Judges 2:23 · Bible study
Judges 2:23 Commentary: Purpose in Leaving the Nations
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why did God leave enemy nations in Canaan? This study examines the twin purposes of testing and judgment in Judges 2:23.
Research Summary
- Meaning: God intentionally allowed Canaanite nations to remain in the land, with the dual purpose of testing Israel's faithfulness and judging their covenant-breaking.
- Key words: “left” (yanach Hiphil, to cause to rest/permit to remain); “hastily” (mahēr, quickly); “without driving them out” (bilti horisham, so as not to dispossess them).
- Main debate: Whether the primary purpose is testing (v. 22) or judgment (vv. 20, 21); most commentators combine both purposes.
- Theological theme: God’s sovereignty over nations; the interplay of divine judgment and testing; conditional covenant promises.
- Best use: Preaching or teaching on why God allows trials, the nature of divine discipline, and the call to persevering faithfulness.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
That is why the LORD had left those nations in place and had not driven them out immediately by delivering them into the hand of Joshua.
WEB World English Bible 2000
So Yahweh left those nations, without driving them out hastily. He didn’t deliver them into Joshua’s hand.
KJV King James Version 1769
Therefore the Lord left those nations, without driving them out hastily; neither delivered he them into the hand of Joshua.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
So Jehovah left those nations, without driving them out hastily; neither delivered he them into the hand of Joshua.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And Jehovah leaveth these nations, so as not to dispossess them hastily, and did not give them into the hand of Joshua.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
Therefore Jehovah left those nations, without dispossessing them hastily, neither delivered he them into the hand of Joshua.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
The Lord therefore left all these nations, and would not quickly destroy them, neither did he deliver them into the hands of Josue.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Por esto dejó Jehová aquellas gentes, y no las desarraigó luego, ni las entregó en mano de Josué.
Por isso o SENHOR deixou aquelas nações, e não as tirou logo, nem as entregou nas mãos de Josué.
Et l’ Éternel laissa en repos ces nations qu’ il n’ avait pas livrées entre les mains de Josué, et il ne se hâta point de les chasser.
Also ließ der HERR diese Heiden, daß er sie nicht bald vertrieb, die er nicht hatte in Josuas Hand übergeben.
Alzo liet de HEERE deze heidenen blijven, dat Hij hen niet haastelijk uit de bezitting verdreef; die Hij in de hand van Jozua niet had overgegeven.
E l’Eterno lasciò stare quelle nazioni senz’affrettarsi a cacciarle, e non le diede nelle mani di Giosuè.
I zostawił Pan one narody, nie wyganiając ich rychło, ani ich podał w rękę Jozuego.
И оставил Господь народы сии и не изгнал их вскоре и не предал их в руки Иисуса.
這樣耶和華 留下各 族，不 將他們速速 趕出，也沒有 交付 約書亞 的手。
So the Lord let those nations go on living in the land, not driving them out quickly, and did not give them up into the hands of Joshua.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Judges 2:23
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators broadly agree that Judges 2:23 explains why Canaanite nations remained in the land after Joshua's death. The surrounding context (vv. 20, 22) presents two purposes: judgment for covenant-breaking (God's anger because Israel transgressed) and testing (God says He will leave the nations to prove Israel's faithfulness). Adam Clarke emphasizes practical mercy, God did not expel all inhabitants at once, giving Israel time to grow and preventing the land from falling to waste. Gill's Exposition notes both a punitive sense (God driving out no more because of disobedience) and a testing sense (to prove Israel). Keil and Delitzsch argue the word 'hastily' limits the threat: God would not drive out any more while Israel persisted in idolatry, but could resume if they repented. The verse thus holds judgment and testing together, with the immediate emphasis on testing (v. 22).
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Test-oriented view: Emphasizes v. 22: the nations are left 'that by them I may test Israel.' The primary purpose is to prove and strengthen faithfulness.
- Judgment-oriented view: Emphasizes vv. 20–21: God's anger and decision not to drive out more nations as a direct punishment for covenant violation.
