Judges 2:20 · Bible study
Judges 2:20 Commentary: Burning Anger, Broken Covenant
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
What does it mean that God's anger 'burned'?
Research Summary
- Meaning: God declares judgment on Israel for breaking the covenant and refusing to listen to him, using the metaphor of burning anger.
- Key words: charah (burn/be hot), 'aph (anger/nose), berit (covenant), shama (listen/obey).
- Main debate: Whether the divine speech represents an actual prophetic message or an internal rationale for God's actions.
- Theological theme: Covenant faithfulness and the consequences of sustained disobedience.
- Best use: Teaching on the seriousness of covenant, the nature of divine anger, and the cycle of sin and judgment in Judges.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
So the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed the covenant I laid down for their fathers and has not heeded My voice,
WEB World English Bible 2000
Yahweh’s anger burned against Israel; and he said, “Because this nation transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not listened to my voice,
KJV King James Version 1769
And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel; and he said, Because that this people hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened unto my voice;
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel; and he said, Because this nation have transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened unto my voice;
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And the anger of Jehovah doth burn against Israel, and He saith, `Because that this nation have transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened to My voice--
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And the anger of Jehovah was hot against Israel; and he said, Because this nation hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and hath not hearkened unto my voice,
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And the wrath of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he said: Behold this nation hath made void my covenant, which I had made with their fathers, and hath despised to hearken to my voice:
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y la ira de Jehová se encendió contra Israel, y dijo: Pues que esta gente traspasa mi pacto que ordené á sus padres, y no obedecen mi voz,
Então a ira do SENHOR se acendeu contra Israel, e disse: “Visto que este povo transgride o meu pacto que ordenei aos seus pais, e não dá ouvidos à minha voz,
Alors la colère de l’ Éternel s’ enflamma contre Israël, et il dit: Puisque cette nation a transgressé mon alliance que j’ avais prescrite à ses pères, et puisqu’ ils n’ ont point obéi à ma voix,
Darum ergrimmte denn des HERRN Zorn über Israel, daß er sprach: Weil dies Volk meinen Bund übertreten hat, den ich ihren Vätern geboten habe, und gehorchen meiner Stimme nicht,
Daarom ontstak de toorn des HEEREN tegen Israel, dat Hij zeide: Omdat dit volk Mijn verbond heeft overtreden, dat Ik hun vaderen geboden heb, en zij naar Mijn stem niet gehoord hebben;
Perciò l’ira dell’Eterno si accese contro Israele, ed egli disse: “Giacché questa nazione ha violato il patto che avevo stabilito coi loro padri ed essi non hanno ubbidito alla mia voce,
Przetoż wzruszyła się popędliwość Pańska przeciw Izraelowi, i rzekł: Dla tego, że przestąpił ten naród przymierze moje, którem przykazał ojcom ich, a nie byli posłuszni głosowi mojemu,
И воспылал гнев Господень на Израиля, и сказал Он: за то, что народ сей преступает завет Мой, который Я поставил с отцами их, и не слушает гласа Моего,
於是耶和華 的怒氣 向以色列人 發作。他說：「因 這 民 違背 我吩咐 他們列祖 所守的 約，不 聽從 我的話，
And the wrath of the Lord was burning against Israel, and he said, Because this nation has not been true to my agreement which I made with their fathers, and has not given ear to my voice;
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Judges 2:20
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree this verse marks a decisive shift in the divine response to Israel's persistent unfaithfulness. Adam Clarke describes Israel as 'fuel' and God's displeasure as fire ready to consume that fuel. Gill underscores the covenant made at Sinai, especially the prohibition of other gods, as the standard Israel violated. Keil and Delitzsch treat the speech as a formal divine sentence: because Israel broke the covenant, God will no longer drive out the remaining nations. Barnes and the Cambridge Bible observe that the 'saying' may reflect God's internal reasoning rather than a direct prophetic oracle, but all agree on the substance: covenant breach triggers covenant judgment. The verb forms are consistent: Israel 'has transgressed' (perfect, completed action) and 'has not listened' (perfect, settled refusal). God's anger 'burned' (characteristic vivid metaphor for incineration, not mere displeasure). This verse confronts readers with the seriousness of covenant loyalty and the reality of divine anger as a consistent response to betrayed love.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: God's anger is a direct response to Israel's repeated covenant transgression and refusal to listen, leading to his decision to stop driving out the Canaanite nations.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of God's anger | All traditions see the language as anthropomorphic, conveying God's personal response to sin. | Some emphasize God's unchanging nature, viewing anger as a consistent judicial response; others see it as relational emotion that reveals God's grief and love. |
