Judges 14:15 · Bible study
Judges 14:15 Commentary: Coercion and Conflict in Samson's Marriage
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Analysis of the Philistines' threat to burn Samson's wife, revealing hostility, deceit, and the tragic consequences of mixed alliances.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The Philistines threaten to burn Samson's wife if she does not extract the riddle's answer, revealing their greed and hostility.
- Key words: pati (entice/persuade), yarash (impoverish/dispossess), pen (lest). The verb 'entice' and the economic accusation frame the coercion.
- Main debate: Whether the timeline should read 'seventh day' (Hebrew) or 'fourth day' (LXX/Peshitto), which affects how much time the guests gave the woman to act.
- Theological theme: The consequences of unequal yoking; God's sovereignty over human scheming; the escalation of sin from pride to violence.
- Best use: A case study in how fear and greed corrupt relationships, and a warning about the cost of alliances that compromise faith.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
So on the fourth day they said to Samson’s wife, “Entice your husband to explain the riddle to us, or we will burn you and your father’s household to death. Did you invite us here to rob us?”
WEB World English Bible 2000
On the seventh day, they said to Samson’s wife, “Entice your husband, that he may declare to us the riddle, lest we burn you and your father’s house with fire. Have you called us to impoverish us? Isn’t that so?”
KJV King James Version 1769
And it came to pass on the seventh day, that they said unto Samson’s wife, Entice thy husband, that he may declare unto us the riddle, lest we burn thee and thy father’s house with fire: have ye called us to take that we have? is it not so?
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And it came to pass on the seventh day, that they said unto Samson’s wife, Entice thy husband, that he may declare unto us the riddle, lest we burn thee and thy father’s house with fire: have ye called us to impoverish us? is it not so?
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And it cometh to pass, on the seventh day, that they say to Samson's wife, `Entice thy husband, that he declare to us the riddle, lest we burn thee and the house of thy father with fire; to possess us have ye called for us? is it not?'
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And it came to pass on the seventh day, that they said to Samson's wife, Persuade thy husband, that he may explain to us the riddle, lest we burn thee and thy father's house with fire. Have ye invited us to impoverish us, — is it not [so]?
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And when the seventh day came, they said to the wife of Samson: Sooth thy husband, and persuade him to tell thee what the riddle meaneth. But if thou wilt not do it, we will burn thee, and thy father's house. Have you called us to the wedding on purpose to strip us?
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y al séptimo día dijeron á la mujer de Samsón: Induce á tu marido á que nos declare este enigma, porque no te quememos á ti y á la casa de tu padre. ¿ Habéisnos llamado aquí para poseernos?
E ao sétimo dia disseram à mulher de Sansão: Induz a teu marido a que nos declare este enigma, para que não te queimemos a ti e à casa de teu pai. Chamaste-nos aqui para possuir-nos?
Le septième jour, ils dirent à la femme de Samson: Persuade ton mari de nous expliquer l’ énigme; sinon, nous te brûlerons, toi et la maison de ton père. C’ est pour nous dépouiller que vous nous avez invités, n’est-ce pas?
Am siebenten Tage sprachen sie zu Simsons Weibe: Überrede deinen Mann, daß er uns sage das Rätsel, oder wir werden dich und deines Vaters Haus mit Feuer verbrennen. Habt ihr uns hierher geladen, daß ihr uns arm macht? Oder nicht?
Daarna geschiedde het op den zevenden dag, dat zij tot de huisvrouw van Simson zeiden: Overreed uw man, dat hij ons dat raadsel verklare, opdat wij niet misschien u, en het huis uws vaders, met vuur verbranden. Hebt gijlieden ons genodigd, om het onze te bezitten; is het zo niet?
E il settimo giorno dissero alla moglie di Sansone: “Induci il tuo marito a spiegarci l’enimma; se no, darem fuoco a te e alla casa di tuo padre. E che? ci avete invitati qui per spogliarci?”
