And he said, “Go”: Perhaps due to the emotion of the moment, Jephthah’s response is a very brief imperative Go. The verb said may be rendered “replied” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). If the command Go sounds quite harsh in the target language, we might say “You may go” (New International Version, New Living Translation) or “Go ahead.” Translators should find an appropriate response. Some languages may prefer to use indirect speech here. For example, Good News Translation has “He told her to go.”

And he sent her away for two months: The Hebrew verb rendered sent (shalach) is used frequently in this book, often in negative contexts (see, for example, verse 9.23). However, when Jephthah sent her away, he was not banishing his daughter. New Jerusalem Bible says “and he let her go away for two months.”

And she departed, she and her companions: And, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, introduces a result here, so a better connector might be “So” (New Revised Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible). Departed renders the same Hebrew verb as Go. She and her companions is a typical Hebrew construction that highlights this main character and adds poignancy. It mirrors a similar construction in verse 11.37 (“I and my companions”). More simply we can say “So she went away with her friends.”

And bewailed her virginity upon the mountains: See the comments on verse 11.37. The Hebrew verb for bewailed is singular. Probably all the girls cried, but here Jephthah’s daughter is in focus.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

So Manoah took the kid with the cereal offering …: Manoah complies with the angel’s request. So, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, may also be translated “Then” (New International Version) or omitted (Revised English Bible) here. Took may be rendered “picked up” or “took hold of.” It would be easy for one man to pick up a small goat. Manoah also took a cereal offering, which renders the most general Hebrew word for any kind of religious sacrifice (see verse 6.18, where it is translated “present”), but here it refers to an offering of grain. It could be raw grain, finely ground grain, or grain made into cakes and then baked or fried. Instructions for the cereal offering are found in Lev 2.1-16 and verse 6.14-23. Good News Translation has “some grain.” Other possible renderings are “grain offering” (New International Version, New Living Translation) and “food offering.”

And offered it upon the rock to the LORD: Offered renders a causative form to the Hebrew verb ʿalah meaning “go up,” which is used throughout this book (see verse 1.1). Here it means to completely burn a sacrifice (see verse 6.26). The pronoun it refers to the burnt offering of the young goat and its accompanying grain offering. The rock seems to imply that there was a particular rock on which offerings were made in Manoah’s hometown of Zorah. Traditionally, a large rock was used as an altar, as was the case in the Gideon episode. Good News Translation makes explicit that Manoah “offered them on the rock altar.”

To him who works wonders is literally “and an extraordinary thing to do.” This clause can describe the LORD as “the one doing wonders” (as in Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and English Standard Version), or it can be combined with what follows by saying “and an amazing thing happened” (similarly Contemporary English Version, New International Version, NET Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Wonders renders the same Hebrew root (p-l-ʾ) as the word for “wonderful” in verse 13.18 (see verse 6.13, where the same word is translated “wonderful deeds”). This word refers to the extraordinary acts of the LORD which some may qualify as miraculous. But since the word “miracle” does not appear here, it may be better to speak of “the LORD, the one who does marvelous/amazing things,” or if the alternative interpretation is chosen, to say “an amazing thing happened.” Both interpretations are acceptable. Taking the first approach, Revised English Bible says “to him whose works are full of wonder.” Taking the second one, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “and a marvelous thing happened.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh includes a footnote to say that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain, but if a footnote is included, it is probably better to put in the alternate interpretation.

The Hebrew text actually has another clause at the end of this verse, which is literally “and Manoah and his wife were watching.” Some versions combine this clause with the previous one. For example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “and a marvelous thing happened while Manoah and his wife looked on.” New International Version is similar with “And the LORD did an amazing thing while Manoah and his wife watched.” However, this clause also occurs in the next verse, where it seems more logical and appropriate. Therefore some scholars believe it was copied into this verse by mistake. This is certainly what led Revised Standard Version to omit it here. This is a textual problem, so translators may want to acknowledge it in a footnote.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In 15.4-5 Samson has been acting alone. Now the Philistines come on the scene, so some versions begin a new paragraph here (Contemporary English Version, New International Version). It seems to be common knowledge that one of their group actually gave a wedded daughter to another man.

