Skip to content
Translation
King James Version
Then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land: but the king of Edom would not hearken thereto. And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab: but he would not consent: and Israel abode in Kadesh.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Then Israel H3478 sent H7971 messengers H4397 unto the king H4428 of Edom H123, saying H559, Let me, I pray thee, pass through H5674 thy land H776: but the king H4428 of Edom H123 would not hearken H8085 thereto. And in like manner they sent H7971 unto the king H4428 of Moab H4124: but he would H14 not consent: and Israel H3478 abode H3427 in Kadesh H6946.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
then Isra'el sent messengers to the king of Edom, to say, "Please let us pass through your land." But the king of Edom wouldn't let them. He sent a similar message to the king of Mo'av, but neither would he, so Isra'el stayed at Kadesh.
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
Then Israel sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let us pass through your land,’ but the king of Edom would not listen. They also sent messengers to the king of Moab, but he would not consent. So Israel stayed in Kadesh.
Ask
American Standard Version
then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land; but the king of Edom hearkened not. And in like manner he sent unto the king of Moab; but he would not: and Israel abode in Kadesh.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
then Israel sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, ‘Please let me pass through your land;’ but the king of Edom didn’t listen. In the same way, he sent to the king of Moab; but he would not: and Israel stayed in Kadesh.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
And Israel sent messengers vnto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, goe thorowe thy lande: but the King of Edom woulde not consent: and also they sent vnto the King of Moab, but he would not: therefore Israel abode in Kadesh.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
and Israel sendeth messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me pass over, I pray thee, through thy land, and the king of Edom hearkened not; and also unto the king of Moab hath Israel sent, and he hath not been willing; and Israel abideth in Kadesh,
Ask