I rzekli dnia siódmego do żony Samsonowej: Namów męża twego, aby nam powiedział zagadkę, byśmy snać nie spalili ciebie, i domu ojca twego ogniem; na tożeście nas wezwali, abyście posiedli majętność naszę, czy nie na to?
В седьмой день сказали они жене Самсоновой: уговори мужа твоего, чтоб он разгадал нам загадку; иначе сожжем огнем тебя и дом отца твоего; разве вы призвали нас, чтоб обобрать нас?
到第七 天，他們對參孫 的妻 說：「你誆哄 你丈夫，探出 謎語 的意思告訴 我們，免得 我們用火 燒 你 和 你父 家。你們請了 我們來，是要奪我們所有的 嗎？」
So on the fourth day they said to Samson's wife, Get from your husband the answer to his question by some trick or other, or we will have you and your father's house burned with fire; did you get us here to take all we have?
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Judges 14:15
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that this verse exposes the corrosive hostility beneath Samson's marriage. The Philistine guests, frustrated by their failure to solve the riddle, coerce Samson's wife by threatening to burn her and her father's house. Barnes notes the threat reveals their conviction that the riddle was a scheme to "impoverish" them, to take their possessions. Keil and Delitzsch call the threat "barbarism and covetousness." The guests assume Samson and his wife are colluding to rob them. Gill adds that the words "take that we have" imply the Philistines believed the couple planned to strip them of their garments. The Cambridge Bible observes a chronological difficulty: the LXX and Peshitto read "fourth day" instead of "seventh," but most commentators interpret the narrative as telescoping events, moving to the final day, then backtracking to the wife's earlier efforts. However the timeline is resolved, the verse captures the moment when the festive atmosphere collapses into naked threat.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Chronological difficulty (seventh vs. fourth day): The Hebrew text says 'seventh day'; the LXX and Peshitto read 'fourth day.' This affects how long the guests waited before threatening the bride.
- Wife's complicity: Some see her as coerced (Gill, Keil), others as a willing collaborator (implied by the guests' accusation 'have you called us to impoverish us?'). The narrative leaves her motives ambiguous.
- Ethical assessment of Samson: Samson's choice to marry a Philistine and his later violent revenge can be read as sinful or as God's instrument. The text itself presents both: his parents object (14:3), but the Spirit empowers him (14:19).
What is clear: The Philistines threaten to burn Samson's wife to force her to extract the riddle's answer, revealing their hostility and distrust.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Chronology: seventh day vs. fourth day | The Hebrew text reads 'seventh day'; the LXX and Peshitto read 'fourth day.' | Some commentators (Barnes, Keil) see no conflict: the narrator first moves to the seventh day, then backtracks to the wife's earlier efforts. Others (Cambridge) find the two statements inconsistent and suspect a textual addition to heighten drama. |
| Role of Samson's wife | She is threatened and manipulated by the Philistines to extract the riddle. | Is she a passive victim (used by both sides) or a willing participant who ultimately betrays Samson? Gill and Matthew Henry treat her as coerced; later in the chapter she weeps and presses Samson, but still reveals the secret. |
| Meaning of 'impoverish us' | The Hebrew verb <em>yarash</em> can mean 'to dispossess' or 'to impoverish.' | Does it refer to literal impoverishment (losing the wager) or a more general taking of what they have (their garments, property)? Most commentators agree it is literal: they fear the loss of thirty garments each. |
| Moral evaluation of Samson's marriage | The marriage leads to conflict and violence. | Some see it as a clear example of the dangers of mixed marriage (forbidden in Deut 7:3), while others note that God uses it to start deliverance from Philistine oppression. The text does not explicitly condemn Samson's choice, though his parents disapprove (Judg 14:3). |
Historical & Cultural Context
The wedding feast lasted seven days (Judges 14:12). Posing and solving riddles was a known banquet entertainment among ancient peoples, including Greeks and Philistines. Samson's wager, thirty linen garments and thirty changes of clothing, represented a substantial sum, far beyond what most wedding guests could afford to lose. The Philistines, already under Israelite suspicion as oppressive rulers, resent being outsmarted.
