Judges 15:7 · Bible study
Judges 15:7 Commentary: Personal Anger or Divine Mission?
Hebrew · 7 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Explore Samson's declaration of vengeance in Judges 15:7.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Samson's vow to fully avenge the Philistines, understood by most commentators as part of his divine commission to deliver Israel from oppression.
- Key words: naqam (H5358, to avenge), carries both personal and judicial dimensions; chadal (H2308, to cease), used here as part of an oath formula promising no rest until vengeance is complete.
- Main debate: Whether this vengeance is primarily personal anger or a fulfillment of Samson's calling as a judge and deliverer.
- Theological theme: God's sovereignty in using imperfect, even morally ambiguous, human agents to accomplish His saving purposes.
- Best use: Teaching on justice, righteous anger, and the complexity of biblical heroes; also as a springboard for discussing how believers relate to personal grievance and public injustice.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
And Samson told them, “Because you have done this, I will not rest until I have taken vengeance upon you.”
WEB World English Bible 2000
Samson said to them, “If you behave like this, surely I will take revenge on you, and after that I will cease.”
KJV King James Version 1769
And Samson said unto them, Though ye have done this, yet will I be avenged of you, and after that I will cease.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And Samson said unto them, If ye do after this manner, surely I will be avenged of you, and after that I will cease.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And Samson saith to them, `Though ye do thus, nevertheless I am avenged on you, and afterwards I cease!'
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And Samson said to them, If ye act thus, for a certainty I will avenge myself on you, and then I will cease.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
But Samson said to them: Although you have done this, yet will I be revenged of you, and then I will be quiet.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Entonces Samsón les dijo: ¿ Así lo habíais de hacer? mas yo me vengaré de vosotros, y después cesaré.
Então Sansão lhes disse: Assim o havíeis de fazer? Mas eu me vingarei de vós, e depois cessarei.
Samson leur dit: Est-ce ainsi que vous agissez? Je ne cesserai qu’après m’ être vengé de vous.
Simson aber sprach zu ihnen: Wenn ihr solches tut, so will ich mich an euch rächen und darnach aufhören,
Toen zeide Simson tot hen: Zoudt gij alzo doen? Zeker, als ik mij aan u gewroken heb, zo zal ik daarna ophouden.
E Sansone disse loro: “Giacché agite a questo modo, siate certi che non avrò posa finché non mi sia vendicato di voi”.
Którym rzekł Samson: Chociaście to uczynili, przecięć się ja pomszczę nad wami, a potem przestanę.
Самсон сказал им: хотя вы сделали это, но я отмщу вам самим и тогда только успокоюсь.
參孫 對非利士人 說：「你們既然 這樣 行，我必 向你們 報仇 才 肯罷休。」
And Samson said to them, If you go on like this, truly I will take my full payment from you; and that will be the end of it.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Judges 15:7
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions see in Samson's words a pointed transition from personal grievance to national deliverance. Gill's Exposition stresses that his vengeance was not aimed at private injury but at the public oppression of Israel; the Philistines had burned his wife and father-in-law to ingratiate themselves, but Samson's response targets their broader tyranny. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown concur, noting that as a divinely appointed judge, 'his work of retribution was not yet accomplished.' Keil and Delitzsch highlight the Hebrew construction as a binding oath: the particle ki im negates any cessation until vengeance is complete. Together these voices agree: however mixed his motives, Samson's act participates in God's purpose to confront Philistine rule. His personal anger is real, yet it is taken up into a larger calling to begin delivering Israel from her oppressors.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Personal Vengeance View: Relies on Samson's emotional history and the explicit language of anger in the narrative to argue that his primary motive was private retaliation.
- Divine Commission View: Points to Judges 14:4 and the repeated pattern of the Spirit coming upon Samson to show that his actions, though impassioned, are guided by God's deliverance plan.
