Original Meaning
The Narrative of Deborah and Barak (4:1–24)
THE NARRATIVE OF Judges 4 is a well-composed unity.1 Its opening prologue (4:1–3) and concluding epilogue (4:23–24) form a type of inclusio, so that the items in the prologue are readdressed in the epilogue. The main story is organized into two parts (4:4–16 and 4:17–22), and these are subdivided into two scenes each (4:4–10 + 4:11–16; and 4:17–21 + 4:22).
Prologue (4:1–3). This prologue relates the background to the story using two narrative frame statements:
A The Israelites do evil in the eyes of Yahweh (4:1)
B Yahweh gives them into the hand of Jabin, king of Canaan, who lives at Hazor and who oppresses them through Sisera (4:2–3)
The opening statement that “the Israelites once again did evil in the eyes of the LORD” is the exact same wording as the opening to the Ehud narrative.2 Ehud’s judgeship did not prevent the cyclical recurrence. Rather, the Israelites return to their apostasy (the Song of Deborah will reveal that they worship “new gods,” 5:8). As expected, Yahweh sells them into the hand of an oppressor. The oppressor is once again a foreign monarch (melek), “Jabin, a king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor.”3 But immediately the prologue introduces Jabin’s commander, Sisera, who will be the up-front antagonist in the story. Jabin blends into the background; the text mentions his name twice (4:7, 17), and the epilogue resolves matters through a threefold repetition of his name. Thus, he is always in the background while Sisera is in the forefront.
The two pieces of information recounted about Sisera are important to the plot and will be alluded to again in the body of the narrative (4:13, 16). (1) He dwells in Harosheth Haggoyim.4 (2) He has nine hundred iron chariots at his disposal.5 Especially difficult for infantry, these “iron chariots” were a technology that Israel did not possess, and they therefore pose a great intimidation to them.6
Contrary to what is commonly stated, ancient chariots were not like modern tanks. They were not used to break through enemy lines.7 Instead, they were used for pursuit and slaughter of the fleeing enemy. They were primarily a killing platform. Against a fleeing enemy on an open plain they were very effective.
Sisera’s name is clearly non-Semitic, probably of Anatolian origin.8 He is apparently a mercenary in charge of Jabin’s chariot corps. On account of these chariots, Sisera is able to oppress9 the Israelites for twenty years, resulting in the Israelites’ crying out to Yahweh.
Part 1 (4:4–16). With the background established, it is now possible to investigate Part 1: Deborah :: Sisera + Barak. Here the focus is on Deborah and Sisera with Barak as an inclusion on the basis of Deborah’s first prophecy.
Scene 1 (4:4–10) subdivides into the introductory circumstances (4:4–5) for Deborah and the plot development (4:6–10) based on this. The introduction of Deborah will parallel the introduction of Heber in the next scene. Four basic points are made here: Deborah (“honey bee”) is a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth (4:4a); she is judging Israel at that time (4:4b); her dwelling is under the Palm of Deborah in the hill country of Ephraim, where she sits (4:5a);10 and Israel goes up to her for judgments (4:5b). These same basic informational-type items were included in the introduction of Sisera (4:2–3).
It is her role as prophetess that is catalytic in this narrative.11 A prophet was primarily a spokesperson or mouthpiece for the deity, a conduit for communication (see esp. Ex. 4:15–16; 7:1–2).12 As a prophetess, Deborah stands in a long tradition starting with Miriam (Ex. 15:20) and continuing throughout the Old Testament.
