The perfect tense is the completed tense. What we have is that the Hiphil imperfect of the verb to add or to continue represents the action of the people which is ongoing, and Ehud’s death just occurs. The two events occur perhaps around the same time but the evil committed by the sons of Israel begins before and certainly continues past the death of Ehud. It would be nice and neat to replace the wâw consecutive with when or after (The sons of Israel continued to do evil after Ehud died); however, the Hebrew really does not allow for that understanding. Furthermore, we even have Scriptural backing for this understanding that Israel goes awry even while their deliverer is still alive: Then Jehovah raised up governors who delivered them from the hands of those who plundered them; and yet, they did not listen to their judges, for they played the harlot after other gods and bowed themselves down to them. They turned aside quickly from the way in which their fathers had walked in obeying the commandments of Jehovah (Judges 2:16–17).

We may reasonably assume that there was some spiritual revival when Ehud first delivered Israel, and that there was great enthusiasm when Moab was defeated and their king assassinated. However, after awhile, after a few decades of peace, a new generation of Israelites are born, and with much less appreciation of what God has done for them.

The United States, at this point in time, provides a remarkable parallel. In World War !!, we defeated one of the greatest evil forces of the world; and thousands upon thousands of men gave their lives in this endeavor. For about two decades, American was appreciative of the peace we had won on the battlefield. Strong families, a worshiping of God, and great appreciation for what we had been given was the norm. When my generation came into its own, our appreciation waned, our spiritual life moved into idolatry, and we became all about pleasure, rather than self-discipline and self-sacrifice. I write this about 60 years after World War II, and we have become so different from that generation and so far removed. We are unappreciative, unpatriotic, not willing to sacrifice anything, even for our own sons and daughters.

As I see it, Ehud was a governor for some years after delivering Israel; but he became old; the victory over Moab became less and less memorable; that great oppression something remembered only by those who were getting old. One generation sprung up, then another after that; as Ehud became older and older. Those of his generation recalled the oppression of Eglon and may have even participated in the victory over the Moabite army; however, after 40 or 50 years, there were a significant number of people who did not know about any of this from personal experience. The next few generations had less and less appreciation for Jehovah God, for His mandates, for the land which He gave them. Therefore, they did evil in the eyes of Jehovah. Although we are not given any specifics, I think we may reasonable assume that they married women of other nations, or women of indigenous populations, and compromised their faith, worshiping other gods, falling into the idolatry which Israel had been warned against.

In the Church Age, we live in an era of historical trends, rather than an era of prophecy; an era when God works through His church, rather than through one country; yet, God’s ban on idolatry continues in all ages. There is one God and one mediator between man and God—the man Christ Jesus (1Tim. 2:5). “I am the way, the truth and the life; no man comes to the Father but by Me.” (John 14:6). We do not worship the same God that the Buddhist worship; we are not to pay homage to Mohammed; John Smith is just another man, not a prophet of God. It’s easy to see—the further we move away from our God, the worse things become.

Application: You cannot legislate Christianity; you cannot legislate faith in God. The repeated attacks against our spiritual heritage are symptomatic of our weakened spiritual state. No matter what we do legislatively or in the courts, it will make little or no difference as fewer and fewer believers understand God’s Word. As the number of believers decrease and as the number of believers who hold firm to true doctrine, our country will continue on a downhill slide, which will be reflected in our greed, our attitudes, our weak and non-existent family structure, our unwillingness to work, our unwillingness to put in any sort of effort, and in our unwillingness to put off or forgo pleasure. The World War II generation had no problem with the God of our fathers; they had no problem with singing Christmas hymns in school; if they came across the name of God in some public institution, it did not concern them. Several generations later, it is a different story. But, this did not come about because of our court system, corrupt as it is; or because of our legislature, or because of this or that president; all of this came about because of the weak spiritual condition of the believers in this land.

Application: Just as Israel was oppressed by the Moabites; just as Israel felt the shame of a foreign military on their land, we will face the same things. If you go to Lev. 26, you can see the stages of divine discipline that we potentially face. We do not solve this by getting the right person into office; by electing the right president; by appointing the best judges to our courts; this comes about by a spiritual revival—by faith in Jesus Christ first, and then true spiritual growth.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so sold them Y^ehowah into a hand of Jabin, a king of Canaan who reigned in Hazor; and a commander of his army, Sisera, and he was dwelling in Harosheth-hagoiim.

Septuagint                              And the Lord sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Chanaan, who ruled in Asor; and the chief of his power was Sisara, and he dwelt in Arisoth of the Gentiles.

Significant differences:           The only real difference between the Greek and Hebrew is the Greek has the word power instead of army, as does the Latin and Syriac. Hagoiim is a transliteration; the translation is the Gentiles.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       So the LORD let the Canaanite King Jabin of Hazor conquer Israel. Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army, lived in Harosheth-Ha-Goiim.

The Message                         ...GOD sold them off to Jabin king of Canaan who ruled from Hazor. Sisera, who lived in Harosheth Haggoyim, was the commander of his army.