What is clear: Samson's words are not merely a personal threat but carry national implications, as the Philistines were oppressors of Israel and Samson was appointed to begin their deliverance.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of Samson's vengeance | All commentators recognize that Samson's vengeance was directed against the Philistines, who were oppressors of Israel. | Catholic and Protestant traditions differ on the moral status of Samson's anger. Some emphasize that his actions were divinely sanctioned even if his emotions were flawed; others see his personal vengeance as a sin that God used nonetheless. |
| Samson's role as judge | Christians agree that Samson was a God-appointed judge called to begin delivering Israel from the Philistines. | Evangelicals tend to see Samson's conflicts as directly fulfilling God's purpose (citing Judges 14:4), while some mainline traditions focus more on his moral failures and treat his victories as mixed examples. |
| Application for Christians today | All traditions caution against using Samson's vengeance as a direct model for personal behavior. | Catholic and Orthodox teaching often invokes the Sermon on the Mount to condemn personal revenge, while some Pentecostal/charismatic circles may see Samson as an example of Spirit-empowered warfare against evil. |
| Relationship to New Testament ethics | Romans 12:19 is widely cited to show that ultimate vengeance belongs to God. | Dispensationalists may argue that Samson's context under the Law permits retribution that is abrogated in the church age; covenant theologians emphasize continuity and see Samson's example as subordinate to Christ's teaching. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The Philistines ruled over Israel when Samson was born. Judges 13:5 declares he would begin to deliver Israel from their hand. By the time of chapter 15, Samson's earlier marriage to a Timnite woman had ended in betrayal. His wife was given to another man, and when Samson retaliated by destroying Philistine crops using foxes and torches, the Philistines burned her and her father in their house (v. 6). They did this ostensibly to punish Samson, but also to appease his anger by eliminating the source of his grievance.
Gill observes that this act was intended to ingratiate them with Samson. Instead it ignited a deeper conflict. The wheat harvest setting (v. 1) points to late spring, a time when economic devastation would have been severe. The Philistine strategy backfired: they assumed Samson would be satisfied, but he declared he would not stop until he had exacted full vengeance. His language echoes the pattern of blood vengeance common in ancient Near Eastern culture, where retaliation was often a familial or clan duty. Yet the narrator consistently frames Samson's actions within God's overarching plan (Judges 14:4). What appears as personal vendetta is woven into the fabric of divine deliverance.
Samson's role as a Nazirite, set apart from birth, undergirds the seriousness of his actions. He is not merely a strongman acting out of spite; he is the designated judge raised by God to oppose Philistine dominance. The Philistines considered themselves lords over Israel, and their burning of Samson's wife was an assertion of power. Samson's response is a counter-assertion, one that will lead to a great slaughter at Lehi (v. 8).
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Judges 15:7. The differences among English translations (e.g., 'If you behave like this' vs. 'Though you have done this') reflect interpretive choices in rendering the Hebrew particle אִם (im) and the consecutive construction, not manuscript variation.
Reception History
Judges 15:7 has been read across church history as a text about righteous anger and divine calling. Early church fathers like Augustine used Samson as a type of Christ, with his vengeance prefiguring Christ's judgment of evil. Medieval interpreters such as Gregory the Great focused on Samson's moral weaknesses alongside his strength, seeing the verse as a warning against mixing personal passion with holy purpose. During the Reformation, Matthew Henry and others emphasized that God's purposes prevail even through flawed instruments, while some Anabaptist traditions used the verse to contrast Old Testament violence with New Testament nonresistance. In modern preaching, the verse is often cited when discussing the tension between personal grievance and the call to forgive.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The Wrong That Stirs the Conflict, The Philistines burned Samson's wife and father-in-law, thinking this would satisfy his anger. Instead it revealed their oppression. Personal injury becomes the occasion for confronting a systemic evil.
- The Vengeance Declared, Samson's words are an oath: he will not rest until he has taken revenge. The Hebrew idiom emphasizes absolute determination. This is not a fleeting emotion but a settled resolve, one that lifts private grievance into public justice.
