I'm going to be reading from Judges 2, 1 through 5, and obviously not just preaching on this. It would take up my whole time if I read the whole book, but we're going to try to give you a good, good summary of the book as a whole in a bit. Then the angel of Yehovah came up from Gilgal to Bokin and said, I led you up from Egypt and brought you to the land of which I swore to your fathers. And I said, I will never break my covenant with you and you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land. You shall tear down their altars, but you have not obeyed my voice. Why have you done this? Therefore, I also said, I will not drive them out before you, but they shall be thorns in your side and their gods shall be a snare to you. So it was when the angel of Yehovah spoke these words to all the children of Israel that the people lifted up their voices and wept. And when they called the name of that place Bochem, and they sacrificed there to Yehovah. And when Joshua had dismissed the people, the children of Israel went each to his own inheritance to possess the land. Amen. Father, we thank you for the faithfulness of your messengers to bring rebuke when needed, and to bring encouragement when needed, but to keep steering us back to the road that you have called us to walk on. And I pray that each one of us would cherish your word, cherish your law, cherish your grace, and cherish the promises that you have given that are so awesome and so splendid. So Father, I pray that you would anoint me and enable me to faithfully bring your word a book that is so relevant to our day and age. Bless me and bless this your people as they hear, and I pray it in Jesus' name, amen. Well, Judges is a book that contains some of the most wonderful stories in the Bible. What child does not take delight in the stories of Deborah and Barak and Gideon and Samson? But this book also has stories that make you absolutely sick to your stomach because they illustrate the depth to which depravity can take us and can even take the heroes of the faith. And we're going to be seeing some examples of that in this book. Now, it was brilliantly written in a way where we don't take sin lightly. We don't delight in evil. In fact, it brings us to hate that evil and want to do something about it. It's very well written in that way. Sin should always make us feel ill. Second, this book is a powerful exposition of the irrational cycle of sin that cultures often go through. It starts with small compromises in the first generation. expanded compromises in the second generation, a full slide into sin, and then God's discipline, usually with civil government, which by the way, we'll see in this book, God doesn't have a high opinion of centralized civil government, but he does use it as a tool of discipline on a corrupt people. That's about the only good thing you got for civil government. It's a discipline tool, a spanking tool. And then through the misery brought by civil government, God brings the people to repentance, then deliverance, then to a recommitment to his law. The chart of the cycle of sin that's on the first page of your outlines there, that needs to be burned into our memories and make us fear the little compromises that over time escalate, especially in coming generations. Third, this book shows that without revival, America is headed to very tough times. as are most countries in Western civilization. In a December 1951 speech, General Douglas MacArthur gave what I consider to be a perfect summary of at least part of the message of judges. He said about America, this is 1951, In this day of gathering storms, as moral deterioration of political power spreads its growing infection, it is essential that every spiritual force be mobilized to defend and preserve the religious base upon which this nation is founded. For it has been that base which has been the motivating impulse to our moral and national growth. History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual reawakening to overcome the moral lapse or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster. And I believe he is right. We are faced with only two options in our nation, repentance or our nation is heading toward disaster. And some people might say, OK, well, did the nation head to disaster like General Douglas MacArthur said it would? Well, actually God used General Douglas MacArthur and several other heroes of that time to speak out against the evils, and it actually brought our nation to repentance. People a lot of times dismiss that. They don't think that there was much good going on. But there was such a movement amongst the people that they elected all kinds of Christians to Congress. Those were the days when Congress produced a massive report documenting in detail that our nation was always intended to be a Christian nation, but it was a nation that was supposed to be following God's laws. That was the time when they put one nation under God in our Pledge of Allegiance. That was the time when our national motto became, In God We Trust. Now it was not a perfect revival, but it was a turning back to God that parallels at least a couple of the revivals that happened in the book of Judges. So fourth, Judges is not simply a warning about compromise and sin. It is also a book about the wonderful faithfulness of God in the face of extreme sin. Part of that grace is God's disciplines of his people. That is an act of grace. A lot of people think, oh, we need more of God's grace. Well, that is God's grace. When he's bringing his spanking stick, he loves his church too much to allow it to go on indefinitely in their sins, and he does not want them to be comfortable in their sins. So while this book does display the utter ugliness of sins, it also displays the beauty and the richness of God's grace. I want to look first of all at the Christology of this book, because I think it's rather unique. Each of the deliverances that those judges brought stand as a type of the Lord Jesus Christ who rescues us out of the clutches of Satan. Now, there's other types of Christ in here as well. There's atonement, you know, there's the sacrifices that they give. I'm not going to look at those this morning. You need to keep those in mind. There is Christology all through the book. We've dealt with those kinds of things adequately. But the judges themselves were types of Christ. Between the books of Judges and 1 Samuel, there are 17 judges in all. Some, like Othniel and Gideon, were warrior rulers. Some, like Samuel, were prophets. Two of them were priests, Eli and Samuel, so cumulatively they are types of the Lord Jesus Christ who is the prophet, priest, and king, the ultimate one, the true one that they were all pointing towards. And even their failures is designed in a way that makes us realize, you know, these judges, they're not the final answer. They're just small images, small types that point us to the Lord Jesus Christ, who alone can bring about the peace and the righteousness that the Scriptures promise, and He's going to do so in history. So these judges restored people to God through the sacrifices, that's one type of Christ, and committed the people to God's law. And as such, they show that Jesus Christ himself is committed to law and gospel. Law and gospel are anchor points in this book. So that's the Christology of this book in a nutshell. And we can go home. Not quite. There's more. The key word is judge. And that's all I'll say there. I think that's pretty obvious for this book. If you look at the visual outline, though, of the book on the first side of your outlines, you will see the logical structure that Samuel, the author of Judges, gave to us. First two chapters are a double introduction that parallels a double appendix at the end of the book. The bulk of the book, in between chapter 3 through 16, illustrates what was brought up in the introductions, the double introduction, and what will be expanded upon in the double appendix. And he does so by going through 14 judges' lives. So that's the overall structure. It's very, very simple. You've got a theological introduction, a theological conclusion, and you've got 14 judges who illustrate the principles in that introduction and conclusion. Okay, so it's pretty easy to keep that outline in your head. Now let's look at the introduction first. Chapter 1 recounts some of the characteristics of the first and second generations of the Israelites after Joshua died. Now, it's obvious from this record they were not perfect, but I'm gonna quickly lay out for you seven absolutely fantastic, and I don't think I included those in your bulletins, but fantastic characteristics of those first and second generations. Despite their limitations and some of their compromises, they really did have some splendid aspects to their lives. Verse 1 shows that they were committed to the task that Joshua had given them even after Joshua had died. So they were going to do what Joshua had asked them. They didn't just quit as soon as he dies. Verse 2 shows that they were attentive to the Lord. That's such an important characteristic of any nation that's going to be blessed by God. Verses 3-4 show that they were obedient and they were very decisive in their obedience. Verses 5-7 show that they were sensitive to sin and injustice and they inflicted on the pagan king Adonai Bezek, the justice that he deserved. Strange name. He called himself the Lord of lightning. You know, he had pretty high thoughts of himself, but the true Lord of lightning and everything else in this world, Jehovah, was going to bring him down. Now, some people think, you know, that is so barbaric. Why on the earth did they cut off his thumbs, both of his thumbs, both of his big toes, That was just simply a literal application of the lex talionis principle in the Old Testament, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. There could, in some cases, be a ransom or a lesser penalty that was brought or an equivalent penalty. But he was a king who cut off the toes and the fingers of kings and made them crawl around his table to humble them. And so they cut off his toes and his thumbs. And