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.