Judging Samson (Judges 15:9-17)

What weapon did Samson use to slay 1,000 Philistines? The jawbone of a donkey (Judges 15:16)

Samson is the last of six major Israelite leaders depicted in the book of Judges (Judges 13:1-16:31). Judges filled the leadership void during a time when Israel has no trained warriors and remained under a foreign power. As such many judges functioned as guerilla warriors.

In Samson’s time, the Philistines dominated Israel. His birth is foretold by an angel and his parents are instructed that he will take a lifelong Nazirite vow (Judges 13:5), abstaining from alcohol, cutting his hair and touching corpses (Numbers 6:1-21).

Samson has become perhaps the most famous judge though he is remembered as much for his fall and association with Delilah as his superhuman strength; even the biblical text notes that his demise overshadows his rise (Judges 16:30). Even so, the Bible relays several tales depicting Samson as a renowned warrior. In one episode, Samson avoids a posse by playing possum, breaks chains that presumably contain him, and then picks up a the jawbone of a donkey and proceeds to slaughter one thousand Philistines foes (Judges 15:9-17).

He found a fresh jawbone of a donkey, so he reached out and took it and killed a thousand men with it. (Judges 15:15 NASB)

The story is intentionally fantastic. The trickster action hero demonstrates his unparalleled skill as a warrior while performing nothing less than a miracle (through God). This and similar herculean efforts make Samson a folk hero.

Though Samson does some preparation in allowing himself to be tied, he either forgets or finds it unnecessary to arm himself. During the adventure, Samson’s weapon of choice is absurd: the jawbone of an ass, which he presumably uses as a makeshift club.

Daniel I. Block (b. 1943) notes:

Reminiscent of Shamgar’s victory over the Philistines using an oxgoad [Judges 3:31], Samson used a fresh jawbone to slaughter a thousand men. The image is intended to be comical. Being only about nine inches long, a donkey’s jawbone is an unlikely weapon. (John H. Walton (b. 1952), Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), 198-99)

Weapons of opportunity are common in Judges (Judges 4:21, 7:19, 15:15) and as Block notes, there is a strong parallel earlier in the book to minor judge named Shamgar (Judges 3:31).

Gregory Mobley (b. 1957) compares:

Samson’s use of a makeshift primitive weapon, the jawbone of an ass, which Othniel Margalith (b. 1916) compares to Herakles’ use of an oak sapling, has a biblical parallel: Shamgar’s use of an oxgoad, a cattle prod to slay six hundred Philistines. The oxgoad, if that is what malmad (Judges 3:31) means, is a rudimentary tool, as Margalith notes, but except that minor difference (and another: Samson kills four hundred more Philistines than Shamgar does), these biblical accounts are very similar. (Mobley, Samson and the Liminal Hero in the Ancient Near East, 10)

Specifically, Samson employs a “fresh” jawbone. The Hebrew tariy is most commnonly translated “fresh” (ASV, ESV, HCSB, MSG, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, RSV) but is also rendered “new” (KJV) and “recently killed” (NLT). The CEV interprets, “The jawbone had not yet dried out, so it was still hard and heavy”. Practically speaking, a fresh bone is less dry and brittle, making it a better weapon. This jawbone was as good a weapon as a jawbone could be.

Samson is seen being resourceful. He takes an object that has no use and recycles it into a weapon. On the other hand, the object also has theological significance. In freely scavenging from a fresh corpse, Samson completely disregards his Nazirite vows.

James L. Crenshaw (b. 1934) notes that this is not an isolated incident:

Perhaps a word is in order about Samson’s fascination for animal carcasses, particularly in light in the claim that he would be a Nazirite to God. What compelled Samson to gather honey from the carcass and to eat his fill [Judges 14:8-9]? And at a later time, what explains his readiness to grab a fresh jawbone of an ass as a weapon against the onrushing Philistines [Judges 15:5]? Surely Samson did not look upon himself as one who had to avoid anything unclean. (Crenshaw, Samson: A Secret Betrayed, a Vow Ignored, 84)

Samson plays by his own rules, has his own agenda and seemingly views himself to be above the law.