NLT                                        So the Lord handed them over to King Jabin of Razor, a Canaanite king. The commander of his army was Sisera, who lived in Harosheth-haggoyim.

TEV                                        So the Lord let them be conquered by Jabin a Canaanite king who ruled in the city of Hazor. The commander of his army was Sisera, who lived at Harosheth-of-the-Gentiles.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So the LORD used King Jabin of Canaan, who ruled at Hazor, to defeat them. The commander of King Jabin's army was Sisera, who lived at Harosheth Haggoyim.

HCSB                                     So the LORD sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. The commander of his forces was Sisera who lived in Harosheth of the Nations.

JPS (Tanakh)                         And the Lord surrendered them to King Jabin of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. His army commander was Sisera, whose base was Harosheth-goiim.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       And the LORD sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. The commander of his army was Sisera, who lived in Harosheth-hagoyim.

LTHB                                     And Jehovah sold them into the hand of Jabin the king of Canaan, who ruled in Hazor. And his army commander was Sisera; and he lived in Harosheth of the nations.

Young’s Updated LT             And Jehovah sell them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who has reigned in Hazor, and the head of his host is Sisera, and he is dwelling in Haroshes of the Goyim.

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: Therefore, Y^ehowah sold them into the hand of Jabin, the king of Canaan who reigned in Hazor. God selling Israel into the hand of their enemy is repeated throughout this book and the next and appears to apply primarily to northern Israel (Judges 2:14 3:8 6:1 I Sam. 12:9).

There is a Jabin of Hazor mentioned way back in Joshua 11:1, 10, which would indicate that Jabin is either a generic title for the king of the Canaanites (like pharaoh), or of a dynasty of the Canaanites. We studied Hazor in great detail in Joshua 11:1, noting that it had been destroyed and rebuilt 21 times over the centuries. What seems most likely is that the Israelites totally destroyed the city back in Joshua 11 and did not go back in to re-build and re-populate it (quite like Jericho). The Canaanites of northern Israel and/or north of Israel apparently moved back in, re-established Hazor, and either restored the throne of the family of Jabin, or simply kept the title, which is even more likely. Now, according to the archeological evidence, Hazor was burned to the ground circa 1400 b.c., circa 1300 b.c. and circa 1230 b.c. Now, we cannot simply add up the years of good times and bad times in this book, add them linearly, and determine the date. Joshua’s attack on the land was probably the 1400 b.c. date. This attack was very likely the 1230 b.c., which fits in quite well with the time line which I set up in the introduction. It is possible that the second burning of the city is the work of Jabin, the king of Canaan. Also, bear in mind that you cannot just assume archeology is right on the money when it comes to the time frame. However, what archeological studies have determined is that Hazor was burned to the ground in 1400 b.c., which would square with Joshua 11:11–13. Then, the upper city of roughly 25 acres was occupied, while the lower city, of about 150 acres, remained unoccupied. The location of Hazor is at a strategic position overlooking a major trade route would make it a likely area for the Canaanites to repopulate themselves a century later. It is also reasonable for the chariot force to be maintained at a separate location, Harosheth hagoiim, in the Plain of Sharon.

Translation: The commander of his army [was] Sisera,...

Translation: ...and he was dwelling in Harosheth-hagoiim [or, Harosheth of the Gentiles]. This is the first mention of the city of Harosheth-hagoiim. This might be properly Harosheth of the Goiim (of the Gentiles).

Barnes explains the meaning of Harosheth: The name Harosheth signifies workmanship, cutting, and carving, whether in stone or wood (Ex. xxxi. 5), and hence might be applied to the place where such works are carried on. It has been conjectured that this being a great timber district, rich in cedars and fir-trees, and near Great Zidon (Josh. xi. 8), Jabin kept a large number of oppressed Israelites at work in hewing wood, and preparing it at Harosheth for transport to Zidon; and that these woodcutters, armed with axes and hatchets, formed the soldiers of Barak’s army.

Whereas the beginning of this thought is likely, the latter is pure conjecture, and would very likely have been included in Scripture if true, if only for its irony. One author of the ZPEB places it in a narrow valley Where the Kishon flows out of the Esdraelon Plain into the Plain of Acre and the Mediterranean Sea. The Macmillan Bible Atlas places this further inland 2–3 miles south of Megiddo. If you are not looking at a map, you cannot appreciate that these are very different places. The suggestion of ZPEB places it about 30+ miles west of the Sea of Chinnereth and The Macmillan Bible Atlas places it a little less than 30 miles southwest of the Sea of Chinnereth. In other words, two of my sources place this city almost 30 miles apart. In either case, this places Hazor in Naphtali and Harosheth-hagoiim is at least 40 miles away, either in Asher, Zebulun or Manasseh. This means that the Canaanites had a serious foothold in the northern one-third of Israel. My thinking is that these two men were split up for two reasons—one, to keep out of each other’s way (so that there would not be a power grab between the two of them); and secondly, to control a major portion of Israel. Rather than having control over one city and its perimeter, they have a diagonal foothold over much of the land running from Lake Huleh to where the Kishon River flows into the Mediterranean Sea. You might recall how Dan has or will conquer an area on the very northern perimeter of Israel? Quite obviously this had to occur either before or after this incident.

