Of Redeemers: both Kinsman and Kinswoman, or, Naomi and Ruth Help Each Other Up (Ruth 1-4)

My normal procedure when I begin to study the women in a passage of Scripture for a blog post is to, even if I know the story, read methodically from the beginning to look for any female characters and notice them. In the book of Ruth, the first one you come across is actually Naomi. My initial thought was that I would devote a post to her, preliminarily, before looking in depth at the main character of the book, Ruth. But as I continued to search for her name as I skimmed along, I came to the realization that Naomi, not Ruth, seems to be the main protagonist of the book that bears Ruth's name. It begins with her tragedy and ends with the redemption of her suffering-- so much so that in the end she is the only one congratulated for the birth of Ruth's son Obed, and the one who "cuddles him to her breast." What a surprising angle I had not noticed before! As we go through the book of Ruth, we will get to see how Ruth ministers to Naomi, and how Ruth's own happy ending serves to bring joy to the main character of this book. 

What we learn about women:

• We see an example of God helping Naomi as she helps Ruth, and God helping Ruth as she helps Naomi. This dynamic is not unusual or exclusive to women, but the portrayal of the ministry these women have to one another in a difficult time is strikingly beautiful
• A deep ministry is available to us, especially within families, to share faithful presence with those who are suffering and also to provide physical needs.
• In ancient Israel, the loss of a husband was not just a devastating personal tragedy, but also a serious economic and status problem. This is still true to some degree today, but it was worse then.

What I'm wondering:

• First question: this courting ritual about sneaking in at night and uncovering Boaz's feet, what precisely was that??
• I do wonder at the very brief descriptions of the womens' first marriages, how were they? How would personal and economic losses have measured up against each other in this time?

When the book of Ruth opens "in the time of the Judges," (though notably and thankfully lacking any mention that "Israel had no king and everyone did as he saw fit") Naomi's family moves from Bethlehem to Moab to escape a famine. Here is another mention of that important small town. The decision to move is Naomi's husband Elimelech's very short contribution to the story. After moving to Moab, his next recorded action a sentence or two later is to die. Naomi was then "left with her two sons." The sons marry Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth, and then they also have no other action recorded over ten years until they die in the next sentence. Now Naomi is "left alone without her two sons or her husband." The clear focus of the opening of the book is Naomi's loss.

We can imagine that before the famine, Naomi was very happy with her husband and two sons, living the just the kind of life as a wife and mother of sons that a woman would have wanted in ancient Israel. But the first five verses of the book serve her famine, exile from her home, and the loss of her entire family. 

Naomi hears that the crops have recovered in Judah, and decides to return there with her daughters-in -law. As they are leaving, we are given a deep look into Naomi's heart, which is overflowing with both despair and love. She urges Orpah and Ruth to return to their mothers' homes (not their fathers' as we might expect, another little female-focused detail of this story) and prays, in gratitude for their care for her and her sons, that the Lord will bless them with the security of another marriage. This testifies to the importance and security of marriage and male family members for these women. Ruth and Orpah have been good wives, so they should merit, and hope for, the provision of good husbands to take care of them. In contrast, Naomi sees that she will not be able to bear any more sons, and therefore will not be able to care for them, or for herself for that matter. She tells them, "things are far more bitter for me than for you, because the Lord himself has raised his fist against me." This statement of pain and hopelessness comes in the context of her wish and hope that God will bless and provide security for her daughters-in-law. The women weep together at their situation.

This interaction gives me a clue why, even after Orpah returns to her family of origin, Ruth shows such devotion and care for her mother-in-law. You can see how Naomi loves her family deeply, and loves and trusts God, despite feeling so alone and abandoned by him.  It's also evident how much she wants to help her daughters, even while knowing that she cannot do it. This inspires Ruth to make the declaration of love and faithfulness that we use to this day to bind ourselves in marriage,"til death do us part." But Naomi does not have the energy to do anything in response other than stop resisting Ruth's determination to stay with her. Ruth then takes the lead. 

The two women arrive back in Bethlehem at the start of the barley harvest. The other women of Bethlehem serve in the role of something like a chorus to give a backdrop for Naomi to express her bitterness. Naomi is lost in her grief, so at the start of chapter 2, Ruth sets about taking care of the details-- she goes out to gather food. Naomi doesn't appear to have the presence of mind to send Ruth to the farm of her kinsman Boaz. Ruth just happens to wind up there to glean behind the harvesters, which is very fortunate. When Boaz comes out to greet the people working in his fields he notices and praises Ruth because he has heard how she is caring for her mother-in-law. He also describes her as having taken refuge with God, and prays that God will bless her. 

