And Jephthah sent messengers again to the king of the Ammonites is literally “And Jephthah added/did again and he sent messengers….” See verse 9.12. Obviously there are steps in the negotiation process that are not made explicit here. The Ammonite king sent Jephthah’s envoys back to him with his response. Upon hearing it, Jephthah now sends messengers back. Contemporary English Version says “Jephthah sent the messengers back to the king of Ammon,” which implies that the same people were sent as before, but the text does not imply this is the case.

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 .

Samson’s parents’ lengthy response shows their disappointment. Not only does Samson break with the traditional way of doing things—he also wants to marry a girl who is not an Israelite.

But his father and mother said to him: But, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, introduces a contrast here. Samson expects his parents to comply with his request, but they oppose him. Translators should try to find a way of expressing this opposition. The phrase his father and mother occurs repeatedly in this subsection to show their solidarity and mutual concern for their son (see verse 14.2). If this repetition is inappropriate, translators may say “his parents” (Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible). The general verb said may be rendered “protested” (Revised English Bible), which conveys well the parents’ disappointment and opposition.

Is there not a woman among the daughters of your kinsmen…?: This negative rhetorical question implies a positive answer. It may be rendered as a strong statement by saying “Surely there is a woman….” Is there not reflects the Hebrew, but in some languages it may be more natural to say “Surely you can find” or “Can’t you find.” Woman renders the Hebrew word ʾishshah again, which can also mean “wife” (see verse 14.2). It occurs twice in this verse and may be rendered either way. Among the daughters of your kinsmen is literally “among the daughters of your brothers.” Among the Israelites there were fixed rules concerning marriage. Israelites were not to marry outside their own people (Deut 7.3-4). At the same time, there were also strict rules against incest. The expression “among the daughters of your brothers” refers to the female Israelites whom Samson could have married. It may be rendered “among your own people.” Revised English Bible suggests “among your cousins,” but this rendering may be too specific, especially in cultures where this could be considered incest. Certainly in Israel, not all cousins could be married. So we might say more generally “from our clan” or “from our own tribe.”

Or among all our people: This phrase emphasizes what Samson’s parents have to say: Can’t you find a suitable wife among all the people of Israel? Why do you have to marry a foreigner? Or renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which may be translated “and” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), depending on the receptor language. All our people is literally “all my people.” Almost all versions render “my” as “our.” The pronoun “my” may reflect the fact that the father seems to be the main person talking (see the comments below). The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) can point to other nations, but more often it refers to the people of Israel. Here it refers to fellow Israelites. Contemporary English Version renders this phrase and the previous one as “in our clan and even more in the rest of Israel.” We might say “from our clan and all our other people.”

That you must go to take a wife from the uncircumcised Philistines: That, which renders the Hebrew particle ki, introduces a result of what precedes. Is it really true, the parents ask, that there are no marriageable young women in our clan, which would force you to go outside to the Philistines for a wife against the customs of our people? The tone here is one of bitter disappointment. Some might say “so that you feel you must marry…,” “so you’re going to marry…,” or “so you’ve decided to marry….” The auxiliary verb must does not appear in Hebrew. Revised Standard Version adds it to express well the bitter tone here. Take renders the same Hebrew verb translated “get” in verse 14.2 (see comments there). The real extent of the parents’ anger and disappointment can be seen here as they insult the ethnic group of Samson’s future wife by calling them uncircumcised. Circumcision was commonly practiced by peoples throughout the region, but not by the Philistines. In Israel circumcision was the sign of their covenant relationship with Yahweh (Gen 17.11). Calling someone uncircumcised was a serious insult. David used this same word when he spoke about the Philistine giant Goliath (verse 1 Sam 17.26). The Israelites considered the Philistines as unclean because they were not circumcised. In many cultures circumcision is known and is the mark of true male adulthood and status in the society. If this is the case, translating uncircumcised will not pose a problem. But in some languages it will not be easy to render this phrase, either because circumcision is not known or because it does not have the same connotation. In some cultures circumcision is not something that can be mentioned openly. In these languages translators will need to find a word or expression that conveys some of the negative impact of the word uncircumcised. Good News Translation says “heathen,” and New Living Translation uses “pagan.” Both these words are religious terms conveying the kind of strong negative feelings that Israelites had toward Philistines. In this passage the exact details of circumcision are not in focus, but throughout the Bible this practice plays an important role, so another possibility is to refer to it literally here and explain in a footnote or in the glossary its connotation here and other similar contexts.