Sisera is quite possibly not a Canaanite himself (according to the NIV Study Bible, his name is not Canaanitish). He and Jabin will attempt to take back the land which once belonged to the Canaanites. He will actually be mentioned twice in Scripture after this, in retrospect. 1Sam. 12:9 has Samuel addressing Israel, and he says: “But they forgot Jehovah their god, so He sold them into the hand of Sisera, captain of the army of Hazor, and into the hand of the Philistines, and into the hand of the king of Moab, and they fought against them.” In that once verse, Samuel summed up much of the book of the Judges. The psalmist Asaph also mentions Sisera: Deal with them as with Midian; as with Sisera–Jabin, at the torrent of Kishon. In fact, we will likely study this psalm after Judges 5.

The difference between this chapter and most of the others in this book is that in the other chapters, Israel’s attackers come from without—Aram, Naharaim, Moab, Midian and Ammon, whose primary interest was to take some of Israel’s wealth. In Judges 4–5, the Canaanites who live within will up to reclaim portions of the land of Canaan.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so cried sons of Israel unto Y^ehowah because nine hundreds chariots of iron to him and he, [even] he, oppressed sons of Israel by force [or, with violence] twenty years.

Septuagint                              And the children of Israel cried to the Lord, because nine hundred chariots of iron were to him; and he mightily oppressed Israel twenty years.

Significant differences:           The Greek inserts the verb to be, which is implied in the Hebrew. In both languages, the sense is, he had 900 chariots of iron.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Jabin's army had nine hundred iron chariots, and for twenty years he made life miserable for the Israelites, until finally they begged the LORD for help.

NLT                                        Sisera, who had nine hundred chariots, ruthlessly oppressed the Israelites for twenty years. Then the Israelites cried out to the Lord for help.

TEV                                        Jabin had nine hundred iron chariots, and he ruled the people of Israel with cruelty and violence for twenty years. Then the people of Israel cried out to the Lord for help.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

HCSB                                     Then the Israelites cried out to the LORD, because Jabin had 900 iron chariots, and he harshly oppressed them 20 years.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Then the people of Israel cried out to the LORD for help, for he had 900 chariots of iron and he oppressed the people of Israel cruelly for twenty years.

Young’s Updated LT             And the sons of Israel cry unto Jehovah, for he has nine hundred chariots of iron, and he has oppressed the sons of Israel mightily twenty years.

What is the gist of this verse? .

One of the things that you have no doubt noticed is that we are no longer spending a lot of time in the Hebrew in this chapter. The reason for that is that, although this Hebrew is not elementary (the vocabulary is varied, but not difficult), the sentence structure and the syntax is fairly simple.

Translation: Then the sons of Israel cried unto Y^ehowah...

Translation: ...because he had 900 iron chariots [lit., (there were) 900 chariots of iron to him]... Despite all of the battle victories of the Israelites in the book of Joshua, they had collected precious few weapons and no armored vehicles (chariots). Sisera was able to oppress them because of his elite corps of chariot warriors. However, this should not have been enough to oppress the Israelites. Recall what Moses had told them: “Why you go out to battle against your enemies and you see horses and chariots—people more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them, for Jehovah your God, Who brought you up from the land of Egypt, is with you.” (Deut. 20:1). That the Canaanites from that general area did have chariots is confirmed by the words of Joshua. When Ephraim and West Manasseh complained that their territory was too small, Joshua told them, “You are a numerous people and you have great power; you will not have one lot, but the hill country will also be yours. For, though it is a forest, you will clear it, and to its farthest borders, it will be yours; for you will drive out the Canaanites, even though they have chariots of iron and though they are strong.” (Joshua 17:17b–18) .

The NIV suggests that the 900 chariots are the result of a coalition, and not the chariots of only one city. Their reasoning is that in the 15^th century b.c., Pharaoh Thutmose III boasted of having captured 924 chariots at the battle of Megiddo. The Bible here is not claiming that there were 900 chariots from one city.

We will see in v. 10 that Barak will assemble Zebulun and Naphtali against Sisera. Given the location of the two cities of Jabin and Sisera, it is possible that Asher, West Manasseh and Issachar were also oppressed by Jabin and Sisera.

Translation: ...and he, [even] he, oppressed the sons of Israel with violence [for] twenty years. In describing the way Sisera oppressed the Israelites, we have the bêyth preposition and the feminine singular noun châz^eqâh (ה ָק  ׃ז ָח) [pronounced khawz^e-KAW], which means strength, might, violence. With bêyth, this means by force or with violence. This is the same word used of Egypt over Israel back in Ex. 3:8. Strong’s #2394 BDB #306.

Now might be a good time to examine (again) Historical Parallels: The “Israel Stele.”