- Combined view: Holds both purposes together as equally valid. God judges disobedience and tests future generations within the same action.
What is clear: God intentionally caused these nations to remain in the land, and His action was directly connected to Israel's covenant failure, with the stated goal of testing their fidelity.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose of leaving the nations | God's action serves both as a test of Israel's faithfulness (v. 22) and as a consequence of their covenant-breaking (vv. 20-21). | Some commentators (e.g., Clarke) emphasize the gracious, protective aspect; others (e.g., the plain reading of v. 21) stress judgment. Both are present, but weight varies. |
| Conditionality of God's threat | God's declaration not to drive out more nations is connected to Israel's persistent idolatry. | Keil and Delitzsch argue the word 'hastily' leaves room for reversal upon repentance; others read it as a fixed judgment without stated condition. |
| Relationship to Joshua's conquest | Joshua's death marks a transition; God's method changes from swift conquest to prolonged presence of enemies. | The Cambridge Bible suggests the second half of the verse ('neither delivered he them into the hand of Joshua') may be a later redactional note, questioning its historical accuracy. |
| Nature of the test | The test is to see if Israel will keep Yahweh's way as their fathers did. | Is the test primarily for the generation after Joshua (so v. 22 looks forward) or for future generations (the pattern throughout Judges)? Commentators differ on the timeline. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The book of Judges opens with a record of incomplete conquest (ch. 1). Joshua had led victorious campaigns, but many Canaanite enclaves remained. Earlier generations had seen God drive out enemies as they were faithful (Joshua 23:9, 10). By Judges 2, Israel's pattern of apostasy was already underway. The generation that had known Yahweh's works was gone; a new generation 'did not know the LORD' (2:10).
God's covenant promised land and rest on condition of obedience (Deuteronomy 28). When Israel broke the covenant, God declared He would no longer drive out the remaining nations (v. 21). The Hebrew verb yanach (Hiphil of nuach) in this verse means 'to cause to rest' or 'to leave, permit to remain.' It carries the sense of allowing the nations to settle undisturbed, in effect, giving Israel space to feel the consequences of their choices. The word mahēr ('hastily') signals that God could have removed these nations quickly, as He had earlier shown, but chose not to.
Ancient Near Eastern suzerainty treaties included curses for disloyalty, abandonment by the overlord to enemy attacks. Here, the curse takes the form of ongoing foreign presence, a constant provocation and test. This fits the cyclical pattern of the book: sin, oppression, cry, deliverance. The delayed expulsion gave Israel repeated occasions to turn back. It was both a consequence of sin and an invitation to repentance.
Keil and Delitzsch observe that God's threat in v. 21 is limited by the word 'hastily.' Had Israel repented, God could have resumed driving out the nations. The delay was not final abandonment but a suspended sentence, contingent on Israel's response.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Judges 2:23 in the Hebrew manuscript tradition. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges raises a source-critical question: the first part of the verse ('Yahweh left those nations, without driving them out hastily') may belong to the Jahwist source (J) and connect to Judges 3:1, 3, while the final clause ('neither delivered he them into Joshua's hand') may be a harmonizing gloss. This analysis touches on literary composition, not textual corruption. No manuscript evidence for alternative readings is cited.
Reception History
Throughout church history, Judges 2:23 has been read as a key text for understanding why God permits ongoing opposition in the lives of His people. Early church writers often allegorized the remaining nations as spiritual trials or persistent sins. Medieval interpreters saw a warning against complacency after initial spiritual victories. Reformation-era commentators like Matthew Henry and Wesley emphasized both the justice of God's judgment and the mercy in preserving a remnant for testing. The verse has been cited in discussions of divine sovereignty and human responsibility: God's leaving of the nations is neither accident nor weakness, but a deliberate act with redemptive purpose. Modern evangelical and Catholic interpreters continue to see the passage as affirming that God's delays are not denials; they serve to deepen faith and expose hidden loyalties.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- God's sovereignty over the remnant nations. The verse affirms that the presence of Canaanites was not accidental. Yahweh left them, and He did not deliver them into Joshua's hand. Their continuance was under divine control, not human failure.