| Covenant conditionality | Israel's covenant with God included both blessings and curses; breaking it brought consequences. | Protestants often stress the unconditional aspects of the Abrahamic covenant, while Catholics and Orthodox highlight the conditional nature of the Sinai covenant. This verse clearly operates within the Sinai frame. |
| Judgment as test vs. punishment | The remaining nations serve both to test Israel's loyalty and to punish them for disobedience. | Some prioritize the punitive purpose (Keil), others the pedagogical (Lange). Both are present in the text. |
| Speech genre | The text presents a divine declaration. | Barnes and Cambridge suggest it may be internal deliberation; Keil and others see it as an actual divine oracle. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Judges 2:20 sits within a carefully structured cycle: Israel sins, God punishes, Israel cries out, God delivers, then the pattern repeats. Verses 6, 19 recount the generation after Joshua that 'did not know the LORD' (v. 10). The covenant referred to here is the Sinai covenant (Exodus 24:3, 8), where Israel swore obedience (Ex. 24:3). Later at Shechem, Joshua renewed the covenant (Joshua 24:24, 25). The covenant was not merely a contract; it was a bond of loyalty to Yahweh, a suzerain-vassal treaty. Violating it meant rejecting Yahweh's authority. The phrase 'I commanded their fathers' echoes Exodus 24 and Deuteronomy 29, where the covenant is presented as divine command, not human proposal.
The burning anger language (Hebrew charah 'aph) appears throughout the Old Testament to describe God's response to idolatry (Exodus 32:10; Deuteronomy 32:22). It is anthropomorphic, God's 'nose' burning, but it expresses intense personal injury, not caprice. The immediate consequence is stated in verse 21: God will no longer drive out the nations Joshua left. These nations would become both a test and a punishment. The literary context shows that God had previously delivered Israel out of compassion (v. 18), but now the pattern shifts: judgment becomes ongoing. The announcement comes from God himself, whether spoken through a prophet or delivered inwardly (as Barnes suggests). Theologically, this is a turning point where covenant curses (Joshua 23:16) begin to take effect.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for Judges 2:20. The Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate align with the Hebrew Masoretic text. The main interpretive question is not textual but theological and narrative, concerning the form of the divine speech and the relationship of this verse to the surrounding context.
Reception History
In the early church, this verse was read as a warning against idolatry and a demonstration of God's holiness. Origen and Jerome used it to illustrate the consequences of turning from God, while Augustine saw in it the justice of God who fulfills covenant curses. During the Reformation, Calvin and the Geneva Bible highlighted God's anger as a pastoral warning to the church against apostasy. Matthew Henry and Wesley applied the verse spiritually, seeing it as a mirror for believers who grow cold. In modern scholarship, the verse is often treated as part of a Deuteronomistic editorial layer, explaining Israel's persistent failure and God's judicial withdrawal. Across all eras, the verse has been used to stress that covenant relationship requires faithful listening, not just formal obedience.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The reality of God's anger. God's anger is not petty temper; it is the settled opposition of holiness to sin that persists over time. The metaphor 'burned' conveys intensity and finality. This anger is covenant anger, it arises from a broken relationship.
- The specific transgression. Israel 'transgressed my covenant' and 'has not listened to my voice.' The covenant is not abstract; it is what God commanded their fathers. The double accusation highlights both deed (transgression) and attitude (disobedience).
- The consequence for the relationship. God declares he will no longer act as their protector. Israel's freedom comes at the cost of his presence and help. That is the root of judgment: God steps back.
Five-point outline
- Anger that burns, the intensity of God's response.
- Because, every divine judgment is grounded in reason, not whim.
- This nation, a collective identity called to be holy now acts as a rebel.
- Transgressed my covenant, breaking a solemn treaty with the King.
- Not listened to my voice, the root issue is refusal to hear and obey.
Illustration hooks
- A marriage covenant broken. A spouse who repeatedly breaks wedding vows experiences not anger from the other but grief, withdrawal, and consequences. God’s anger is the flip side of his committed love.
- A fire alarm ignored. Israel kept ignoring the warning signals, the judges, the enemies, the groaning. Eventually the fire came. The verse reminds us that repeated warnings precede final judgment.
