"In those days there was no king in Israel"; everyone did what was right in his own eyes (Judges 17:6).

There was no king in Israel because God was their king, and the people had rejected the Lord's rule by rejecting His Law. Having rejected the guiding light of His Law, everyone simply did what seemed right in their own eyes.

So we get a glimpse of what life is like apart from the Word of God. When there is no Word of God, people call evil good and good evil. When there is no Word of God, there is no punishment for sin, and the weak always give way to the strong. Even those whose profession is to lead worship will bend to the lure of power, money, and security. They will say, "Thus says the Lord..." even as they facilitate the worship of idols. And through it all, they will think they are honoring the Lord.

Micah said, "Now I know that the Lord will prosper me," because he had a Levite as priest (Judges 17:13).

Micah is confident the Lord will prosper him because he has hired a Levite as his personal priest to help him worship his idols. He gives no thought to his blatant idolatry and violation of God's Law. Surely God would bless him for the sincerity of his intention, right?

Friends, the Lord struck down a man who simply reached out his hand to keep the ark of the covenant from falling off a cart. God did this because He had commanded that the ark be carried on poles by a very particular group of Levites. God's Word was not followed.

God will not hold anyone guiltless simply because of good intentions or sincerity. Consider Paul's grief over Israel: he prayed for their salvation, testifying that they had a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge; being ignorant of God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness (a paraphrase of Romans 10:1–3).

In the church today there are many people "zealous for the Lord," yet I believe many are zealously wrong. Like Micah, they call good evil and evil good. For instance, some prophetic movements have redefined biblical prophecy as something less than infallible truth, so that false predictions offered as prophetic "words of encouragement" carry no consequence.

In my view, some manifestations that the Bible typically associates with pagan or demonic activity — uncontrolled emotional outbursts, animal sounds, ecstatic speech with shaking and collapsing — are today being attributed to the Holy Spirit. In Jesus' day, genuine healings by Jesus were attributed to the devil; that was how the religious leaders chose to reject Jesus as the Messiah, declaring the genuine to be counterfeit. I fear we have come full circle, so that today some attribute to the Holy Spirit what does not come from Him, declaring the counterfeit to be genuine.

Let anyone with wisdom and insight in the Word consider what I am saying. Can you see what the devil is doing? He has always been a counterfeiter, disguising himself as an angel of light, subtly yet devastatingly attacking the Word of truth by mixing half-truths with deception. Consider the matter of "speaking in tongues." I believe it was given as a miraculous gift for the edification of the body and as a sign of judgment on unbelieving Israel. In my view, what is practiced today is not the same miraculous gift, for I do not believe people are speaking languages they have never learned; it is labeled "angelic tongues." What is more, contrary to the gift's original purpose of building up the body, it is often used for "personal edification," which I believe can serve spiritual pride rather than genuine service to the body of Christ.

Friends, I left my local church not simply because it was wrong theologically — something that unfortunately happened over time through the influence of a few — but because its leaders chose to close their minds to the Word of God. Not only did they refuse to debate the merits of their convictions, they were unwilling even to discuss them, and sought to squash all disagreement, citing "church unity" as the reason. Similar reasoning was given by the U.S. branch of World Vision in 2014, when it briefly changed its hiring policy to employ Christians in same-sex marriages. Thankfully, World Vision reversed its decision within a couple of days. I pray that the leadership of my former church will also come to their senses.

Friends, we must all be of a right mind by studying the Scriptures for ourselves, as we are commanded: present yourself to God as one approved, "rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).

AI-Expanded Reflection

Judges 17–21 is a deliberately dark epilogue to the book, framed by the refrain "In those days there was no king in Israel" (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). Micah's story is almost comic in its confusion: his mother dedicates stolen silver "to the Lord" to make an idol (17:3), and he hires a wandering Levite, who is later lured away by the tribe of Dan with a better offer (18:19–20). The narrator never comments directly; the absurdity speaks for itself. And the refrain points forward — Israel's need for a faithful king would be met in part by David and fully by Christ, under whose rule people no longer do what is right in their own eyes but what pleases God.

The comment raises serious concerns about practices in parts of the charismatic movement, and it is worth noting the range of Christian views. Cessationists, like the comment, hold that tongues were known human languages given miraculously and that the gift ceased with the apostolic era. Many Pentecostals and charismatics understand tongues to include both human languages (as in Acts 2) and speech directed to God that "no one understands" (1 Corinthians 14:2), used in private prayer, while agreeing that public use must be interpreted and orderly (14:27–33). Many within charismatic circles also share the comment's concern about disorderly manifestations and apply Paul's test that "all things should be done decently and in order" (14:40). See #1843 and #1929 for further discussion. Across these views, believers agree with the comment that everything must be tested by Scripture, and that zeal without knowledge is dangerous.