Then the Philistines said: Then renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which some versions leave untranslated (Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible). Since it introduces a result here, it may also be translated “So” or “And.” Throughout this incident there is a distinction made between the family of Samson’s wife in Timnah, who are themselves Philistines, and the rest of the Philistines who interact with Samson. Contemporary English Version shows the distinction by rendering the Philistines as “Some of the Philistines.” We may also say “the rest of the Philistines” or “the Philistine authorities/leaders.” In this context the general verb said may be rendered “asked” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “demanded” (Revised English Bible).

Who has done this?: This question expresses the strong emotion of the Philistines because of the extensive devastation. If necessary, this direct quote may be expressed indirectly by saying “So the Philistine leaders asked who had done this.” Good News Translation is similar with “When the Philistines asked who had done this.” However, using indirect speech robs the narrative of its strong impact.

And they said: The referent for the pronoun they is not immediately clear. It must refer to other Philistines, not those who asked the question. So this pronoun may be rendered “some others.” Another possibility is to use a passive expression, for example, “they were told” (New International Version, New American Bible). Good News Translation suggests “they learned.” In both these renderings the pronoun “they” refers to the same Philistines as in the first sentence.

Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite: This is the answer to the question, Who has done this? Many languages will be able to follow the Hebrew here, which has no verb, but some may need to say “It was Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite [who did this].” This clause seems to remove any doubt about the marriage having taken place or not, since Samson is referred to as the son-in-law of the woman’s father. The Timnite means Samson’s father-in-law was from the town of Timnah. Contemporary English Version calls him “that man in Timnah.”

Because he has taken his wife and given her to his companion: Because renders well the Hebrew particle ki, which introduces the reason Samson destroyed the crops of the Philistines. The pronoun he refers to the father-in-law of Samson, and the two occurrences of the pronoun his refer to Samson. As in verse 1.12, the verb given carries the sense of “give in marriage.” For his companion, see verse 14.20. If the receptor language has a special verb tense for flashbacks, it may be used here, for example, “for that man from Timnah had taken Samson’s wife and had given her to Samson’s [best] friend.” Another possible model is “That man took Samson’s wife and married her to Samson’s friend. That is why Samson did this.” It seems clear here that the community recognizes this was not the right thing to do.

And the Philistines came up, and burned her and her father with fire: This sentence shows that it did not help Samson’s wife to reveal the solution to the riddle, since the threat against her and her family is now carried out (verse 14.15). It also shows that the solidarity among the Philistine people was not too strong. Instead of siding with the father-in-law against Samson, these people turn against him even though he was a fellow Philistine. They punish Samson’s father-in-law for bringing this trouble upon their people. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces their reaction, so it might translated “So” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “then” (New Jerusalem Bible). New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh uses a stronger conjunction, “Thereupon.” The Philistines may be rendered “those Philistines,” since this phrase appears to refer to yet another group. Came up renders the key Hebrew verb ʿalah meaning “go up,” which is often used in military contexts (see verse 1.1). Here it introduces the violent act of burning. In some languages it may be rendered simply “went” (Good News Translation, New Living Translation). Contemporary English Version says “went to Timnah,” which is probable, but not in the text.

For burned her and her father with fire, see verse 14.15. Burned … with fire is redundant in many languages, but since the word fire is emphasized here and throughout the book of Judges, it should be kept it if possible. The pronoun her refers to Samson’s wife, which Contemporary English Version makes explicit. Instead of her father, the Septuagint and some other ancient versions have “her father’s house.” They add the word “house” to harmonize the text with verse 14.15. This is the reading followed by Good News Translation. However, despite this smoother text, there seems no reason to make this change here. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating to the Hebrew text, so it should be maintained. We might say “burned Samson’s wife and her father to death.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then the Philistine leaders asked, “Who did this?” and they were told, “It was Samson, the son-in-law of that man from Timnah. He gave his daughter in marriage to Samson’s friend. That’s why Samson did this.” So the Philistines went to Timnah and burned to death the woman and her father.

