And the men of Ephraim were called together, and passed over northwards, and said to Jephthah, Why didst thou pass over to fight against the children of Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? We will burn thy house upon thee with fire.
Jephthah has just won a God-given victory over the Ammonites. Now the tribe of Ephraim crosses the Jordan and threatens to burn his house down. Why does a rescue make them so angry? And why does the worst fighting among God's people so often start over who got asked to help?
The complaint is not new. Ephraim had made the same complaint to Gideon after an earlier victory.
The men of Ephraim were as proud toward Jephthah as they had been toward Gideon before. Jephthah had gained the victory over the Ammonites. They should have shown real appreciation for it. Instead they came with bitter hostility, angry because Jephthah had not called them to help defeat Ammon.
Gideon had calmed them once. But calming is not curing, and what was never judged came back stronger.
Ephraim's discontent came from a sense of his own importance. Gideon's humility had calmed him on the earlier occasion. But his conscience was never reached, and he never judged himself. So he brought the same accusations against Jephthah. A fault in our Christian life that we never judge will come back sooner or later in similar circumstances. Here Ephraim's state had grown worse. On the earlier occasion he had at least gleaned. This time he waited for someone else to stir him, and did nothing. That did not make him any less jealous of the results that his brothers' energy of faith had produced.
Ephraim's weight among the tribes fed the grudge. So did contempt for where Jephthah came from.
Ephraim had the leading influence — so much so that in the prophecies the ten tribes are often called Ephraim. The same spirit appeared when Jephthah had overcome the Ammonites. In this case they were called, and they refused. Even so, they resented his victory. Who was Jephthah, the child of a concubine? Should Ephraim follow him? But the man they despise is victorious, and this they resent. It was resenting the mercy of God who had worked a great deliverance for them. Their jealousy rose to the point of civil war, in which they were defeated.
So their complaint had no facts behind it.
There are fights worth having.
When divine principles are at stake we must not fail to stand in the gap, even at the risk of war between brothers. The saints of that time valued Israel's unity, as God had established it, more than polite relations with each other.
Judges 12 is the opposite case. Nothing whatever was at stake.
There was not a single principle involved in this struggle. On every side it was only jealousy, personal importance, and angry words traded by irritated hearts. So a war between brothers broke out in Israel, brought on by their own hand.
Jephthah was in the right, and said so. That is where it went wrong.
Jephthah did not answer as wisely as Gideon had. In Gideon's case a soft answer turned away wrath. But Jephthah was at once on the defensive. He told Ephraim in effect that he had expected them to deliver Israel from the Ammonites. When they failed to do this, he took his life in his hands and attacked the Ammonites, whom God delivered into his hands. So Jephthah made it clear to them that they were in the wrong. But people rarely take it well when someone proves them wrong. Here it led straight into conflict.
The man had just proved he could win a war. What he could not do was absorb an insult.
Jephthah may have had little desire for such a conflict. Even so, where do we see meekness, where patience? And be sure of this: in an evil world, patience is worth far more than power.
There is a cure, and it begins with how we see someone else's work.
Let us be on our guard against such traps. If one thing belongs above all to a time of ruin, it is strife in the family of God. Let us have our hearts enlarged about the work of God in this world. When the work is in other hands than ours, it should have the same importance and value for us as if we had done it ourselves. Paul wrote to the Philippians from his chains in Rome. He rejoiced that people were preaching Christ, even those who were adding to the affliction of his chains.
- Self first. Ephraim's anger came from a sense of his own importance, not from any wrong done to God.
- Self unjudged. Soothe a fault without judging it and it returns — the same complaint, louder, one chapter later.
- Self resentful. To despise the man God used is to resent the mercy God gave through him.
- Self defended. Jephthah was right and still lost. Proving people wrong drives them to fight, not to repent.
- Self enlarged. The cure is a heart big enough to value God's work in other hands as much as in its own.
And Jephthah said to them, I was at great strife, I and my people, with the children of Ammon; and I called you, but ye saved me not out of their hand.