In spite of its violence and vulgarity, the story of Samson’s triump would have been read as a comedic folk story. J. Alberto Soggin (1926-2010) comments:

The episode of the jawbone of the ass is not notable for its mythical-religious and popular basis, which is absent, but for the almost grotesque insistence on the extraordinary physical strength of Samson, especially when the spirit takes possession of him. The term grotesque does not seem rash: this narrative has an obviously humorous tone, as does the one which precedes it. Here the Philistines are not only implacable enemies: they are also ridiculous, and the men of Judah, with their prompt submission and obedience, are not less so. (Soggin, Judges: A Commentary (Old Testament Library) 249)

If Samson is going to employ such an inferior weapon, why does he not just use his bare hands? What is the most insufficient tool you have seen effectively employed? What items can you utilize that have seemingly outlived their usefulness? Is anyone above God’s mandates for their life?

The donkey’s jawbone is meant to be viewed as a ridiculous. It clearly holds no value to Samson as he discards it as soon when the battle subsides (Judges 15:17). The insufficiency of Samson’s weapon should accent his God’s sufficiency. The text underscores this point by noting for the third time in the Samson saga that the Spirit of the Lord is the source of Samson’s strength (Judges 14:6, 19, 15, 15:14). Samson, however, does not interpret the events this way.

In an example of the trickster’s affinity for riddles and poetic expression, he taunts his opponent with a pun. The NIV attempts to retain the wordplay:

“With a donkey’s jawbone
I have made donkeys of them.
With a donkey’s jawbone
I have killed a thousand men.” (Judges 15:16 NIV)

Cheryl A. Brown (b. 1949) clarifies:

The NIV rendering preserves a wordplay but does not literally translate the phrase. A more exact translation is “With the jawbone of a donkey, a heap, two heaps...”...Dale Ralph Davis (b. 1944) (Such a Great Salvation, p. 184) refers to James Moffatt (1870-1944)’s ingenious rendering: “With the jawbone of an ass I have piled them in a mass!” (J. Gordon Harris [b. 1940], Brown and Michael S. Moore [b. 1951], Joshua, Judges, Ruth (New International Biblical Commentary, 253)

Donkey (chamowr) and heap (chamorah) form a Hebrew pun. Tammi J. Schneider (b. 1962) explains, “The root h-m-r can mean ‘heap’ or, ‘to make a ruin heap,’ and a similar root is the word for ‘ass,’ the same word used in reference to the tool he used to kill these people in Judges 15:15 (Schneider, Judges (Berit Olam: Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry), 216).”

Samson then names the place Ramath Lehi, “Jawbone Hill”. (Lehi is Hebrew for jawbone.) The exact location of Jawbone Hill cannot be identified.

After taking credit for God’s work, Samson, who has not uttered a word to God in Judges 14 and 15, finally addresses Yahweh, asking the deity to quench his understandable thirst (Judges 15:18).

Victor H. Matthews (b. 1950) critiques:

In victory...Samson once again demonstrates either a lack of understanding for his Nazirite obligations or a total disregard for them...The real significance of his victory comes in Judges 15:17-20. An acknowledgment of Samson’s power source is found in this etiological story of the Enhakkore spring at Lehi. Samson’s prayer, despite its negative rhetoric (compare Judges 14:3 and Judges 15:11b) and it coming on the heels of victory, is a definitive reminder for the reader of God’s role in these events. (Matthews, Judges and Ruth (New Cambridge Bible Commentary), 154)

Carolyn Pressler (b. 1952) adds:

The hidden agency of God is very hidden in this part of the Samson story. No reference to Yahweh is made from Judges 15:1 until Judges 15:14, when the “spirit of the LORD” comes over Samson and once again endows him with superhuman strength. The ridiculous inadequacy of Samson’s weapon underscores the supernatural quality of his strength. God’s agency is hidden, but effective. (Pressler, Joshua, Judges and Ruth (Westminster Bible Companion), 219)

K. Lawson Younger, Jr. (b. 1953) finds further fault in Samson’s motivation:

This single-handed slaughter of a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of the donkey in Judges 15:15 cannot help but to recall to mind the remarkably similar exploit of Shamgar, who “struck down six hundred Philistines with an oxgoad” (Judges 3:31). But the difference is pronounced. Shamgar saved Israel; Samson did not. Shamgar’s motive was to aid Israel; Samson’s motive is personal revenge. (Younger, Judges, Ruth (The NIV Application Commentary), 308)

Michael Wilcock (b. 1932) advises:

The victory at Jawbone Hill underlies the paradox of Samson. He was so obviously now acting as the one through whom God would save Israel. Yet at the same time he was as clearly identified with Israel’s sin as with God’s salvation. He was a Nazirite, under a vow to distance himself from forbidden things, but...the very weapon he used against God’s enemies he must have taken from a carcass...And that was just the attitude of his people. They were supposed to be devoted to the Lord.. But they had reached the stage where so far from wanting to destroy the wicked ways of Canaan, they would not even distance themselves from forbidden things...So as his compatriots (and his enemies, for that matter) look at Samson, they see in him the power of God at work for salvation; but as God looks at him, he sees in him the sin of Israel at work for destruction. The twelfth judge may be in some ways the nearest we get in this book to a Christ-figure, but he is also a walking disaster. Let all who are given great opportunities, great responsibilities, and great gifts take warning. (Wilcock, The Message of Judges (Bible Speaks Today), 142-43)

How would you judge Samson, the judge? If Samson was successful with such an inferior weapon, is there anything additional you need for God to accomplish something through you? Are you more identifiable with sin or salvation? When have you taken credit for God’s handiwork? When has God accomplished through you in spite of yourself?

“You don’t just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first.” - Joe Hallenbeck (Bruce Willis [b. 1955]), The Last Boy Scout (1991)

Gideon: When Less is More (Judges 7)

Who cut down his army and won a great victory? Gideon (Judges 7:2-8)

During the period of the judges in the 12th century BCE, Midianite raiders attacked Israel from the eastern desert (Judges 6:4). Their advances were made during summer (Judges 6:3), near harvest time, and impoverished Israel (Judges 6:6).

With the nation in peril, Gideon reluctantly agreed to God’s request to lead the Israelites against Midian (Judges 6:11-39). Gideon called in reserve units and Israel rallied around their new commander until God informed Gideon that he had a problem - he had two many soldiers (Judges 7:1). God opted for a less is more strategy.

The army was drastically reduced through two tests (Judges 7:3-7). The first test, comparable to modern psychiatric screening and in accordance with mandates in Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 20:1-8), slashed Gideon’s army from 32,000 to 10,000 (Judges 7:3). The second test, a drinking manners test which differentiated between “lappers” and “kneelers”, whittled Gideon’s army down to its final tally of 300 soldiers (Judges 7:5-7). In contrast, the Midianites were as numerous as locusts (Judges 6:5, 7:12).

Fewer numbers being beneficial is counterintuitive. Military historian Richard A. Gabriel (b. 1942) notes that Gideon intentionally minimized his numbers from the outset. Though the Midianites had camped in Endor, land endowed to the tribe of Issachar, Gideon did not enlist Issachar. Gabriel rationalizes, “Gideon made no attempt to bring Issachar under arms. To do so would have immediately alerted the enemy. Gideon seems to have chosen to forego the additional manpower to preserve the element of surprise in mobilizing his army (Gabriel, The Military History of Ancient Israel, 171).”

Gabriel contends that the small army was simply strategy - “Given Gideon’s plan...the force was too large (Gabriel, 172)”. This is seen particularly in the second test that dwindled his numbers. Though its rationale is not stated many have viewed it not as arbitrary but rather as a means of choosing quality over quantity. Gabriel explains, “Gideon devised an ingenious method of selecting his best warriors for the attack...he watched the hot and thirsty soldiers drink their fill. He then chose his best soldiers...Gideon chose only the men “that lapped putting their hand to their mouth,” that is, the men who drank silently and remained vigilant with their weapons at the ready (Gabriel, 172).” As such, at the rest stop, 9700 were discharged leaving only an elite force of seasoned warriors prepared for battle.

Whatever Gideon’s reasons for preferring the smaller unit, he used his 300 wisely. He divided his soldiers into three companies (Judges 7:16), attacked at midnight which concealed the small size of his force (Judges 7:19), confused and scattered the enemy into attacking one another (Judges 7:19-20) and forced them to retreat into a convoy of waiting Israelites (Judges 7:23). Gideon ultimately executed two Midianites kings (Judges 7:24-25).

How would you have reduced Gideon’s army? When is a smaller force advantageous? Why do you think God reduced the size of Gideon’s army?