because he had killed many people, he was a murderer, he was put to death, but only after he watched his glorious city of Jerusalem going up in flames. So there really is nothing barbaric about it. It's not cruelty. It was perfect administration of justice. Verses 8 through 14 show tenacity in their conquest with Caleb and his son-in-law showing heroism that does not die. Verses 12 through 15 show that faith can be audacious in expectations. And some people say, oh, that's really odd that he would promise to anybody who conquers, well, he's promising to his generals, any of whom would have been worthy to marry his daughter. you know, because they all had faith. This was a faithful generation. And I don't think that her request for the upper or lower springs was audacious, I mean, bad at all. It was not negative. I think it was an audacious, it was a bold faith, and we ought to have the same kind of faith that they do. Then verses 16 through 20 show tremendous courage. So there's a lot of good points, even of that second generation. But that was a transitional generation. God's work cannot all be finished in one generation. It is a multi-generational calling, and this is why covenant succession is so important if there is to be compounded growth over time. Now, some of us have had losses, you know, in our financial dealings, but you start again and you're going to have compounded growth over time. That's what you're looking for. And this chapter illustrates two pretty good generations, but sadly, the book illustrates the disappointing reality that they did things that stopped the compounded growth. There was some covenant succession, but they stopped the compounded growth of the kingdom over time. And we'll look at some of the reasons for that. The glory years of the millennial reign of the Lord Jesus Christ are going to be showing nonstop compounded growth generation after generation until the whole earth is filled with the glory of the Lord, filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the ocean bed. It's going to be so awesome to be able to see that. But it's important that Christians understand if there are things that are going to be cutting off this covenant succession in a compounded way. We might think, oh, we've had covenant succession. Look, my kids turned out okay. Yeah, but did you invest in them in a way where there's going to be compounded growth over time? That's the kind of stuff we're going to be looking at today. So this chapter shows the breakdown of covenant succession so that we can avoid the same problems. When the previous generation passed the baton onto their children, their children were satisfied with less than what God had called them to. Look at verse 21. Chapter 1, verse 21 says, But the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites who inhabited Jerusalem. So the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day. To this day is what? It's the day of Samuel. That's a long time that they have been staying in Jerusalem. And the crazy thing is the previous generation had completely dispossessed Jerusalem of its inhabitants. They had conquered it. So why are there Jebusites living in there? For some reason, they saw an advantage to living side by side with these people in the city. There was some pluralistic thinking that was going on in their heads. The next verses, verses 22 to the end of the chapter, show a mixture of doing God's will but not doing it all the way. For some reason, they thought that, hey, we've conquered these tribes. Why shouldn't we make money off of them with tribute? Because look at all the expenditures we've had. Why don't we make money off of them with tribute rather than destroying them? It amounts to the same thing, doesn't it? God said, no, it does not amount to the same thing. I told you to destroy these tribes, right? God explains failure to take the conquest was not an issue of lack of ability. Too many times we excuse our moral lapses and our laziness with this task is too big for us. Let me tell you something, brothers and sisters, if God commands you to do something, You can do it because if God is with us, who can be against us, right? So it's a lousy excuse to say, I can't do it. No, if God's commanded you to do it, you say, Lord, give me the strength. I know I can't do it on myself, but give me the strength to do this. Now, chapter 2 backs up to the time just before chapter 1, verse 1. This is confusing to people, but let me completely sort out this confusion. If you look at chapter 1, verse 1, It starts with now after the death of Joshua, but in chapter 2, verse 6, Joshua dismisses the people. So he's still alive, right? So what chapter 2 is doing is it's going back in time to just before chapter 1 begins. That's why I say this is a double introduction. Rather than being chronological, The introduction and the conclusion are theological overviews of the whole period of Judges. In other words, the whole period from chapter 3 to chapter 16. That's what the conclusion and the introduction are dealing with. Chapter 1 is one snapshot of that period that's being discussed. Chapter 2 is another snapshot of the same period. Chapter 1 uses some examples to show failure. Chapter 2 uses some examples to show the underlying causes or reasons for that failure. Now, in terms of causes, some of it involves the influences that the Canaanites had upon their children, much like the Canaanites have been educating the children of believers for many, many generations in America. They've had a huge influence upon our children. Chapter 2 gives, in a nutshell, the series of cycles of sin that are going to be going on throughout this book and that inevitably lead, if not the next generation, at least the third generation, to no longer have a consistent Christianity or even to abandon the faith altogether. Many people are mystified as to why hundreds of thousands of Christians are leaving the Christian faith in America and in the West. Why are they doing that? They're mystified. If you read the book of Judges, you won't be mystified at all. It makes perfect sense. It makes perfect sense. So, some of the compromises and failures to conquer that happened in this chapter happened even before Joshua died. Let's start reading at verse 1 of chapter 2. Chapter 2, verse 1. And the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochem and said, I led you up from Egypt, brought you into the land which I swore to your fathers, and I said, I will never break my covenant with you, and you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land. You shall tear down the altars. But you have not obeyed my voice. Why have you done this? Therefore I also said, I will not drive them out before you, but they shall be thorns in your side and their God shall be a snare to you. So it was when the angel of the Lord spoke these words to all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voices and wept. Then they called the name of that place Bokim. Bokim means weeping. Called the name of that place Bokim, and they sacrificed there to the Lord. And when Joshua had dismissed the people, the children of Israel went each to his own inheritance to possess the land." Okay, cool. They repented. They recommitted themselves to doing what they were supposed to do in the first place. That's a wonderful thing. So, the point here is that all of chapter 1 happens immediately after verse 6 of chapter 2. All of chapter 1 happens immediately after verse 6 of chapter 2, after Joshua dies. The temptation to compromise had happened with the most faithful generation in the history of Israel, okay, but their repentance, and that is key, led to very faithful actions until that generation died out. Chapter 2 verse 7 says, So the people served the Lord, Yehovah, all the days of Joshua and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great works of Yehovah, which he had done for Israel. And we know from verse eight, how long Joshua lived. He lived to 110. So he died in 1424 BC, according to Usher's chronology. So there were 20 years, pretty faithful, decent faithfulness. And another eight years before the elders who were part of the initial conquest had completely died off. And it's getting near the end of the second generation as well. But chapter one already informed us that the children of the second generation were willing to make treaties. When the first generation were willing to make minor compromises with the Canaanites, and granted they repented of them, when they were willing to do that, the second generation went a step further And then the grandchildren were willing to embrace Baal worship entirely. That is the way human nature goes. It may not seem like much of a compromise in the first generation, but compounded growth of covenant succession guarantees growth of both evil, if it is neglected, or good, if it is nurtured. Okay? So verses 10 through 15 speak to the grandchildren. when all that generation had been gathered to their fathers, another generation arose after them who did not know the LORD, or the Yehoah, nor the work which he had done for Israel. Then the children of Israel did evil in the sight of Yehoah, and served the Baals. And they forsook Yehoah God of their fathers, who had brought them out of the land of Egypt. And they followed other God's from among the gods of the people who were all around them, and they bowed down to them, and they provoked the Lord to anger. They forsook Yehoah, and the serf bailed, and the Ashtoreths. And the anger of Yehoah was hot against Israel. So he delivered them into the hands of plunderers who despoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies all around. so that they could no longer stand before their enemies. Wherever they went out, the hand of Yehoah was against them for calamity, as Yehoah had said and as Yehoah had sworn to them, and they were greatly distressed." To have the hand of God against us is not a good thing. If Satan's against you, your neighbors are against you, God's against you, just give up quick, repent, and say, Lord, I want you to be with me. So these were Christians who were trying to plunder