Deborah Calls for Barak; They Go out to War Against the Canaanites

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And Deborah, a woman, a prophetess, a woman of Lappidoth—she was judging Israel in the time the that.

Septuagint                              And Debbora, a woman, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth,––she judged Israel at that time.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Deborah the wife of Lappidoth was a prophet and a leader of Israel during those days.

NLT                                        Deborah, the wife of Lappidoth, was a prophet who had become a judge in Israel.

REB                                       At that time Deborah wife of Lappidoth, a prophetess, was judge in Israel.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Deborah, wife of Lappidoth, was a prophet. She was the judge in Israel at that time.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

WEB                                      Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

Young's Updated LT              And Deborah, a woman inspired, wife of Lapidoth; she is judging Israel at that time.

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: Deborah—a woman, a prophetess, [and] the wife of Lappidoth—... Only two women in the Bible have this name: Rachel’s nurse (Gen. 35:8) and Deborah of the judges (Judges 4–5). According to Zodhiates, Deborah means “bee,” perhaps emphasizing the [active and] organized life of that insect.

Deborah is first called the feminine singular of îshshâh (ה ָֹ ̣א) [pronounced eesh-SHAWH], which means woman, wife. It is the name that Adam gave to the woman.

Deborah is also called a prophetess. In fact, this is only the second time so far that we have seen this word in the Bible (the first time, it was applied to Miriam, Moses’ sister). In fact, it might be instructive to examine each and every time that this word is found in Scripture.

.

Then she’s called îshshâh again, but this time as a feminine construct attached to her husband, Lappidoth, who is never mentioned again. There is this unbearable emphasis upon asceticism in the Catholic church where those who serve God preferably do so in celibacy. Paul suggested this, and rationalized his suggestion. He made it clear that this was not for everyone who served God. He also recommended that it is better to marry than to burn with sexual desire. Certainly, the Catholic church can point to Paul and to Paul’s argument and say that it is better for a person to remain single and to serve God, as he is less likely to be derailed and he (or she) will have more time to devote to God’s work. And all this is well and good—unless that person has an insatiable desire for the opposite sex, but is so confused by asceticism that he sublimates it or allows it to finally come out in ways which are embarrassing to the church. It is better to marry than to burn with sexual desire (I Cor. 7:9b; see also I Cor. 7:2). The idea that large chunks of the church which serves the community should be unmarried is ridiculous and is nowhere taught in God’s Word.

Translation: ...was judging [or, governing] Israel at that time. You will notice that it seems as though we jump prematurely into Deborah and what she does, as we have gotten so used to thoughts being held together by and’s. An and is but a single line with a mark under it, not too unlike an underlined i. It is easy to see how that could be dropped out of the text. However, two early printed editions of the Massoretic text have an and prior to she. What Deborah is said to be doing is the Qal active participle of shâphaţ (ט ַפ ָש) [pronounced shaw-FAHT], which means to judge, to govern. The point is that the very same word used of Othniel and Shamgar is also used of Deborah. Strong’s #8199 BDB #1047. What we need to examine now is the Doctrine of the Responsibilities and the Requirements of the Judges of Israel.

Barnes suggests that all of the Judges had some sort of direct communication with God. I should quality that. What we hear over and over again in books like Leviticus and Numbers is and God said. This is not what we hear in this book. The judges were certainly learned in Scripture and that, with the ministry of God the Holy Spirit, were able to render reasonable legal decisions, as well as lead Israel against the many oppressors of Israel. There is enough information in the canon of Scripture up until this time to understand that God has given Israel a particular plot of land and that He will fight on Israel’s behalf. There is also enough information given in Scripture to indicate that Israel would find herself in this continual cycle of oppression and relief—that is, God has promised Israel either cursing or blessing, depending upon Israel’s spiritual choices. We need to recognize those very choices stand before us. God gives us rich blessing and protection (much more than we realize) when our life lines up with His Word. When, as a saved believer, we turn away from Him and pursue something else—money, sex, approbation—this naturally puts us under discipline (just as touching a hot stove burns one’s hand). It is simply the natural progression of things that a believer cannot get away from.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And she was dwelling under a palm of Deborah between the Ramah and Beth-el in a hill country of Ephraim; and so went up unto her sons of Israel for the judgment.

Septuagint                              And she sat under the palm–tree of Debbora between Rama and Baethel in mount Ephraim; and the children of Israel went up to her for judgement.

Significant differences:           None. The words which may appear to be different (dwelling/sat) are both legitimate translations of the Hebrew verb.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       She would sit under Deborah's Palm Tree between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, where Israelites would come and ask her to settle their legal cases.

The Message                         She held court under Deborah's Palm between Ramah and Bethel in the hills of Ephraim. The People of Israel went to her in matters of justice.

NJB                                        She used to sit under Deborah’s Palm between Ramah and Bethel in the highlands of Ephraim, and the Israelites would come to her for justice.

NLT                                        She would hold court under the Palm of Deborah, which stood between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to settle their disputes.