While Gideon’s smaller army was effective, a strategic explanation does not fit the theme of the text. Five separate references are made to God’s promise to save Israel through Gideon (Judges 6:36, 7:2, 7, 9, 14-15). Joseph R. Jeter (b. 1943) contends, “The story of Gideon’s victory over the Midianites is less about the battle than it is about who is to get credit for the victory (Jeter, Preaching Judges, 78-79).” God’s reduction of the army’s numbers leaves no doubts as to who won the battle. This is evident from the text’s outset:

The LORD said to Gideon, “The people who are with you are too many for Me to give Midian into their hands, for Israel would become boastful, saying, ‘My own power has delivered me.’” (Judges 7:2 NASB)

Susan Niditch (b. 1950) explains, “The outcome of the battle depends not on Israelite expertise, but upon the prowess and goodwill of the divine warrior, protector of Israel. The fewer the number of human soldiers, the greater the victory of God (Niditch, Judges: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 97).” As such, the story of Gideon is really a story about the sovereignty of God.

Are there any areas of your life where it would serve you well to incorporate a less is more approach? Where do you need to become less so that God can become greater (John 3:30)? Has God’s power ever been perfected in your weakness (II Corinthians 12:9)?

I asked God for strength, that I might achieve.
I was made weak, that I might learn humbly to obey.
I asked for health, that I might do greater things.
I was given infirmity, that I might do better things.
I asked for riches, that I might be happy.
I was given poverty, that I might be wise.
I asked for power that I might have the praise of men.
I was given weakness, that I might feel the need of God.
I asked for all things, that I might enjoy life.
I was give life, that I might enjoy all things.
I got nothing that I asked for—but got everything I had hoped for.
Almost despite myself, my unspoken prayers were answered.
I am, among all people, most richly blessed.
- The Prayer of an Unknown Confederate Soldier

Deborah: Right Man for The Job (Judges 4)

Who was the only woman to judge Israel? Deborah.

After the conquest of Israel, charismatic leaders or “judges” periodically surfaced to lead Israel. Deborah is the book’s third major judge, emerging at a time when Israel was experiencing a spiritual and moral decline (Judges 4:1-5:31). She is also described as a prophetess (Judges 4:4) who held court beneath a palm tree (Judges 4:5).

Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. She used to sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim; and the sons of Israel came up to her for judgment. (Judges 4:4-5 NASB)

Deborah’s tenure was a success that resulted in forty years of peace (Judges 5:31). The apex of her rule was convincing Barak to lead a successful counterattack against the forces of Jabin king of Canaan and his military commander Sisera (Judges 4:6-24). This contingent had wreaked havoc on Israel for twenty years (Judges 4:2-3).

Susan Niditch (b. 1950) explains, “Deborah is a prophet, that is, one capable of mediating between God and human beings, and is perceived of having gifts of divination and charisma. She is a conduit to God, a vessel for divine communications of various kinds. It is this inspired oracular gift that allows her to “judge” leading on and off the battlefield (Niditch, Judges: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 65).”

The only other background detail that the text provides is that Deborah was the “wife of Lappidoth” (Judges 4:4 NASB). In Hebrew, this can also be read “woman of fire” or “woman of torches”.

Douglas A. Knight (b. 1943) and Amy-Jill Levine (b. 1956) expound:

The Hebrew for “wife of Lappidoth,” eshet lapidot, can also be translated “woman of flames.” The words for “wife of” and “woman of” are the same, and there is no Mr. Lappidoth featured in the text. Nor is there any fellow named Lappidoth found elsewhere in the Bible. (Knight and Levine, The Meaning of the Bible: What the Jewish Scriptures and Christian Old Testament Can Teach Us, 60)

This interpretation also provides a word play as Deborah is the torch that sets general Barak (whose name means “lightning”) on fire. J. Clinton McCann (b. 1951) states succinctly, “Deborah as ‘Torch Lady’ would be quite appropriate (McCann, Judges (Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 52).”

Have you ever seen anyone who arose at the right time to lead a previously divided people? Do you think that Deborah’s gender played a role in Barak’s hesitation to follow her advice? How significant is her gender to her story?

Deborah was the only woman to serve in the capacity as “judge”, which at the time equated to the highest public office in the land. Her gender is stressed throughout.

Tikva Frymer-Kensky (1943-2006) explains:

Both the story and the song emphasize the fact that Deborah is a woman. The story tells us that she was a prophetess-woman, adding the word “woman,” ’iššah, when the female noun “prophetess,” nebî’ah, already conveys that information. She is called “Lapidot”-woman or Lapidot’s woman, again repeating the word “woman,” ’ēšet...And the song stresses that Deborah was a “mother in Israel.” The femaleness is neither hidden nor incidental: it is an integral part of the story. The motherhood of this “mother in Israel” goes beyond biology. It describes her role as counselor during the days before the war, and it indicates her role in preserving the heritage of Israel, in her case by advising in battle. (Frymer-Kensky, Reading the Women of the Bible: A New Interpretation of Their Stories, 49-50)

As Frymer-Kensky alludes, Deborah describes herself as “mother to Israel” (Judges 5:7 NASB). Deborah not only does not conceal her femininity, but stresses it. For her, it is an asset, not a detriment to her ability to lead.