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Judges 11:17, recounted by Jephthah in his diplomatic exchange with the Ammonites, details Israel's peaceful and respectful attempt to secure passage through the lands of Edom and Moab during their wilderness journey. Both nations refused, compelling Israel to alter their route. This historical account serves to validate Israel's legitimate claim to the land they eventually occupied, demonstrating their adherence to divine commands to avoid conflict with related nations and their patient reliance on God's guidance despite significant obstacles.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse is intricately woven into Jephthah's comprehensive historical defense (Judges 11:12-28) against the Ammonite king's assertion that Israel had wrongfully seized their territory upon departing Egypt. Serving as both a judge and a diplomat, Jephthah meticulously reconstructs Israel's wilderness wanderings and their interactions with surrounding peoples. His detailed argument is pivotal for establishing Israel's rightful possession of the land east of the Jordan River, specifically by demonstrating that they did not conquer land from Ammon or Moab. Instead, they acquired territory from the Amorite king Sihon, who had aggressively opposed their peaceful request for transit. This historical review not only justifies Israel's actions but also exposes the baseless nature of the Ammonites' claims, thereby setting the stage for the impending conflict.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: The events described in Judges 11:17 refer back to the period immediately following the Exodus, as the Israelites journeyed toward the Promised Land. Edom and Moab were nations with whom Israel shared deep ancestral ties: the Edomites descended from Esau, Jacob's brother, and the Moabites from Lot, Abraham's nephew. These nations controlled crucial trade and travel arteries, including the vital "King's Highway." As recorded in Numbers 20:14-21, Israel dispatched a respectful request to Edom for peaceful transit, pledging to adhere to their laws and pay for water, but was met with a firm refusal and a display of military readiness. Similarly, Moab denied passage, as implied here and further elaborated in Deuteronomy 2:4-9. God had explicitly commanded Israel to avoid provoking these nations due to their familial connections, a directive Israel diligently obeyed, even when it necessitated a longer, more arduous route. Kadesh, where "Israel abode," was a significant oasis and a primary encampment site for Israel during their wilderness wanderings, serving as a base for a considerable period before their final approach to Canaan.
  • Key Themes: Jephthah's recounting of this historical episode illuminates several pivotal themes central to the book of Judges and Israel's national identity. Firstly, it underscores Israel's Righteous Conduct and Legitimate Claim. Jephthah employs this history to substantiate Israel's peaceful intentions and their adherence to both international diplomatic norms (seeking permission) and divine commands (avoiding conflict with kin). This directly refutes the Ammonite king's false accusations, thereby establishing Israel's rightful possession of the land. Secondly, the theme of Divine Sovereignty and Guidance is profoundly evident. Despite the rejections from Edom and Moab, God supernaturally guided Israel around these territories, demonstrating His unwavering faithfulness in leading His people to their inheritance, even through circuitous routes. This illustrates that God's purposes are fulfilled irrespective of human resistance, as seen in Deuteronomy 8:2. Finally, the verse subtly touches upon The Nature of International Relations, revealing the often-hostile environment Israel navigated and the critical importance of respecting national sovereignty, even when it presented significant challenges to their journey.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • hearken (Hebrew, shâmaʻ', H8085): This verb (H8085) means "to hear intelligently," often implying attention, obedience, or compliance. In the phrase "would not hearken [thereto]," it signifies a definitive refusal not merely to listen, but to heed or comply with Israel's request. It conveys a deliberate unwillingness on the part of the king of Edom to consider or grant the petition, indicating a firm and unyielding stance against Israel's peaceful overture.
  • consent (Hebrew, ʼâbâh', H14): The verb (H14) means "to breathe after," figuratively "to be acquiescent," "to be willing," or "to agree." When it states that the king of Moab "would not [consent]," it communicates a similar, decisive rejection of Israel's plea for passage. This word emphasizes a lack of willingness or inclination on the part of Moab to accommodate Israel, reinforcing the consistent opposition Israel faced from these related neighboring nations.
  • abode (Hebrew, yâshab', H3427): This verb (H3427) means "to sit down," and by implication, "to dwell," "to remain," or "to settle." The phrase "and Israel abode in Kadesh" indicates that Kadesh served as a prolonged encampment or a settled base for the Israelites. It suggests a period of stability, patience, and waiting, highlighting that Israel did not immediately resort to force but patiently remained in their designated location after their requests were denied, demonstrating their obedience to God's command to avoid conflict.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land:" This clause establishes the diplomatic initiative undertaken by Israel. Under divine instruction to avoid direct confrontation with Edom due to their shared ancestry, Israel formally communicated through envoys. The request for passage was polite ("I pray thee") and specific, indicating a desire for peaceful transit rather than conquest or prolonged occupation. This demonstrates Israel's commitment to a non-aggressive and respectful approach to international relations.
  • "but the king of Edom would not hearken [thereto]." This part records the immediate and firm rejection from Edom. The refusal to "hearken" implies not just a denial of the request, but a closed ear to Israel's plea, indicating a lack of hospitality and perhaps even underlying hostility from a nation with whom they shared familial ties. This unyielding stance forced Israel to seek an alternative route, preventing direct conflict but necessitating a detour.
  • "And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab: but he would not [consent]:" This clause reveals a parallel attempt at peaceful negotiation with Moab, another related nation, and an identical outcome. The phrase "in like manner" underscores the consistent diplomatic strategy of Israel and the consistent refusal from these nations. Moab's unwillingness to "consent" reinforces the pattern of rejection, highlighting the persistent challenges Israel faced in their journey and their repeated commitment to diplomatic solutions before resorting to any form of force.
  • "and Israel abode in Kadesh." This final clause describes Israel's patient and obedient response to the double rejection. Instead of forcing their way or retaliating, they patiently remained at Kadesh. This signifies their adherence to God's command to avoid conflict with Edom and Moab (Deuteronomy 2:4-9), demonstrating their trust in God's leading even when the direct path was blocked. Kadesh served as a significant staging ground for their later movements, emphasizing their reliance on divine guidance over human impulse.