- The Ceasing That Does Not Come, Samson says he will cease after vengeance, yet the narrative continues with more conflict (v. 8 shows a great slaughter). The cycle of retaliation does not end easily; only God's ultimate judgment brings closure.
Five-point outline
- Philistine Oppression and Samson's Calling (Judges 13, 14)
- The Provocation: Burning of the Wife and Her Father (15:6)
- The Oath of Vengeance: Meaning of the Hebrew Construction (15:7)
- The Implementation: Slaughter at Lehi (15:8)
- The Broader Purpose: God's Deliverance Through a Flawed Instrument
Illustration hooks
- A community leader whose child is harmed by a corrupt system. The leader's personal pain aligns with a call for justice that benefits everyone.
- A worker passed over for promotion because of unfair policies. What begins as personal frustration can spark advocacy for systemic change.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Does God ever approve of vengeance? How is this different from the New Testament command to forgive?
- If Samson was used by God, does that mean his anger was justified? How do we discern between righteous indignation and sinful wrath?
- What does it mean to leave vengeance to God (Romans 12:19) in a world of real injustice?
Leading a Discussion
This verse sits at a turning point in Samson's story. The Philistines have burned his wife and father-in-law, and Samson responds with an oath of vengeance. But is this simply a personal feud, or part of his God-given mission to deliver Israel? The conversation in your group can explore this tension.
Discussion questions
- What do you think the Philistines expected when they burned Samson's wife? How did they misread him?
- Samson says, 'surely I will take revenge on you, and after that I will cease.' What does this language tell you about his state of mind?
- How does Judges 14:4 ('it was of Yahweh') affect the way you understand Samson's revenge?
- Read Romans 12:19. How does the New Testament call for forgiving enemies stand alongside Samson's example?
- Can personal anger ever be used for God's purposes? What boundaries should we place on it?
- Samson 'ceased' after his slaughter (v. 8). But the conflict resumes later. What does this say about the limits of human vengeance?
- In what ways does your community struggle with the tension between seeking justice and leaving room for God's vengeance?
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)
| Judges 14:4 | But his father and his mother didn’t know that it was of Yahweh; for he sought an occasion against the Philistines. Now at that time the Philistines ruled over Israel. |
| Judges 14:19 | Yahweh’s Spirit came mightily on him, and he went down to Ashkelon and struck thirty men of them. He took their plunder, then gave the changes of clothing to those who declared the riddle. His anger burned, and he went up to his father’s house. |
| Romans 12:19 | Don’t seek revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God’s wrath. For it is written, “Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord.” |
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
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
And Samson saide vnto them, Though yee haue done this, yet wil I be auenged of you, and then I wil cease.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill stresses that Samson’s vengeance was not a private grudge over his wife’s death. His aim was to punish the Philistines for their ongoing oppression of Israel, and he would stop only after that public justice was fully served.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB draws a distinction between two stages of Samson’s vengeance. The Philistines’ earlier actions had unwittingly served as instruments for avenging Samson’s personal wrongs. However, Samson now speaks in his capacity as a divinely appointed judge, whose work of retribution against Israel’s enemies remains incomplete.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch reads Samson's reply as a determined vow: he will not stop until he has fully taken vengeance. The Hebrew particle carries the sense of truly or indeed, underscoring that Samson's cessation is conditional only upon completing the retaliation, not on any other factor.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange highlights Samson's nobility in turning personal injury into a national cause against the Philistines. Rather than petty revenge, he spares his wife's family and ingeniously uses three hundred jackals with torches to devastate their harvest, converting a popular figure into a terrible reality.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that Samson's gift of a kid was not about its value but its meaning as a customary token of reconciliation, intended to restore friendship after a quarrel. This small gesture shows that even in his anger, Samson was willing to make the first step toward peace.
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.