the wisdom of the pagans. I've heard Christians say that. You know, we're just plundering. I said, no, no, no. The Israelites, when they left Egypt, plundered the gold and silver, but they did not plunder the wisdom of Egypt. They left that behind. But they're trying to plunder the wisdom of Egypt, or the pagan Canaanites in this case, But it's the Canaanites who end up plundering them instead. They cry out, God gives them judges, the judges rule for a time according to God's laws, but eventually the people compromise again. If you look at 17b, so they turned quickly from the way in which their fathers walked in obeying the commandments of Yehovah, they did not do so. And this cycle keeps repeating. God uses civil, evil governments to afflict His people. The affliction makes them cry out to God. God raises up judges who turn the hearts of the people back to Him. So that's the pattern. I'm going to read two more verses to illustrate that, and the first is 18 to 19. And when Yehoah raised up judges for them, Yehoah was with the judge and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge. For Yehoah was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who oppressed them and harassed them. And it came to pass when the judge was dead that they reverted and behaved more corruptly than their fathers by following other gods to serve them and bow down to them. They did not cease from their own doings, nor from their stubborn way. So chapter two summarizes the cycles of sin found in the heart of this book. And again, if you look at the graphic on the first side of your outlines, I've tried to display that for you. And over the 350 years that this book covers, Israel went through that cycle at least seven times. Now that's amazing when you think about it. It's certainly amazing in terms of God's patience with them. Patience over those 350 years. But it's also amazing that they don't learn from their own history. They keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again, sort of like we do, right? I also find it amazing that this is almost a mirror image of America's history. This was one of the most fascinating things I came upon when I first started studying this a few months ago. It's so close to the cycles in our history. Not only parallels the approximate same amount of time from the pilgrims to the present, but the same similar experiences. Every sin in the book of Judges including the horrifying rape and the cutting up of that woman in chapter 19, have happened in America. And it's not just Jeffrey Dahmer. There have been a number of cases of that happening in America. We have moved from being a confederation of explicitly Christian republics that served the Lord during the colonial era to a nation state 350 years later that rivals any Baal state or Moloch state that is described in this rather gruesome book. None of those tyrants had worldwide interventionism like we do. None of those tyrants had the kind of sophisticated technology that can spy on absolutely everything we say on our phones and everything that we do. None of those tyrants had agencies that are supposed to be governing every facet of our lives like we do. We tend to be blind to America's evils, but when you compare the evils in America, and even worse in Europe, and some of those countries, to the evils and judges, you realize, you know, we are probably going to be facing some tough times if God is at all true to His promise that He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Tony Couchey is correct when he says that America has a remarkable, quote, similarity to the experience of Israel during the period of the judges in the Old Testament. The same cycle of sin and apathy, decline and defeat, desperate prayer for God's help, and finally, his powerful intervention characterizes every revival. Perhaps there is a clue here regarding where today's church should be concentrating her efforts. Now, because people are all over the map on defining where these different revivals begin and end, I want to outline the six great awakenings that happened in America according to quite a number. The people who actually specialize in the study of revivals have said, no, it really breaks out into six great awakenings, not two or three. First great awakening of 1727 was under the leadership of George Whitefield. Now, this was largely a reformed movement, resulted in perhaps the most massive shift in morals in the entire history of America. It was an amazing shift that happened. If you haven't studied that time period, you can easily gloss over it. But our nation went from gross immorality, high crime, gangs terrorizing the seaboard, rampant pornography and immorality, numerous highwaymen stealing things when you're traveling down the roads, to a time when the sheriffs and their deputies were out of work because there was no crime. It was remarkable. It affected politics. The evil we're experiencing is not new in history. We have gone through this downward spiral a number of times and have been rescued out of it. So 1727 began the first Great Awakening. Now sadly, the next 65 years saw godly people being enamored with the academics of France. And they would go to France to get educated, And it would bring this humanistic education. They rejected some of the education, but a lot of it filtered down, and it began corrupting the academics of Christian academies right here in the United States. By the way, that's the same time period when our Declaration of Independence was written and our Constitution was written. You can see exactly the same humanistic streams from France that have infected those two documents. They're great documents, some of the best documents that civil magistrates have put out, but they are not perfect documents. They're certainly not inspired like the Mormon church thinks, not at all. They need to be perfected. But anyway, I'm just trying to give you a little bit of a background of what was happening to the church. They were enamored with the academics of France, And it impacted them. And the Second Great Awakening, there was corruption then, immorality that began developing again. Second Great Awakening happened 65 years after the first one, and went from 1792 and onwards. And it produced not only social changes, but massive missions movements. And actually, this revival hit the United Kingdom, Scandinavia, Switzerland, Germany, and other countries. Some of you have read some of Robert Haldane's commentaries and other works. He would be a representative of Europe. And a person like Timothy Dwight would be an American representative of a Reformed camp. Now, in some places, the Reformation was substantial and produced holiness, whereas in other places, I would say it was largely emotionalism. The good effects probably lasted about 30 years. Now this is the difference between Reformation and Revival. Revival is very short term. Reformation has the potential of being very long term and affecting every aspect of culture. The Third Great Awakening of 1830 had good men like Asahel Nettleton, but it also had manipulators like Charles Finney. I have almost zero respect for Charles Finney. He is not a hero of mine at all. Tremendous manipulator, did not, anyway, we won't get into that, but here's the point. God did use Finney to lead many people to a genuine knowledge of the Lord. God used him as a tool. So some people call this the second Great Awakening. It really is the third Great Awakening, and I can demonstrate that if you want in other contexts. Wales had powerful preachers during this Great Awakening like John Elias, Christmas Evans, William Williams, James Caughey was an evangelist who ministered in the United States, England, and Canada. Scotland had the likes of Thomas Chalmers, Robert Murray-McChain. Some of you have probably read Murray-McChain's stuff. W.H. Burns, William Chalmers Burns. This great awakening spread even to Scandinavia, Central Europe, South Africa, the Pacific Islands, India, Malabar, and Ceylon. It lasted until 1842, so about 12 years. And the impact of those 12 years continued to last for some time. The fourth great awakening was 15 years later. It started in 1857 and produced massive growth of the church in Canada, America, Europe, Western Russia, Australia, the South Seas, South Africa, and India. So it was a worldwide movement as well. In America, 50,000 people a week were being added to the church, and that is incredibly significant when you realize America's population was only 30 million back in those days. One million came to Christ out of Britain's 27 million, and I'll just break down some of the numbers of Great Britain. Ulster saw 100,000 converted. Scotland saw 30,000. Wales saw 100,000. England saw 500,000. And let me throw out some names that you might immediately recognize. Moody, Sankey, Charles Spurgeon, and others were powerfully used by God. Now, were they all reformed? No. And let me tell you something, God does not need Reformed people to bring revival. He will use anyone whose heart is captured by Him. He is not dependent upon us as well. He used people like Hudson Taylor, Lord Shaftesbury, many other notables sprang from this movement of God. The Fifth Great Awakening started in 1880 and lasted till 1903 and largely revolved around D.L. Moody, Billy Sunday, Andrew Murray in South Africa, and John McNeil in Australia. And the Sixth Great Awakening is really a collage of numerous revivals around the world. The most famous of these was the Welsh Revival. That's probably the one you've heard of. But a shockwave was felt all over America. Though there were solid men in each of these revivals, the revival was sadly marred by Pentecostal extremes, and there were other extremes like Perfectionism. Perfectionism is like the Wesleyan perfectionism. You come to the place in your Christian life where you have a second baptism of the Holy Spirit, and then you become perfect. You never sin again. And I've talked to people who've said, oh, I haven't sinned in 21 years. I said, well, that's a sin right there because you just called God a liar. So I blew his bubble. Actually, he didn't think I did. He