• Then the Philistines said, “Who did this?” And they learned it was Samson, the son-in-law of the man from Timnah—the man who had taken Samson’s wife and given her to Samson’s friend. So they went to Timnah, and they set fire to the father and his daughter, burning them both to death.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Because of the shift of focus to the Philistines, many versions begin a new paragraph here (Contemporary English Version, New International Version). Without divine power, Samson is easily captured. A series of four verbs follows in quick succession expressing the speed with which the Philistines deal with their prisoner: seized, gouged out, brought … down, and bound. The verse ends with the sad picture of Samson: blind, in chains, and forced to do humiliating work. The situation is drastic.

And the Philistines seized him: And, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, may be translated “So” (New Revised Standard Version), “Then” (New International Version, Revised English Bible), or even “Suddenly.” Translators should choose a connector to carry the story forward and to emphasize the change in Samson, from confident hope to painful powerlessness. For the Hebrew verb rendered seized, see verse 1.6, where it is translated “caught.” Here it may be rendered “grabbed” (Contemporary English Version), “took hold of,” or “captured.” Obviously, the Philistines are not ready to lose Samson again.

And gouged out his eyes: This very cruel way of treating prisoners was meant to inflict pain, as well as to humiliate the enemy and render him helpless (see also verse 2 Kgs 25.7). The Hebrew verb rendered gouged out is not used often. It describes digging out something forcefully. Many languages will have a special expression for this kind of torture, for example, “poked out his eyes” (Contemporary English Version) or “put his eyes out” (Good News Translation). Just saying they “blinded him” might not be sufficient here.

And brought him down to Gaza: Brought … down renders a causative form of the Hebrew verb yarad meaning “go down” (see verse 14.1). There may be actual downward movement here, since the road from Delilah’s house to Gaza on the Mediterranean coast was actually downhill. For Gaza see verse 1.18. New International Version says they “took him down to Gaza.” Contemporary English Version‘s “They took him to the prison in Gaza” anticipates the end of the verse.

And bound him with bronze fetters: Bound is a keyword in this chapter (see verse 16.5-8, 10-13; and comments on verse 15.10). It may be rendered “tied [him] up.” The Hebrew word for bronze fetters refers to bronze chains used to bind a criminal or enemy. Bronze is a very strong metal, so translators should try to communicate this important feature. New Jerusalem Bible says “a double chain of bronze,” which renders the Hebrew dual form here. This dual form could also refer to two shackles, one for the feet and one for the hands. If bronze is not known, translators may say “strong/heavy metal chains.” Though these chains were very heavy, they did not keep Samson from walking and moving around, as the next clause shows.

And he ground at the mill in the prison: This clause could be the beginning of a new paragraph. Along with the next verse, it constitutes a kind of turning point in the story. We understand it as a concluding remark for this incident. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “At that time.” He ground is literally “he was one grinding.” The Hebrew construction here indicates ongoing action. The Hebrew verb for ground refers to grinding grain into flour. The phrase at the mill does not occur in Hebrew but designates the place where grain is ground into flour. He ground at the mill may be rendered “he became a grinder at the mill.” Though the text is not explicit, many illustrations show a blind but strong Samson walking in a circle pushing a millstone, as an ox would normally do. In the prison is literally “in the house of those who were bound,” with the same the Hebrew verb that appears earlier in this verse. We might say “At that time Samson was held in a prison, where he was forced to grind grain.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then the Philistines captured Samson, put his eyes out, and took him down to the town of Gaza. There they bound him with strong metal chains and forced him to work, grinding grain in the prison.

• So the Philistines grabbed hold of Samson and gouged out his eyes. Then they took him down to Gaza, where they tied him up with [two] bronze chains. In the prison there, he was forced to grind grain into flour.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And they passed on from there to the hill country of Ephraim: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” (Contemporary English Version) to indicate that this clause gives the next stage in the Danites’ journey. The text does not say how long they remained at Kiriath-jearim. For the key Hebrew verb rendered passed on (ʿavar), see verse 3.26 and verse 11.29. Revised Standard Version gives one interpretation for it here, but the clause can also mean “Then from there they passed over the mountains of Ephraim.” For the hill country of Ephraim, see verse 2.9.

And came to the house of Micah: See verse 18.2. The intrigue becomes more complicated, as the irony of the situation becomes evident. Earlier, the Danite spies had stopped at Micah’s house and found out about his idols. Here 600 armed Danite soldiers, who were sent out to find a new place to live (their “inheritance”), end up at Micah’s house, where all they can find to do is rob one man of his idols.