REB                                       It was her custom to sit under the Palm Tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill-country of Ephraim, and Israelites seeking a judgement went up to her.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         She used to sit under the Palm Tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the mountains of Ephraim. The people of Israel would come to her for legal decisions.

HCSB                                     It was her custom to sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites went up to her for judgment.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

LTHB                                     And she lived under the palm tree of Deborah, between Ramah and Bethel, in the hills of Ephraim. And the sons of Israel went up to her for judgment.

Young’s Updated LT             And she is dwelling under the palm-tree of Deborah, between Ramah and Beth-El, in the hill-country of Ephraim, and the sons of Israel go up unto her for judgment.

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: And she held court [lit., was sitting] under a palm of Deborah between Ramah and Beth-el, in the hill country of Ephraim,... The first verb is the Qal active participle of yâsha^bv (ב ַש ָי) [pronounced yaw-SHAH^BV] and it means to remain, sit, dwell. Strong's #3427 BDB #442. Deborah is located immediately due south of where Jabin and Sisera oppressed Israel. She herself appears unaffected by this oppression. What is interesting is the phrasing that she lived or dwelt beneath a palm (actually, under a palm of Deborah). We find similar phrasing in I Sam. 14:2a: And Saul was staying in the outskirts of Gibeah under the pomegranate tree which is in Migron; and I Sam. 22:6b: Now Saul was sitting in Gibeah, under the tamarisk tree. It reminds me of some very pleasant times that I spent at my first college outside the library, hanging with friends under the liquidambar tree.

This verse deals with Deborah’s customary action as a judge. We have the conjunction bayin (ן  ̣י ַ) [pronounced bah-YIN] or bêyn (ןי ֵ) [pronounced bane]. When found twice, as here, the preposition corresponds most closely with our word between. Strong's #996 BDB #107. Now, although she set up shop in Ephraim, this does not mean only Ephraimites came to her. A judge apparently served a fairly wide area.

Now, like everyone else, the first time I read this, I looked at the cities as if they weren’t even there. Benjamin is directly south of Ephraim. At the most northern border of Benjamin, between Benjamin and Ephraim, is the city of Beth-el. Ramah also properly belongs to Benjamin (Joshua 18:25, 28). This would place Deborah on the border between Ephraim and Benjamin, judging in an area belonging to Ephraim. This does not appear to be a city; it appears as though she was most comfortable sitting under a palm in the hill country of Ephraim.

Translation: ...and sons of Israel came to her for judgment. Now here is a place where we need to separate responsibility from general practice. A judge had civil authority and people brought to the judges matters of dispute as well as possibly criminal cases. Their involvement with the military appears to be more of an outgrowth of their authority as judges, as opposed to an assigned function of judging. Deborah will only participate in the military campaign of Barak as a favor to him (vv. 8–9) and not because this was a part of her job description.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so she sent and so she summoned Barak ben Abinoam from Kedesh-Naphtali and so she said unto him, “Has not commanded Y^ehowah, God of Israel, ‘Go and you will draw out in Mount of Tabor and you will take with you ten thousand men from sons of Naphtali and from sons of Zebulun.

Septuagint                              And Debbora sent and called Barac the son of Abineem out of Cades Nephthali, and she said to him, “Has not the Lord God of Israel commanded you? And you will depart to mount Thabor, and you will take with you ten thousand men of the sons of Nephthali and of the sons of Zabulon.

Significant differences:           The Greek begins with Deborah’s name; the Hebrew (and the Latin and the Syriac) simply use the feminine singular of the verb to send. Commanded in the Greek has a 3^rd person masculine singular suffix, as does the Syriac and the Latin, apparently (or, so their English translations). Finally, the verb to go in the Hebrew is in the imperative; however, in the Greek, it is a future middle indicative, which could be understood as an imperative, but, strictly speaking, it is not. The Latin and Syriac both use the imperative here.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One day, Barak the son of Abinoam was in Kedesh in Naphtali, and Deborah sent word for him to come and talk with her. When he arrived, she said: I have a message for you from the LORD God of Israel! You are to get together an army of ten thousand men from the Naphtali and Zebulun tribes and lead them to Mount Tabor.

The Message                         She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, "It has become clear that GOD, the God of Israel, commands you: Go to Mount Tabor and prepare for battle. Take ten companies of soldiers from Naphtali and Zebulun.

NLT                                        One day, she sent for Barak son of Abinoam, who lived in Kedesh in the land of Naphtali. She said to him, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, commands you: Assemble ten thousand warriors from the tribes of Naphtali and Zebulun at Mount Tabor.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Deborah summoned Barak, son of Abinoam, from Kedesh in Naphtali. She told him, "The LORD God of Israel has given you this order: 'Gather troops on Mount Tabor. Take 10,000 men from Naphtali and Zebulun with you.