Good News Translation reverses the order of the two clauses in this rhetorical question, and this is acceptable. Another possible model is “Among all our clan and all the rest of our people, can’t you find a [suitable/good] woman to marry? Why do you have to find one among the heathen Philistines?”

But Samson said to his father: Once again But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, since it introduces another contrast here. Samson now addresses his father alone. Normally he should listen to his father, but unexpectedly, he refuses.

Get her for me: This is the same request Samson made in verse 14.2. But in light of what the parents have said, the statement seems even more disrespectful here. In Hebrew the word order changes and the demand is briefer here, literally “Her get for me.” Samson makes it clear this is the only woman he wants. Good News Translation attempts to convey this emphasis by saying “She is the one I want you to get for me.” We may also say “It’s her [and her alone] I want. Get her for me.” Samson is being impatient and almost childish.

For she pleases me well: The Hebrew conjunction ki rendered for introduces the reason Samson wants her, but in many languages this conjunction may be omitted (Good News Translation). She pleases me well is literally “she is straight in my eyes,” which means “She’s the right one for me” (New International Version). Good News Translation‘s “I like her” seems weak here. In light of verse 14.7, it seems that Samson has only seen this woman and not yet talked to her. Nevertheless, this declaration seems quite strong. Some languages may prefer to reverse this clause and the previous one and say “She is the one for me. Get her for me.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• But his parents objected, saying, “Why do you need to look for a wife among those heathen Philistine girls? In all our clan and in all the rest of our people, surely you can find a [suitable] wife!”
But Samson replied, “Get her! She’s the right one for me!”

• But Samson’s parents protested, “Surely, you can marry one of our own. Why do you insist on marrying somebody from those uncircumcised Philistines?”
But Samson said to his father, “I said, she is the one I want. Get her for me!”

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 .

This verse introduces some poetic lines that were probably set to music. As with verse 5.1-31, victory songs were often composed following a great defeat. This is Samson’s song of triumph. Like the Song of Deborah, these lines are probably much older than the written narrative found here. The word jawbone occurs twice, as well as other repetitive phrases. Translators should place these lines in poetic format.

And Samson said: And renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction here, but another possible connector is “Then” (New International Version, New American Bible). The mention of Samson by name shows that this literary unit is coming to a close. The general verb said may be rendered “sang” (Good News Translation) since a song follows.

Following the rendering of Revised Standard Version, the special poetic pattern of the song here becomes clear. It reads literally:

With the jawbone of the donkey,
one heap, two heaps;
with the jawbone of the donkey,
I struck a thousand man.

The first line is repeated in the third line. The second line is explained in the last line. When rendering this song, translators may make use of any stylistic devices in their language to show that this is poetry, for example, rhythm, rhyme, and reversals in word order. They may also want to capitalize each line.

With the jawbone of an ass: This first line gives the main theme of Samson’s song. As with other heroes in Israel (for example, Ehud and Jael), his weapon was small and held in his hand. It is not just the fact that he killed 1,000 men that is astounding. It is also how he did it. For the jawbone of an ass, see verse 15.15.

Heaps upon heaps: The Hebrew word for heaps refers to a pile of objects. This same word occurs in Exo 8.14, when following the second plague, there were heaps of dead frogs everywhere. Here there are heaps upon heaps of dead Philistines. This line expresses the great number of people Samson killed—1,000 men in all. In Hebrew this line consists of two words, which are chamor chamoratayim (literally “one heap, two heaps”). However, Good News Translation follows the Septuagint by saying “I piled them up in piles.” New International Version proposes “I have made donkeys of them,” noting in a footnote that the words for “heap” and “donkey” are very similar in Hebrew. By repointing the Hebrew text, another possible meaning emerges: “thrashing I thrashed them,” a reading that Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {C} rating. This reading fits the context of boasting that is part of this song, so can clearly serve as a reliable text here. Translators will have to make their choice, but can put the alternative readings in a footnote. If Revised Standard Version is followed here, it can be noted there may be a wordplay, since the Hebrew word for ass has the same root letters as the word for heaps (ch-m-r). Indeed, whichever reading is followed, these sounds occur repeatedly throughout the first three lines.

With the jawbone of an ass is repeated in the third line. Most languages enjoy repetition in songs, but in some languages the two lines may occur one after the other, with the rest of the material following, or one line at the beginning and the repetition at the end. If such repetition is not appreciated, this redundant line may be removed, but it is strongly recommended to respect the text if it all possible.

Have I slain a thousand men: Here Revised Standard Version reverses the normal order of the auxiliary verb and the subject in English to convey a poetic style. Slain renders the same Hebrew verb translated “slew” in the previous verse (see comments there). In some languages a thousand men will be a long and non-poetic sounding expression. If so, an ideophone or idiomatic expression may be used, for example, “I killed many, many, many men” or “I killed many men, you cannot count them!”

Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version change the order of the lines in this poem for naturalness in English. Contemporary English Version says:

I used a donkey’s jawbone
to kill a thousand men.
I beat them with this jawbone
over and over again.

This version, however, does not render in a clear way the second line of the poem. Possible models for the whole verse are:

• Then Samson said:
“With a donkey’s jawbone, I thrashed them thoroughly;*
with a donkey’s jawbone, I killed a thousand men.”
* Some think the Hebrew here says “heaps upon heaps [of dead bodies].”

• Samson sang:
“A simple donkey’s jawbone,
dead bodies everywhere!
A simple donkey’s jawbone,
and I slaughtered 1,000 men!”

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 .

As happened with Gideon (verse 8.32), Samson was buried in the tomb of his father. In this final verse of the Samson story there are many links back to the story’s beginning. The name Manoah (verse 13.2) forms an inclusio, as does the phrase between Zorah and Eshta-ol (verse 13.25).

Then his brothers and all his family …: Then renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, introducing the next event after Samson’s death. His brothers and all his family refers to Samson’s extended family. Samson’s father and mother appear several times in this story (see, for example, verse 14.2, 9), but it is only at his death that his other relatives are mentioned. This is certainly because his parents are now deceased, as becomes clear below. All his family (literally “all the house of his father”) may be rendered “the rest of his family” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) or “his other relatives” (similarly New Living Translation).

Came down and took him and brought him up and buried him: This series of four verbs reflects a typical Hebrew style. However, it is important to note that in this final journey for Samson, his family came down and then brought … up his body for burial. This final use of the Hebrew verbs meaning “go down” (yarad) and “go up” (ʿalah) seems to have special significance (see verse 14.1-2). If possible, these verbs should be kept. In many languages it will be necessary to speak of Samson’s body, rather than him at this point. We might say “Then Samson’s brothers and the rest of his family came down and took his body back for burial….”

For between Zorah and Eshta-ol, see verse 13.25. This fact, which seems insignificant, is actually very pertinent. It was between Zorah and Eshta-ol that Yahweh first empowered Samson. This fact is a reminder that Samson, despite all his faults, was empowered by the LORD and was truly a hero in Israel.

In the tomb of Manoah his father: No mention has been made of the death of Samson’s father, but of course it was a very common practice to keep the bones of a family in the same place (see verse 8.32). Tomb refers to the actual place where these bones were kept, usually in a cave or underground. The Hebrew word for tomb comes from the same root as the verb rendered buried. If the notion of tomb is hard to express, we might simply say “in the same place his father Manoah was buried.”

He had judged Israel twenty years: See verse 15.20. This is the narrator’s final note on Samson’s life. In this summary statement Samson’s name does not appear, but rather an emphatic pronoun for He in Hebrew. In many languages it will be necessary to mention Samson’s name here, as in Contemporary English Version and New Living Translation. The Hebrew verb for judged (shafat) is yet another case of this word having a broader sense than someone judging legal cases (see verse 3.10). There is no evidence Samson ever acted in this way, but it is clear he was a national hero. So it very important that translators use the exact same terminology used when describing the other leaders or heroes in this book. We can say Samson “led,” “was a leader,” or even “was [a major] hero.” In this context Israel refers to the area around the Philistine region, but since this way of speaking is a major feature of this book, no modification should be made here. Twenty years is the time that Samson was active in the land. Though it is a long period, it is only half the time that the Philistines oppressed the Israelites (verse 13.1).

As far as we know, Samson is the only judge to die an unnatural death, this at his own hand. Though premeditated murder is against God’s Law (Exo 20.13; Deut 5.17), other cases of suicide are known in the Old Testament, notably when Saul falls on his own sword (verse 1 Sam 31.4).

History’s view of Samson is mixed. Though empowered by Yahweh, Samson broke his Nazirite vow on several occasions, and in several ways strayed far from the standards of the more righteous Israelite leaders. His connection to foreign women who trick him is particularly and universally condemned. However, more space is allotted to this “hero” than to any other one in this book. And despite the fact that his contribution to Israel’s history seems limited to acts of vengeance, he is known throughout history for gaining spectacular victories over Israel’s enemies, all empowered by Yahweh’s “spirit” and strength. Nevertheless, most scholars consider him as part of the lesser leaders of Israel, and in many ways he can be seen as at the bottom of the “downward spiral” in this period of Israel’s history. Perhaps significantly, he is the last “judge-hero” to appear in the book.