continued to think he did not sin. Finney had another slightly different perfectionism. There was a more moderate perfectionism called the higher life movement. So the point is these movements were from God, were used by God, and even many of these men whom I strongly disagree with, I admire, they have done great good in God's kingdom. I love them as brothers in the Lord, even though their theology was hugely marred, and I will add, just like many of the revivals in the book of Judges that God clearly used, were sadly marred by bad theology and by bad practices. Okay, it's just giving you a little bit of perspective. I give those revival statistics because I think they parallel the cycles of judges in many ways, and Reformed people tend to be way too critical. You know, we criticize some of the leaders in the second, third, fourth, fifth Great Awakenings in America as having theological issues. And I say, I agree with you. They did have theological issues. But let me tell you something, brother. Let me tell you something, sister. Compared to Gideon and Samson and Abimelech, every one of these guys is saints, okay? I'm gonna wrap my arms around these brothers, and because God wrapped his arm around Gideon and Samson and some of these guys, I gotta wrap my arms around them too. I might smack them a couple of times, but anyway, we do have to have a little bit of perspective and not be so perfectionistic. Now why, why did these great awakenings end up being so short-lived. Their impact lasted at the most for one or two generations, and then things were bad again. Part of the problem was that parents failed to give consistently Christian education and discipleship, preferring the lazy way of letting the Canaanites disciple their kids in the public schools. I'm talking about America here. And they said, well, our kids, they went to government schools, and they turned out OK. And I could say the same thing. I went to a government school. I turned out OK, right? And actually, I've found over the years more and more things that I've had to get rid of, get rid of, because I didn't even realize that they were unbiblical concepts that had been drilled into me. They may have staying power in God's kingdom, But what you've done when you send your children away to government school is you've cut out the compounding growth. You're not adding from the Scriptures the depth that needs to be there if there is to be compounded kingdom growth. Now, I'll admit that part of the problem was formalism in the Church of America, and part of it was children seeing compromises and hypocrisy in the parents, and then either leaving the faith or justifying their even greater compromises. What we need today is not revival. Now, I'll welcome a revival if God gives it. He's sovereign in what He gives, but I long for a reformation that will be greater than any reformation that we have had before. America and the worldwide church desperately needs a full-scale reformation. So let's take a survey of the heart of the book. Chapter 3, verses 1 through 6 shows a backslidden condition of the church once again, and God makes them suffer severely under Kushan Rishathayim, the king of Mesopotamia. These Jews were so backslidden that they had married unbelievers. And just as God raised up preachers in America and in Europe, God raised up Ophniel, filled him with the Holy Spirit, and after delivering the people through warfare, he judged the people. Now, to judge the people of Israel should not be thought of in terms of the modern state. There was nothing like that in the Bible, like what we have today, the overreaching state. It shouldn't even be thought of in terms of the later kings of Israel. A judge had two main functions. First of all, to protect the people by military leadership, one needed, but not with a standing army. And in second, to reestablish God's law as the law by which all of the judges of the nation would judge their court cases. So Othniel, just like Eli and Samuel, he was not the only judge. That'd be ridiculous for millions of people to have one judge. No, he trained all of the local judges and the laws of God, and he called the people as he went around his circuit back to the laws of God. That was one of his main functions. The judges had very decentralized, for the most part, very decentralized government, similar to our original Articles of Confederation. And he was successful, Othniel was, in bringing the people back to the law of God. So it says that the land had rest for 40 years. That doesn't seem like a really long time. Why does God allow short-term revivals? Why doesn't He change people for all time? You know, it's a complicated answer, and I'm not sure that I have an uncomplicated, a complicated question. I don't have an uncomplicated answer. But if I was forced to give a simple answer, and it's not adequate, but if I was forced to give a simple answer, it would be given to you under three points. The first point is God is sovereign and His providences are sometimes mysterious. And some people say, that's a cop-out, Phil. And I agree, it sort of is, but it's true. You cannot make a revival. I've heard so many people say, we're scheduling a revival for next year. No, you cannot. God is sovereign. He brings it. Now, does He use some of our means? Yes, when God is going to bring a revival, He stirs up prayer, He stirs up other things. We're going to look at man's role in a bit, but God is sovereign. over revival. Second, the book of Judges shows why parents must pass on the faith by engaging in Christian education as demanded in Deuteronomy chapter 6. Deuteronomy 6 is a fascinating passage. I think it demands homeschooling because it says that we are to bring God's Word to bear in discipling our kids when they sleep So how do you sleep? How do you deal with your dream life? How do you go to bed at the right time? How to get up? How to eat? How to go by the wayside? How to work? Everything we do needs to be discipled from the Word of God. You can't do that if you've sent your child away for eight hours out of the day. And so the lure of free education has been disastrous to Christianity in America. There is no way that you can give 12 years of intense discipleship by pagans into just a couple of hours, you know, a day that Christians try to invest through devotions and other things like that, and it destroys covenant succession. There will never be compounded growth of the kingdom without consistent Christian education. So why do we homeschool in a radically biblical way? Because we want compounded kingdom growth. Now, I praise God for raising up people who work in government schools and try to ameliorate some of this negativity there, and people who work in politics, and people who work in—that's being leavened in society, but our kids aren't ready for that. They have to be discipled. Third, God insists on antithesis even by faithful believers. If our generation will not consistently apply God's law to all that we do, why should the next generation not follow suit, just imitate us, or be even less consistent? God has set up laws of cause and effect, and one of those laws of cause and effect is that compromise always begets more compromise, not less. You plant one dandelion in your a yard, just one dandelion seed every year, and your kids are going to have thousands of dandelions in their yard. But if each generation is pulling up these dandelions, then no generation is going to have an over amount of work. My generation had a lot of work to try to reverse some of the things, and that's what some of you guys, some of you are first generation on this. A lot of work, but take heart. Over time, it gets easier and easier. Compounded kingdom growth. Now one side note. is that Othniel's name in chapter 3 verses 5 through 11 means God is powerful. God is my protector. Now you could say he named himself that. He was Caleb's brother. It could be Caleb and him named themselves, but I think his parents probably named Caleb and Othniel, and Caleb has a bad name. Othniel's got a great name. He's the younger brother. I think that his parents came to faith later in life, and Caleb got the lousy name before they were Christians. Othniel got the good name. But to me, this is so encouraging. You first-generation Christians can make a huge difference. I mean, you look at Caleb. Incredible, the difference that he made. You look at Othniel. It was absolutely incredible, the difference that he made. Don't be discouraged. By the way, he was, when I say he was first generation, he was not even a Jew. Neither Caleb nor Ophiel were Jews. They were Kenizzites who were converted, they became Jews, but previously they were outside, they were not descendants of Abraham. So what matters is faith and faithfulness, not ethnicity. So even the first and second generation of Christians can be as faithful in passing on the faith as Caleb was. Now let me make three additional very, very quick applications from Othniel's life. Verses 1 through 2 make it clear that war is biblical and legitimate. Some people struggle with that, but God deliberately left tyrants to exist in order to teach His people war. That implies God says it's legitimate to war, right? So that should not be a conscience issue. Verses 6 through 7 show that intermarriage between believers and unbelievers is a grave sin that receives God's judgment. Verses 9 through 10 shows that secession of a portion of a country from an ungodly country is a legitimate aspect of interposition. The secession of the southern states from the northern states in America perfectly lawful, perfectly legitimate. I don't agree with all of their reasons for doing so. But secession is allowed in the Scripture. There's a lot of other practical stuff in that section, but let's move on. Second cycle is in verses 12 through 30. Now once again the church tolerates sin in its midst and God brings discipline. Once again through statism. Eglon, the king of Moab, I've got a sort of picture of him in the outline there, was a tyrant who exacted onerous tribute from Israel. I view taxes as being God's discipline to humble us. Taxes is never a good