TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Judges 15:1–8. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Here is, I. Samson's return to his wife, whom he had left in displeasure; not hearing perhaps that she was given to another, when time had a little cooled his resentments, he came back to her, visited her with a kid, Jdg 15:1. The value of the present was inconsiderable, but it was intended as a token of reconciliation, and perhaps was then so used, when those that had been at variance were brought together again; he sent this, that he might sup with her in her apartments, and she with him, on his provision, and so they might be friends again. It was generously done of Samson, though he was the party offended and the superior relation, to whom therefore she was bound in duty to sue for peace and to make the first motion of reconciliation. When differences happen between near relations, let hose be ever reckoned the wisest and the best that are most forward to forgive and forget injuries and most willing to stoop and yield for peace' sake.
II.The repulse he met with.
Her father forbade him to come near her; for truly he had married her to another, Jdg 15:2. He endeavours, 1. To justify himself in this wrong: I verily thought that thou hadst utterly hated her. A very ill opinion he had of Samson, measuring that Nazarite by the common temper of the Philistines; could he think worse of him than to suspect that, because he was justly angry with his wife, he utterly hated her, and, because he had seen cause to return to his father's house for a while, therefore he had abandoned her for ever? Yet this is all he had to say in excuse of this injury. Thus he made the worst of jealousies to patronize the worst of robberies. But it will never bear us out in doing ill to say, "We thought others designed ill." 2. He endeavours to pacify Samson by offering him his younger daughter, whom, because the handsomer, he thought Samson might accept, in full recompence for the wrong. See what confusions those did admit and bring their families to that were not governed by the fear and law of God, marrying a daughter this week to one and next week to another, giving a man one daughter first and then another. Samson scorned his proposal; he knew better things than to take a wife to her sister, Lev 18:18.
III.The revenge Samson took upon the Philistines for this abuse.
Had he designed herein only to plead his own cause he would have challenged his rival, and would have chastised him and his father-in-law only. But he looks upon himself as a public person, and the affront as done to the whole nation of Israel, for probably they put this slight upon him because he was of that nation, and pleased themselves with it, that they had put such an abuse upon an Israelite; and therefore he resolves to do the Philistines a displeasure, and does not doubt but this treatment which he had met with among them would justify him in it (Jdg 15:3): Now shall I be more blameless than the Philistines. He had done what became him in offering to be reconciled to his wife, but, she having rendered it impracticable, now they could not blame him if he showed his just resentment. Note, When differences arise we ought to do our duty in order to the ending of them, and then, whatever the ill consequences of them may be, we shall be blameless. Now the way Samson took to be revenged on them was by setting their corn-fields on fire, which would be a great weakening and impoverishing to the country, Jdg 15:4, Jdg 15:5.
1.The method he took to do it was very strange. He sent 150 couple of foxes, tied tail to tail, into the corn-fields; every couple had a stick of fire between their tails, with which, being terrified, they ran into the corn for shelter, and so set fire to it; thus the fire would break out in many places at the same time, and therefore could not be conquered, especially if this was done, as it is probable it was, in the night. He might have employed men to do it, but perhaps he could not find Israelites enough that had courage to do it, and he himself could do it but in one place at a time, which would not effect his purpose. We never find Samson, in any of his exploits, making use of any person whatsoever, either servant or soldier, therefore, in this project, he chose to make use of foxes as his incendiaries. They had injured Samson by their subtlety and malice, and now Samson returns the injury by subtle foxes and mischievous fire-brands. By the meanness and weakness of the animals he employed, he designed to put contempt upon the enemies he fought against. This stratagem is often alluded to to show how the church's adversaries, that are of different interests and designs among themselves, that look and draw contrary ways in other things, yet have often united in a fire-brand, some cursed project or other, to waste the church of God, and particularly to kindle the fire of division in it.