A translation model for this verse is:

• From there they passed on into the hill country of Ephraim and came to Micah’s house.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And he lifted up his eyes, and saw …: Coming from the fields and arriving in the town square, the old man (he) looks around and sees the group of travelers. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces the next action, but many versions omit it (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). New International Version prefers to cast this clause as a dependent clause, saying “When he looked and saw…” (similarly NET Bible). He lifted up his eyes, and saw renders a well-known Hebrew idiom, which if translated literally, would be unnatural in most languages. Translators can use some natural equivalent, for example, “he caught sight of” or simply “he saw.”

The wayfarer in the open square of the city: The wayfarer is literally “the man, the traveling one,” which refers to the Levite. Here the Hebrew word for “man” (ʾish) appears yet again, as it does throughout this section. In most languages the wayfarer may be translated “the traveler” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “the stranger.” The text does not say how the old man recognized the Levite as a stranger but this was probably obvious from his clothes, his donkeys, and so on. Also, the fact that the Levite was sitting in the open square of the city (see verse 19.15) waiting for help may have indicated that he was a foreigner. Obviously the old man sees not just the Levite but the whole group.

And the old man said: Naturally in this culture, he would have addressed the husband, rather than the concubine or the servant. The old man may be rendered simply “the man” or “he” (New Living Translation) if this is more natural in the target language. In many languages it will be necessary to first say the man approached the Levite and his group before speaking, so translators might say “and he went up to them, and he said.” In this context the general verb said may be translated “asked.”

Where are you going? and whence do you come?: These two questions are the old man’s polite way of beginning a conversation with the Levite. However, in many languages an initial word such as “Welcome” might be necessary. These questions are similar to those which the angel of the LORD asks Hagar in Gen 16.8. Here as there, they are questions of information, not rhetorical questions, and the Levite immediately answers them. Where are you going? asks for the Levite’s final destination, while whence do you come? asks for his starting point. In many languages it will be more natural to put these questions in reverse order. Whence is an old English word meaning “from where.” The second question may be rendered “Where are you coming from?” or “Where have you come from?” The Hebrew pronoun for you is singular, but in many languages it will be better to use a plural “you.” We might say “Where have you [all] come from? And where are you headed?” For those languages that prefer indirect speech here, see the second model below.

Translation models for this verse are:

• And when he saw the travelers in the town square, he approached them and said, “Greetings, friends. Where have you come from? And where are you going?”

• As he was coming, the old man saw the stranger waiting in the middle of the town and asked him where he had come from and where he was going.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But the people, the men of Israel, took courage …: But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction here. Despite what happened, the Israelites were not discouraged. They continued fighting. The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) is often used to refer to the people of Israel (see verse 2.4). Its use reminds the audience of all that Yahweh has done up to now for his people. The narrator quickly qualifies this word by adding the men of Israel, which refers more specifically to “the Israelite army” (Good News Translation). This phrase includes all the people except the Benjaminites. The Hebrew verb rendered took courage is literally “strengthened themselves” (see verse 7.11, where a different form of the verb is used). This verb describes the moral character of the Israelites. Instead of giving up after the huge defeat, they “rallied” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). We might also say they “did not lose courage” or “did not give up.” New International Version‘s “encouraged one another” does not seem strong enough to explain their determination at this point.

And again formed the battle line in the same place where they had formed it on the first day: The Israelites regrouped to fight again. They decided to go back to the same place and go into the same formation as the previous day. The audience will certainly wonder if this was a good strategy, in view of the previous day’s defeat. This detail may show how courageous and determined they were. Again formed the battle line is literally “they added to arrange [for] battle.” The Hebrew verb here is the same one rendered “drew up [the battle] line” in verse 20.20 (see comments there). The same verb is repeated in the next clause as well.

In the same place where they had formed it on the first day is literally “in the place that they arranged there on the first day.” This clause may be translated “in the same place they had lined up for battle the day before.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Despite that, the Israelites renewed their courage and once again lined up for battle in the same place where they had stood on the first day.

• Nevertheless, the Israelite soldiers were courageous and took position in the same place as the previous day to fight [the Benjaminites] once again.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .