Judges 19:24

The old man tried to uphold the social duty of hospitality, even if it meant putting the vulnerable at risk (compare James 1:27). We cannot lessen the horror of what happened next, whether in their time or ours. The era of the judges was ending in extreme moral decay. Something was seriously wrong.

• This second epilogue (see study note on Judges 17:1–21:25) shifts the focus from individuals to entire tribes. It begins with the outrage in the Benjamite town of Gibeah (Judges 19), which led to a civil war (Judges 20) and the near destruction of Benjamin. It then moves to the attempt to save the tribe from disappearing (Judges 21). The book ends with the familiar refrain: In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. This was what they did in the days of Gibea, perhaps the lowest point in Israel's history that Hosea, 400 years later, would compare to the depths Ephraim had reached (Hosea 9:9; 10:9).

• The path was cleared for a shift from charismatic leadership to "covenant-charismatic kingship." This kingship combined living under the Lord’s covenant with the anointing of the spirit for ruling, as seen with Saul and David.

These two epilogues (Judges 17–18 and 19–21) show that inspired but unstructured leadership cannot last. As society moved toward chaos and civil war, the phrase, In those days there was no king in Israel appears four times. The phrase, everyone did what was right in his own eyes is added twice (Judges 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). The era of inspired leadership declined and ended in disorder. Something important was missing.