Literary Devices

Judges 11:17 primarily employs Historical Narrative as a literary device. Jephthah's meticulous recounting of past events serves a specific rhetorical purpose: to establish a factual, irrefutable basis for Israel's claim to the land. By presenting a chronological account of Israel's peaceful intentions and the unprovoked rejections they faced, he constructs a compelling legal and moral argument against the Ammonites. The verse also features Diplomatic Rhetoric, illustrating the formal exchange between nations through messengers, highlighting the established protocols of ancient Near Eastern diplomacy. Furthermore, there is an element of Repetition in the parallel rejections from Edom and Moab, which emphasizes the consistent opposition Israel encountered and, conversely, their consistent adherence to peaceful means.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

This verse, situated within Jephthah's larger argument, profoundly illustrates God's sovereign guidance over His people, even when their path is fraught with human resistance. Israel's patient and peaceful approach, despite repeated rejections, underscores their obedience to God's command to avoid conflict with their kin, demonstrating a reliance on divine providence rather than military might for their progress. It highlights that God's ultimate plan for His people's inheritance will be realized, not necessarily through the easiest or most direct route, but through His chosen, often circuitous, path. This historical account serves as a powerful reminder that faithfulness to God's commands can involve enduring inconvenience and seeking alternative pathways when faced with opposition, trusting that His purposes will prevail.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Judges 11:17 offers timeless lessons for navigating life's challenges with integrity and faith. Like ancient Israel, we often encounter "closed doors" or unexpected obstacles on our journey, whether in career, relationships, or personal aspirations. This verse encourages us to first pursue peaceful and respectful resolutions, demonstrating wisdom and humility in our interactions, even when facing potential adversaries. When met with refusal, the example of Israel teaches us not to react with aggression or despair, but to patiently seek God's alternative pathways. Their willingness to "abide in Kadesh" and wait, rather than force their way, speaks to the importance of trusting in divine timing and guidance, even when it means a significant detour or a prolonged delay. Our past experiences, like Jephthah's historical recount, can provide valuable context and justification for our present actions, reminding us of God's faithfulness through every season of life and strengthening our resolve to follow His leading.

Questions for Reflection

  • How do I typically react when my plans are blocked or my requests are denied, and what can I learn from Israel's response?
  • In what areas of my life might God be calling me to "abide in Kadesh" – to patiently wait or seek an alternative path rather than forcing a solution?
  • How can understanding God's past faithfulness in my life, or in the history of His people, strengthen my trust in His guidance for my future, especially when facing obstacles?

FAQ

Why was it so important for Israel to avoid conflict with Edom and Moab?

Answer:It was crucial for Israel to avoid conflict with Edom and Moab primarily because of their shared ancestral ties. The Edomites were descendants of Esau, Jacob's brother, and the Moabites were descendants of Lot, Abraham's nephew. God explicitly commanded Israel to respect the territorial integrity of these nations and not to provoke them, as their lands had been given to them by divine decree (Deuteronomy 2:4-9). Israel's obedience to this command demonstrated their faithfulness to God and their commitment to peaceful relations, even when it meant enduring inconvenience and taking a longer route to the Promised Land. This also served to distinguish Israel's conquests, showing they only took land from those who aggressively opposed them, like the Amorites, not from those God had protected.

What is the significance of "Kadesh" in this verse?

Answer:Kadesh (specifically Kadesh-barnea) was a highly significant oasis and a major encampment site for the Israelites during their wilderness wanderings. It served as their primary base for a considerable period, particularly after the initial rebellion and the forty-year wilderness decree (Numbers 13:26). In Judges 11:17, stating that "Israel abode in Kadesh" after being refused passage by Edom and Moab underscores Israel's patient and obedient response. Instead of forcing a confrontation, they remained in their designated location, trusting God to lead them around the hostile territories. This highlights their reliance on divine guidance and their commitment to avoid unnecessary conflict, even when facing significant obstacles on their journey to the Promised Land.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