Rereading a post from a year ago, I realize not much has changed. Judges 17:6 reads that in those days Israel had no king, and all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes.

Friends, if you can read chapters 17–18 of Judges without nearly every verse troubling you, then you do not know the Scriptures as you ought. Virtually everything is wrong in the accounts of Micah and the tribe of Dan — a household shrine, a hired priest, a stolen idol, a massacre of a peaceful town — yet Scripture provides no moral commentary here to make this clear. It is as if the text were designed to be an indictment not only of its characters but of readers who pass through it without noticing.

I am reminded of God's commission to Isaiah, to preach to a people who had lost their spiritual awareness: they would be ever hearing but never understanding, ever seeing but never perceiving (a reference to Isaiah 6:9–10). Isaiah was sent to those who could not recognize truth when they heard it. This was Israel's condition by the end of Judges. Only a few generations after Joshua, their moral compass was already broken. They had forgotten God's Word, and so they did whatever seemed right in their own eyes.

I find this condition widespread today — people are unfamiliar with God's Word, and in many cases so are those teaching them.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The observation about narrative silence is the sharpest thing in this comment and is a real feature of the book's technique. Judges 17–21 contains no divine speech and no prophetic verdict. The refrain about no king and everyone doing what was right in his own eyes is the whole of the editorial comment, repeated at intervals, and it functions as a frame rather than an explanation.

That method places real demands on a reader. A text that condemns explicitly requires only assent; a text that reports without comment requires the reader to supply a judgment, which means the reader's own moral sense is what gets tested. The comment's claim that the passage indicts inattentive readers is not an overreading — it describes how the narrative works.

Worth noting the specific failure the refrain names. It is not that the people did what they knew to be wrong; it is that the standard had migrated inward, so that "right in his own eyes" became the operative measure. That is a description of a lost reference point rather than of defiance.

We see how quickly Israel became corrupted by Canaanite culture. I believe one reason for their swift backsliding was a lack of real knowledge of God — they'd begun serving Him in their own preferred way, if at all, alongside worshiping Canaanite deities outright. Moses and Joshua repeatedly told them how important it was to keep the Book of the Law always on their lips, meditating on it day and night, careful to do everything written in it (a paraphrase of Joshua 1:8). We may laugh at Micah and the Danites for their foolish sin, wrongly assuming we'd never do something similar in our own walk with the Lord. Brothers and sisters, without real knowledge of God, we can easily fall into the exact same snares set by imposters bringing a false gospel — we can even deceive ourselves. Living in a culture that resists any notion of a wrathful God, many preachers twist the gospel to satisfy itching ears, emphasizing only His love. Yet we can only rightly grasp the richness of that love once we're fully aware of His righteous anger too — the same God who wiped out humanity in Noah's flood and overturned the money-changers' tables in the Temple. Let's ask ourselves honestly, do we fear God — not as one terrified of a tyrant, but recognizing that He can, and sometimes does, temporarily suspend His patience to discipline those He loves?

AI-Expanded Reflection

The one-sided "God is only love" preaching this comment critiques gets a direct biblical corrective worth adding — Paul describes God's own character as combining both kindness and severity in the very same breath, urging believers to consider both together rather than isolating one from the other (a paraphrase of Romans 11:22). That pairing suggests the imbalance this comment identifies isn't simply a matter of modern preaching taste — it's a failure to preach the full range of what Scripture itself insists on holding together, since removing either half (love without severity, or severity without love) produces a genuinely different, incomplete God than the one actually described throughout the Bible.

There's so much wrong with the story of Micah's idol in Judges 17 that it's hard to know where to begin. Micah apparently steals from his own mother — not spare change, but 1,100 shekels of silver, equivalent to over a hundred years of wages (we know this because the Levite Jonathan agrees to work for just ten shekels a year, Judges 17:10). Micah only returns the money after hearing his mother pronounce a curse over it (Judges 17:2) — meaning his return wasn't remorse, but fear of the curse itself. He's apparently unaware of, or indifferent to, the curses God Himself pronounced for disobeying His law (Deuteronomy 28). At this point he's already broken the fifth commandment (honor your father and mother) and the eighth (do not steal) (Deuteronomy 5:16, 19).

When Micah returns the money, his mother simply says, "the LORD bless you, my son!" No discipline at all — no wonder he stole from her in the first place. She then vows to consecrate the silver to God — except only 200 of the original 1,100 shekels actually go toward this. What happened to the remaining 900? She's essentially cheated God out of most of what she vowed, using the rest to make an idol for her son instead — breaking the first and second commandments too (Deuteronomy 5:7–8). Not only does Micah end up with multiple household gods, but his own ephod, shrine, and priest — despite God's clear instruction that there would be only one legitimate place of worship, chosen by Him alone (Deuteronomy 12:13–14).