Jephthah has just defeated Ammon, and now the men of Ephraim arrive angry that the fight went on without them. His reply is the first thing he says to fellow Israelites after a God-given victory, and it shows what a man reaches for when his brothers challenge his worth.
One thing stands out in his answer: the speaker. Earlier Jephthah had spoken of Israel as one. Now he draws a line through the middle of it.
In his defence he made self prominent. Jephthah talked of himself and thought about his disputed worth. He fell into the snare that Satan had set for him, and he formed a party. Just before this he had identified himself with the people and had proclaimed their unity in front of the children of Ammon. But now, "my people" meant Gilead as opposed to Ephraim.
Jephthah had just shown great power against an enemy. The test in front of him now asked for something harder.
Jephthah may have had little desire for such a conflict. Still, where do we see meekness, where patience? And be sure of this: in an evil world, patience is morally far above power. So we may find the most striking displays of power in men as disorderly as the Corinthian Christians. But those same people are plain proof of this: it is far harder to do the will of the Lord, and harder still to suffer according to God, than to work any miracles at all.
His words push the blame back on Ephraim: he called them, and they did not come. Nothing in that account is false. But proving people wrong is not the same as winning them over.
In Gideon's case a soft answer turned away wrath. Jephthah was on the defensive at once. He told Ephraim in effect that he had expected them to deliver Israel from the Ammonites. When they failed to do this, he took his life in his hands and attacked the Ammonites, whom God delivered into his hands. So Jephthah made it clear to them that they were in the wrong. But few people take it well when someone proves them wrong, and here it led straight into conflict.
Ephraim had brought the same complaint once before, to Gideon. A gentle reply calmed them then. Being calmed is not the same as being cured.
The discontent of Ephraim came from a sense of his own importance. Gideon's humility had calmed him the first time. But nothing had reached his conscience, and there had been no self-judgment. So he brought the same accusations against Jephthah. A fault in our career as Christians left unjudged will reappear sooner or later in similar circumstances. Here the state of Ephraim had grown worse. Last time he had at least gleaned. This time he did nothing, waiting for some prompting from outside.
Jephthah had used the sword against Ammon. He was about to use it on fellow Israelites. So one question presses in: do the two deserve the same treatment?
Here is one who loves Christ, whose heart is filled with love to Him, one who desires to please Him. Am I to treat such a person like a teacher of blasphemy? Like someone who brings in all kinds of false doctrine about the Person of the Lord? Are Ammonite and Ephraimite to be the same? Should both receive the same judgment? Surely not. I am to remember that the Ephraimite is a fellow Israelite, and a brother. He stays a brother even if he is self-important. He stays a brother even when he taunts the Gileadites with being runaways from Ephraim, and complains in jealousy that Gilead has won a victory that by rights belonged to Ephraim.
There was another way than counting up his own services. It starts with how we value work God puts into other hands.
Let us have our hearts enlarged about the work of God in this world. When it is entrusted to other hands than ours, it should be as important and valuable to us as if we had done it ourselves. Paul wrote to the Philippians from his chains in Rome. He rejoiced that others were preaching Christ, even those who were making his imprisonment harder. Let us give no importance whatever to our own work.
- Self first. Jephthah's defence puts himself forward. The man who had spoken for all Israel now says "my people" and means Gilead against Ephraim.
- Self divides. Answering wounded pride with wounded pride does not settle a quarrel; it forms a party.
- Self proves. He showed Ephraim their error, and proving them wrong drove them straight into conflict.
- Self repeats. Nothing had ever reached Ephraim's conscience, so the old jealousy came back worse. An unjudged fault returns in similar circumstances.
- Self spares no one. Once self is the standard, a brother gets the treatment owed to an enemy.
And when I saw that ye would not save me, I put my life in my hand, and passed over against the children of Ammon, and Jehovah gave them into my hand. Why then are ye come up to me this day, to fight against me?
Jephthah has just beaten Ammon, and instead of thanks he meets a war party from Ephraim. His answer is true — he risked his life, and God gave him the victory — but the chapter asks whether being in the right is the same as being wise.
Ephraim complains that Jephthah left them out of the fight. He answers that he called them and they would not come. One writer sets this quarrel beside their earlier one with Gideon.