Judges 11:17, though a historical detail, profoundly foreshadows aspects of Christ's ministry and the nature of God's kingdom. Just as Israel sought peaceful passage but was rejected by those with whom they shared a common heritage, Jesus, the ultimate "Prince of Peace," came to His own, but "His own received Him not" (John 1:11). He sought to lead humanity on the King's Highway of righteousness, yet many refused His invitation, preferring their own paths of rebellion and self-will. Despite this pervasive rejection, Christ did not force His way or resort to violence. Instead, He embraced a "circuitous route"—the path of suffering, sacrifice, and ultimately, the cross—to achieve humanity's redemption (Philippians 2:8). His "abiding" in the face of rejection, culminating in His ultimate victory over sin and death, demonstrates that God's plan of salvation is fulfilled not by human might or forced entry, but through humble obedience and the patient unfolding of divine will. The ultimate "promised land" is the Kingdom of God, entered not by conquest of earthly nations, but by faith in the Lamb of God, who patiently endured rejection to open the true and living way (Hebrews 10:20) for all who believe.

Copy as

Commentary on Judges 11 verses 12–28

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

We have here the treaty between Jephthah, now judge of Israel, and the king of the Ammonites (who is not named), that the controversy between the two nations might, if possible, be accommodated without the effusion of blood.

I. Jephthah, as one having authority, sent to the king of Ammon, who in this war was the aggressor, to demand his reasons for invading the land of Israel: "Why hast thou come to fight against me in my land? Jdg 11:12. Had I come first into thy land to disturb thee in thy possession, this would have been reason enough for fighting against me, for how must force be repelled but by force? but what hast thou to do to come thus in a hostile manner into my land?" so he calls it, in the name both of God and Israel. Now this fair demand shows, 1. That Jephthah did not delight in war, though he was a mighty man of valour, but was willing to prevent it by a peaceable accommodation. If he could by reason persuade the invaders to retire, he would not compel them to do it by the sword. War should be the last remedy, not to be used till all other methods of ending matters in variance have been tried in vain, ratio ultima regum - the last resource of kings. This rule should be observed in going to law. The sword of justice, as well as the sword of war, must not be appealed to till the contending parties have first endeavoured by gentler means to understand one another, and to accommodate matters in variance, Co1 6:1. 2. That Jephthah did delight in equity, and designed no other than to do justice. If the children of Ammon could convince him that Israel had done them wrong, he was ready to restore the rights of the Ammonites. If not, it was plain by their invasion that they did Israel wrong, and he was ready to maintain the rights of the Israelites. A sense of justice should guide and govern us in all our undertakings.

II. The king of the Ammonites now gives in his demand, which he should have published before he had invaded Israel, Jdg 11:13. His pretence is, "Israel took away my lands long since; now therefore restore those lands." We have reason to think the Ammonites, when they made this descent upon Israel, meant no other than to spoil and plunder the country, and enrich themselves with the prey, as they had done formerly under Eglon (Jdg 3:13) when no such demand as this was made, though the matter was then fresh; but when Jephthah demanded the cause of their quarrel, and they could not for shame own what was their true intent and meaning, some old musty records were searched, or some ancient traditions enquired into, and from them this reason was drawn to serve the present turn, for a colourable pretence of equity in the invasion. Even those that do the greatest wrong yet have such a conviction in their consciences of justice that they would seem to do right. Restore those lands. See upon what uncertain terms we hold our worldly possessions; what we think we have the surest hold of may be challenged from us, and wrested out of our hands. Those that have got to the heavenly Canaan need not fear having their titles questioned.