When Naomi sees the huge quantity of grain Boaz has given to Ruth, her spirits appear to lift. She is even more delighted that Ruth has happened to meet and find favor with Boaz, the man who could possibly offer shelter and a home to both Ruth and to her. Boaz is their kinsman redeemer, the man who has the legal right to marry Ruth and give her children to carry on the name of her husband. Naomi encourages Ruth to continue to glean in his field. The chapter ends with a sweet sentence: "And she lived with her mother-in-law." Naomi and Ruth begin to settle in together and carve out a life after their loss. Ruth is doing the faithful work of living with and being present with Naomi as she struggles through her darkness, and also simply providing her food. 

But then time passes, and Naomi has the resources to begin to help Ruth again in the way she has wanted to. Now that Ruth has shown such faithfulness to Naomi and in doing so, to her family at large and to God, Naomi is able to help her move on a more exciting and rewarding path--to again become a wife and mother. She gives Ruth advice on how to approach Boaz with what we can assume are a culturally specific set of actions for this kind of situation. Ruth follows these instructions faithfully. Boaz is pleased with her request and promises to try to marry her. When Ruth returns home from her "date night" with Boaz, they talk it all out together and Naomi reassures Ruth, "The man will not rest until the matter is settled today."

In the last chapter, Boaz does as he has promised. He makes the necessary arrangements with the leaders, and he and Ruth are married. When she conceives and gives birth to a son, we see that the point of this whole story is how the gift of ministry in grief from a loving daughter-in-law has saved and redeemed Naomi, even as Ruth is also redeemed by Naomi's kinsman. The women of the town return to rejoice exclusively with Naomi, and eventually claim that "Naomi has a son!" because Ruth does. They speak of the Lord providing Naomi with redemption through this son. This reminds us of the vital importance of male household members to provide for the women in their families. But the women also say that Ruth is a daughter-in-law who has been "better to you than seven sons." To top it all off, the book of Ruth ends with the genealogy that shows how Ruth will become the great-grandmother of David, the founder of the greatest Israelite dynasty. Naomi has indeed been honored and redeemed through the love and care of this faithful woman, Ruth. 

What a gift to find such a clear and beautiful meaning in this story after the disturbing unfaithfulness and distance from God which was so common throughout the book of Judges. In this story, we are simply given a beautiful picture of how God ministers to those suffering from loss, through the faithfulness of the people who stay with them and go through life with them. This story is especially about how women can help each other here. Though it is obvious that both Ruth and Naomi will need the love and care of men in order to live a traditionally happy and prosperous life in ancient Israel, the faithfulness of Ruth to Naomi in her time of depression and physical need is transformative for both of them. Naomi might have been lost in darkness without Ruth to bring her food and to live with her. Ruth may never have been able to join a community and reattain her status as a wife and mother without Naomi's help and counsel. These women were simply struggling to get by, and to take care of each other well. Naomi was afraid that God had turned against her, even as he was powerfully at work to redeem both her and Ruth through their care for one another. Truly this relationship of love and care between women brought more benefit to each of them than seven sons may have. The fact that within three generations, God would bring forth from this family line the birth of King David, Israel's greatest king, and an archetype of Christ, is even greater testimony to the way God's plan can unfold in the midst of grief and suffering when his people care for one another well in the midst of it. 

I also love that this story which is so female-focused as it relates to friendship, mother-daughter relationships, dating and dating advice, joy over grandchildren, etc., has been placed here in the canon of Scripture. These issues are shown to be an important part of the heritage of King David, who will be arguable the main character of the dynasty of Israel, which will occupy the next main section of Scripture, and a key place in the redemptive history of the people of God. The fact that Naomi and Ruth care for each other so well is crucial to the movement of God's plan. It is honored as such, since it provides the literary transition from the wildness of the time of the Judges to purposeful time of the books of Samuel where God established the nation of Israel under the house of David. 

Warriors, mothers, daughters, wives, and lovers--a coordinated pattern emerges from the fascinating women of Judges (Judges 1-21)

 

OK, so I know I keep saying how the stories in Judges are wild. We have now come to the end of the book, and the very last story, which is a postscript to the account of the civil war between the tribe of Benjamin and the rest of Israel which we discussed briefly in the last post. Today's story is, again, bizarre to the ears of a modern reader. But again, I must remind myself that human history has been in general, as in the saying about nature, metal. Nature is metal. And history is metal. I'm currently reading a survey of medieval history which is not unlike the book of Judges in its steady flow of war, trickery, bloodshed, religious confusion, and, relevant to this project, abuse of women. But as we wrap up our study of women in Judges, I think there is an interesting pattern we can discern amidst the madness.

What we learn about women:

• The last episode in Judges displays the deep lack of power women held in Israel at this time, with the Israelite leaders treating them as hardly more than resources for reproduction.
• Throughout the book of Judges, men and women are juxtaposed, often to show the failings of men.
• This juxtaposition seems to apply to the wider world as well.

What I'm wondering:

• Is the apparent structure of the stories of women in Judges legitimate?
• If the patterns here reflect the world at large will we continue to see them in the Bible as we go along, or is this just one way of understanding some stories?

I'm frankly a bit exhausted in my capacity for shock at strange stories about wild behavior in the book of Judges. Perhaps that is the effect intended by the author. Chapter 21 recounts the fallout after Israel's civil war, when the eleven victorious tribes are saddened by the fact that the tribe of Benjamin has been so crushed that there is a risk that it will die out all together. Part of the problem is that there are no women who can be given as wives to the few men from Benjamin who have survived. The eleven tribes have vowed before God not to give any of their daughters in marriage to the Benjamites. But they find a convenient loophole in that they also have vowed to put to death anyone who was not there at Mizpah when that vow about their daughters was taken. The men from Jabesh Gilead are discovered to have been absent. Therefore, the Israelite army goes to destroy the entire town, with the exception of the young unmarried women. These women have not had any promises made about their marriages, and they can be given away to the Benjamites. Problem solved. Except, unfortunately, even after the women of Jabesh Gilead have been captured, there are still not enough women for the surviving Benjamites. 

Another legal maneuver is devised. The Israelite leaders conclude that it is technically not "giving" anyone's daughter in marriage if the young woman is kidnapped and then taken as a wife. Thankfully the festival of Shiloh is about to take place near Bethel, and many young women will be out dancing. The bachelor Benjamites are instructed to hide in the vineyards nearby, and simply go and capture wives for themselves from among the dancers. If the fathers of the young women protest, the situation about the oath will be explained, and hopefully everyone will understand. This plan is carried out, and everyone returns home.

What else is their really to say than to conclude with "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit?" 

Though Judges has been nothing short of a fascinating source of biblical material about women, I am quite looking forward to starting the logical, redemptive, moral story of Ruth which is coming up next. But first, I would like to pause and take a concluding look at the interesting literary pattern of male-female juxtaposition I've noticed in this book and try to summarize the evidence I see for it. 

I observe that in the book of Judges, we consistently see male and female characters placed together, with the women serving either to show a contrasting higher standard of behavior or to bear in horrifying amplification the consequences of the men's bad behavior. 

First, we have the very short story of Caleb's daughter Aksah asking her husband to negotiate about the land the couple has been given, but then slightly upstaging Caleb by actually doing the negotiation herself when she meets up with her father. 

Then there is Deborah, who summarizes her relationship with the Barak, commander of the Israelite army called to lead Israel to victory against Sisera, when she says, "because of the course you are taking, the honor will not be yours, for the Lord will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman." Jael, the deadly nurse-assassin is contrasted with both Sisera who she slays with a tent-peg, and Barak, who arrives too late in pursuit of Sisera only to find him dead. 

Then we encounter Abimelek and and Jephthah, both illegitimate sons who struggle with their brothers. Both of their lives end in ruin, each time related to a woman: Abimelek is finally killed and defeated in battle when a woman drops a millstone on him in battle, Jephthah is "destroyed" emotionally when he fulfills a foolish vow to sacrifice his daughter after a military victory. These two exhibit both being shamed by a woman (Abimelek) and inflicting unjust suffering on a woman (Jephthah).

The story of Samson's mother's angelic message about his birth, which I can't help but see as comical, is next. She is contrasted with her husband who is very slow on the uptake of the genuine nature of the message she has received. After the stories of Samson's romantic partners, there is another story of a mother, who is herself slow on the uptake. This is Micah's mother, who rewards his return of money he stole from her with thanks to God and the gift of an idol to help him worship, rather than a rebuke. She is perhaps to be considered together with her son. Though she almost amplifies rather than contrasts with his lack of moral compass and theological understanding, she does set him on a course which he follows into idolatry, bringing the entire tribe of Dan along with him. 

Samson's love interests make a nice contrasting pair themselves. They are two Philistine women, one his wife, and one his lover, both of whom he should not have been in league with in the first place, and both of whom who cause him a load of trouble and tragedy. The difference in the endings of their stories is noteworthy, one is horribly killed in the fallout of Samson's revenge on her kin, the other is the person who lures Samson to his capture and blinding at the hands of the same Philistine community. Again, one of these women is the victim of suffering which condemns the male perpetrators and one woman gets the best of her man and reveals his failings in that way.

The last story of the concubine from Bethlehem stands alone. She plays the role of victim as a contrast against the whole nation, showcasing the evil lurking within Israel itself, which is found to be just about as horrible as the pagan nations the book has been oriented against. In the very last episode discussed above, a footnote to the story of the concubine and the war, we have more evidence that Israel itself is foundering in its identity as a nation. There has been a civil war, and in order to try to restore the nation, everyone is agreeing to killing the inhabitants of another Israelite town, and kidnapping lots of young women. The women of Shiloh dancing happily at a festival make quite a contrast with defeated and shamed Benjamite warriors hiding in the bushes to carry them off. 

As I write this out, I am struck, in addition to the contrasting men and women in Judges, by what seems to be a pairing of the stories of two warrior women, two women (side characters) who destroy warriors, two mothers, and two lovers. I'm not sure if that's a legitimate level of literary structure or not, but it's an interesting way to keep track of the women of Judges in our minds. 

I never expected to find this quantity of perspective on women and the male-female dynamic in this book. Again, I don't know if the author of the book intended the women here to serve the functions they do, but as I think it over, it really rings true to life in general. I think just as men and women pair into couples for love and family, they also pair in their larger societal roles. These more and less powerful roles really seem to show in a symbolic way the result of inherent inequality in the world--in all its injustice, and also its potential beauty. When women, who are normally less powerful, are able to exhibit power and influence in an unexpected way, we take note and admire, and often give glory to God who makes the weak strong. When men, who in their strength and power ought to achieve and protect, either abdicate or oppress, the ugliness of injustice becomes unbearable to look at. Judges portrays everything going wrong in Israel while everyone does as they see fit. I think this plays out in a very illuminating way between men and women and I am really thankful, despite the horror and sadness we encounter here, for the insight it has provided.

Another story about Bethlehem (Judges 19-20)

The story we will discuss in this post has been lurking in my awareness since I started working through the book of Judges. It is a kind of grand finale of horror for all those days when "Israel had no king and everyone did as he saw fit." Judges has not been gentle in its recounting of these wild days before the establishment of the monarchy, and it does not wrap things up encouragingly either. Still, when I consider the story of the concubine from Bethlehem, I think I can see a shadow of the story of Christ there.

What we learn about women:

• We see another example of a woman in the role of a victim of a crime which screams the guilt of the perpetrator.
• Women had so little status in this group that it seemed obvious to the men of the household that it would be better for this concubine to meet a terrible fate than for them to try to protect themselves all together.
• The outrage sparked by this crime, after the fact, was enough to bring the whole nation to war; but the obvious risk of the crime ahead of time wasn't enough to provoke anyone to help her in the moment in the moment of her need.

What I'm wondering:

• What spiritual harm comes generally to men in their relative strength which offers them so great an opportunity to oppress?
• What is the backstory of the woman having run away to her father's home, and then him encouraging her to return with her husband, but to stay with her family for an extended visit?
• The big one: what ultimate good or justice comes about through horrific suffering which God allows? How does Christ's suffering relate?

Here is a summary. A Levite travels to Bethlehem to convince his concubine, who has left him, to come back to Ephraim from her parents' house. After a week or so of feasting with her family, they depart Bethlehem late in the day, and pass by several non-Israelite towns which they reject as unsafe, before arriving in a Benjamite city, Gibeah. Since it's so late, they intend to stay the night in the square. But a local man takes them into his house, warning them not to stay outside there under any circumstance. When they are settled inside, men come banging on the door, intending to sexually assault the Levite man. To avoid this, the men in the house push the concubine outside to the mob. She is assaulted through the night, and released at daybreak. She makes it to the door of the home and collapses, dead. The Levite brings her back to his home, and decides he must let the rest of the nation know about the horrible thing that has been done to her. So he dismembers her body and sends part of it to each of the tribes of Israel. The national horror at this message is so great that all of Israel declares war on the tribe of Benjamin.

This is the kind of story which leaves you without words. It is absolutely horrifying. It seems clear that this is the effect which is intended by the author the narrative. All of Israel reacts with the reader in shock and desire for vengeance. The fact that this story is in the Bible evokes several pressing thoughts. In the first place, what are we to make of finding perhaps the worst possible kind of behavior documented among the people group who the Biblical narrative calls the special people of God? What does this say about the effectiveness of knowing God in producing virtue and goodness? In the second place, it is heartening to know that where this type of crime and abuse happens, it is not somehow outside the limits of what God is aware of. The woman who was abandoned to a violent mob to be raped and murdered was not unseen by God. In the third place, we have the perennial question: how could God see this and not intervene on her behalf?

Leaving these crucial questions to stand for a moment, we can also use the lens of the "female gaze" to focus even on a story like this and provide enlightening context. An important element in the story is that the Levite and his host seem to make the decision to offer the concubine to the men on the basis of gender, thinking that it would be worse for the men of Gibeah to commit homosexual sin. This calculation is made under the guise of a concern for righteousness, but it leads them to conclude that it would be better for someone else, weaker and under their authority, to suffer in their places. In the narrative, the rape and murder of the concubine is roundly condemned, but the decision by the Levite and his host to offer her up is not mentioned. Our judgment does not let them off the hook so easily. 

The general principle of the duty of the strong to use their power to support and protect the weak which I argue should underlie all social relations, particularly those between men and women, would make other demands on the men in authority here. Perhaps they would claim self defense to attempt to justify tossing someone else to the mob. But the behavior is about as justifiable as using a human shield in war. It leaves us with nearly as much shock and grief as the resulting rape and murder. An enduring bit of the reaction in Israel to this event is the astonishment that this kind of crime has happened, not among the pagan nations who surround them, but within one of their own tribes. Taking this same point of view and applying it within the smaller event, I find myself outraged that this poor woman was offered up by her family, not stolen away violently by those who did not care for her.

Putting together our general questions about this story's role in Scripture with the way gender-based power dynamics fit in, we are led to the overarching demand for justification for the suffering of the powerless. Here I think we can forge an interesting link between the suffering of the weak and the suffering of Christ. The archetype of one person suffering instead of the many in their place is an obvious fit for the archetype of a Christ figure. Of course, in this story there are large and important differences. This was not a willing self-sacrifice, it was a cowardly sacrifice of another to save someone's own skin. But I find myself wondering if we can almost read the archetype backwards in this situation. It seems one aspect of the meaning of Jesus's suffering was for him to identify with us as we experience inflicted suffering. In offering himself passively to the Romans, he took on the experience of enduring the suffering that others perpetrate. His resurrection declared that this kind of suffering is not the end of the story, but is seen and vindicated by God. The evil done by those who would hurt others stands in history as a lasting condemnation of their actions, but the Gospel tells us that the harm itself does not last into eternity. At first glance, it seems unfair that the lot of women is often to serve as symbols of suffering and victimhood which condemn the men who inflict it. But when we remember Christ, who filled this role par excellence, we see that those who suffer, as women or otherwise, are more closely united with him in some ways than those who do not. This gives us resources to interpret a story which is utterly confounding and depressing otherwise. 

Micah's mother shrugs and generations go astray (Judges 17-18)

Micah's mother has a short but intriguing story. She and her son are from the tribe of Ephraim. Her influence on him leads to the establishment of the worship of an idol, believed to represent the true God, which continues among the tribe of Dan from the time off the Judges, all the way through the monarchy, until Israel's exile. The way this comes about will leave us scratching our heads a bit. However there is something to learn from the story about the importance of a mother's spiritual and, even more importantly here, intellectual influence on her children.

What we learn about women

• Micah's mother blunderingly points him in the direction of idol worship, and he enthusiastically continues on the path.
• In raising children, both failures of omission and vagueness about truth have consequences.
• Regardless of the level of knowledge of God in the culture, mothers have a unique potential to influence what their children believe and do.

What I'm wondering

• How did this family gain such enthusiasm for God without knowing much about him? What does God think of enthusiasm like this?
• How did this idol gain such a a value that it was worthy of being stolen and used for worship by an entire tribe?
• Did the characters involved really identify the idol with Yahweh?

This story is punctuated a couple of times with that line the author of Judges uses to let us know he is shaking his head, "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes." So we are obviously not to take the reported behavior as endorsed by God. Here is the basic story. Micah tells his mother that the approximately 25 thousand dollars worth of silver she has been upset about missing is actually in his possession! What's more, that's because he was the one who had taken it in the first place. One might be surprised at the fact that she reacts with nothing but joy and thankfulness, and blesses her son. Even more surprising, to reward him, she devotes the silver to God and to her son, to be made into a cast image, an idol. Micah is extremely happy with this, and makes a special priestly ephod for his own son to wear, and commissions his son to be the priest for this idol. Let's stop here to comment.