Ephraim had the greater influence. In the prophecies the ten tribes are often called Ephraim. See their jealousy at not being first in Gideon's victory over the Midianites. His meek answer softened their anger. The same spirit appeared when Jephthah had overcome the Ammonites. In this case Jephthah called them, and they refused. Even so, they resented his victory. Who was Jephthah, the son of a concubine? Should Ephraim follow him? But the man they despise wins, and this they resent. It was resenting the mercy of God, who had worked a great deliverance for them.
Jephthah gives God the credit for the victory, yet his answer keeps circling back to himself and to "my people." One commentator watches what that phrase has come to mean.
We no longer find in Jephthah the unselfishness or humility of a Gideon. He answered the flesh with the flesh. His own wounded feelings clashed with the selfishness of Ephraim. In his defence he made self prominent… Jephthah talked about himself and brooded on his disputed worth. He fell into the trap Satan had set for him, and formed a party. Just before this he had identified himself with the people, and had proclaimed their unity in the face of the Ammonites. But now "my people" meant Gilead as opposed to Ephraim.
Jephthah's account of events is accurate. One writer shows how being right led straight into a fight.
In Gideon's case a soft answer turned away wrath. But Jephthah was at once on the defence. He told Ephraim in effect that he had expected them to deliver Israel from the Ammonites. When they failed to do this, he took his life in his hands and attacked the Ammonites, whom God delivered into his hands. So Jephthah made it clear to them that they were in the wrong. But people do not usually like being shown that they are wrong. In this case it led straight into conflict.
Jephthah may not have wanted this fight at all. One writer still asks what was missing from his answer.
After this we find how the pride of the men of Ephraim flares up at a person of such an origin as Jephthah. God had given Israel a remarkable deliverance through him, yet they come out to fight. Jephthah may have had little desire for such a conflict; even so, where do we see meekness, where patience? And be assured that in an evil world patience is morally far above power.
Ammon was an enemy. Ephraim was a brother tribe. One writer presses the distinction Jephthah lost.
Here is one who loves Christ, whose heart is filled with love for Him, one who wants to please Him. Am I to treat such a person the same way I would treat a teacher of blasphemy? Should I treat him like someone who brings in all kinds of false doctrine about the Person of the Lord? Are Ammonite and Ephraimite to be the same, and is the same judgment to be given to both? Surely not. I am to remember that the Ephraimite is a fellow Israelite, and a brother. That holds even if he is conceited, even if he taunts the Gileadites with being runaways from Ephraim, and complains with jealousy that Gilead has won a victory that by rights belonged to Ephraim.
At the fords of the Jordan, a test word became a death sentence.
Great strife follows. The Gileadites take the fords of the Jordan, and those who said "Sibboleth" were killed. A horrible record! Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were murdered… Shibboleth means "flood," that which divides. Sectarianism is certainly in view here. How God's people have suffered under it and still suffer! It is true that "every test which divides the people of God from one another, and not from their enemies, is another false shibboleth."
- Grievance. Jephthah called Ephraim, and they refused to come. Their anger at his victory was resentment of the mercy God had shown them.
- Self. Jephthah's defence is crowded with "I" and "my people." The phrase that once meant all Israel now means Gilead against Ephraim.
- Flesh. He answered the flesh with the flesh. His wounded feelings clashed with the selfishness of Ephraim.
- Sword. Being right settled nothing. Showing Ephraim they were wrong led straight into a slaughter of 42,000 brothers.
- Shibboleth. Any test that divides God's people from each other, not from their enemies, is a false shibboleth. In an evil world, patience stands higher than power.
And Jephthah gathered together all the men of Gilead, and fought with Ephraim; and the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, because they said, Ye, Gilead, ye are fugitives of Ephraim in the midst of Ephraim, [and] in the midst of Manasseh.
Jephthah has just beaten Ammon, and now Israel turns on itself. Gilead and Ephraim go to war over a sneer about where the Gileadites came from.
The insult was not new. Ephraim had a habit of pushing its own importance, and the Gileadites were not its first target.