III. Jephthah gives in a very full and satisfactory answer to this demand, showing it to be altogether unjust and unreasonable, and that the Ammonites had no title to this country that lay between the rivers Arnon and Jabbok, now in the possession of the tribes of Reuben and Gad. As one very well versed in the history of his country, he shows,

1.That Israel never took any land away either from the Moabites or Ammonites. He puts them together because they were brethren, the children of Lot, near neighbours, and of united interests, having the same god, Chemosh, and perhaps sometimes the same king. The lands in question Israel took away, not from the Moabites or Ammonites (they had particular orders from God not to meddle with them nor any thing they had, Deu 2:9, Deu 2:19, and religiously observed their orders), but they found them in the possession of Sihon king of the Amorites, and out of his hand they took them justly and honourably, as he will show afterwards. If the Amorites, before Israel came into that country, had taken these lands from the Moabites or Ammonites, as it should seem they had (Num 21:26; Jos 13:25), Israel was not concerned to enquire into that or answer for it. If the Ammonites had lost these lands and their title to them, the children of Israel were under no obligation to recover the possession for them. Their business was to conquer for themselves, not for other people. This is his first plea, "Not guilty of the trespass."

2.That they were so far from invading the property of any other nations than the devoted posterity of cursed Canaan (one of the branches of which the Amorites were, Gen 10:16) that they would not so much as force a passage through the country either of the Edomites, the seed of Esau, or of the Moabites, the seed of Lot; but even after a very tedious march through the wilderness, with which they were sadly tired (Jdg 11:16), when the king of Edom first, and afterwards the king of Moab, denied them the courtesy of a way through their country (Jdg 11:17), rather than give them any offence or annoyance, weary as they were, they put themselves to the further fatigue of compassing both the land of Edom and that of Moab, and came not within the border of either, Jdg 11:18. Note, Those that behave themselves inoffensively may take the comfort of it, and plead it against those that charge them with injustice and wrong doing. Our righteousness will answer for us in time to come (Gen 30:33) and will put to silence the ignorance of foolish men, Pe1 2:15.

3.That in that war in which they took this land out of the hands of Sihon king of the Amorites he was the aggressor, and not they, Jdg 11:19, Jdg 11:20. They sent a humble petition to him for leave to go through his land, willing to give him any security for their good behaviour in their march. "Let us pass (say they) unto our place, that is, to the land of Canaan, which is the only place we call ours, and to which we are pressing forward, not designing a settlement here." But Sihon not only denied them this courtesy, as Edom and Moab had done (had he only done so, who knows but Israel might have gone about some other way?) but he mustered all his forces, and fought against Israel (Jdg 11:20), not only shut them out of his own land, but would have cut them off from the face of the earth (Num 21:23, Num 21:24), aimed at nothing less than their ruin, Jdg 11:20. Israel therefore, in their war with him, stood in their own just and necessary defence, and therefore, having routed his army, might justly, in further revenge of the injury, seize his country as forfeited. Thus Israel came to the possession of this country, and doubted not to make good their title to it; and it is very unreasonable for the Ammonites to question their title, for the Amorites were the inhabitants of that country, and it was purely their land and their coasts that the Israelites then made themselves masters of, Jdg 11:21, Jdg 11:22.

4.He pleads a grant from the crown, and claims under that, Jdg 11:23, Jdg 11:24. It was not Israel (they were fatigued with their long march, and were not fit for action so soon), but it was the Lord God of Israel, who is King of nations, whose the earth is and the fulness thereof, he it was that dispossessed the Amorites and planted Israel in their room. God gave them the land by an express and particular conveyance, such as vested the title in them, which they might make good against all the world. Deu 2:24, I have given into thy hand Sihon and his land; he gave it to them, by giving them a complete victory over the present occupants, notwithstanding the great disadvantages they were under. "Can you think that God gave it to us in such an extraordinary manner with design that we should return it to the Moabites or Ammonites again? No, we put a higher value upon God's favours than to part with them so easily." To corroborate this plea, he urges an argument ad hominem - directed to the man: Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy god giveth thee? He not only appeals to the common resolutions of men to hold their own against all the world, but to the common religion of the nations, which, they thought, obliged them to make much of that which their gods gave them. Not that Jephthah thought Chemosh a god, only he is thy god, and the worshippers even of those dunghill deities that could do neither good nor evil yet thought themselves beholden to them for all they had (Hos 2:12, These are my rewards which my lovers have given me; and see Jdg 16:24) and made this a reason why they would hold it fast, that their gods gave it to them. "This thou thinkest a good title, and shall not we?" The Ammonites had dispossessed those that dwelt in their land before them; they thought they did it by the help of Chemosh their god, but really it was Jehovah the God of Israel that did it for them, as is expressly said, Deu 2:19, Deu 2:21. "Now," says Jephthah, "we have as good a title to our country as you have to yours." Note, One instance of the honour and respect we owe to God, as our God, is rightly to possess that which he gives us to possess, receive it from him, use it for him, keep it for his sake, and part with it when he calls for it. He has given it to us to possess, not to enjoy. He himself only must be enjoyed.

5.He pleads prescription. (1.) Their title had not been disputed when they first entered upon it, Jdg 11:25. "Balak who was then king of Moab, from whom the greatest part of these lands had been taken by the Amorites, and who was most concerned and best able to oppose us, if he had had any thing to object against our settlement there, yet sat still, and never offered to strive against Israel." He knew that for his own part he had fairly lost it to the Amorites and was not able to recover it, and could not but acknowledge that Israel had fairly won it of the Amorites, and therefore all his care was to secure what was left: he never pretended a title to what was lost. See Num 22:2, Num 22:3. "He then acquiesced in God's way of disposing of kingdoms, and wilt not thou now?" (2.) Their possession had never yet been disturbed, Jdg 11:26. He pleads that they had kept this country as their own now about 300 years, and the Ammonites in all that time had never attempted to take it from them, no, not when they had it in their power to oppress them, Jdg 3:13, Jdg 3:14. So that, supposing their title had not been clear at the first (which yet he had proved it was), yet, no claim having been made for so many generations, the entry of the children of Ammon, without doubt, was barred for ever. A title so long unquestioned shall be presumed unquestionable.

6.By these arguments Jephthah justifies himself and his own cause ("I have not sinned against thee in taking or keeping what I have no right to; if I had, I would instantly make restitution"), and condemns the Ammonites: "Thou doest me wrong to war against me, and must expect to speed accordingly," Jdg 11:27. It seems to me an evidence that the children of Israel, in the days of their prosperity and power (for some such days they had in the times of the judges) had conducted themselves very inoffensively to all their neighbours and had not been vexatious or oppressing to them (either by way of reprisal or under colour of propagating their religion), that the king of the Ammonites, when he would seek an occasion of quarrelling with them, was forced to look 300 years back for a pretence. It becomes the people of God thus to be blameless and harmless, and without rebuke.

7.For the deciding of the controversy, he puts himself upon God and his sword, and the king of Ammon joins issue with him (Jdg 11:27, Jdg 11:28): The Lord the Judge be judge this day. With this solemn reference of the matter to the Judge of heaven and earth he designs either to deter the Ammonites from proceeding and oblige them to retire, when they saw the right of the cause was against them, or to justify himself in subduing them if they should go on. Note, War is an appeal to heaven, to God the Judge of all, to whom the issues of it belong. If doubtful rights be disputed, he is hereby requested to determine them. If manifest rights be invaded or denied, he is hereby applied to for the vindicating of what is just and the punishing of wrong. As the sword of justice was made for lawless and disobedient persons (Ti1 1:9), so was the sword of war made for lawless and disobedient princes and nations. In war therefore the eye must be ever up to God, and it must always be thought a dangerous thing to desire or expect that God should patronise unrighteousness.

Neither Jephthah's apology, nor his appeal, wrought upon the king of the children of Ammon; they had found the sweets of the spoil of Israel, in the eighteen years wherein they had oppressed them (Jdg 10:8), and hoped now to make themselves masters of the tree with the fruit of which they had so often enriched themselves. He hearkened not to the words of Jephthah, his heart being hardened to his destruction.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 12–28. Public domain.
Copy as
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Judges 11:17 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.