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.