Ephraim had the place of the firstborn son, and the tabernacle stood in the tribe of Ephraim, so in the time of the judges we find this tribe asserting its own importance. They were angry with Gideon for not calling them to the war sooner, but a gentle answer calmed their anger. Again they complained to Jephthah that he had gone to fight the Ammonites without them, though Jephthah declared that he had called them and they had not responded. They also said proudly of the Gileadites that they were fugitives of Ephraim. They meant that Gilead was not a tribe at all, but belonged to Ephraim and had run away from it. The conflict was sharp. The Gileadites seized the ford of the Jordan. They made everyone who wanted to cross say the word "Shibboleth," which the Ephraimites could only pronounce as "Sibboleth," and so they killed 42,000 men of Ephraim.
The verse gives the cause of the war in three words: because they said.
Words intensified the quarrel. "The men of Gilead struck Ephraim, because they said, 'You are fugitives of Ephraim, you Gileadites, in the midst of Ephraim and Manasseh'" (v. 4). There was not a single principle involved in this struggle. On all sides there was only jealousy, self-importance and angry words traded by irritated hearts. So a war between brothers broke out in Israel, and they brought it on themselves.
Not every clash between God's people is like this one. Israel once came close to war over an altar, and that time a real division was at stake.
In the book of Joshua, where the power of the Holy Spirit was with Israel, this attempt was blocked at the time of the dispute over the altar called Ed (Joshua 22). Thanks to the energy of the tribes, party divisions never took hold. When divine principles are at stake we must not fail to stand in the gap, at the risk of war between brothers.
The verse says Jephthah "gathered all the men of Gilead." Just before, he had spoken for the whole nation against Ammon. Now he speaks for one group against another.
In Jephthah we no longer find the unselfishness or humility of a Gideon. He answered flesh with flesh. His own wounded feelings clashed with the selfishness of Ephraim. In his defence he put himself forward… Jephthah talked about himself and thought about his disputed worth. He fell into the snare that Satan had set for him, and he formed a party. Just before this he had identified himself with the whole people and proclaimed their unity in front of the children of Ammon. But now, "my people" meant Gilead as opposed to Ephraim.
Ephraim's taunt did not stay where they aimed it.
Their taunting words about the Gileadites came true, word for word, about themselves. They became "fugitives of Ephraim among the Manassites," who, sadly, do not spare them. Quarrels between brothers are the worst of all. The closer the ties that are broken, the greater the bitterness.
Ephraim had an enemy it never fought.
This proud and envious tribe was punished for troubling their brothers, when they had not driven the pagan peoples out of the land as they should have done. They are a picture of many in the church who in their pride quarrel with their brothers, but do not fight God's battles against spiritual wickedness.
Jephthah had just fought Ammon. Now he uses the same sword on a brother tribe.
Here is someone who loves Christ, whose heart is full of love for Him and who wants to please Him. Am I to treat such a person the same way I would treat a teacher of blasphemy — someone who brings in all kinds of false teaching about the Person of the Lord? Are Ammonite and Ephraimite to be the same, and am I to hand out the same judgment to both? Surely not. I am to remember that the Ephraimite is a fellow Israelite, and a brother. That holds even if he is conceited, and even when he does what he does here: taunting the Gileadites as fugitives from Ephraim, and complaining out of jealousy that Gilead has won a victory that by rights belonged to Ephraim.
- Words start it. Gilead struck Ephraim "because they said." A sneer, not a principle, set the nation at war with itself.
- Pride feeds it. Ephraim asserted its own importance against Gideon, then did it again, harder, against Jephthah.
- Flesh answers flesh. Jephthah met selfishness with self. The man who had spoken for all Israel now says "my people," and means Gilead against Ephraim.
- Judgment falls on it. The insult "fugitives of Ephraim" came true of the ones who invented it, and 42,000 of them died at the fords.
- Discernment prevents it. Stand firm when God's principles are at stake. But an Ephraimite is a brother, not an Ammonite, and you must not meet him with the sword.
And Gilead took the fords of the Jordan before Ephraim; and it came to pass that when the fugitives of Ephraim said, Let me go over, the men of Gilead said to him, Art thou an Ephraimite? and he said, No.