Then the Levite Jonathan enters the picture, apparently unemployed and homeless — living in a godless nation, there evidently wasn't much work for priests. He could have brought real reform to Micah's household, but instead aids his idolatry. Even someone meant to know and teach God's Word turns out to be just as lost — either ignorant of God's commands or conveniently setting them aside for personal gain. This reinforces something important: not everyone who calls themselves a servant of the Lord is actually following His righteous path, or even knows what His Word actually says. We have to be careful to follow godly leaders rooted in Scripture — but how can we recognize that rootedness if we ourselves don't know Scripture well enough to judge? I believe many sincere people get led into cults precisely because they place more faith in a charismatic leader than in what God has actually revealed. In the middle of all this sin, Micah sincerely believes hiring a Levite as his personal priest will please God — telling himself the LORD will now be good to him, since he finally has a proper priest (a paraphrase of Judges 17:13).

I wonder how many Christians today assume that appearing godly — attending church, doing a certain amount of activity, giving a certain offering — is enough to please God. But God doesn't look at outward appearance; He looks at the heart, and not merely the sincerity of that heart, since sincerity alone doesn't save. What saves is worshiping the true and living God in spirit and truth — a time that has now come, when the Father seeks worshipers who worship Him this way, since God Himself is spirit (a paraphrase of John 4:23–24).

Let's worship the Lord tomorrow in spirit and truth.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The specific arithmetic error this comment catches — 900 of the promised 1,100 shekels simply unaccounted for — is worth flagging as a genuinely sharp piece of close reading, since it's easy to skim past this detail and simply register "she made an idol" without noticing the vow itself was only partially honored. That detail sharpens the whole episode's underlying irony: even the one moment that looks like devotion (consecrating silver to God) turns out, on closer inspection, to be another act of quiet self-dealing, dressed up as piety. The story isn't just about an obvious idol — it's about how thoroughly self-interest can disguise itself as religious devotion at every single step along the way.

In chapter 18, there was a priest serving for the tribe of Dan. Since the Levites were the ones commissioned to serve and minister for the LORD, was it wrong for this to happen? Also, when was this written, since it seems to reference the exile?

Yujin responds... Yes, it was wrong for them to appoint a non-Levite as priest. But there's so much wrong with the scenarios presented in this chapter that this violation is only the tip of the iceberg. The key verse is Judges 17:6 — in those days Israel had no king, and everyone did whatever seemed right in their own eyes (a paraphrase of Judges 17:6). They weren't obeying the LORD, even though they likely believed they were.

AI-Expanded Reflection

On the dating question, which didn't get addressed directly: Judges 18:30 mentions this arrangement continuing "until the day of the captivity of the land" — a phrase most scholars take as a reference to an exile, though there's some debate over whether it means the fall of the northern kingdom to Assyria in 722 BC, or an earlier, more localized event. Either way, it's a genuine clue that the book of Judges, even though it describes events centuries earlier, was compiled or edited sometime after that captivity had already happened — someone writing with the benefit of hindsight, watching Israel's earliest pattern of "everyone doing what's right in their own eyes" play out all the way to its eventual, national conclusion.

I can't quite make sense of Samson's blindness to what was happening. He caught on quickly with his first fiancée that he'd been betrayed. Did he really not catch on that his wife was betraying him this time? Or did he genuinely not know what the actual source of his strength was?

Yujin responded... Great questions, Fernando! It appears from the text that he knew his wife wanted to learn the secret of his strength, but he didn't know the Philistines were hiding nearby, waiting. It seems that before they revealed themselves, he'd already demonstrated his strength safely several times. Only on the last occasion, when he finally revealed that his strength came from the LORD through his Nazirite vow (cf. Judges 13:4–7; 16:17), and then lost his strength as a result, did the Philistines emerge from hiding and capture him. It appears Samson knew the source of his strength, but having never actually been without it, probably assumed he never could lose it. His strength was never really about his hair — it came from the LORD — and when Samson violated his lifelong vow, God withdrew that strength. When he later repented and asked God for it back, God restored it, just as his hair grew back as well.

AI-Expanded Reflection

There's a piece of quiet wordplay easy to miss in English: Samson's name is widely understood to derive from a Hebrew root meaning "sun," or "little sun." The story of a man named for the sun ending in blindness — losing his own light entirely — reads like more than coincidence once that's noticed. It also mirrors something larger than Samson himself: strength, betrayal, judgment, and eventual restoration is the exact cycle the whole book of Judges keeps repeating at a national level. Samson isn't just an individual with a tragic flaw; his story compresses all of Israel's larger pattern — blessed, unfaithful, judged, restored — into a single life.