2.The mischief he hereby did to the Philistines was very great. It was in the time of wheat harvest (Jdg 15:1), so that the straw being dry it soon burnt the shocks of corn that were cut, and the standing corn, and the vineyards and olives. This was a waste of the good creatures, but where other acts of hostility are lawful destroying the forage is justly reckoned to be so: if he might take away their lives, he might take away their livelihood. And God was righteous in it: the corn, and the wine, and the oil, which they had prepared for Dagon, to be a meat-offering to him, were thus, in the season thereof, made a burnt-offering to God's justice.
IV.The Philistines' outrage against Samson's treacherous wife and her father.
Understanding that they had provoked Samson to do this mischief to the country, the rabble set upon them and burnt them with fire, perhaps in their own house, Jdg 15:6. Samson himself they durst not attack, and therefore, with more justice than perhaps they themselves designed in it, they wreak their vengeance upon those who, they could not but own, had given him cause to be angry. Instead of taking vengeance upon Samson, they took vengeance for him, when he, out of respect to the relation he had stood in to them, was not willing to do it for himself. See his hand in it to whom vengeance belongs. Those that deal treacherously shall be spoiled and dealt treacherously with; and the Lord is known by these judgments which he executes, especially when, as here, he makes use of his people's enemies as instruments for revenging one upon another his people's quarrels. When a barbarous Philistine sets fire to a treacherous one, the righteous may rejoice to see the vengeance, Psa 58:10, Psa 58:11. Thus shall the wrath of man praise God, Psa 76:10. The Philistines had threatened Samson's wife, that, if she would not get the riddle out of him, they would burn her and her father's house with fire, Jdg 14:15. She, to save herself and oblige her countrymen, betrayed her husband; and what came of it? The very thing that she feared, and sought by sin to avoid, came upon her; she and her father's house were burnt with fire, and her countrymen, whom she sought to oblige by the wrong she did to her husband, brought this evil upon her. The mischief we seek to escape by any unlawful practices we often pull upon our own heads. He that will thus save his life shall lose it.
V.The occasion Samson took hence to do them a yet greater mischief, which touched their bone and their flesh, Jdg 15:7, Jdg 15:8.
"Though you have done this to them, and thereby shown what you would do to me if you could, yet that shall not deter me from being further vexatious to you." Or, "Though you think, by doing this, you have made me satisfaction for the affront I received among you, yet I have Israel's cause to plead as a public person, and for the wrongs done to them I will be avenged on you, and, if you will then forbear your insults, I will cease, aiming at no more than the deliverance of Israel." So he smote them hip and thigh with a great stroke, so the word is. We suppose the wounds he gave them to have been mortal, as wounds in the hip or thigh often prove, and therefore translate it, with a great slaughter. Some think he only lamed them, disabled them for service, as horses were houghed or ham-strung. It seems to be a phrase used to express a desperate attack; he killed them pell-mell, or routed them horse and foot. He smote them with his hip upon thigh, that is, with the strength he had, not in his arms and hands, but in his hips and thighs, for he kicked and spurned at them, and so mortified them, trod them in his anger, and trampled them in his fury, Isa 63:3. And, when he had done, he retired to a natural fortress in the top of the rock Etam, where he waited to see whether the Philistines would be tamed by the correction he had given them.
Historical interpretation
Historical Reception
2 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
But the perfidy of the maiden being thus discovered, he abstained from intercourse with her, and returned to his father's house. The damsel, disturbed in mind, and justly dreading that the wrath of this mighty man would be kindled into fury by this wrong, gave her hand to another man, one whom Samson, relying on his fidelity, had brought with him as his bridesman to his marriage. But neither by this expedient of a marriage did she avoid offence. For when the affair was disclosed, and he was forbidden to return to his wife, and her father said that she was married to another man, but that he might, if he chose, marry her sister, he was exasperated by the affront, and determined to take a public revenge for his domestic injury. Wherefore he took three hundred foxes, and in the heat of summer, when the corn was now ripe in the fields, he tied them together two and two by the tails, and fastened a burning firebrand between them, binding it with a firm knot, and by way of avenging his wrong turned them loose among the sheaves which the Philistines had cut. But the foxes, terrified by the fire, scattered flames whichever way they turned, and burnt the harvest. And the Philistines, incensed by the loss of all their corn in that region, told it to the princes of their land. And they sent men to Timnath, and burnt in the fire the woman who had been faithless to her husband, and her parents and all her house; saying that she had been the cause of this injury and devastation, and ought not to have provoked a man who could avenge himself by a public calamity.