The clauses “[she] was leading [judging, špṭ] Israel at that time” (4:4b) and “the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided [lit., for judgments, mšpṭ]” (4:5b) seem to imply either that Deborah functions as a “judge” in the same sense as the others mentioned in the book,13 or that she acts as a legal functionary rendering judicial decisions.14 The former is unlikely, since it is Barak, not Deborah, who is the designated deliverer and who ought to have served as the main character of the account.15 Block argues against the former, stating, “one wonders why the narrator would have inserted this parenthetical reference to the settlement of relatively petty civil disputes when the issue in the chapter is a national crisis.”16 He suggests that 4:4b is better understood as “she was governing [cf. NIV, leading] Israel at that time” and that 4:5b refers to the Israelites’ going up to her “for the judgment” (namely, that she would give them the divine answer to their cries).17
The plot development in Scene 1 (4:6–10) will correspond in many ways to that in the plot development of Scene 2 (4:12–16). For Scene 1 the structure is clear:
A The command of Deborah and the response of Barak (4:6–9)
a Deborah commands Barak to gather an army, assuring him of victory (4:6–7)
b Barak requires Deborah’s presence (4:8)
c Barak wins his request but loses glory (4:9)
B Barak deploys the troops (4:10)
a Barak calls (zʿq) the troops to Kedesh (4:10a1)
b Barak goes up (ʿlh) with the troops (4:10a2–b)
In 4:6, Barak (“lightning”), the son of Abinoam of Kedesh Naphtali, is introduced (note that Deborah “sends” for him and then “commands” him). Clearly she is the one who is taking the initiative, not Barak. From the introduction of Deborah in 4:4 on, the narrator surprises the reader with numerous twists in the plot. Deborah is not what we would expect. The fact that she holds a position of authority and takes the initiative in relation to the prospective male hero is surprising. Moreover, Deborah stands as God’s envoy, the means by which God issues his call to Barak.
As Barak initially proves to be reluctant to serve Yahweh, Deborah also acts as a foil to further Barak’s negative characterization. Twice Deborah anticipates Barak’s reluctance to follow her instructions from Yahweh by using the rhetorical construction hālōʾ yhwh (“has not Yahweh?”) (4:6, 14). The first time (4:6) literally reads: “Has not Yahweh, the God of Israel, commanded, go?” (cf. the NIV: “The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go.’ ”). Thus, this is not her opinion about his calling and how things ought to work out but the sure word of Yahweh.
Deborah’s charge to Barak in 4:6–7 indicates that he is destined for a role comparable to that played by Othniel in 3:7–11. His response, however, to Deborah’s command from Yahweh with its great assurance of victory18 is hardly the stuff of an Othniel or even an Ehud: “If you go with me, I will go; but if you don’t go with me, I won’t go” (4:8). While his motive for expressing his desire for Deborah to accompany him is not indicated in the narrative, some interpreters see this as a sign of cowardice.19 But note what the Old Greek (LXX) adds, “for I [Barak] never know what day the angel of the Lord will give me success.” This seems to suggest that Barak desires Deborah’s presence as a source of oracular inquiry.20 Block argues that “the request to be accompanied by the prophet [sic] is a plea for the presence of God.”21 O’Connell notes that by conditioning his obedience to Yahweh on Deborah’s willingness to accompany him, “Barak was effectively denying her the authority that Yahweh had conferred upon her as a prophetess (4:4a).”22
Deborah’s response that she will go seems to allay the problem of Barak’s hesitation. But then she issues another prophecy: “. . . the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman” (4:9). The reader has only one woman to suspect as the possible fulfillment—Deborah. But the ironic twist is just over the horizon. Thus, while Barak will win a notable victory, his insistence that Deborah accompany him instantly diminishes his heroic stature. With the assurance of Deborah (and hence God’s) presence, Barak deploys the troops (4:10). He calls (zʿq) the troops to Kedesh and then goes up (ʿlh) with them.
Scene 2 (4:11–16), like Scene 1, contains introductory circumstances (4:11) and a plot development (4:12–16). In the introductory circumstances, Heber the Kenite is introduced. He has previously left the other Kenites in Judah (1:16) and has made his dwelling, like Deborah, under a great tree in Zaanannim near Kedesh (Barak’s home). This sudden introduction of Heber is anticipatory. Ironically, it is not Heber who will be of aid to Israel’s cause—as we might expect, based on 1:16. Instead, it will be his wife, Jael, since Heber has not only “left” his Kenite clan in Judah but has “friendly relations” with Jabin (the use of šālôm, lit., peace, does not necessitate a formal treaty, 4:17).
The plot development in Scene 2 (4:12–16) corresponds in many ways to that in Scene 1 (4:6–10).
B′ Sisera deploys the troops (4:12–13)
a′ Sisera hears that Barak has gone up (ʿlh) (4:12)
b′ Sisera calls (zʿq) the troops to Wadi-Kishon (4:13)
A′ The command of Deborah and the response of Barak (4:14–16)
a′ Deborah commands Barak to go into battle, assuring him of victory (4:14a)
b′ Barak goes down to fight (4:14b)
c′ Barak wins the battle but loses Sisera (4:15–16)
Sisera, whose military intelligence has discovered Barak’s military movements (i.e., that he has gone up [ʿlh]),23 calls up (zʿq) his troops to the wadi Kishon. Sisera’s deployment in B′ (4:12–13) corresponds to Barak’s deployment in B (4:10). The narrative leaves the impression in these verses that Sisera is functioning on his own (or Jabin’s) initiative, but the reader knows from verse 7 that Yahweh is setting the stage for the showdown.