- Testing reveals what is in the heart. Verse 22 makes explicit: the nations were left to test Israel, to see if they would keep Yahweh's way. God's delays in removing obstacles serve as an examination of loyalty and trust.
- Judgment is not the last word. Keil and Delitzsch note that the word 'hastily' leaves room for restoration. When Israel repented, God raised up judges. The postponement of full conquest was meant to lead to repentance, not to permanent rejection.
Five-point outline
- The covenant context: God promised land; Israel broke the covenant.
- God's response: He left the nations as a consequence of sin (v. 20, 21).
- The hidden mercy: The delay prevented Israel's self-destruction (Clarke) and provided ongoing opportunity for return.
- The test: Continued presence of enemies tested Israel's faithfulness (v. 22).
- The hope: God's actions are conditional; repentance could reverse the sentence.
Illustration hooks
- Gardening: A gardener knows when to pull weeds and when to leave young plants to strengthen. Immediate removal of all threats might destroy what is meant to grow.
- Physical therapy: A therapist applies resistance to build strength. The 'left' nations become the weight that tests and develops spiritual muscle.
- Relationship tests: A parent allows a child to face small challenges without immediate intervention, not from neglect but to build trust and maturity.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why does God let difficult people or situations remain in my life?
- Is my current hardship a punishment from God or a test of my faith?
- How do I know whether to fight the 'enemy' or accept God's timing for removal?
Leading a Discussion
This verse sits at a turning point in Judges. Israel has failed to fully obey, and God announces He will no longer drive out the nations. But He also says the nations will test Israel. The two purposes, judgment and testing, intertwine. As you discuss this passage, consider how God's 'no' can be a call to examine your own heart.
Discussion questions
- Read Judges 2:20, 23. What events lead to God's decision to leave the nations?
- The Hebrew verb 'left' (yanach) can mean 'to set at rest' or 'to permit to remain.' What nuance does this add to God's action?
- Why do you think God explicitly says He wants to test Israel (v. 22)? What does He want to discover about them?
- Adam Clarke argues that leaving some nations prevented the land from going to waste and gave Israel time to grow. How might God's restrictions in your life be protective rather than punitive?
- If God's threat in v. 21 is limited by the word 'hastily' (Keil and Delitzsch), does that change how you view God's judgments? Can His discipline be temporary?
- In what ways do you see the pattern of testing and judgment repeating in your own relationship with God?
- How does this passage challenge or confirm your understanding of God's character?
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.
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke explains that God did not expel all the Canaanites at once because Israel was not yet numerous enough to occupy the whole land. Leaving some inhabitants prevented the land from becoming overgrown and overrun by wild animals. This gradual process also kept Israel dependent on God, as their continued victory required ongoing faithfulness.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
This commentary argues that the first half of the verse leads into the next chapter, where nations are left to teach Israel war, and likely belongs to an earlier source. The second half is treated as a later harmonizing gloss, not original to that source.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes observe that God deliberately left these nations in the land, choosing not to drive them out immediately or deliver them into Joshua's control. The emphasis falls on divine timing and purpose: the conquest was not complete because God intentionally withheld full victory at that point.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill proposes that God left some nations unconquered to test Israel's faithfulness, not because Joshua failed. He draws an analogy to how God permits indwelling sin to remain in believers, using it to prove their graces and display divine power more clearly.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch draw attention to the word "hastily" in the threat, arguing it limits the Lord's judgment. The threat was not a permanent halt to driving out the Canaanites, but a suspension that would be lifted whenever Israel truly repented and returned to keep the covenant.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange stresses that the judges were not primarily military deliverers but restorers of God's law. Their title "Shophetim" means staff-men, those who hold authority to enforce right judgment. God raised them up to reestablish the legal and moral order in Israel, not merely to win battles.
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.