Judges 21:22

KJV

And it shall be, when their fathers or their brethren come unto us to complain, that we will say unto them, Be favourable unto them for our sakes: because we reserved not to each man his wife in the war: for ye did not give unto them at this time, [that] ye should be guilty.

KJV (with Strong's)

And it shall be, when their fathers {H1} or their brethren {H251} come {H935} unto us to complain {H7378}, that we will say {H559} unto them, Be favourable {H2603} unto them for our sakes: because we reserved {H3947} not to each man {H376} his wife {H802} in the war {H4421}: for ye did not give {H5414} unto them at this time {H6256}, that ye should be guilty {H816}.

Complete Jewish Bible

When their fathers or brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, 'Give them as a personal favor to us, because we didn't take wives for each of them in battle. You didn't give them to them; that would have made you guilty of breaking your oath.'"

Berean Standard Bible

When their fathers or brothers come to us to complain, we will tell them, ‘Do us a favor by helping them, since we did not get wives for each of them in the war. Since you did not actually give them your daughters, you have no guilt.’”

American Standard Version

And it shall be, when their fathers or their brethren come to complain unto us, that we will say unto them, Grant them graciously unto us, because we took not for each man of them his wife in battle, neither did ye give them unto them, else would ye now be guilty.

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Judges 21:22 presents the controversial justification offered by the remaining Israelite tribes to the families of the women abducted for the surviving Benjamite men. Following a devastating civil war that nearly annihilated the tribe of Benjamin, and bound by a hasty oath not to give their daughters to Benjamin, the Israelites devised a morally compromised plan. This verse articulates the legalistic loophole: the fathers and brothers of the seized women would not incur guilt for breaking the oath, as they did not "give" their daughters, but rather the Benjamites "took" them during a festival. It starkly illustrates the moral decay and desperate measures characteristic of a period when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes."

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** Judges 21:22 concludes the book of Judges, a narrative cycle depicting Israel's repeated apostasy, oppression, repentance, and deliverance through divinely raised judges. The final chapters (Judges 19-21) recount a particularly dark episode: the Levite's concubine incident, which escalates into a brutal civil war against the tribe of Benjamin. The other tribes, having sworn a solemn oath at Mizpah [not to give their daughters to any Benjamite](/judges/21-1 "Judges 21:1 - The Oath Not to Give Daughters to Benjamin") and having nearly wiped out Benjamin ([Judges 20:46-48](/judges/20-46 "Judges 20:46-48 - Near Annihilation of Benjamin")), faced a dilemma: how to preserve a tribe of Israel without violating their oath? After securing 400 virgins from Jabesh-Gilead, 200 Benjamite men still lacked wives. The solution, outlined in [Judges 21](/judges/21 "Judges 21 - Wives for Benjamin"), involves allowing the remaining Benjamites to seize virgins from Shiloh during a festival. Verse 22 provides the pre-arranged defense for this abduction, highlighting the lengths to which the Israelites went to reconcile their oath with their desire to prevent a tribe from perishing.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** The period of the Judges (roughly 14th-11th centuries BC) was a transitional era in Israel's history, marked by a decentralized tribal confederacy without a central king. The recurring refrain, "[In those days there was no king in Israel](/judges/17-6 "Judges 17:6 - No King in Israel"), but every man did that which was right in his own eyes" ([Judges 17:6](/judges/17-6 "Judges 17:6 - Everyone Did What Was Right in Their Own Eyes") and [Judges 21:25](/judges/21-25 "Judges 21:25 - Moral Anarchy")), aptly describes the moral and spiritual anarchy prevalent. Oaths, particularly those sworn before God, carried immense weight in ancient Israelite society, often viewed as binding divine contracts ([Numbers 30:2](/numbers/30-2 "Numbers 30:2 - Fulfilling Vows")). The cultural norm regarding marriage involved families arranging unions and the father "giving" his daughter. The desperate measure of abduction, while morally reprehensible, was a pragmatic, albeit unrighteous, attempt to navigate the consequences of a rash oath within a patriarchal society where the preservation of tribal lineage was paramount.
* **Key Themes:** This verse encapsulates several critical themes. First, it underscores the **desperate measures** and moral compromise that arise when human wisdom attempts to solve problems apart from divine guidance, especially in a context of spiritual decline. The Israelites, trapped by their own hasty oath, resorted to ethically dubious means to preserve the Benjamite lineage. Second, the passage highlights the **weight and consequences of ill-conceived oaths**. The solemn vow at Mizpah, made in anger and without divine consultation, created an impossible ethical bind, leading to a legalistic contortion to avoid perceived guilt while committing a clear injustice. Third, the proposed justification reveals a profound **moral compromise and rationalization**. The argument that the families would not be "guilty" because they did not "give" their daughters, but rather they were "taken," represents a focus on external adherence to the letter of the law rather than its spirit or moral implications. Finally, the narrative speaks to **collective guilt and responsibility**, as the entire Israelite community, having participated in the war and the oath, felt compelled to ensure Benjamin's survival, even if it meant endorsing an act of abduction.