The threat to burn the wife and her father's house is not idle. In the ancient Near East, burning was a punishment for grave offenses, often associated with sexual crimes or betrayal. Here it is used as coercive leverage: the Philistines intend to force the woman to extract the riddle's answer by any means. The phrase "have you called us to impoverish us?" (Hebrew yarash, to dispossess) shows they view the wager not as a game but as a plot to ruin them financially. This accusation transforms the guests from wedding companions into hostile interrogators.
The episode also reflects the fraught dynamics of marriage across ethnic lines. Samson's choice of a Philistine wife was controversial among Israelites (Judges 14:3, his parents object). The Philistines, in turn, view Samson as an outsider and suspect his motives. The wife is caught between two hostile parties: her own people threaten her life, and her husband refuses to share the secret. This cultural and political tension makes the marriage a powder keg, and the riddle contest provides the spark.
Textual Notes
The most significant textual variant concerns the day number. The Masoretic Text reads "on the seventh day," while the Septuagint and Peshitto (Syriac) read "on the fourth day." The Cambridge Bible notes that the LXX reading aligns with the statement in verse 14 that the guests could not solve the riddle "in three days", pushing the threat to the day after that period. Gill and Barnes argue the MT reading can be explained by narrative telescoping: verse 15 states the outcome on day seven, while verses 16-17 describe earlier events. Keil and Delitzsch accept the MT without change. The Dead Sea Scrolls do not preserve this passage, so the oldest witnesses are the MT and LXX. No other significant variants are noted in the supplied sources.
Reception History
Christian interpreters across traditions have read this verse as part of the broader Samson narrative, often focusing on moral lessons. Matthew Henry (1710) uses the verse to illustrate how sin breeds further sin: Samson's attraction to a Philistine woman leads to deceit, threats and murder. Wesley (1754) notes the Philistines' barbarism. Reformation-era commentators (Geneva Bible, 1599) emphasized the danger of marrying outside the faith. In the medieval period, the story was sometimes allegorized: Samson as Christ, the riddle as the mystery of the Incarnation, the Philistines as enemies of the faith, though this reads far beyond the literal sense. More recently, the verse has been cited in discussions of domestic coercion and the ethics of marriage alliances. The threat of burning, echoed in Judges 15:6, underscores the violent context of the period.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The threat reveals the guests' real character. What began as a festive wager becomes an extortion plot. Greed and fear of losing face drive the Philistines to threaten murder. Their question, "Have you called us to impoverish us?", betrays a deep lack of trust, turning celebration into coercion.
- The wife is caught in the middle. She becomes a pawn in a power struggle. Her life is used as leverage. This reflects the broader pattern of alliances with those who do not share Israel's faith: they lead to impossible pressures and moral compromise.
- Sin escalates quickly. A riddle leads to threats, then to the wife's betrayal of Samson, then to Samson's violent revenge (Judges 14:19). Each step flows from the previous. The warning for God's people is to avoid entanglements that place loyalty to God against loyalty to spouses or community.
Five-point outline
- Setting: the wager, Samson proposes a riddle with high stakes (Judges 14:12-13).
- Frustration: three days of failure, The guests cannot solve the riddle (v.14).
- Coercion: the threat to burn, They turn on Samson's wife (v.15).
- Manipulation: the wife pressures Samson, She uses tears and accusation (vv.16-17).
- Revelation and violence: the riddle solved, then slaughter, Samson kills thirty Philistines to pay his debt (v.19).
Illustration hooks
- A group of friends at a game night who, when they start losing, accuse the winner of cheating. The fun turns sour as pressure mounts.
- A spouse pressured by family to betray a confidence at work or in marriage. The loyalty test puts them in an impossible position.
- An extravagant bet made in bravado, then the panic when the bill comes due. The threat of loss exposes the true character of the people involved.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why would the Philistines threaten to burn the woman? Was that a real punishment or just a scare tactic?
- Was Samson's wife a willing participant in the plot, or just a victim?
