#tanach asks

I don't believe my ask said that biblical criticism has no place at all, only that its position is weaker than you might think. It's still very interesting and while I might not send yeshiva students to learn it I still read some journals myself.

I wanted to clarify a point about the biases in the field. I'm not talking about bigotry necessarily but biases more broadly. There are a lot of assumptions built into how anything gets interpreted and that's pretty much inevitable when working in this field. And because of the complex nature of this material the biases can lead to weird places. That doesn't deny that the in-group also brings biases to their own interpretation - they do! My point is mainly meant to push back on treating the conclusions of bible critics as being more objective or accurate. Fascinating and occasionally insightful? Yes. Scientifically correct? Eh.

Fair, I'm sorry, I wrote without enough acknowledgement to what you yourself said.

I'm afraid not. However, I am in possession of a sleeved coat! It's great, really. Nons of my ten brothers have one, they work in the field with the sheep and the grains and sleeves tend to get in the way. But father made me a special coat with sleeves, because I stay in the tent with him! I'm sure my brothers understand that I'm just fated to continue the line and to lead our family, after all I told them about my dreams with their sheafs bowing down to me and the sun and moon and eleven stars doing so as well. They joked around about it, but I'm sure they understand.

My first major problem with this question is that I pick favourites between books in the Tanach. And the book of Judges is low on the list. Due to mostly that, I don't necessarily have a favourite judge, but I can probably pick one with some thought.

My first thought would be Gid‘on. I'm not going to compare him to all other judges, because I don't necessarily remember them all too well, but Gid‘on has, in my opinion, been one of the most level-headed of them - he comes out especially as a good one when compared to his fellow tribesman, Yiphtaḥ. You see, both of them face the same conundrum: their sibling tribe, Ephraim, complain not getting a part in the glory of the fight.

One thing that is easy to overlook in the time of the judges, and I promise this is relevant, is how divided it is. When you actually look at the stories, most of them are isolated to very specific tribes. When the Moabites subjugate Israel, it's a Binyaminite rising against them. The Pelishtim are fased by a Danite who stays around Yehudah. The king of Ḥatzor is faced by a small coalition of Naftalites abd Zevulunites mostly. Yiphtaḥ fights the Ammonites, which is framed as a more general undertaking? But I'm pretty sure that the first time most of the tribes come together is, ironically, against Binyamin, in the Levite's Concubine story. Fun stuff. Point being, the nation is divided, and if Menashe want to rise up against the midianites... Well, Ephraim might not see a reason to join... Until victory is assured, that is. At which point they'll complain not being called.

In all honesty, in both the situations with Gid‘on and Yiphtaḥ, I feel like the Ephrites are whining for nothing. It's not really totally clear, but Yiphtaḥ just blows on them, claiming that he did call them... But let's wheel back a minute and describe the situation.

Both Gid‘on and Yiphtaḥ win their fights against their respective enemies, though Gid‘on keeps going after the incident described. Anyway, right after said victory, the Ephrites come to complain over not being called to partake in the battle. They even threaten violence over that. And here comes the difference between the judges: while Yiphtaḥ escalated, claiming that he did call them and they didn't came, Gid‘on de-escalated, telling them that they captured the leaders, completing the most important part.

And it's not like Gid‘on never takes harsh actions to people refusing to cooperate with him. Look at the people of Sukkot. That might not be a positive trait of his, but his policy is certainly better than Yiphtaḥ. He avoids war over hurt egos, instead only punishing people who refused to lend him aid when he could use it, because they weren't assured he'll win.

Gid‘on also gets a great introduction - literally asking an angel he meets where are all the miracles of the olden days. After destroying a local idol, his father defends him by claiming the god he ruined the altar of can avenge him for it, giving Gid‘on the nickname Yeruba‘al. Meaning "the Ba‘al will fight him", basically.