Then follow the words “Samson was angry because a friend married his wife.” This friend prefigured all heretics. It is a great mystery, my brothers. Heretics who divide the church have wanted to marry the wife of the Lord and carry her away. By departing from the church and the Gospels, they attempt through adulterous wickedness to seize the church, that is, the body of Christ, as their portion. For this reason that faithful servant and friend of the Lord’s bride says, “I betrothed you to one spouse, that I might present you a chaste virgin to Christ.” Moreover, through the zeal of faith and a rebuke he touches the person of his wicked companion: “And I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve, so your minds may be corrupted from the truth which is in Christ Jesus.” Who are the companions, that is, the heretical deserters who want to seize the Lord’s spouse, unless Donatus, Arius, Manichaeus, and other vessels of error and perdition?
Continue studying Judges 15:2 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Judges 15:2 captures a pivotal and deeply frustrating interaction between Samson and his Philistine father-in-law, revealing the cultural chasm and personal betrayals that escalate the conflict between Samson and the Philistines. Following Samson's departure after his wedding feast, his father-in-law, presuming Samson's permanent abandonment of his wife, gave her to one of Samson's wedding companions. This verse captures the father-in-law's attempt to rationalize his actions and mitigate Samson's fury by offering a seemingly pragmatic, yet culturally insensitive, alternative: the younger, "fairer" sister. This moment not only highlights the objectification of women in that era but also serves as the immediate catalyst for Samson's subsequent acts of vengeance against the Philistines.
Context
Literary Context
Judges 15:2 is situated immediately after Samson's return to Timnah, seeking to reconcile with his Philistine wife. The preceding chapter, Judges 14, details Samson's initial encounter with the Philistine woman, his marriage, and the infamous riddle he posed at the wedding feast. Crucially, his wife, under duress from her own people, betrayed Samson by revealing the riddle's solution, as recorded in Judges 14:17. Enraged by this betrayal, Samson left her and returned to his father's house in Zorah. His prolonged absence led his father-in-law to assume a permanent abandonment, prompting the father-in-law to give Samson's wife to one of his "companions" (likely the best man or a close friend from the wedding). This verse, therefore, sets the stage for Samson's violent retaliation, moving the narrative from personal betrayal to broader inter-ethnic conflict.
Historical & Cultural Context
The period of the Judges was characterized by a cyclical pattern of Israel's apostasy, oppression by foreign powers, their cry for deliverance, and God raising up a judge. Samson's story, spanning Judges 13-16, unfolds during a time of significant Philistine domination over Israel. The Philistines were a powerful, technologically advanced (iron-working) people who had settled on the coastal plain of Canaan. Marriage alliances, especially across ethnic lines, were complex and often fraught with political and social implications. The practice of a father giving his daughter in marriage, and the cultural norms around divorce or abandonment, varied. In Philistine society, it appears that a husband's prolonged absence could be interpreted as abandonment, allowing the father to re-marry his daughter. The casual offer of a younger sister as a replacement, based on her physical appearance, reflects a patriarchal society where women's agency was limited, and they were often viewed as property or commodities for alliance and procreation.