The sections that follow (17.1–21.25) are considered appendices. Indeed, in terms of sheer horror, immorality and chaos, they surpass all the previous stories in this book. Interestingly, they also follow the same general pattern as the judges’ episodes. Beginning with a troubling story of idolatry and thievery among the Israelites, the appendices continue on with an horrific account of a bloody civil war.

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 shouted to the Danites: And, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, introduces the next event, but in many languages it can be omitted. The pronoun they refers to Micah and his neighbors. Shouted renders the Hebrew verb meaning “call,” which figures so prominently in the Samson story. Here Micah and his people cried out in a loud voice to catch the Danites’ attention. This clause conveys some humor, since this handful of men is trying to “shout down” and stop hundreds of people.

Who turned round renders an independent clause in Hebrew, which is literally “and they turned their faces.” As Micah and his band are calling out to them, the Danites turn around to see who is shouting. Contemporary English Version gives a good rendering with “They turned to face him [that is, Micah].”

And said to Micah: The general verb said may be rendered “asked” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) since a question follows.

What ails you…? is literally “What to you…?” (compare the last question in verse 18.3). In most languages translators may say “What do you want?” Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible say “What is the matter with you…?” This rendering carries a note of contempt, which seems appropriate in this context.

That you come with such a company is literally “that you were called out,” which has the same Hebrew verb as in verse 18.22. We might say “Why did you bring all these men?” (Contemporary English Version) or “Why have you called out all these people?” Again there is sarcasm here, as the Danites far outnumber Micah’s men.

Translation models for this verse are:

• They shouted for the Danites to stop, and so they turned around and asked Micah, “What do you want? Why have you called out all these people [against us]?”

• They called out to the Danites, who looked around and said to Micah, “What’s the matter? Why did you bring all these men?”

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 .

The scene now changes from that of the night of horror and abuse and the woman near death lying at the doorstep to the people inside the old man’s house who seem unconcerned about her fate. This is yet another ironic contrast, certainly intended to shock the audience. Some people might qualify this passage as one of the saddest in the Old Testament.

And her master rose up in the morning: And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction. Some languages may prefer to omit it at this high point in the story. Others may prefer to cast this clause as a dependent one by saying “When her husband rose in the morning,” adding to the suspense. For the ironic use of her master, see verse 19.26. Once again the Hebrew verb qum rendered rose up appears. Used throughout this book to describe how Yahweh “raised up” a deliverer for his people (verse 2.16), here the Levite ironically rose up to discover his wife brutalized by his fellow Israelites. However, he seems oblivious to his own responsibility in the events leading to civil war in Israel. If at all possible, the same verb should be used here as used previously in the book, thus preserving this important literary link. If this is not possible, then we might say he “woke up” (Contemporary English Version), “got up” (Good News Translation), or “got out of bed.”

And when he opened the doors of the house renders an independent clause in Hebrew, literally “and he opened the doors of the house.” New Revised Standard Version and Contemporary English Version maintain an independent clause here. However, like the previous clause, this one and the next lead up to the climax of this episode, which is the discovery of the dead concubine. In many languages the use of subordinate clauses here and even in the first three clauses of this verse will be effective in building suspense. New International Version‘s rendering is especially striking: “When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way.” The Hebrew word for doors is plural, suggesting a door with two sides (see comments on verse 19.26, where a different Hebrew word is used). Of the house is a repetitive expression that slows down the story right before the climax, which is typical of Hebrew narrative.

And went out to go on his way (literally “and went out to go on his road”) means the Levite left the old man’s house ready to continue on his journey. He had no concern for his concubine. The Hebrew verb rendered went out (yatsaʾ) occurs often in this section. The men who surrounded the house asked the old man to “bring out” the Levite (verse 19.22), but his concubine was “put out” in his place (verse 19.25). Now the Levite “goes out.” In many languages different verbs may need to be used in each of these contexts.

Behold, there was his concubine … is literally “and behold the woman, his concubine….” Here the Hebrew word hinneh rendered behold marks the high point of the story, as the Levite discovers his concubine on the doorstep. It expresses his surprise at finding her there. Translators should look for some way of expressing this important word. Some will use a word such as “Look!” or an equivalent of the French word voici. In other languages a conjunction or an ideophone expressing surprise may be used. In the Hebrew text there is repetition and heavy emphasis on his concubine, literally “the woman, his concubine.” Many versions omit one of these expressions, but if possible, both of them should be kept for emphasis, as in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh. The use of this phrase also shows the impersonality of this entire account. Neither the Levite, his concubine, nor the old man are given names.