thing. Never, ever, ever. It is always a bad thing. It is discipline upon God's people. If you want proof of that, you can talk with me for an hour afterwards. But it is not a good thing. Or you can talk with Robert Fugate, who's written a whole book on the subject. Ehud was a civil representative of Israel. By God's spirit, he planned a daring assassination attempt in order to rescue Israel. It's a very fun story. You ought to read it. It results in war. Israel wins the war. And this time, the land has rest for 80 years. That's phenomenal. That's enough time for a third generation to grow up and to be faithful in the Lord, in the ways of their parents and their grandparents. And more on that later. Now this section teaches us some more things. Is it okay to break forced treaties? I believe so. Verse 15 indicates that they were under a treaty to bring tribute, but it was a forced treaty, not something voluntarily entered into, and it was an ungodly treaty. Are assassinations allowed? I believe so. If they are done by a lawfully, legitimately elected civil magistrate. Verses 12 through 25, chapter 4, verse 21, chapter 5, verses 24 through 27, they all indicate that assassination of a tyrant is a good thing. It's sometimes the most efficient way to win a war with the least loss of life. Is deceit and intrigue allowed during a time of war? Sometimes people have really struggled over that. Read the story of Joshua in the previous book and you will see that God, by direct order, caused them to deceive their enemy. And here we see that illustrated in verse 19, a spirit anointed leader doing so as an act of war. So during war, deceiving the enemy is allowed. You do not need to have conscience problems if you're in the military and your state calls you to deceive the enemy, not your people. Make a distinction there, but the enemy that you are at war with. Are national armies allowed? Verses 27 through 29 would indicate so, but numbers would specify that it should be voluntary and it should be divided up under locally run units. General Stonewall Jackson, just as a little tidbit of history, he referred to passages like this, a book of Joshua and Judges, he would go to over and over again as he taught in his War College, War Ethics and War Strategies. These are the kinds of things that we don't have time to get into today. There's so much cool stuff in the book of Judges. Now, based on the introductory two chapters, we can assume that after 80 years, Israel followed the cycle of sin and experienced God's hand of discipline. Yes, you guessed it, from a wicked state. God doesn't have a very high opinion of centralized governments. The Old Testament does not look upon bullying centralized police states as good in any other way than to oppress a corrupt people. People get what they deserve, is what I often say. Just like we, when we vote in those people, that's exactly the kind of corrupt people that are corrupt a nation deserves. Now, thankfully, our God is a God of grace and mercy, and God raised up Shamgar to deliver Israel, presumably after they repented. And I say presumably because God didn't want to have to repeat himself on every single story. So in chapter 2, he says, this is the principle. This cycle is always going to be happening in chapters 3 through 16. So even if I don't repeat myself, you can assume each of these steps was there, right? So that's why I say there's a presumption there. But there is a historical detail that I want to point out just to protect you. Your modern establishment study Bibles follow Thiel's, T-H-I-E-L-E, Thiel's errant chronology, and Thiel has Shamgar, Deborah, Barak, and Gideon as all ruling at the same time. And worse, they later are forced to put Abimelech, Tola, Jireh, Jephthah, Ebaz, Elon, Eli, and Samson as having at least overlapping rules with each other. Now in contrast, if you look at the chart that I've made based on James Usher and Floyd Nolan Jones books, you will see that I have all of the judges in this book as being sequential. Modern revisionist historians don't see these judges as being sequential and it leads them to numerous blatant contradictions. For example, what's the very next verse? It says, when Ehud was dead, and then it gives the history of Deborah. When he was dead. Deborah and Ehud could not have contemporary judgeships. It's impossible. Chapter 10, verse 1 says, After Abimelech there arose to save Israel Tola. Tola clearly comes after Abimelech. Verse 3 says, After him arose Jireh. I mean, it's just plain silly to say that those three ruled contemporaneously, and yet several modern study Bibles, some of which you may have in your laps right now, do exactly that. They're contemporaries, they say. Now they try to reconcile it by saying, hey, some of these judges only ruled over tiny parts of Israel. They didn't rule over the whole. They still got a problem because it says after this judge died, this one arose. They got that problem. And secondly, where does it say that this judge only ruled over a part of Israel? It does not say that. Chapter 10, verse 2 says, Tola judged Israel. not part of Israel, but Israel. Verse 3 says, Jire judged Israel. And yet you have charts galore all over the web that have these judges all mixed up and bundled together and only ruling over tiny portions of Israel. And you might wonder, how on earth did such diverse divergencies happen That's a redundancy, isn't it? Diverse divergencies. How on earth did this happen that evangelicals would buy into something like that? Well, the first reason is that the evangelical church of today has followed Edwin Thiel in making the secular chronologies of Assyria and Egypt primary and forcing, I mean literally, forcing the biblical chronologies and text into those errant, and they are very errant, chronologies. even though it produces massive contradictions in the Bible, even when it clearly makes the Bible's history 44 years too short. Why would they do that? Well, my guess is it's in part because of a lust for academic respectability with the liberals. It is, after all, hard to buck the establishment when most evangelical pastors have been trained by the establishment. In any case, Biblicists should not follow Thiel since he did not operate with biblical presuppositions. I'll just give you one example from his book. Quoting Thiel, he says, if the biblical chronology seems to be at variance with Assyrian chronology, it may be because of errors in the Hebrew records. Uh-uh. No way. And yet evangelicals follow him blindly. Why? Because he's the scholar. And he represents evangelical scholarship, right? He's the scholar. By the way, if everybody's supposed to trust these Assyrian chronologies that we're fitting the Bible into, I say, okay, just read a little bit earlier in those same Assyrian chronologies when they have kings reigning for tens of thousands of years. Oh, no, no, no. Well, that part we don't follow. I say, yeah, but you're saying this part we have to, but the earlier part of the Assyrian record we don't have to follow? It's ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. So I can show you numerous places in the Bible where Theo either changes the Bible, assumes there was a mistake or a scribal error in the Bible, ignores key verses that contradict his thesis, or says that it cannot be reconciled. At one point, he has to make a third Hebrew kingdom. And this is the guy who's followed by all evangelicals. He has to make a third Hebrew kingdom out of thin air to rescue something that is irreconcilable in his system. He made up five co-regencies out of thin air. I highly recommend the chronology of James Usher, especially as it's been retooled by Floyd Nolan Jones. Now, why do I even bother to give you that background information? For one thing, some of your study Bibles are going to make you utterly confused. And so you've got to be cautious. Are these people really biblical in their background? You've got to be very cautious with what you read. And secondly, what I want to illustrate with this is that the evangelical world is so in bed with the world's scholarship, they don't even realize that they are tainted. It's just pervasive. Now, thankfully, this is not so of Creation Ministries International or of Answers in Genesis. They are putting out some fabulous stuff in terms of chronology. So I'm pointing you in the right direction of where you can get good history. OK, let's move to chapters four and five. I love the story of Deborah and Barack. Though Barak later became a great leader in Israel, Deborah has to coax and push him to do the right thing. She did not use her prophetic gift as an excuse to take over his role as political leader. In fact, the very opposite is true. When you read the passage, it's quite clear that Deborah did not leave the army. She did not recruit soldiers, did not fight. She did not even lead Israel before the war or after the war, period. None of that happened. She was a judge of disputes by divine prophetic inspiration. So she only had one of the functions of the judge. And thus, if people were to disobey her inspired revelation, they didn't say they disobeyed her. They disobeyed God, is what it says. She was not ruling over them. She was simply a passive vehicle for God's inerrant revelation. Let me just give you some points, because feminism has so distorted the story of Deborah that I think we need to counter that. Let me give you four points that show that she is a marvelous, marvelous model for what we believe the rest of Scripture teaches. First, Chapter 4, verse 6 makes it clear that Barak was commanded to lead, not Deborah. History by itself is not normative. God's commands are. And even apart from the law of God, which is crystal clear, this historical account gives God's command for the male to lead. She says, has not the Lord God of Israel commanded, go and deploy troops? So Deborah said, hey, that's a man's job. You go do it, Barak. Second, the fact that Barak didn't want his God-given leadership role in verse 8, and the fact that Barak may have theoretically disobeyed that command, though I don't think he did disobey it, but some people think