For the second time, Deborah anticipates Barak’s reluctance to follow her instructions from Yahweh by using the rhetorical construction hālōʾ yhwh (“has not Yahweh?” 4:14; cf. 4:6 above): “Has not the LORD gone ahead of you?” This underscores the certainty of the victory but serves to heighten Barak’s reluctance without great assurance.24
Interestingly, Deborah’s announcement in 4:14a that “this is the day the LORD has given Sisera into your hands” seems to suggest that, on the basis of Barak’s performance of Yahweh’s instructions, perhaps Sisera will be given into Barak’s hands after all despite the limitation predicted in 4:9. However, the reference to Sisera is only a metonymy (subject [military commander] for adjunct [his chariots and troops]). Barak apparently takes Deborah’s words literally for he will vainly pursue Sisera to the end. But in reality Sisera does not control things, nor does Barak control the outcome. God controls the battle and the results: Sisera will be the victim of a woman.
Perhaps stimulated by the assurance, this time Barak’s response is appropriate. Barak goes down to fight with the ten thousand men following and wins the battle, but he loses Sisera (in accordance with Deborah’s prophecy). Yahweh was the one who routs Sisera and his army with its iron chariots.25 Ironically, Barak will pursue the chariots and army as far as Harosheth Haggoyim (Sisera’s home), certainly with the expectation that he will get Sisera (and the honor connected to this). The humor here is at the Israelite general’s expense. He expends tremendous effort to pursue the enemy from the Kishon to Harosheth Haggoyim, but all for naught.
Part 2 (4:17–22). In Part 2 the focus is on Jael and Sisera with Barak as an inclusion on the basis of Deborah’s second prophecy (hence: Jael :: Sisera + Barak). Like Part 1, Part 2 is composed of two scenes with introductory circumstances and plot developments.
Scene 1 (4:17–21) opens with introductory circumstances (4:17) in which there is a reintroduction of Sisera (this time as a fugitive) and an explanation of Sisera’s new location. Having escaped the battle Sisera flees to the tent of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, because there are friendly relations between Jabin and Heber.26 The introductory circumstances of Scene 1 will be paralleled by the introductory circumstances of Scene 2 (the reintroduction of Barak).
The plot development in Scene 1 corresponds in many ways to that in that of Scene 2 (4:22) below. The structure is:
A Jael entreats Sisera to come into her tent (4:18a)
B Sisera enters asking for aid (4:18b–20)
C Jael kills Sisera (4:21)
Jael intentionally goes out to meet Sisera and entreats him to come into her tent as a place of safety. Her words “Don’t be afraid” disarm the Canaanite warlord. Having entered her tent, he makes his own entreaty: “I’m thirsty. . . . Please give me some water.” The commander of the Canaanite hosts continues to issue commands, this time to a woman. Jael demonstrates ancient Near Eastern hospitality in giving him milk27 and covering him up. These actions disarm Sisera even more. He issues his last command to the woman, which is rich in irony:
“Stand in the doorway of the tent.
If someone [ʾîš] comes by and asks you,
‘Is anyone [ʾîš] here?’
say ‘No [ʾên].’ ”
The someone/anyone (lit., “man” [ʾîš]) who comes to the door of the tent is, of course, Barak. And the “man” (ʾîš) within the tent is Sisera, dead by the time Barak arrives. Murray observes:
The confrontation is not now of two leaders at the head of vast armies, but of two men in the presence of a woman; and one word put with dreadful irony into the mouth of Sisera who has so cravenly abandoned his position of leadership, adumbrates the impending fate of them both: (ʾên) [lit., “nothing, no-one”].28
Sisera, now completely mollified, falls asleep as a result of the exhaustion of the battle and escape. Then Jael, having set her victim at ease, picks up a tent peg and hammer and drives the peg through Sisera’s temple into the ground.