The fords of the Jordan were the only way home for a beaten army, and Jephthah's men held them. A quarrel over wounded pride has turned the crossing into a checkpoint. Each of the "fugitives of Ephraim" must now prove who he is.
Earlier leaders had kept such quarrels from spreading. This fight is not just one bad day in Israel's history.
Judges 12 is a picture of one of the gravest symptoms of ruin: contention and open war between brothers. In the past this disaster did not happen. The people had not yet left their first love, or their leader showed more spiritual power. Satan's constant design is to divide the children of God.
Taking the fords was a military move with no military purpose left.
Jephthah and his army took possession of the fords of the Jordan. They were determined to kill off every Ephraimite they could... Usually, once a battle is over, the victors do no more than take the defeated captive. So this action of Jephthah was cold-blooded murder. Do things like this ever happen among Christians today? ... These Ephraimites were no longer fighting against Jephthah. How much better it would have been to let them return to their land, and pray for them!
The test worked on accent alone.
The Gileadites chose this word to find out who was an Ephraimite. They seem to have picked it with no thought for its meaning: some take it to be "an ear of corn," others "a stream." The Ephraimites pronounced the SH as S, making the word SIBBOLETH. As the men fled from the victorious Jephthah and came near the ford of the river, they were tested this way... From this comes our habit of calling any party watchword a mere "shibboleth" — and even any particular view of truth or doctrine held by one section of the church.
Gideon had faced the same complaint and answered it softly. Jephthah answers in his own defence, and Gaebelein counts the pronouns.
The strife of Ephraim and their question remind us of what happened under Gideon's judgeship. There the soft answer turned away wrath. How different it is here... Notice the "I" in his answer. "I was at great strife" — "I and my people" — "I called you" — "I saw" — "I put my life in my hand"... It is true that "every test that divides the people of God from one another, and not from their enemies, is another false shibboleth."
Rossier looks at what the two sides were fighting over.
There was not a single principle involved in this struggle. On all sides it was only jealousy, personal importance and angry words exchanged by irritated hearts... At the crossings of the Jordan they identified one another by a Shibboleth, so that they could kill one another. That word was a formula with nothing to do with the truth of God.
The sword that struck Ammon now falls on Israelites. Ridout asks whether an enemy of God and a difficult brother deserve the same judgment.
Here is one who loves Christ, whose heart is filled with love for Him, one who wants to please Him. Am I to treat such a person the same way I would treat a teacher of blasphemy? That man brings in all kinds of false doctrine about the Person of the Lord. Are Ammonite and Ephraimite to be the same, and is the same judgment to be given to both? Surely not... The Ephraimite — even if he is conceited, even if he taunts the Gileadites with being runaways from Ephraim — is a fellow Israelite, and a brother.
Ridout does not object to dealing with Ephraim. He objects to the ford.
I can deal with Ephraim, as I surely should. But it is quite another thing to take the fords of Jordan and force everyone who crosses to say exactly this or that. To force him to say shibboleth, and if he cannot say it quite right, to cut him off. Shibboleth is the flood — the thing that divides. It refers to what divided Gilead from Ephraim. So to put men of Ephraim to the sword because they cannot quite pronounce what divides is faithfulness gone mad. It stops being faithfulness and becomes destruction... in Jephthah we have the failure of man's rule when the conscience is under the power of legalism.
None of this makes every division wrong.
When divine principles are at stake we must not fail to stand in the gap, even at the risk of war between brothers.
- Pride. Ephraim's complaint was about importance, not truth. A soft answer had once settled it. Jephthah's self-defence made it worse.
- Self. The repeated "I" in his reply shows a man defending his own worth. The road home became a killing ground.
- The test. The password had nothing to do with the truth of God — only with how a man's mouth formed a sound.
- The sword. Firmness against the real enemy turned into firmness against a brother. Faithfulness that makes no distinction becomes destruction.
- The cure. Where God's own principles are at stake, stand — but never turn a local difference into a blade at the river.
Then they said to him, Say now Shibboleth! and he said, Sibboleth, and did not manage to pronounce [it] rightly. Then they took him, and slaughtered him at the fords of the Jordan. And there fell at that time of Ephraim forty-two thousand.