HCSB                                     She summoned Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, "Hasn't the LORD, the God of Israel, commanded you: 'Go, deploy the troops on Mount Tabor, and take with you 10,000 men from the Naphtalites and Zebulunites?.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       She sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali and said to him, "Has not the LORD, the God of Israel, commanded you, 'Go, gather your men at Mount Tabor, taking 10,000 from the people of Naphtali and the people of Zebulun.

NRSV                                     She sent and summoned Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali, and said to him, “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you, ‘Go, take position at Mount Tabor, bringing ten thousand from the tribe of Naphtali and the tribe of Zebulun.

Young’s Updated LT             And she sends and calles for Barak son of Abinoam, out of Kedesh-Naphtali, and says unto him, “Has not Jehovah, God of Israel, commanded? Go, and you have drawn towards mount Tabor, and have taken with you ten thousand men, out of the sons of Naphtali, and out of the sons of Zebulun.

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: She summoned Barak, son of Abinoam from Kedesh-Naphtali,... Barak is properly bârâq (ק ָר ָ) [pronounced baw-RAWK], which is a proper name not related to blessing (bêrâkâh—Strong’s #1293 BDB #139), but to lightning or lightning flash (bârâq—Strong’s #1300 BDB #140). Strong’s #1301 BDB #140. Barak lived north, northeast of Deborah, near the Sea of Galilee (it was not called that then, although the district was ), in the territory of Naphtali.

Translation: ,,,and said to him, “Has not Y^ehowah, God of Israel, commanded you,...

Barnes: Deborah refers to Jehovah as God of Israel to remind the Israelites, in the day of their distress, that He was ready to perform the mercy promised to their fathers, and to remember His holy Covenant. This title, too, would recall to their memories in an instant all His past acts in Egypt, at the Red Sea, in the wilderness, and in the conquest of Canaan.

Translation:...‘Go and proceed to Mount Tabor... What God has apparently ordered him to do is first the Qal imperative of hâlak^e (׃ך ַל ָה) [pronounced haw-LAHK^e], which means go, come, depart, walk. Strong’s #1980 (and #3212) BDB #229. The second thing he was suppose to do was the Qal perfect of mâshak^e ( ַש ָמ) [pronounced maw-SHAHK^e], which means, in general, to draw out, to drag, to continue with something, to proceed to, to march to. This is a difficult verb and is translated variously gather (Owen); thou hast drawn towards (Young); draw towards (Rotherham); march to (NASB); lead the way to (NIV). Strong’s #4900 BDB #604.

What he was drawing toward himself in Mount Tabor was these 10,000 men. Mount Tabor is roughly 1300 feet high, just northeast of the battle site.

Barnes: The purpose of this was to effect a junction of the northern tribes with the tribes of Ephraim and Benjamin, who were separated from them by the plain of Esdraelon, where Sisera’s chariots would naturally congregate and be more effective. Mount Tabor rises from the plain of Esdraelon, about 1,865 ft. above the sea, and its broad top of nearly a mile in circumference afforded a strong position, out of reach of Sisera’s chariots.

We have gone into much greater detail concerning Mount Tabor back in Joshua 19:22, where ZPEB also agrees with the higher figure, making me think that 1300 ft. found in the NIV Study Bible was a typo and should have been 1800 ft. This could also have referred to the actual height of the mountain with respect to the surrounding area, as opposed to its height above sea level.

Edersheim seems to agree with the latter understanding. About six or eight miles east of Nazareth rises abruptly a beautifully-shaped conical mountain, about 1000 feet high. This is Mount Table (“the height”), its sloping sides covered with trees, and affording from its summit one of the most extensive and beautiful prospects in Palestine.

In either case, we are not talking some great mountain, as this is roughly a third of a mile high (for comparison, keep in mind that Denver is the mile-high city. Now, the reason for Israel meeting here was simple; the chariots of Sisera would be useless against an army fighting on a wooded mountain. Their advantage would be found only in an open plain area. This would allow for the gathering of such a large group of people in opposition to Sisera.

Edersheim continues: Tidings soon reached the head-quarters of Sisera. His chariot could only of course fight to advantage in the valleys, and he naturally marched north-west to the plain of Jezreel or Esdraelon. This has ever been, and will prove in the final contest (Rev. 16:16), the great battle-field of Israel. It was now the first of many times that its fertile soil was to be watered with the blood of men.

Translation: ...and you will take with you 10,000 men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun. The next verb is the Qal perfect of lâqach (ח ַק ָל) [pronounced law-KAHKH] which means to take, to take from, to take in marriage, to seize. Strong’s #3947 BDB #542. This is followed by the preposition with. So, what God commanded him to do was to, “Go and you will drawn out in Mount of Tabor and you will take with you...” Apparently God had made a demand of Barak—a fairly simple and clear one that even Deborah was aware of—and that Barak had not fulfilled this command. At least, this is how this appeared to me the first few times that I read it. The original Qal imperative carries with it the same force of the other verbs; and the other verbs in the Qal perfect means that this should have been completed action by now.