Scene 2 (4:22), relatively brief, contains an introductory circumstance (v. 22a1) and plot development (v. 22a2–b). After the reintroduction of Barak as pursuer (Barak’s new location assumed), the plot development has the following structure corresponding to Scene 1 above:
A′ Jael entreats Barak to come into her tent (4:22a2)
B′ Barak responds by entering (4:22b1)
C′ Jael presents the slain Sisera to Barak (22b2)
Poor Barak, no doubt like Sisera exhausted from the pursuit, is met by Jael, who comes out to meet him as she did Sisera. Jael likewise entreats Barak to enter the tent; Barak does so.29 The dead Sisera lies on the ground—the tent peg climatically and ironically through his head.
The ironic juxtaposition of victor and vanquished in the same tent of Jael is significant. The woman has in effect conquered them both: Sisera, by depriving him of his life, and Barak, by depriving him of the honor that should have been his as the chosen deliverer. Interestingly, the true identity of the “woman” is delayed as long as possible so that the irony is nicely turned against the reader.30 The result of this delay is to enhance the impact, when it comes, of the revelation that Yahweh’s choice fell not merely on a woman, nor even on an Israelite prophetess (as we were led to expect), but on “Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite.”
To the attentive reader, the similarities between Jael’s murder of Sisera and Ehud’s assassination of Eglon are transparent. Both narratives feature a murder scene followed by a discovery scene. Both Ehud and Jael use false premises to set up the murder (Ehud’s claim to have a “word from God”; Jael’s seeming assurance of asylum). Ehud murders Eglon and the attendants discover their dead master; Jael murders Sisera and Barak discovers the dead Canaanite commander. In both narratives the murder and discovery scenes play much more significant roles than the battle scenes.31 While in the Ehud narrative the murder takes place before the battle, in the Barak story it follows it.
Jael’s murder of Sisera is narrated in the same vivid style as Ehud’s murder of Eglon; each separate movement is described precisely (cf. 4:21 with 3:20–22). As Ehud’s manipulation of Eglon and his courtiers serves to satirize Eglon and his men for their gullibility, so Jael’s manipulation of Sisera by means of verbal ambiguity satirizes him for his gullibility. Ehud thrusts (tqʿ ) his sword into Eglon’s belly; Jael drives (tqʿ ) her tent peg (yātēd) into Sisera’s head.32 Finally, Barak’s discovery of the dead Sisera is likewise narrated in the same style as the courtiers’ discovery of the dead Eglon. The courtiers discover “their lord” (ʾ adōnêhem) “fallen” (nōpēl) on the “ground” (ʾarṣâ) “dead” (mēt); Barak discovers “Sisera” (sîserāʾ ) “fallen” (nōpēl) “dead” (mēt).
The result of all this is to ironically picture Barak playing a role analogous to that of Eglon’s courtiers (who were ridiculed in 3:24–25). He has lost the honor to a woman. He can only stand and stare. It is his punishment for trying to manipulate Yahweh and his prophetess, Deborah (4:8). This certainly foreshadows Jephthah, who will bring on himself significant judgment for trying to manipulate Yahweh directly. Just as the vow and its fulfillment is the axis along which tension is developed and resolved in the Jephthah story, so the bargain struck in 4:8–9 (Deborah will go with Barak, but Yahweh will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman) is the axis along which tension is developed and resolved here.33
The Barak narrative involves two men and two women. The women are commanding the men, who lose out when they make demands of the women. Thus:
(1) a woman commands (or invites—in the imperative) a man:
Deborah → Barak Jael → Sisera
(2) the man responds to the command (invitation):
Barak → Deborah Sisera → Jael
(3) the man loses his objective (or realizes his loss):
Sisera (life) Barak (glory)
Finally, Jael emerges as the real heroine of the narrative. But this is ironic too. She is hardly an orthodox hero. Rather, she shares the unorthodox qualities of Ehud and of Shamgar. Like Ehud, Jael is a lone assassin who accomplishes her ends by deception. Like him she dispatches her victim when the two of them are alone in a private chamber (hers, in this case, rather than her victim’s). Moreover, like Shamgar she improvised a weapon from a domestic implement. Like Shamgar, Jael is a non-Israelite. Shamgar, if a Canaanite, was a member of Israel’s archenemies. Likewise, Jael is a member of a Kenite splinter group, which is at “peace” with Jabin, the king of Canaan, Israel’s archenemy (4:11, 17)! Her action is morally ambiguous, but her courage and the sheer virtuosity of her performance are sufficient to silence criticism on that score (5:24). The crowning aspect of her unorthodoxy as a hero is her sex: Yahweh sells Sisera into the hand of a woman.34
Epilogue (4:23–24). The epilogue relates two narrative frame statements in response to the prologue (4:1–3):
B′ God subdues Jabin, king of Canaan, before Israel (4:23)
A′ The Israelites do right by destroying Jabin (4:24)
The NIV’s translation of the last sentence “until they destroyed him” obscures the threefold mention of “Jabin, king of Canaan” in the Hebrew text. This threefold mentioning seems to stress that with the destruction of his army at the Kishon and the death of Sisera, his commander, Jabin becomes isolated in Hazor and is eventually overcome by the Israelites, who thus finally establish their supremacy over the Canaanites in the north.
Bridging Contexts
IT IS IMPORTANT—as a preliminary to the interpretation and application of this cycle—to place it within the larger macrostructure of the cycles section (see the introduction, pp. 34–43). This ensures that the cycle will be interpreted in its proper overall context within the moral declivity movement of the cycles. Thus Barak is not the judge that Ehud was and certainly not the judge that Othniel was. But he will be unquestionably better in fulfilling the role of “judge” (šōpēṭ) than Gideon (see comments on chs. 6–7).
Glorification of Yahweh. It is also important to remember that each cycle narrative works on two levels: human and divine. (1) On the human level, the characters of Deborah, Barak, Jael, the tribal participants/nonparticipants, and Sisera’s mother evince positive and negative qualities that serve to bridge the ancient context to the modern context (see below). (2) On the divine level, there is the continuing theme of the glorification of Yahweh. In this passage, both in the prose account and in the poem, Yahweh is glorified through his work on Israel’s behalf. His sovereignty in accomplishing this is intensified by the fact of the shortage of dedicated Israelites from which he might work. The hesitancy of Barak and the noninvolvement of a number of Israelite tribes emphasize this situation. This problem will become worse in the successive cycles.
The cycle’s satirization of the military commander Sisera as an agent of Jabin’s oppressive foreign kingship is in contrast to the glorification of Yahweh, who controls all circumstances that lead to Israel’s deliverance—both those of the temporal order in the prose portrayal and those of the cosmic order, with which Jael’s actions are consonant, in the hymnic portrayal. This oppression of Jabin and Sisera (especially with Sisera’s iron chariots) is a significant trial and affliction for the Israelites. Like the previous oppressions, it is brought on the Israelites by God in order to chasten them, and it once again stresses his justice. God is utterly consistent in dealing with apostasy. He will not allow the Israelites to do as they please without certain repercussions in accordance with his covenant with them. But God is also compassionate; he does not overpunish. He uses his prophetess to raise up the deliverer. In spite of spiritual failings on the part of this deliverer, God brings about Israel’s deliverance, ultimately using a non-Israelite tent-woman to bring judgment on the enemy leader.
Deborah. It is significant that the role over against the powerful monarch Jabin is Deborah, the prophetess—a person whom Jabin and Sisera would have mockingly derided as a leader. But in her weakness in a patriarchal world, Deborah proves to be God’s answer. As his prophetess she will commission God’s general, Barak, the counterpart to Sisera. And she will willingly and with great faith initiate the process of the demise of the mighty Canaanite king and his military commander.
It should be added that Deborah also stands in the commissioning position in the narrative structure that the angel of the Lord does in the Gideon narrative that follows. God is proving here what he proves many times over: He uses the weaker things (or what the world considers the weaker things) in order to confound the wise and mighty. He will bring down the arrogant and abusive Jabin and Sisera in his timing.
Barak. If Ehud was no Othniel, then Barak is no Ehud. Barak’s unwillingness to go and fight even though he has tangible assurance through God’s prophetess is serious. While this fact documents the continuation of the moral declivity of the major/cyclical judges, it especially reveals the reluctance to believe God’s promise. Even though Barak gains the victory, he expends much time and energy trying to obtain the prize he has already forfeited. This is one of the sad truths testified to in the Bible as well as throughout the history of the church. God in his goodness is constantly looking for opportunities to give good gifts to men and women. Yet because of their lack of faith, they forfeit these blessings that God would freely give.