Are there times when a woman is not only adequate to lead but better suited? During what circumstances? Could you vote for a woman president? If a woman was equipped and appointed to lead Israel, God’s people, can a woman lead a church, also God’s people?

Ehud: A Cloak and Dagger Story

Who was the judge who was left-handed? Ehud. (Judges 3:15)

The death of Joshua (Judges 1:1) created a leadership vacuum which left the twelve tribes of Israel with no centralized government and susceptible to invasion. Periodically, charismatic leaders known as “judges” arose to give the Israelites a temporary respite from their enemies. Judges were not arbitrators of cases like today but rather more often than not guerilla warriors. Ehud is the second of the six major judges (Judges 3:15-30). His story is vulgar and a tale one would not expect to find in the Bible or to be heard in church.

Eglon, king of Moab, aligned himself with Ammon and Amalek and captured “the City of Palms”, Jericho (Deuteronomy 34:3; Judges 3:13). Jericho had been the Israelites’ first major conquest in the Promised Land (Joshua 6:1-26). Instead of obliterating the Israelites, Moab opted to subjugate them and extract tribute (Judges 3:15). Eglon was morbidly obese (Judges 3:18), presumably at the expense of his subjects. His tyranny endured for eighteen years before Ehud emerged (Judges 3:14).

Having no trained army at his disposal, Ehud devised a plan to assassinate Eglon opportunistically using his position as leader of the couriers that paid the Israelites’ tribute (Judges 3:15). Before leaving on his mission, Ehud fashioned a double-edged sword one cubit (eighteen inches) in length (Judges 3:16). The weapon was innovative for its time as the standard sword was curved with only one sharp edge. The straight sword was designed for stabbing and more importantly for Ehud allowed it to be concealed, unlike its curved counterparts.

Ehud’s left-handedness also aided his deception. In fact, he is the first left-hander mentioned in the Bible (Judges 3:15). This appears to be a genetic trait of his tribe, Benjamin (Judges 3:15, 20:16), which ironically means “son of my right hand” (Genesis 35:18). Being a southpaw, Ehud kept his weapon on his right thigh instead of the usual left. His bare left thigh made him appear unarmed.

Ehud obtained a private audience with Eglon under the auspices of relaying a secret (Judges 3:19). Alone with the king, Ehud thrust his weapon so deep into Eglon’s corpulence that not only the blade but the haft was lodged as well (Judges 3:22). This tactic prevented the immediate spurt of blood which would have alerted the guards. Ehud then locked Eglon in the room and escaped as Eglon’s staff misinterpreted the smell to be that of the king relieving himself (Judges 3:23-24). Before Eglon’s corpse was discovered, Ehud escaped to the mountains of Ephraim where the king’s death served as a rallying cry for Israel who then defeated the Moabites (Judges 3:26-29).

Ehud commits premeditated murder. His action was as risky as a double edged sword. To Moab, Ehud was an assassin but to Israel he was a “deliverer” canonized as a judge (Judges 3:15). Fortunately for him, Israel wrote the history.

Do you feel Ehud is a hero, villain, or something else in between? Why?

Hundreds of years later, another potentially left handed swordsman attempted to do battle for God. When Jesus was being arrested, all four gospels report that a disciple cut off the ear of one of the arresting party (Matthew 26:51-52; Mark 14:47; Luke 22:49-51; John 18:10-11). John identifies the disciple as Peter and the victim as Malchus (John 18:10). It was Malchus’ right ear that was severed, meaning that either Peter was left-handed or a remarkably inept swordsman (Luke 22:50; John 18:1).

Jesus disapproves of the action and offers this aphorism of non-violence:

“Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52, NASB)

The contrast between the stories of the swordsmen, Ehud and Peter, demonstrates the radical nature of the kingdom Jesus was establishing.

How is the kingdom of God different from the kingdom of Israel? Could there ever be such a thing as a Christian assassin? If so, under what circumstances?