- A child running from a parent. The child turns away, refuses to listen, and walks into danger. The parent feels both anger and grief. God’s 'burning' is not cold; it is the heat of love rejected.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why does God seem so angry in the Old Testament and more loving in the New?
- Does God's anger mean he stops loving?
- What does covenant mean for Christians today? Are we under a covenant that we can break?
Leading a Discussion
This verse shows God pronouncing judgment after Israel's repeated unfaithfulness. Before you read it together, reflect on the weight of the word 'covenant', a bond that carries both promise and obligation. Consider how you have experienced broken promises in human relationships, and how that frames the seriousness of covenant-breaking with God.
Discussion questions
- What does the phrase 'anger of the LORD burned' tell you about how God views sin? How is this different from human anger?
- Read Exodus 24:3,8. What did Israel promise at Sinai? How does Judges 2:20 show that they broke that promise?
- Why does God describe the covenant as something he 'commanded' their fathers? What does that imply about the nature of the relationship?
- Compare verse 20 with verse 18, where God is grieved. How can God feel both grief and anger at the same time? What does that tell us about his character?
- What does it mean that Israel 'has not listened to my voice'? Is this just about obeying rules, or is it deeper?
- How does the consequence (v.21) relate to the sin? Why would leaving enemies as a test be a form of judgment?
- Christians are in a new covenant through Christ. In what ways can we still 'transgress' that covenant, and what does God's response look like now?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Exodus 24:3 | Moses came and told the people all Yahweh’s words, and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice, and said, “All the words which Yahweh has spoken will we do.” |
| Exodus 24:8 | Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, “Look, this is the blood of the covenant, which Yahweh has made with you concerning all these words.” |
| Exodus 32:10 | Now therefore leave me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them, and that I may consume them; and I will make of you a great nation.” |
| Exodus 32:11 | Moses begged Yahweh his God, and said, “Yahweh, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, that you have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? |
| Deuteronomy 29:10 | All of you stand today in the presence of Yahweh your God: your heads, your tribes, your elders, and your officers, even all the men of Israel, |
| Deuteronomy 29:13 | that he may establish you today as his people, and that he may be your God, as he spoke to you and as he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. |
| Deuteronomy 32:22 | For a fire is kindled in my anger, that burns to the lowest Sheol, devours the earth with its increase, and sets the foundations of the mountains on fire. |
| Joshua 23:16 | when you disobey the covenant of Yahweh your God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods, and bow down yourselves to them. Then Yahweh’s anger will be kindled against you, and you will perish quickly from off the good land which he has given to you.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke pictures the people’s transgressions as dry fuel and God’s anger as a fire ready to kindle and consume it. His distinctive point is that their own sins are what make the divine displeasure burn so hot; the cause and the effect are directly linked.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes questions whether God actually gave a formal message to Israel here. He notes the surrounding verses seem like digressions, and the words may simply describe what passed through the divine mind, expressing the thoughts that guided God's actions rather than a specific announcement.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator sees two separate layers in the passage: verses 20-21 attribute the remaining nations to punishment for Israel's sin, while verse 22 adds a different motive—testing loyalty. These likely come from different sources (E and D), later edited together, though the two ideas are compatible.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
Wherfore the wrath of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he sayd, Because this people hath transgressed my couenant, which I commaded their fathers, and hath not obeyed my voyce,
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes that God's anger against Israel flared up repeatedly whenever they turned to idolatry, just as it had at the start. The specific sin was breaking the Sinai covenant, which commanded exclusive worship of God, and refusing to obey his voice on matters of worship and against idolatry.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch emphasizes that God's anger takes the form of a formal judicial sentence, matching Israel's covenant breaking with a deliberate withdrawal of His covenant promise. The passage presents God's decision as a direct divine declaration, not merely an emotional response.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange emphasizes that the judges (shophetim) were raised up primarily to restore the authority of God’s law, not merely to deliver Israel militarily. He argues God deliberately left the Canaanite nations to test the people, because obedience and faith can only prove themselves through temptation. The recurring cycle of apostasy, oppression, and deliverance was therefore a divine education, not a meaningless repetition.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry highlights how quickly Israel fell into idolatry once the generation that witnessed God's great works had passed away. The new generation did not know the Lord because they had not personally experienced His mighty acts, and so they turned to other gods almost immediately.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley rejects Matthew Henry's claim that the goodness of God's promised land will intensify the punishment of those who perish. He argues that this reasoning fails under predestination: if some are not elected, they never had a genuine offer, and if all the elect are saved, the grant was never free to the others.