he did, just because, let's say theoretically he did, does not empty the command of its obvious meaning. Thus, however you interpret the de facto leadership that happened, you cannot explain away the de jure command that the male must lead the nation in this passage. Now, I happen to believe that the de facto and the de jure are perfectly reconciled, but the point is, Deborah, by inspiration, said, you lead. Third, verses 8 through 9 clearly indicate that Barak's need of Deborah's moral support was a shame and not something to be imitated today. Now, how could it possibly be a shame on an egalitarian interpretation? It wouldn't have been a shame at all. If feminism is true, it would have been something to model. It would not have been a shame. And so here's the point. Shameful conduct should not be imitated. It should be avoided. Fourth, Deborah kept insisting that Barak take his leadership role as women should do today. She insisted on male headship of the army, chapter 4, verse 6. Male headship of the government, chapter 5, verse 2. She only saw herself as a mother in Israel. Now, there's a big difference between being a mother in Israel and being the mother of Israel. In other words, being over them. She was not. She's just a mother. She's another mother in Israel. That's chapter 5, verse 7. In the two capacities she did act in, she is listed as being under the authority of a man. As a judge, she is described in chapter 4, verse 4, as a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth. In composing the song, we find Deborah sings with Barak in chapter 5. But she actually takes a backseat in absolutely everything else. We find that Barak takes leadership in drafting an army, chapter 4, verse 10. It is Barak that Sisera sees as the head of the army, chapter 4, verse 12. Barak takes leadership in the fighting, chapter 4, verse 14, 15, 16, and 22. And Hebrews, which looks back on this event and summarizes all of these events, he only mentions the valor of Barak, Hebrews 11, 32. The story of Deborah is not a justification for female politicians. It is the opposite. It is a clear rebuke to men who will not leave. And on my kaisercommentary.com blog, I have a number of exegetical points that show Deborah to be a marvelous rebuke to feminism. I love the character and the role of Deborah. She was a marvelous woman who knew her place under God, who was super confident in that role. And yes, she was willing to bring a rebuke to men who failed to lead. And I say, good for her. We need more of her kind of rebukes to modern wimpy men. Now, let me quickly list a few applications that may be of interest to you. Chapter five, verse eight says, not a shield or spear was seen among 40,000 in Israel. And the rest of Israel had to get their weapons illegally. But of the 40,000, not a spear or shield could be found. Here's the point. Throughout history, tyrants sought to disarm the people, whereas leaders who were actually interested in liberty always insisted that the people be armed. These judges always allowed their people to get rearmed, insisted upon it. and kept them rearmed during the duration of their judgeship. Any government that seeks to disarm its citizens is by definition a tyrannical government that should repent, period. Interestingly, when Israelite citizens were disarmed by tyrants and they could not obtain first-class weapons, that sometimes happens, no biggie, they perfected alternative weapons. Shamgar in chapter 3, verse 31 has a homemade weapon, as does Ehud. Jail is praised as a woman for killing a man with a tent peg, chapter 5, verses 24 through 20. I mean, you use what you can get, right? But the value of being armed can be seen throughout the book as well. Judges 3, verse 27, Ehud calls all Israel to arms, but interestingly, he does not supply those arms. The Bible expects citizens to already have them and know how to use them. By the way, Jesus said exactly the same thing. In Luke 22, 36, Jesus said, he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. And Judges 5, there is praise for Israelites who quickly responded to the call of arms. Verse 9, that was given by the recruiter in verse 14. Reuben, Gilead, Dan, and Asher are criticized for not having the courage to join the uprising in verses 16 through 17. Even stronger language is given to the city of Meraz. Let me quote it. Curse Meroz, said the angel of the Lord. Curse its inhabitants bitterly, because they did not come to the help of the Lord, or the help of the Lord against the mighty." So if you don't want to be cursed by the Lord, you better pay attention to that verse. Very important. That verse indicates it is a moral responsibility to have arms, to be prepared to use them when a civil magistrate calls for righteous interposition. The people were cursed when they did not respond to the recruiter. With each of the judges, this was an assumed responsibility. Now, I've got a ton of stuff out of the sermon. I'm probably putting too much in this morning. But if I ever preach through judges again, I'll probably take a year because it is just loaded with things like this, just absolutely loaded. In chapter six, we see another cycle of sin leading to bondage and then deliverance by Gideon. Now, the bondage was only seven years. I find that such an encouraging story in judges. You don't have to have the 40 years, you know, that chapter 13, verse 1, had Israel go through 40 years of misery. This was only seven years of misery. Our God is so good. So don't assume you always have to go through a long time. All it takes is for God's people, not the whole nation, but for God's people to repent. And what did the verse we've read, what, three times today say? God will not only be with His church, He'll heal the whole land. It's really a cool promise. So, another application is that since God brings the sinful actions of tyrants as a spanking stick to discipline His people, a proper response to God is needed rather than simply moral outrage against the tyrants. Louis de Boer said, ultimately, what is the church confronting when it faces the issue of tyranny? We may say that we're dealing with wicked men. We may go a step further and say, we're not dealing with mere flesh and blood, but are confronting principalities and powers, even Satan himself. But ultimately, we are dealing with God. He is the great first cause of all things. As the writer to the Hebrews put it, it is with Him that we have to do. If we face the question of the problems of tyranny squarely, we cannot possibly do so apart from the recognition of its source and its place in the providential purposes of a sovereign God who works all things according to His purpose. So rather than complaining about the tyranny in America, we should recognize this is God's tool to bring the church to repentance. And the sooner the church comes to repentance, the sooner the tyranny can be removed. We're looking at things backwards when we start with politics. Now, obviously, you don't ignore politics, but you don't start there. You start with God. You start with repentance. Anyway, Gideon starts off fairly good judge and he illustrates incredible faith in God as God whittles down his army to 300 people against a massive number of people. And he wins. It's just an incredible, I love this, one of my favorite stories of the lamps, you know, and the trumpets of Gideon. But the story of Gideon begins a list of judges who also have character flaws and who goof up big time. Gideon engages in murder against fellow Israelites who refused to help him. You don't do that. That's not only petty, God treated it as murder. He sets up an idol, a competing ephod, which Israel later worships. And so he's definitely not a perfect example. Now, while the story as a whole has many spiritual lessons that we can benefit from, here's four more that I want to highlight. First, it is written in such a way as to make it clear, as were some of the earlier stories actually, that God's war is not ultimately against flesh and blood. It is a war against the demon god Baal and all other demons. Demons can easily make us compromise, make our allies compromise, just like those demons made Gideon compromise. And in America, we are facing largely a demonic onslaught that cannot be solved with politics alone. Second, the story of Gideon shows that our trust cannot be in human judges. Though they were types of Christ, they could definitely let Israel down, and several did. Though Gideon was for the most part good, he was compromised with his worldly thinking. He thought like the world, he acted like the world on some levels. And let me give you just a minor, minor example. I can't go through all of them. He named one of his sons Abimelech, which means, my father is king. We need to say, no, the judges were not supposed to be kings. Well, Gideon started to act like a king, his sons took it a step further, and Abimelech in particular became a wicked tyrant. Third, Gideon's story highlights the evils that result from polygamy. Just as Leviticus 18.18 clearly condemned Jacob's polygamy, don't ever think that because Jacob's in the Bible and he had four wives that polygamy is okay. No. Leviticus 18.18 clearly condemned Jacob's polygamy, and here we see the disaster of polygamy as well. It is virtually impossible to find any polygamous father who does not end up with absolute disaster. Why? Because a polygamous father cannot adequately shepherd, disciple, discipline all of his children, certainly cannot adequately pass on the faith intact. Without exception in the Bible, all polygamous families ended up with disaster in their children. Absolute disaster. And the 72 children of Gideon were a royal disaster, an utter disaster. Fourth, There is a tendency for God's people to overlook serious sins in their heroes, but they should not. Gideon's idolatrous ephod is a case in point. I believe that should have disqualified him as a judge, period. Not only does Israel put up with his compromises, Just as Americans tend to put up with the compromises of their favorite politicians, they eventually worship the ephod. Now, we see similar things happening today with Christians covering for President Trump, even when he is aggressively pushing the sodomite cause internationally and in America. Now, has President Trump done a lot of good things? Absolutely, and I praised President Trump for the good things that he has done, but that does not mean I'm going to cover just because I don't like the opposition even more. I hate the opposition even more maybe is the way to say it. Now, that's not a good thing. You're supposed to love your enemies. You know what I mean. You can't cover for sin. You cannot cover for the sins of your heroes. It is ungodly. In any case, as a result of Israel's idolatry, God uses the sons of Gideon to punish the Israelites with their own homegrown tyranny. Again, politics alone will never solve America's problems. If Christians continue to trust in politics to save them, God will increasingly make politics the spanking stick that will bring pain to our derrieres. And this is especially illustrated with Gideon's son Abimelech in chapter 9. Israel is so disgusted with the tyranny of Gideon's sons that they engage in a revolution by siding with the rhetoric of Abimelech. He sounds good, but it's all empty rhetoric. His heart is far from God. Now certainly Abimelech gets rid of 70 Gideon's problem sons but because he doesn't follow biblical process he is treated by as a murderer by the narrator and in order to win he resorts to pragmatism and he says I've got to align myself politically with both groups so he aligns himself with believers he aligns himself with the horrible Baal worshipers okay both so God uses Abimelech a homegrown tyrant to punish Israel These Israelites don't learn. They hate Abimelech, so they try revolution to overthrow their revolutionary tyrant, and it backfires on them. Then they turn to Ga'al to deliver them in another attempt at revolution, which also backfires. Revolutions always backfire. That's the message of that section. And by the way, American War for Independence was not a revolution. It was a lawful war of lawfully elected magistrates interposing themselves, seceding very lawfully. It was not a revolution. We should not call it a revolution. But these attempted revolutions backfired. Abimelech destroys the city. He goes on a rampage. The history of revolution shows that revolutions spawn more tyranny, not less, and more revolutions, not less. Abimelech's tyranny was only stopped by a woman who throws a millstone over the wall of the The city that he's attacking hits him on the head and he's taken out. And so even though women should not be in the military, that illustrates, you know, the biblical principle that women can certainly defend themselves. And I really think that women ought to learn how to shoot. I think they ought to learn how to protect themselves. But anyway, we're going down all kinds of rabbit trails. I see Abimelech as an antichrist who served bail and an anti-judge. He illustrates the problems of Christians treating politics as a messiah. The author of Judges does not disguise his absolute contempt for Abimelech. There is nothing positive about him at all. Nothing. He's not a hero of the faith. He is an abominable man. Not until chapter 10 verse 1 does it say that a judge actually delivered Israel in a truly biblical sense once again. And Tola judged Israel for 23 years. With Tola's death in chapter 10, verse 2, the position of judge transferred to Jair in chapter 10, verse 3, and he ruled for 22 years. It doesn't seem to be any cycle of sin here. The cycles of sin are not inevitable. That's the encouraging part of this book. You could theoretically go from one judgeship to another judgeship with no falling away if each generation would guard their hearts and would train their children. But Jair's children had something wrong with them. It appears to be a pride issue. They had aspirations for kingship. Smaller compromise in parents leads to greater compromise in sons. And there isn't much space given to Tola and Jair simply because it doesn't fit Samuel's purpose of showing the disaster of trusting in politics. I mean, actually, if you look at them, those were two politicians who seemed to work out fairly well. But we're already seeing problems with the children of Jair. But a lot of time is devoted to Jephthah. Even though Hebrews 11, 32 says that Jephthah was a believer who conquered the Ammonites by faith, his life was so messed up that it is no surprise he degenerates very quickly into acting like a tyrant himself. Like the later King Saul, he's anointed with the Spirit of God in chapter 11, verse 29. He gets an army together. He crushes the Philistines. So far, so good. But his big biblical ignorance makes him make a rash vow and then fulfill a rash vow by sacrificing his daughter. That is absolutely disgusting and horrendous behavior, however you interpret that sacrifice. And there's debate. There always has been debate. Some people say it wasn't a literal killing of her. It was just he gave her to the temple and she couldn't get married. Either way, he should have repented of that vow. You can admire his desire to keep his word, but sometimes vows must be repented of. And if you want to study that subject, there's a great little section in the wine book by G.I. Williamson, a great little section in there. The Reformers had made vows to the Roman Catholic Church that were sinful vows. And they said, do we keep these? We're perpetually living in sin if we keep these. And they said, no, you repent of ungodly vows is what you do, including the vows of celibacy. By the way, if a person was not celibate, they should have repented of those. Anyway, Jephthah's lack of humility and lack of other biblical qualifications for rulership made him engage in a virtual genocide of the Ephraimites. So what we're seeing is the book progresses. If the judges reflect God's character less and less, no doubt because they know less and less about the Bible. Pragmatism becomes the name of the game more and more. Mercifully, God only let Jephthah rule for six years. Praise God. He's gone. Ibzon, Elon, and Abdon are passed over rather early in chapter 12 verses 8 through 15, but it appears their judgeships are just a holding pattern for the next 25 years. And verse 14 hints that though they might have been better than Jephthah, they were I think, and were for sure better than Abimelech, they had all of the same problems of the modern conservative movement. They were trying to conserve old values rather than radically returning to biblical values. And it illustrates a conservative movement simply does not have the spiritual power to hold back the downward slide of people into depravity. This book does not in any way honor conservatism. Instead, it is a cry for God's people to return radically back Law of God and to the Gospel. For 40 years God places Israel under a severe bondage to the Philistines as His judgment for their backslidden condition. Chapter 13 verse 1 says, the Lord delivered them into the hand of the Philistines for 40 years. That's a long time to suffer. Let me tell you something brothers and sisters, God is willing to let you suffer as long as it takes to bring you to repentance. And He'll just keep upheading the suffering until you come to repentance if you are truly elect. Once repentance happens, God raises up Samson, a man who does not in any way reflect the God of the Bible in these chapters. Now, according to Josephus, his earlier years were marked by, quote, extraordinary virtue. But the author just skips over all of those early virtuous years. He focuses on his later years, his later compromises. And the reason is that the author is trying to get across to the readers, do not put your trust in man. Realize that princes do not save, only God does. And I'm just going to focus on one story. It's a story of Samson eating honey from a lion. The whole section is full of compromise I'm not going to get into. For example, they're commanded not to marry the pagans around them. He goes off and he marries a pagan, right? That's what he's going to do. So he's going on the way to get his courtship formalized and everything. In chapter 14, verse 5, a lion tries to attack Samson. The Holy Spirit enables him to tear that lion apart. On a later time, he returns to the Philistine family with his parents. This is going to be the marriage ceremony. And in verse 8, he checks out the carcass of the animal. He finds that a hive of bees has gone in there and started forming a honeycomb. Now, we aren't told the reason why Samson went off the path. I just assume he's trying to satisfy his curiosity. But according to the laws of the Nazarite in Numbers chapter 6, he should not have done that. He should have stayed as far away from potential contamination as he could get. Even the smell of the decaying animals should have kept them away. Now, I doubt that his intention was to deliberately defile himself. by touching the animal, but the point is, he allows his curiosity to get him close to sin. He's beginning to flirt with danger. This is the character flaw in Samson. Now that he sees the dead lion there, there's another temptation that comes along. Look at the second sentence in verse 8. Behold, a swarm of bees and honey were in the carcass of the lion. Why is that a temptation? Nowadays, that wouldn't have been a temptation to any of you. You know, honey that's inside of a decaying carcass. You got to be kidding. You wouldn't probably even climb a tree to get some because you get stung up unless you're Gil and he doesn't mind getting stung. But back then they didn't get sweets very often. So this was a huge temptation. Oh, honey, it's not often you come across that. So he's tempted, and in order to get something that he wants, he has to come very close to sinning, if not sinning itself. Does he pass it up because of the danger of defilement? No, he risks the danger. Verse 9 says, he took some of it in his hands, and in order to do that, he has to reach carefully into the carcass, without touching the carcass, get that honey out. Nazirites were not allowed to touch carcasses, so he took some of it in his hands and went along eating. When