At the Jordan crossings one sound decided who lived and who died. The men killed were fellow Israelites. The verse raises a hard question. What happens when God's people use a test on each other that has nothing to do with God?
The Gileadites picked the word for its sound, not its meaning. Writers differ over what it even means.
The Gileadites chose this word, it seems, with no thought for its meaning. Some take it to mean "an ear of corn," others "a stream." They used it to pick out the Ephraimites, who pronounced the SH as S, making the word SIBBOLETH. The men fled from the victorious Jephthah and came to the ford of the river. There the Gileadites tested them this way and killed the Ephraimites, who had brought the conflict on themselves.
That ford gave us a word we still use. A "shibboleth" now means "any watchword of a party, or indeed any particular view of truth or doctrine held by a section of the church."
Was there anything real behind the killing? One writer weighs the whole quarrel.
There was not a single principle involved in this struggle. On all sides it was nothing but jealousy, personal importance and angry words traded by irritated hearts. So a war between brothers broke out in the middle of Israel, brought about by their own hand. At the crossings of the Jordan they identified each other by a Shibboleth, so that they could kill each other. It was a formula with nothing to do with the truth of God.
Why was Ephraim so quick to fight? The tribe had a history, and one writer reads it as a warning for us.
Ephraim held the place of the firstborn, and the place of worship stood in their land. So in the time of the judges this tribe kept pushing its own importance. They were angry with Gideon for not calling them to the war sooner, but a soft answer calmed them… They also said proudly that the Gileadites were fugitives of Ephraim. They meant that Gilead was not a tribe at all, but part of Ephraim, escaped from it. The conflict was sharp… So this proud and envious tribe was punished for troubling their brothers, when they had not driven out the heathen inhabitants of the land, as they should have done. They are a type of many in the church. These fight their fellow believers out of pride, but they do not fight God's battles against spiritual wickedness.
One writer says why a fight inside the family cuts deepest.
Quarrels between brothers are the worst of all. The closer the ties that are broken, the greater the bitterness. Civil strife, as the saying goes, is the most uncivil.
The Ephraimites at the ford were beaten men on their way home.
Usually the winners of a finished battle would do no more than take the beaten men prisoner. So this action of Jephthah was really cold-blooded murder. Do things like this ever happen among Christians today? Not in the same way. Yet we can too easily reject other Christians in a sectarian spirit, because they do not meet our requirements… These Ephraimites were no longer fighting against Jephthah. How much better it would have been to let them return to their land, and pray for them!
Dealing with Ephraim's pride was one thing. Killing a man for a mispronounced word was another.
I can deal with Ephraim, as I should. But it is quite another thing to take the fords of Jordan and force everyone who passes to say exactly this or that. To make him say shibboleth, and if he cannot quite say it, to cut him off. Shibboleth is the flood, that which divides. It refers to what divided Gilead from Ephraim. So if the men of Ephraim cannot quite pronounce what divides, to put them to the sword is faithfulness gone mad. It stops being faithfulness and becomes destruction.
The same spirit did not die with Ephraim. One writer draws a rule from it.
This sad wiping out of brothers has its sequel in Christendom. Shibboleth means "flood," that which divides. Sectarianism is undoubtedly in view here. How God's people have suffered under it and still suffer! It is true that "every test which divides the people of God from one another, and not from their enemies, is another false 'shibboleth.'" May God graciously deliver His people from all sectarian strife, which is only the work and fruit of the flesh.
- Pride starts it. Ephraim demanded to be recognised, twice over. A soft answer from Gideon calmed it once. Left unchecked, it grew into war between brothers.
- The word is empty. Shibboleth was chosen for its sound, not its meaning — a test with nothing of God's truth in it.
- The sword follows. Forty-two thousand died at the fords after the fighting was over. Commentators call that cold-blooded murder, not victory.
- The rule stands. Any test that separates God's people from each other, instead of from their enemies, is a false shibboleth.
- The cure is mercy. Let beaten brothers go home to their own land, and pray for them, instead of holding them at the ford.