Lying at the door of the house: Lying renders the Hebrew verb nafal meaning “fall,” this keyword that most often describes the enemies of Israel as they lay dead, defeated by the Israelites (see verse 19.26). Here ironically it is used to describe an Israelite woman raped and murdered by her own people. Lying renders a Hebrew participle, a verb form that often occurs with hinneh (behold). The woman was probably lying face down. At the door of the house is another repetitive phrase (see verse 19.26), possibly emphasizing the breach of hospitality.

With her hands on the threshold is literally “and her hands upon the doorsill.” These are powerful words and they paint a pitiful picture. Throughout this book, the Hebrew word for hands occurs continually to describe how the heroes of Israel defeat their enemies, starting with Ehud, the left-handed man, and continuing with Jael, Gideon, and Samson. Here the woman’s hands are inert, stretched out in a pitiful appeal for help. The woman, overcome by the abuse, was lying face down with her hands outstretched, grasping the threshold, which refers to the piece of wood at the bottom of the doorframe. If she could have made a sound, presumably someone would have heard her. Translators must try to maintain the keyword hands. In some languages it may be necessary to supply a verb by saying “her hands grabbed the threshold” or “with her hands she grabbed the door opening.” Clearly the narrator is trying to paint a picture of her agony and suffering, and translators should try to convey the emotion here. For example, Good News Translation says “he found his concubine lying in front of the house with her hands reaching for the door.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Her husband arose the next morning and opened the doors to go out and continue his journey. To his surprise, he found the woman—his concubine—lying in the entrance, her hands reaching out toward the threshold.

• The next morning the Levite got up and opened the door, ready to go on his way. Surprise! There was his wife, lying there with her hands clutching the doorsill.

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 .

This verse slows down the narrative and heightens the suspense before the surprise victory of the Israelites. The Benjaminites, lulled by past victories, were tricked into thinking that they would win, as the Israelites drew them further and further into the open.

And the Benjaminites said: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” in this context. The general verb said may mean “shouted” (New Living Translation) as the Benjaminites (literally “the sons [or, children] of Benjamin”) anticipated yet another victory. However, it is more likely that the quotation here portrays their thoughts, so we might say “thought” (New Revised Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible) or “said to themselves.” As in the account of Sisera and his mother (verse 5.28), dialogue reveals the inner thoughts of the characters in the story. Both here and in Deborah’s victory song, Israel’s enemies (in this case, Benjamin) gloat over past victories and fall into the eternal trap: pride.

They are routed before us, as at the first: As the battle rages, the Benjaminites are tricked into thinking they are winning. They declare their victory, even as they fight. The Hebrew verb rendered routed can mean “strike,” “stumble,” or in this context, “defeat.” Before us is literally “before our faces.” Good News Translation says “We’ve beaten them,” but New International Version seems closer to the meaning with “We are defeating them.” We might also say “They’re falling, right before our eyes.” Contemporary English Version‘s “We’re mowing them down” seems too colloquial here.

As at the first is a literal rendering of the Hebrew. Good News Translation and New International Version say “as before,” and Contemporary English Version has “like we did before.”

But the men of Israel said: But is a good rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here, because it introduces the contrasting words of the Israelites and highlights the trick they are about to play on the Benjaminites. It may be translated “But unknown to them” or “But unfortunately for them.” In some languages “Meanwhile” might also be a possibility. The general verb said may be rendered “said to each other.”

Let us flee: The Hebrew verb rendered flee (nus) means “run away,” as when Sisera fled on foot from the battle against Deborah and Barak (see verse 4.15). However, here the Israelites are not fleeing because of fear, trying to escape. Rather, they are pretending to flee. To avoid confusion, translators might prefer to say “Let’s retreat” (New International Version) or “Let’s move back.”

And draw them away from the city to the highways: By retreating the Israelites want to draw the Benjaminites away from Gibeah. For draw away, see verse 20.31. The city is Gibeah, the place of refuge for the Benjaminite soldiers. The highways refers to the two roads mentioned in verse 20.31 (see comments there).

Several versions have changed from direct to indirect speech here (so Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant). Though this is acceptable, it robs the narrative of some of its liveliness and suspense. Some possible models for this verse are:

• Then the Benjaminites cried out, “We’re beating them, like the first time!”
But [unknown to them] the Israelites gave the order, “Retreat and draw them away from the town out onto the roads!”

• Then the Benjaminites thought to themselves, “We’re defeating them, just like we did before.”
Meanwhile the Israelites said, “Let’s draw back and entice them out on the roads, away from their town.”

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 .