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **Complain (Hebrew, _rîḇ_):** This verb signifies to contend, strive, or engage in a legal dispute. In this context, it anticipates the legal or moral challenge that the fathers and brothers of the abducted women would likely bring. The Israelites' pre-planned defense is designed to preempt or neutralize this "complaint" by offering a justification that, in their view, absolves the families of guilt.
* **Favourable (Hebrew, _ḥānan_):** Meaning to be gracious, to show favor, or to have pity. The plea "Be favourable unto them for our sakes" is an appeal for clemency and understanding. It's a request for the aggrieved families to overlook the injustice and accept the situation out of compassion for the Benjamites, and perhaps for the unity of Israel, acknowledging the extreme circumstances.
* **Guilty (Hebrew, _’āšam_):** This term denotes being culpable, incurring guilt, or bearing the penalty for a sin or transgression. The core of the justification rests on the idea that if the families did not formally "give" their daughters, they would not be held morally or legally culpable for violating the oath. This legalistic distinction attempts to shift the burden of "guilt" away from the families, creating a loophole that allowed the Benjamites to acquire wives without the families directly participating in the oath-breaking.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And it shall be, when their fathers or their brethren come unto us to complain,"**: This clause anticipates the natural and righteous indignation of the families whose daughters would be abducted. The use of "complain" (רִיב, _riv_) suggests a formal grievance or legal challenge, highlighting the awareness among the Israelite leaders that their plan was ethically problematic and would provoke strong opposition.
* **"that we will say unto them, Be favourable unto them for our sakes:"**: This reveals the pre-meditated nature of the justification. The leaders instruct the Benjamites on what to say, appealing to the families for mercy and understanding. The phrase "for our sakes" underscores the collective responsibility felt by the other tribes to preserve Benjamin, implying that the families should show favor for the greater good of Israel's tribal integrity.
* **"because we reserved not to each man his wife in the war:"**: This part of the defense acknowledges the dire situation of the Benjamites. It points to the fact that the other tribes, in their zeal to punish Benjamin, had failed to ensure the survival of the tribe's lineage by not "reserving" or providing wives for the surviving men during or after the war. This implicitly places some responsibility on the collective Israelite community for the current predicament.
* **"for ye did not give unto them at this time, [that] ye should be guilty."**: This is the crux of the legalistic loophole. The argument is that since the fathers and brothers did not *formally give* their daughters to the Benjamites (which would have directly violated their oath), they would not be held morally or legally culpable for the resulting unions. The Benjamites simply "took" them, thereby circumventing the oath's prohibition on 'giving'. This highlights a focus on the letter of the law over its spirit, prioritizing technical adherence to an oath over ethical conduct.

#### Literary Devices
The passage employs several literary devices. **Rationalization** is central, as the Israelite leaders construct a convoluted argument to justify a morally questionable act. They attempt to absolve the families of guilt by creating a legalistic distinction between "giving" and "taking," thereby allowing the abduction to proceed without directly implicating the families in oath-breaking. This also demonstrates a profound **Irony**: the Israelites are attempting to uphold the letter of one oath (not to give daughters) by sanctioning the breaking of another, more fundamental moral law (the sanctity of persons and the prohibition against abduction). The entire narrative of Judges 19-21, culminating in this verse, serves as a powerful **Exemplum** or cautionary tale, illustrating the depths of moral decay and social chaos that result when a society forsakes divine authority and "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" ([Judges 21:25](/judges/21-25 "Judges 21:25 - Moral Anarchy")).

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Judges 21:22 is a poignant illustration of human depravity and the consequences of abandoning God's covenant. It demonstrates the dangers of making hasty, ill-conceived vows and then attempting to navigate their repercussions through human wisdom and legalistic loopholes rather than seeking divine counsel and true repentance. The Israelites' focus on avoiding technical "guilt" while committing a grave injustice reveals a distorted understanding of righteousness, where external adherence to a rule supersedes the spirit of justice, compassion, and moral integrity. This passage serves as a stark reminder that true righteousness is not found in clever rationalizations but in wholehearted obedience to God's commands, which are rooted in love and justice. The chaos and moral compromise depicted underscore the desperate need for a righteous king and a covenant-keeping people, a theme that resonates throughout the Old Testament.

* [Numbers 30:2](/numbers/30-2 "Numbers 30:2 - The Binding Nature of Vows")
* [Ecclesiastes 5:4-5](/ecclesiastes/5-4 "Ecclesiastes 5:4-5 - Fulfilling Vows to God")
* [Matthew 23:23-24](/matthew/23-23 "Matthew 23:23-24 - The Pharisees' Legalism")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Judges 21:22 serves as a sobering mirror, reflecting the human tendency to rationalize sin and seek loopholes to justify actions that are clearly contrary to God's character and commands. It challenges us to examine our own lives: do we prioritize external appearances or technical adherence to rules over genuine integrity, compassion, and justice? The desperate measures taken by the Israelites, born out of a self-imposed dilemma, highlight the futility of human-centric problem-solving when detached from divine wisdom. For believers today, this passage underscores the critical importance of seeking God's guidance in all decisions, making vows thoughtfully and prayerfully, and pursuing true righteousness that encompasses both the letter and the spirit of God's law. It reminds us that God desires integrity of heart and actions that reflect His justice and love, not just the avoidance of technical guilt. We are called to live by grace, not by legalistic evasion, and to trust in God's perfect plan rather than our own flawed solutions.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **In what areas of my life might I be tempted to rationalize sin or seek loopholes to justify actions that are not truly righteous?**
* **How can I ensure that my commitments and vows are made thoughtfully and in alignment with God's will, avoiding hasty decisions that lead to moral compromise?**
* **What does this passage teach me about the nature of true justice and compassion, especially in contrast to legalistic interpretations of rules?**
* **How does the chaos and moral decay in Judges, exemplified by this verse, highlight our ongoing need for God's clear guidance and the transforming power of the Holy Spirit?**

### FAQ
**Does Judges 21:22 imply God approved of the abduction of the women?**

Answer: No, the text of Judges 21:22, and indeed the entire book of Judges, is descriptive, not prescriptive. It recounts a dark period in Israel's history where "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" ([Judges 21:25](/judges/21-25 "Judges 21:25 - Moral Anarchy")). The narrative explicitly portrays the moral decay and the consequences of Israel's unfaithfulness to God. The abduction of the women, and the legalistic rationalization for it, are presented as further evidence of the Israelites' spiritual and ethical decline, not as actions condoned by God. The passage highlights human failure and the desperate measures people resort to when they abandon divine wisdom and authority.

**What does this passage teach about the nature of oaths and vows?**

Answer: Judges 21:22, in the broader context of [Judges 21](/judges/21 "Judges 21 - The Preservation of Benjamin"), powerfully illustrates the serious consequences of making hasty or ill-conceived oaths. The Israelites' oath at Mizpah not to give their daughters to Benjamin ([Judges 21:1](/judges/21-1 "Judges 21:1 - The Oath Not to Give Daughters to Benjamin")) created a profound ethical dilemma after they nearly annihilated the tribe. While the Bible emphasizes the importance of fulfilling vows ([Numbers 30:2](/numbers/30-2 "Numbers 30:2 - Fulfilling Vows")), this narrative shows that vows made in anger or without divine consultation can lead to morally compromised solutions. It teaches us to be cautious and prayerful before making solemn commitments, ensuring they align with God's character and will, and to seek God's wisdom when faced with the consequences of past rash decisions.

**Why was it so important for the Israelites to preserve the tribe of Benjamin?**

Answer: The preservation of the tribe of Benjamin was deemed crucial because each of the twelve tribes was a fundamental component of the covenant people of Israel. The destruction of one tribe would have been seen as a catastrophic loss to the national and theological identity of Israel, potentially threatening the fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham regarding his descendants ([Genesis 12:2-3](/genesis/12-2 "Genesis 12:2-3 - God's Promise to Abraham")). Despite Benjamin's egregious sin and the resulting civil war, the other tribes recognized their collective responsibility to maintain the integrity of the twelve tribes, even resorting to extreme and morally questionable measures to ensure Benjamin's survival and prevent a tribe from perishing from Israel ([Judges 21:6](/judges/21-6 "Judges 21:6 - Regret for Benjamin's Near Extinction")).

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The dark narrative of Judges, culminating in the moral compromise of Judges 21:22, powerfully underscores humanity's desperate need for a true King and a perfect covenant. The Israelites' attempt to navigate their self-imposed dilemma through legalistic loopholes ("ye did not give unto them at this time, [that] ye should be guilty") reveals the futility of human righteousness and self-justification. They sought to avoid technical guilt while committing a profound injustice, a stark contrast to the perfect obedience and righteousness of Jesus Christ. Where Israel failed to uphold God's law and resorted to human rationalization, Christ perfectly fulfilled every righteous requirement of the law ([Matthew 5:17](/matthew/5-17 "Matthew 5:17 - Jesus Fulfills the Law")). He did not seek loopholes but willingly bore the full guilt of humanity's sin, becoming the ultimate sacrifice ([2 Corinthians 5:21](/2_corinthians/5-21 "2 Corinthians 5:21 - Christ Became Sin for Us")). The chaos and "every man did what was right in his own eyes" mentality of Judges ([Judges 21:25](/judges/21-25 "Judges 21:25 - Moral Anarchy")) foreshadows the universal human condition apart from God, where sin reigns. Christ, the true King, brings order out of chaos, not through human compromise but through divine grace and truth. He is the one who truly takes away the sin of the world ([John 1:29](/john/1-29 "John 1:29 - Jesus, the Lamb of God")), offering genuine forgiveness and reconciliation where human legalism only creates further entanglement and guilt.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.