Key Themes
This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes within the book of Judges and Samson's narrative. Firstly, it underscores the theme of betrayal and broken covenants, building on the wife's earlier treachery in Judges 14:17 and introducing the father-in-law's perceived betrayal. Secondly, it highlights the pervasive misunderstanding and lack of communication that plague Samson's relationships, leading to escalating conflict. The father-in-law's presumption ("I verily thought that thou hadst utterly hated her") is a prime example. Thirdly, the verse sharply illustrates the objectification of women, treating them as interchangeable commodities based on physical attractiveness ("is not her younger sister fairer than she?"). This dehumanizing perspective is a recurring motif in the book of Judges, often leading to tragic outcomes, as seen in the Levite's concubine in Judges 19. Finally, the interaction serves as a critical point in the escalation of conflict between Israel and the Philistines, demonstrating how personal grievances become intertwined with national struggles, ultimately fulfilling God's purpose for Samson to "begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines" (Judges 13:5).
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term (H4828) refers to a friend, associate, or neighbor. In the context of a wedding, it would likely denote a close friend of the groom, perhaps even the "best man" or one of the wedding attendants. The father-in-law giving Samson's wife to his "companion" is particularly egregious, as it implies a breach of trust not just with Samson, but also within the social circle of the wedding, turning a supposed ally into a rival. This act would have been a profound insult to Samson's honor and a severe social transgression.
This word (H2896) means "good" in the widest sense, but in this context, it specifically refers to being "beautiful," "pleasing," or "good-looking." The father-in-law's use of this word to describe the younger sister underscores the superficiality of his proposed solution. It reveals a cultural mindset where a woman's value, even in the context of marriage, could be reduced to her physical appearance, implying interchangeability and a profound lack of regard for the sanctity of the marital bond or the individual's personhood.
Verse Breakdown
"And her father said, I verily thought that thou hadst utterly hated her;"
This clause reveals the father-in-law's rationale for his actions. The phrase "verily thought" (from H559, ʼâmar, meaning "to say" but also "to think, suppose") indicates a presumption or assumption on his part. He interpreted Samson's prolonged absence as a definitive sign of abandonment and intense dislike ("utterly hated her," from H8130, sânêʼ). This highlights a critical failure in communication and a hasty judgment, leading to a significant misunderstanding that fuels the ensuing conflict.
"therefore I gave her to thy companion:"
This is the direct consequence of the father-in-law's assumption. Acting on his misinterpretation, he re-married his daughter to one of Samson's former wedding associates (H4828, mêrêaʻ). This act, while perhaps culturally permissible under Philistine law for a perceived abandonment, was a profound insult to Samson's honor and a direct breach of the marital covenant from Samson's perspective. It also indicates the father-in-law's attempt to secure his daughter's future, albeit at Samson's expense.
"[is] not her younger sister fairer than she?"
This rhetorical question is a crass attempt by the father-in-law to deflect Samson's anger and offer a "solution." It reveals a disturbing objectification of women, reducing them to interchangeable commodities whose value is primarily based on physical attractiveness (H2896, ṭôwb). The father-in-law assumes Samson's primary concern is merely having a wife, rather than the specific bond or the insult to his honor. The term "younger sister" (H6996, qâṭân and H269, ʼâchôwth) further emphasizes the transactional nature of the offer.
"take her, I pray thee, instead of her."
This is the father-in-law's explicit offer. It's a pragmatic, yet deeply insensitive, attempt to resolve the crisis by substituting one daughter for another. This proposal completely disregards the emotional, relational, and covenantal aspects of marriage, further highlighting the cultural and moral chasm between Samson's Israelite understanding (even if flawed) and the Philistine customs.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several significant Literary Devices. The father-in-law's statement includes a Rhetorical Question ("is not her younger sister fairer than she?"), which is not genuinely seeking information but rather attempting to persuade or justify his actions, revealing his manipulative and superficial approach. There is clear Irony in the father-in-law's attempt to pacify Samson by offering a "fairer" sister, as this very offer, rooted in a transactional view of women, further enrages Samson and directly leads to his destructive retaliation. The entire interaction serves as a powerful instance of Foreshadowing, as this personal betrayal and the father-in-law's dismissive attitude directly precipitate Samson's vengeful acts against the Philistines, escalating the conflict from a domestic dispute to a broader ethnic struggle. The casual offer of the younger sister also functions as Symbolism, representing the patriarchal and objectifying nature of the Philistine culture, contrasting sharply with the covenantal ideals of marriage, even if imperfectly practiced by Samson himself.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Judges 15:2 profoundly illustrates the destructive consequences of broken trust, poor communication, and the objectification of individuals. The father-in-law's presumption and his transactional view of women reflect a broader societal brokenness, where personal honor and physical appearance supersede covenantal fidelity and human dignity. Theologically, this passage underscores the chaos and moral decay prevalent during the period of the Judges, where "everyone did what was right in his own eyes" (Judges 21:25). It serves as a stark reminder of humanity's fallen nature and the need for divine guidance in relationships and societal structures, highlighting how sin distorts perceptions, breaks bonds, and escalates conflict.