Zodhiates presents a somewhat different picture here. He presents Barak as waiting for guidance from Deborah, which would be the prudent thing to do. He bases part of the upon the fact that Barak is mentioned in the mini-hall of faith in Heb. 11:32. Originally, I didn’t see it that way myself. In v. 6, it appears as though both Deborah and Barak already knew what God’s will was for Barak and that Barak was stalling. His request that Deborah accompany him (v. 8) could be interpreted as one who wanted to keep God’s will and guidance close by, but I think this was done more out of fear. Lightning won’t strike him while he is standing next to Deborah. Deborah’s prophecy in v. 9 will sound as though Barak will be robbed of some of the honor and glory of capturing and killing Sisera.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And I will draw out to you unto a river Kishon Sisera, a general of an army of Jabin and his chariots and his troops and I will give him into your hand.’ ”

eptuagint                                And I will bring to you, to the torrent of Kison, Sisara the captain of the host of Jabin, and his chariots, and his multitude, and I will deliver them into yours hands.

Significant differences:           In the Latin and Hebrew, this verse ends with the word hand; it is hands in the Septuagint, Peshitta and in two early printed editions.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The LORD will trick Sisera into coming out to fight you at the Kishon River. Sisera will be leading King Jabin's army as usual, and they will have their chariots, but the LORD has promised to help you defeat them.

The Message                         I'll take care of getting Sisera, the leader of Jabin's army, to the Kishon River with all his chariots and troops. And I'll make sure you win the battle."

NJB                                        I shall entice Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, to encounter you at the Torrent of Kishon with his chariots and troops; and I shall but him into your power”?’

NLT                                        I will lure Sisera, commander of Jabin’s army, along with his chariots and warriors, to the Kishon River. There I will give you victory over him.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         I will lead Sisera (the commander of Jabin's army), his chariots, and troops to you at the Kishon River. I will hand him over to you.'"

HCSB                                     Then I will lure Sisera commander of Jabin's forces, his chariots, and his army at the Wadi Kishon to fight against you, and I will hand him over to you.'"

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Emphasized Bible           And she sent and called for Barak son of Abinoam, out of Kadesh-naphtali,—and said to him—Hath not Yahweh God of Israel commanded,—Come and draw towards Mount Tabor, and bring with thee—ten thousand men, of the sons of Naphtali, and of the sons of Zebulun; and I will draw unto thee unto the torrent of Kishon, Sisera, prince of the host of Jabin, with his chariots, and with his multitude—and will deliver him unto thy hand?

ESV                                       And I will draw out Sisera, the general of Jabin's army, to meet you by the river Kishon with his chariots and his troops, and I will give him into your hand'?"

NASB                                     Now she sent and summoned Barak the sons of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali, and said to him, “Behold, the Lord, the God of Israel, has commanded, ‘Go and march to Mount Tabor, and take with you ten thousand men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun. And I will draw out to you Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his many troops to the river Kishon; and I will give him into your hand.’ ”

WEB                                      I will draw to you, to the river Kishon, Sisera, the captain of Jabin's army, with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into your hand.

Young’s Updated LT             And I have drawn unto you, unto the brook Kishon, Sisera, head of the host of Jabin, and his chariot, and his multitude, and have given him into your hand.”

What is the gist of this verse? .

Translation: “ ‘And I will lure [lit., draw out] Sisera, the general of the army of Jabin, to you, to the Kishon River.

Translation: ...his chariots...

Translation: ...and his troops into...

Translation: Furthermore, I will give...your hand.’ ”

This verse continues the quotation of Jehovah which Deborah is stating. Then she uses the verb mâshak^e again and in the Qal perfect. In most translations, you would have no clue that God has used the same verse twice. Note the chart below:

I think that we can safely say that to draw out [or towards] would be the safest translation. In the first case, Barak is supposed to draw to himself in Mount Tabor the 10,000 men (or, he is support to draw toward Mount Tabor). What God will do is to see to it that Sisera is drawn towards Barak. Strong’s #4900 BDB #604. The key is the prepositional phrase which follows mâshak^e, which is unto you. This also justifies the variety of translations given by the same translator. At this juncture, most Bibles refer back to the Sea of Reeds when God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, drawing him and his troops after Moses, and to their final destruction in the Sea of Reeds (Ex. 14).

God has already give Barak the order to move toward Mount Tabor and to take with him 10,000 men; then God promises that He will draw Sisera toward Barak and his troops. God apparently gave these orders some time ago and Barak has not gotten around to following them. In fact, Deborah has to call him to her to set him straight. You might ask, how the hell did she know this? Furthermore, what business is it of hers? Good questions. I doubt that God came and spoke to Barak. Although we don’t get to know much about him other than through innuendo, my thinking is that his bravery is not going to go down in history side-by-side that of Moses, Joshua, or David. The most reasonable explanation here is that she personally prophesied his victory over Sisera and Jabin already and she called his butt in because he had not yet moved out.

The alternate theory is that she is calling Barak for the first time and he is hearing this for the first time. There is some merit in this theory, as one would think if she had called him before (or, if anyone else had spoken to Barak, including God directly), that this would have been recorded in God’s Word. What might help is if you read through some of the more accurate translations. What I should point out is there is no past, present and future tense in the Hebrew as we have in the English. The tenses which we do have are perfect (completed action) and the imperfect (incomplete action). Unfortunately, that is an over-simplification.

The traditional view of the imperfect tense is that it is a reference to an incomplete or to a future action. This is true, to some extent. Sometimes the imperfect tense views just a portion of an event—i.e., it focuses in on a specific portion of an event and it does not concern itself with the event having already occurred or not. This is often used for on-going action, contingent action, and it can be used to convey capability, possibility and obligation, making it similar to the subjunctive and optative moods in the Greek. The imperfect is a tense of continuous action or uncompleted action, but there is no reference to time. It is referred to by some lexicons as the future tense, although that is an improper designation. This is because the imperfect tense can refer to continuous action in past time, present time or in future time.

The traditional view of the perfect tense is that it is a completed action. However, the perfect looks at the action of the verb as a whole, without an thought to the duration of the events or to their completeness. Zodhiates says that the perfect tense can stand for some action which has begun in the past (or the present) and continues into the present (or the future). It is a tense which examines the action of the verb as a whole, whether the action is still ongoing or not. Context tells us whether we are viewing the action of the verb from its inception, progression or completion. I mention this because God commanding [Barak] is a verb which is in the perfect tense. In most English versions, it sounds as though God had commanded Barak some time ago and that he had just not gotten around to doing anything about it.

Taken from http://www.anova.org/sev/atlas/htm/044.htm. The Kishon River is in the Jezreel Valley.

I must admit that when I first read this, it struck me as though Deborah (or someone else) had already prophesied to Barak concerning his victory of Sisera and that he had not gone through with what God had for him to do. However, in the light of the text and a better understanding of the perfect and imperfect tenses, I can see that this very well could be the first time that Barak has heard of this.

One of the next things that we should examine is the Kishon River and the general geography involved. As you can see on the map, Mount Tabor is between the Sea of Chinnereth (what we know as the Sea of Galilee) and the Kishon River. The Kishon is actually a rather short river, 25 miles in length. The Hebrew word is qîyshôwn (ןשי ̣ק) [pronounced kee-SHOWN], which has been transliterated Kishon. ZPEB says it means curving, but I could not confirm that in my Hebrew Lexicon. This river is mentioned surprisingly few times in Scripture: it is mentioned with regards to this battle (Judges 4:7, 13 5:21 Psalm 83:9) and then once again during the time of Elijah (I Kings 18:40). During the spring and the spring rains, this is apparently a difficult barrier for military operations, although when there has been little rain, this torrent settles down into a stream and is often even dry.

Barnes gives us a marvelous description: The brook of stream Kishon...so called from its winding course, caused by the dead level of the plain of Esdraelon through which it flows, rises, in respect to one of its sources or feeders, in Mount Tabor, and flows nearly due west through the plain, under Mount Carmel, and into the Bay of Acre. In the early or eastern part of its course, before it is recruited by the springs on Carmel, it is nothing but a torrent, often dry, but liable to swell very suddenly and dangerously, and to overflow its banks in early spring, after rain or the melting of snow. The ground on the banks of the Kishon near Megiddo...becomes an impassable morass under the same circumstances, and would be particularly dangerous to a large number of chariots.

This is a modern areal view of the same area. Taken from http://www.bible.org/assets/netbible/map1.jpg

For this battle, the Israelites had gathered at Mount Tabor and Sisera and his army were somewhere along the Kishon. To put his in perspective, Deborah would be found about 80 miles south of Mount Tabor—she would actually be off of our map. Barak was actually located about 25 miles north-northeast of Mount Tabor in Kedesh, Naphtali. In order to get to Deborah, he would have had to have traveled quite a distance to begin with—in fact, he would have to travel through Hazor (or around Hazor), where Jabin ruled from (which was midway between Kedesh and the Lake Chinnereth. Then Barak would have to travel most of the distance back. How they knew of one another (if they did) is not known and why God chose Barak is also unknown. Obviously, he had some leadership capabilities, which accounts for him being able to muster Israelites resistance troops in such short order.

The NIV Study Bible offers the reasoning behind choosing this area: With the Israelites encamped on the slopes of Mount Tabor, safe from chariot attack, the Lord’s strategy was to draw Sisera into a trap. For the battle site, Sisera cleverly chose the Valley of Jezreel along the Kishon River, where his chariot forces would have ample maneuvering space to range the battlefield and attack in numbers from any quarter. But that was his undoing, for he did not know the power of the Lord, who would fight from heaven for Israel with storm and flood (see Judges 5:20–21), as he had done in the days of Joshua (Judges 10:11–14). Even in modern times storms have rendered the plain along the Kishon virtually impassable. In April of 1799 the flooded Kishon River aided Napoleon’s victory over a Turkish army.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so said unto her Barak, “If you will go with me and I will go and if you will not go with me, I will not go.”