- Does this story mean Christians should avoid marriage with non-Christians? How does it inform that question?
Leading a Discussion
This verse shows how quickly a festive occasion can turn hostile when people feel backed into a corner. The Philistines' threat reveals their true motives: they care more about winning the wager than about the woman's life. Samson's marriage, already controversial, becomes a trap for everyone involved. As you discuss this passage, consider how our own relationships can be strained by competing loyalties and unspoken fears.
Discussion questions
- Read Judges 14:15 aloud. What words or phrases stand out to you as particularly harsh? Why?
- Why do you think the Philistines accuse Samson and his wife of trying to "impoverish" them? What does this accusation reveal about their mindset?
- How does the threat to burn the woman and her father's house change the way you view the wedding feast? What does it say about the Philistines' character?
- Compare this threat to the Philistines' later threat to Delilah (Judges 16:5). How are the situations similar? How are they different?
- Samson's wife is caught between her husband and her people. Have you ever been in a situation where two groups you belong to were in conflict? How did you navigate it?
- What does this story suggest about the dangers of forming close relationships (business, marriage, friendship) with people who do not share your core values?
- God uses Samson's flawed choices to accomplish His purposes (bringing conflict with the Philistines). How does this encourage you about God's ability to work through human failure?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Genesis 3:1 | Now the serpent was more subtle than any animal of the field which Yahweh God had made. He said to the woman, “Has God really said, ‘You shall not eat of any tree of the garden’?” |
| Genesis 3:6 | When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took some of its fruit, and ate. Then she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate it, too. |
| Judges 12:1 | The men of Ephraim were gathered together, and passed northward; and they said to Jephthah, “Why did you pass over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didn’t call us to go with you? We will burn your house around you with fire!” |
| Judges 15:6 | Then the Philistines said, “Who has done this?” They said, “Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite, because he has taken his wife and given her to his companion.” The Philistines came up, and burned her and her father with fire. |
| Judges 16:5 | The lords of the Philistines came up to her and said to her, “Entice him, and see in which his great strength lies, and by what means we may prevail against him, that we may bind him to afflict him; and we will each give you eleven hundred pieces of silver.” |
| Proverbs 1:11 | If they say, “Come with us. Let’s lie in wait for blood. Let’s lurk secretly for the innocent without cause. |
| Proverbs 5:3 | For the lips of an adulteress drip honey. Her mouth is smoother than oil, |
| Proverbs 6:26 | For a prostitute reduces you to a piece of bread. The adulteress hunts for your precious life. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
6 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
This commentator points to an inconsistency between verses about when the woman pressed Samson for the riddle's answer, suggesting the numbers may have been added later to heighten the story's drama. They also note a Hebrew textual issue, proposing a slight correction to the Philistines' question.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes draw attention to the Philistines’ ruthless threat: they will burn Samson’s wife and her family alive if she does not coax the riddle’s answer from him. Her bitter reply reveals that she sees their invitation as a trap to take possession of them, not a genuine friendship.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill identifies the seventh day as the last day of the wedding feast, not the weekly Sabbath. He highlights the Philistines’ threat to burn Samson’s wife and her father’s house, and their accusation that the couple conspired to strip them of their clothing through the riddle.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch stress that the Spirit of Jehovah compelled Samson to kill Philistines, showing God's superior power, not personal revenge. They view the Philistines' threats and betrayal of Samson's wife as proof of their faithlessness. The marriage breakdown, they argue, was escalated by the Philistines' deceit, not Samson
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange reads the episode as an unavoidable clash between an Israelite and hostile Philistines, not a mere wedding quarrel. Samson's genuine love and noble nature could not overcome the fundamental antagonism, and the wife's betrayal revealed that no covenant of love is possible with oppressors.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley rejects Matthew Henry's claim that the goodness of God's promised land will intensify the punishment of those who perish. He argues that this reasoning fails under predestination: if some are not elected, they never had a genuine offer, and if all the elect are saved, the grant was never free to the others.