Reflection and Application
Judges 15:2 offers potent lessons for contemporary relationships and our understanding of human dignity. The father-in-law's hasty assumption ("I verily thought that thou hadst utterly hated her") serves as a powerful cautionary tale against acting on unverified perceptions. In our own lives, how often do we presume others' intentions or feelings without seeking clarity, leading to unnecessary conflict and hurt? This narrative compels us to cultivate habits of clear and empathetic communication, prioritizing understanding over assumption. Furthermore, the casual offer of the younger sister as a replacement, based solely on physical appearance, is a stark reminder of the dangers of objectification. We are called to recognize and affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every individual, created in God's image, rather than reducing them to their utility, appearance, or any other superficial characteristic. This applies not only to marital relationships but to all our interactions, urging us to treat others with respect, integrity, and genuine regard for their personhood, upholding the sacredness of commitments and the value of every soul.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Samson's father-in-law give his wife to another man?
Samson's father-in-law gave his daughter to one of Samson's wedding companions because he presumed Samson had permanently abandoned her. After Samson's wife betrayed him by revealing his riddle (Judges 14:17), Samson left her and returned to his father's house. His prolonged absence led the father-in-law to believe that Samson "utterly hated her" and would not return. In Philistine culture, a husband's extended absence could be interpreted as abandonment, allowing the father to arrange a new marriage for his daughter, likely to secure her future and maintain social standing.
What does the offer of the younger sister reveal about the culture?
The father-in-law's casual offer of the younger sister, stating "is not her younger sister fairer than she? take her, I pray thee, instead of her," starkly reveals the patriarchal and objectifying nature of Philistine society at the time. Women were often viewed as property or commodities, their worth tied to their physical appearance and their utility in alliances or procreation, rather than their individual personhood or the sanctity of a marital bond. This highlights a culture where women could be interchangeably offered to resolve disputes, underscoring a profound lack of respect for their autonomy and dignity, a theme unfortunately present in other parts of the book of Judges.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Judges 15:2 vividly portrays human brokenness, betrayal, and the objectification of individuals, it inadvertently highlights the profound need for a perfect covenant-keeper and a redeemer who values every person. The father-in-law's casual disregard for the marital bond and his transactional view of women stand in stark contrast to the divine blueprint for marriage as a sacred, indissoluble union, where two become "one flesh" (Matthew 19:6). More broadly, the passage underscores humanity's pervasive sinfulness, where self-interest, presumption, and a lack of love lead to escalating conflict. Christ, however, perfectly embodies the ultimate covenant-keeper, who, unlike Samson or the father-in-law, never betrays or abandons His bride, the Church (Ephesians 5:25-27). He did not offer a "fairer" substitute but offered Himself, the perfect Lamb of God, as the ultimate sacrifice to redeem a fallen humanity, demonstrating the immeasurable value He places on each individual, regardless of their "fairness" or perceived utility (John 3:16). In Christ, we find the restoration of true dignity, the healing of broken relationships, and the fulfillment of God's perfect love, which transcends all human failures and cultural depravities.