In the case of Barak, he loses the opportunity to truly be used of God. True, he does win the battle, and this is a testimony to his faith (this is why he is listed in Heb. 11:32). But this is not completely what God had in mind to give him. When Christians fail to trust God, demanding assurance when God, in fact, has already spoken, they lose out on the opportunity to be used by him to the fullest extent.
Jael. In the case of Jael, as in the previous case of Ehud, the interpretation of the narrative absence of Yahweh is understood differently by scholars. Some argue that the absence of Yahweh’s involvement in Jael’s actions indicates that her deeds “have been lifted from a Canaanite notebook.”79 Block maintains:
The narration offers no hint of any spiritual motivation on her part or any concern for Israel. She acts entirely on her own and for her own (mysterious) reasons. Her actions are not only deviant and violent but socially revolutionary, challenging prevailing views of female roles in general and the relationship of husband and wife in particular. However, just because the author records her deeds does not mean he approves of them. It simply adds to the mystery of divine providence, demonstrating implicitly what the following verses explicitly affirm: God is able to incorporate the free activities of human beings into his plan for his own glory and for the salvation of his people.80
O’Connell, by contrast, argues that the lack of plot complication (i.e., this problem-free development leading to Jael’s success in killing Sisera), like the lack of plot complication in the Ehud story, indicates that it is Yahweh who has control of the circumstances leading to the success in both cases.81 He puts it this way:
As in the Ehud account, Jael cannot claim final credit for success in humiliating Israel’s enemy. The two foreshadowings of Jael in 4:9 and 4:11 seem designed to demonstrate YHWH’s control over events in the story. That is, before anyone (character or reader) knew her name or understood her significance, YHWH is seen to have predicted the outcome of Jael’s actions through Deborah (4:9) and to have set up the conditions for her humiliation of Sisera (and, unwittingly, Barak) by positioning her tent beside that of her husband on the route by which Sisera would escape (cf. 4:11, 17). Thus, as with Ehud, the strategies of Jael are seen to work in concert with those of YHWH. What is more, the humiliating effect that Jael’s assassination of Sisera has upon Barak (4:22) comes as the result of a strategy outside Jael’s interest (and probably awareness) and demonstrates that YHWH, who predicted her actions and positioned her tent, was the one ultimately in control of the circumstances leading to Jael’s success.82
As with Shamgar, deliverance comes from an unexpected source and in an unexpected manner. Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, is the person who is the ultimate human hero(ine) of the story. She takes the initiative to do what needs to be done.
It is noteworthy that in the deliverances in these cycles the enemy leadership must be effectively dealt with.83 Ideally, as with Othniel, the leadership can be simply overwhelmed. In the case of Ehud, he personally deals with the leadership. Here Barak is ineffective in successfully dealing with Sisera, so God uses Jael to accomplish this.
Jael risks her own life to deliver a people that she is not even a part of. She could easily have remained uninvolved. Her husband’s treaty with Jabin meant that Sisera was not a threat. In fact, if she aided Sisera in his escape, perhaps this would be rewarded. After all, Jabin is still intact as the king of the region, and there is no guarantee that the Israelites will defeat him (note 4:24, which clearly implies a more prolonged process that eventually culminates in Jabin’s demise). Sisera’s defeat may be only a temporary setback. With all these factors, Jael’s involvement is remarkable—again for a people with whom she is not directly associated.84
Like Ehud, Jael accomplishes the victory over God’s enemy. Her willingness to risk her life is in greatly heightened contrast to the Israelite tribes who choose to remain at home, to play it safe.
The context of the Song of Deborah. The praise of Yahweh in song is a unique element to any of the other cycles. In the Song of Deborah, the focus is first on the nation of Israel, then on the ten tribes that either did or did not participate, and then on the two women. But throughout the entire song, it is Yahweh who is acknowledged and praised for his great work. Were it not for him, there would have been no deliverance. Manifold are his deliverances throughout the ages.
The epiphany of Yahweh is unique to this cycle; it pictures Yahweh as triumphant over Baal since Yahweh is pictured as in control of the storm (Baal was commonly pictured by storm imagery). Since this epiphany of Yahweh announces to the kings of Canaan that Yahweh, not their god Baal, reigns supreme, it does the same for the Israelites, whose fascination with Baal brought on the present crisis.
The Song of Deborah especially emphasizes the positive involvement of some of the tribes and Jael. The negative assessment of other tribes (and in particular the city of Meroz) who did not participate in the battle against Sisera and the Canaanites is a comment on God’s outlook and expectations for his people. In this case, noninvolvement equates with self-centeredness.
The issue of participation is raised in the song with evaluative, theological implications. Those who do not participate in the battle against Sisera are guilty of apathy and of indirect support of the enemies of God (and by implication their gods). The Lord expects his people to participate in the advancement of his kingdom. Noninvolvement because of self-centeredness is as unacceptable today as in Deborah/Barak/Jael’s time.
The scene of Sisera’s mother is a powerful image that only poetry can communicate with this kind of effectiveness. The demise of Sisera and the portrayal of his mother are clear comments on God’s determination to judge the wicked. This stanza frees the reader from any positive sympathetic feelings toward Sisera and negative feelings toward Jael. The horrors that Sisera (directly) and his mother (indirectly) have mercilessly dispensed on others come back on them. The mother’s thoughts about Sisera’s plundering and raping of helpless, innocent women reveal what he has done innumerable times in the past. But this time he will not humiliate a single woman; instead, a single woman—a Kenite woman—will humiliate him and turn him into the plunder. The justice is, to a certain extent, retributive—but not completely. What Sisera receives is not really an adequate end to what he has perpetrated, any more than the death of Hitler was adequate justice to what he executed on the Jews.
While in the present church age context we are not encouraged to be exactly like Jael, her action nevertheless serves to give hope that justice will ultimately come on the wicked. With all the injustice in the world, some of it meted out on Christians, it is comforting to know that God has made things right in the past and will make them right in the future.
The imprecation at the end of the poem (5:31a–b) climaxes the emotions of those who love God and hate evil. To God evil and wickedness—especially as manifested in Sisera—is an abomination. Yet his faithfulness to generations to come is evident to those who love him, as Deuteronomy 7:9–10 makes clear:
Know therefore that the LORD your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands. But
those who hate him he will repay to their face by destruction;
he will not be slow to repay to their face those who hate him.85
Contemporary Significance
GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY. God demonstrates that he will not give up on his people. Even though this is the third time they have apostasized, he deals with them in utter consistency. He will not allow them to do as they please. On account of his rich compassion, he will not leave them in prolonged oppression. While there is a decrease in the quality of the type of individuals whom he can use, he nevertheless is able to bring deliverance to his people. In fact, he uses those who in the ancient world were deemed insufficient to the task.
The entire account is deliberately constructed to emphasize the deliverance provided by Yahweh. He is the One pulling the strings, raising generals, deploying armies (even the enemy is indirectly controlled by him), dictating strategy, and effecting the victory. In the end both the narrative and the song celebrate the saving work of Yahweh. The double accounting in prose and poetry stress God’s sovereignty over human events. This passage thus encourages us to perceive God’s sovereignty over history and our own lives. Whether it is in his chastening, in his compassionate deliverance, in his financial provision, or in his leading and guiding decisions, God is sovereign over life, and he is at work bringing his plan to fruition.
Willing vessels. Often God uses the weaker things of this world to confound the wise. Certainly in using Deborah to raise up Barak and in using Jael to bring down the mighty Sisera, we see examples of this. He continues to work in this manner today. He brings deliverance from unexpected sources and in unexpected manners.
When he wants to use us, we need to be willing. We may not feel adequate to the task. We may feel that because of our past, God cannot use us. We may feel ungifted in what he is calling us to do. In one way or another we feel inhibited to serve. When we as Christians do not trust God in these contexts, we lose out on the opportunity for God to work through us. We lose out on his good gifts. And worse, we may find ourselves expending all kinds of time and energy hopelessly trying to make up the difference. We want to have the assurance up front that the risk will be worth it, that we will succeed. But God has often already given the assurance in his Word and wants us to be involved so that he may work to accomplish his plan.
Deborah’s willingness to be God’s spokesperson in calling Barak to deliver his people illustrates the faithfulness that God is seeking. Moreover, her willingness to go with Barak after his request demonstrates her bravery in the midst of great personal danger. There is nothing in the text that indicates any warrior status or abilities on the part of Deborah.86 She does not fight in the battle; she only pronounces to Barak God’s reassurance of victory and exhortation to engage. Hence she is no Xena. In fact, the text seems to present the opposite: She is simply a prophetess, the wife of a man named Lappidoth.
Needing assurances. In the person of the deliverer, Barak, there is an important message for modern contexts. His unwillingness to believe God’s Word through the prophetess serves a strong warning. His demand for tangible assurance of God’s presence and guarantee of victory in order to believe and obey is not uncharacteristic of many believers today. Perhaps it is a matter of being products of the “scientific” age that demands physical proof before belief. However, this passage (and a number of others like it) demonstrate that this is not a recent problem (see more on this issue of tangible assurance in the Gideon section, where the issue is clearest in Judges).
In his goodness, God is constantly looking for opportunities to give good gifts to men and women. Yet because of their lack of faith, they forfeit these blessings that God would freely give. This is true in so many ways. For example, James 1:5–8 states:
If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.
Hence, help is readily obtainable from “the giving God.” To those who lack wisdom, this valuable resource is available for the asking. James assumes his readers will feel the need for wisdom, not just knowledge. God will not only provide wisdom but will do so generously, not grudgingly. However, God’s provision has some prerequisites. To receive God’s wisdom in trials, the believer must be wise in asking. One must ask in faith and not doubt (i.e., vacillate). God wants us to believe that he is and that he is the rewarder of those who diligently seek him. When Christians do not trust God for the gifts he promises, not only do they lose those gifts, but they also may expend much time and energy hopelessly trying to make up the difference, just as Barak did.
Praise of Yahweh. In the end, however, God will do his work whether we are involved in it or not. Moreover, regardless of whether we are involved, he will receive the praise and glory for what he has done. For without him we are nothing, and there will be no salvation.
It is in the person of Jael that God’s effective deliverance of Israel is completed. It is remarkable that Jael becomes involved at all, especially for a people with whom she was not directly associated. Didactically, she serves to illustrate the type of involvement that God is seeking. Obviously, we are not called in the present context to do in Sisera-types with tent pegs. Again, the New Testament’s warfare is solely spiritual. But Jael’s type of willing involvement is needed today. The fact that she is so directly contrasted with the nonparticipant tribes in the Song of Deborah accentuates this.
Praise of Yahweh is hardly limited to Old Testament contexts like this. God’s mighty acts of deliverance continue to be worked on behalf of the undeserving. Israel’s apostasy brought God’s punishing oppression; in fact, as the poem makes clear, the involvement with “new gods” only underscores how undeserving Israel really was. It is God’s amazing willingness to deliver us—certainly no more deserving than Israel—that ought to stimulate great praise of him in our midst.
It is interesting that the ancient poet perceived God’s involvement in this deliverance on the cosmic level. To this poet, God’s revelation through his epiphany in nature was a vital part of the deliverance. The Lord demonstrates his divinity over against whatever things are worshiped, whether in the context of ancient Israel or today. Too often we are so bound in our world today to a naturalistic interpretation of things that even we forget to recognize God’s hand in the natural elements, especially in the divine timing of these natural phenomena.
To participate or not to participate. Participation in the kingdom of God is praiseworthy. Nonparticipation is shameful, perhaps in some cases abominable. This is especially true when his people’s lack of involvement is based on their self-centered, self-serving interest and apathy. Christianity is not a spectator sport; it requires involvement. Just as God is holy, passionate, and zealous for righteousness, he expects his people to be the same. Just as God desires that none should perish and works so great a salvation on humanity’s behalf, so he wants this same desire in his people for the lost. When we choose not to participate in what he has ordained as part of the establishment of his kingdom, we become supporters of another program, a program that is not of God, a program dictated by the gods of this world.
No acquittal of the guilty. How does one apply the scene of Sisera’s mother? In one way, it is a sad, tragic scene. But in the larger scope of the poem as a whole and the cycle in which it is found, it provides an important evaluative balance to the events that have transpired, especially those in the tent of Jael. It prevents the reader from simply concluding that Sisera is an innocent victim. In different circumstances, Sisera would not have hesitated to victimize a Jael any less than he would have hesitated to victimize a Deborah or any other woman.87 His track record is graphically testified to by his own mother—who, in fact, is not only perfectly content with this but apparently has encouraged this in her son. The poem’s presentation of her thought processes serves to show that her son’s life-emphases are like hers: plunder and self-gratification. Such wickedness at the expense of others will not go unjudged (Deut. 7:10). God does not acquit the guilty (Ex. 34:7).