he came to his father and mother, he gave some to them. They also ate, but he did not tell them that he had taken the honey out of the carcass of the lion." Why didn't he tell them? I think his conscience was at work. He didn't want to have them shocked that he would get so close to defilement. But this is merely an illustration of what was at work in all areas of his life. Samson must have known the dangers when he went to visit the harlot at Geza and when he went to visit Delilah. The enemy was waiting in the wings to destroy him. They were out to get him, and yet he flattered himself that he could flirt with the temptress without getting trapped. My father gave me very, very sound advice when he told me not to see how close I could get to sin without sinning, but like the Nazarite, to see how far away from sin I could get. Samson flirted with danger when he went to see the carcass. That flirtation led him to further temptation when he saw the honey, and before he knew it, he was violating his code by actually plucking a honeycomb from the carcass. And the same pattern happens over and over again in young Christians' lives. They flirt with temptation on their Androids and on their iPhones. This is a book that shows the downward slide that Christians can easily get into if they are not ruthless in their fight against their own inner depravity and ruthless in separation from outward contamination. And the book ends with two stories taken from the earlier section time period of Judges. to illustrate how bad things can get if the church does not maintain antithesis. Chapters 17 through 18 show the astonishing superstition, lack of doctrinal awareness, acceptance of idolatry, and compromise even on the part of Levites. That's pastors. The Levites were their pastors. It's astonishing the degree of spiritual blindness that this Levite had. Pragmatism and moral compromise were the name of the game, and yet rather than pointing fingers at this Levite, what I want to do is show we have been no different as a church in America. The evangelical church has been astonishingly blind. We can expect unbelieving liberal pastors like Nadia Boltz Weber to rail against chastity, mock it, oh, you chastity lover, that's ridiculous, and to make her abominable, blasphemous, statuette, sexual statuette, but the degree of hypocritical unchastity in the evangelical church is enormous. Even though the statistic 80%, which is thrown around all the time, that 80% of self-identified evangelicals have engaged in premarital sex has been questioned by one pastor, but I don't see the basis for his question, but he's questioning that figure. It couldn't possibly be that high in the gospel coalition. Everyone admits it is much, much, much too high, and part of it is because they're not following the Bible on how you engage in courtship. They're setting themselves up for failure right off the start. Second, abortion is not just a phenomenon in the liberal churches. It occurs throughout the evangelical churches as well. 70% of women who get abortions consider themselves to be Christians, and 23% of total abortions in America identify as evangelical born-again Christians. 23% of those who get abortions claim to be evangelical born-again Christians. How on earth did that happen? Well, I believe it's because it's a fruit of a lawless church. The church is long ago thrown out God's law. Well, evangelical leaders have actually become stronger on this particular issue since the 1970s, probably more closer to the 80s. Top evangelical leaders supported abortion way back into the 60s. For example, in 1969, the former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, W.A. Criswell, of all people. You'd never guess that he would have done this. But he actually welcomed and hoped for a Roe v. Wade kind of a decision. He said, I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person. And it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed. That was W.A. Criswell, president of the Southern Baptist Convention. In 1971, two years later, the Southern Baptists approved a resolution that says, this is the whole denomination making this statement, we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother. Certainly, that's turned around, praise God. There has been a turnaround on the Southern Baptist view of abortion, but it illustrates that Scripture is not the foundation for much of Christianity. We keep following the cycles of judges. I hate to pick on the same denomination, but hey, they're supposed to be the flagship for evangelicalism, so I think they're fair game. Granted, not every case has gone through the courts yet, but the number of pastors in that denomination that have already been convicted of sexual assaults against children and have been caught in their libraries possessing child pornography is absolutely astounding. We're talking pastors here, pastors like the Levite in the next story that we're going to look at. Currently, there are changes in process against a total of 380 pastors and ministry staff and 700 children being represented legally as having been assaulted. Now the majority of those have already been proved in court to be true and the denomination has not denied the rest of them and have not denied that in the past they've actually swept these things under the carpet, hushed people down on these kinds of things. Over the past two decades, I have seen similar things happening in many different denominations. It makes you sick. it should make us sick. And is it any wonder when confidential polls of pastors across this nation show 57% of senior pastors and 64% of youth pastors struggle with pornography, which in the definition means regularly watch pornography? And then you have evangelical and reform denominations going soft on the concept of sexual orientation, even this past year. And the list could go on and on with moral issues, doctrinal heresies, socialism, endorsement of public schools, which are really government indoctrination centers, evolution, ecumenical dialogue with apostate churches, embracing occult medicine, egalitarianism, etc., etc. This is a relevant book for our times. We need to disseminate this kind of information. The last story given in chapters 19 through 21 It is horrifying. It is beyond horrifying. It makes you want to throw up. It is an awful, awful story, and it showcases moral problems on every level of society, including the clergy. Well, it shows the horrible trajectory of ignoring homosexuality, not treating it as a crime. The horrible trajectory. It also shows the horrible insensitivity of this Levite to his wife. He allowed her to be gang raped to save his cowardly hide. And it shows an entire tribe. that entire, yes, tribe that takes tribal loyalty more seriously than the criminal behavior of that city. There's an entire city that's descended into homosexuality. The whole story stinks. It shows moral sensitivities and sensibilities completely skewed, and it leaves one feeling sick. God wants us to be sick over these things. Now, there's one more phrase that I want to comment on. Four times in these last five chapters, it mentions, in those days, there was no king in Israel. Chapter 17, verse 6, 18, verse 1, 19, verse 1, 21, verse 25. They are very deliberately separated. I can't get into why. This is so often misinterpreted. They think, oh, if there was only a centralized government, if there was only a king, people wouldn't do what was wise in their own eyes. No, absolutely not. It does not teach that. And the reason I can tell you absolutely dogmatically it does not teach that is the same author who wrote Judges, Samuel, also wrote 1 and 2 Samuel, and he knows quite well that kings can be as bad or worse than these judges. No, that's not the lesson of this verse. He begins this whole section and ends the section, in those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes. And what he is saying here is, he's communicating that even with the biblical ideal of almost libertarianism, Of God alone being king and people having a huge degree of freedom, tyranny is unavoidable if the church does not follow God's law, but instead does that which is right in their own eyes. So yes, God's ideal civil government is almost libertarian. By the way, David's was too. Almost libertarian. It allows a great deal of liberty for citizens to sin, but that does not mean that there are no repercussions to the citizens' bad decisions. Immoral libertarianism will always lead to tyranny, to God's banking stick, period. This is the message of the last section. It's really the message of the whole book. It tells them that centralized politics is obviously not a good thing. Libertarianism is not your savior either. God alone is the solution to our problems. The whole book is a story of grace that comes with repentance, as 2 Chronicles 7.14 phrases it. If my people who were called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and heal not just them, but their land. Brothers and sisters, this book calls for a massive movement of repentance in America. I'm so glad that the activist mummy and the Benham brothers and so many other people are beginning these conventions, uh, whatever they call them, a calling people to repentance. Kathy and I actually joined in prayer and fasting with one of these in March, and I did so again this past week. But may the Lord God grant such repentance to the West. Amen. Father, we do. We do long for repentance, further insight into our own sins so that we could repent of our own sins, and further consistency with your law. Father, I'm sure even I blind spots would be we want to be right with you we want to have your pleasure upon us we want your victory to be with us we do not want you to be fighting against us and so we pray father have your way in our lives your will be done not ours your will be done and father may you grant to us a holy zeal to seek first your kingdom and your righteousness and just trust that you will add all of the things that we tend to seek after unto us. May we have the balance, Father, that you have called us to in this book. And I pray it in Jesus' name.