The way she is described in the narrative, Micah's mother comes across as being both extremely quick to forgive, and surprisingly unfamiliar with the God she loves and worships. These do seem like faults, but they do not spring from a strategically diabolical nature. They just betray a lack of discipline and attention to detail when it comes to goodness and truth. Not so serious right? We can probably relate. 

Forgiveness is certainly a virtue. Offering compassion and mercy to a child who is confessing a sin is often the right tack to take. But for a parent, it should be accompanied by figuring out where consequences and learning should be administered, and that can be the hard part. Micah's mother does not seem to offer any critique to her son. And then she takes things in an even more questionable direction when she celebrates her son by having an idol made for him.

Again, all told it seems to me to be much more important to love God than to know correct theological doctrine. But love for God that knows absolutely nothing about him, like that the second thing on his list of commands is that his worshipers should not make idols of him, has to be questioned as to where it is actually directed. When a person says they love God but know nothing about him, is it really God, the specific person who created the universe, they are referring to? Are Micah and his mother in reality just very into sculptural art and the poetry of religious ritual? 

Micah's mother's lack of attention to theology and discipline seems more lazy than anything else. But even without her harboring ill intent, her failings will contribute to serious effects for her descendants. Of course as the story continues it doesn't seem like anyone in the vicinity has very accurate knowledge of God. We really don't know enough about Micah and his mom specifically to know how seriously to fault her for the looseness of her boundaries and theological understanding. Her role in the action is over as soon as the idol is cast, but events continue to unfold. 

A priest, an actual Levite, comes wandering up from the south and encounters the family. Micah is happy to be able to hire a real Levite priest to minister at the altar to his idol. The priest is happy to find a job. The Levite and the idol continue working for Micah until the army of the tribe of Dan comes around and, in an ironic twist, steals from Micah the very idol he got as a reward for returning what he had stolen. The leaders of the tribe of Dan set this false idol along with the kidnapped false priest and his descendants up as their official religious leaders permanently. And we are told that this continues until Israel is finally exiled several hundred years later. 

To expect that Micah's mother should have instructed her son more faithfully when her understanding is not bested by a Levite or the leaders of a whole tribe of Israel may be too much to ask. But we are able to see the outworking of the effects of this in-home episode, and we can imagine how things might have been different if Micah's mother had been able and willing to responsibly teach her son the truth about God and the behavior he loves. 

Delilah's most powerful tool: her sexuality or her persistent nagging? (Judges 16:4-20)

The next woman we encounter in Judges is the infamous Delilah. In the last post we saw how Samson's wife was pushed around by her kin until finally meeting a terrible end. His lover Delilah is also influenced by the Philistines to betray Samson, but she is not so hapless. In the end, Delilah gets the better of Samson, on purpose, for money. 

What we learn about women

• Delilah personifies the sexual manipulation women can exert over men which may cause them to lose all their strength and their sense.
• Delilah ultimately gets the upper hand over Samson by continuing to nag him.
• Nagging can only be done by those without authority, and for that reason it is often characterized as something that women do. Despite its association with lack of ability to compel, a continued request sometimes gets results.

What I'm wondering

• What is the role of "nagging" in relationships of authority?
• Does God want us to nag him? Does he sanction nagging in general?

There are some interesting parallels in the stories of the women in Samson's life. Both women are approached by Philistine leaders who pressure them to sabotage Samson. Both are described as tormenting Samson with nagging until he gives in and gives them information. But as noted above, there are huge differences between the women as well. Samson's wife, of course, was to enter into a legitimate, if politically and religiously unwise, marriage with him. There is no mention of marriage or family with Delilah. She does not pretend to ally herself with him. She entangles him with fairly open treachery--she is caught red-handed three times trying to offer him to his enemies before she finally succeeds. When she does, she is rewarded by the Philistines who come to capture him "with the money in their hands" for her. 

The most notable elements of Delilah's story are, first, her uncomplicated character as a femme fatale, second, the obviousness of this, even to Samson, and third, despite that, her success in bringing him down. It's a classic example of the bad guys winning. What are we to take away from observing her character? 

My hunch is that Delilah is portrayed in this way as an incarnation of the sexual temptation to which men are vulnerable and which causes them to be compromised in their strength, agendas, and good sense. Is this a complete picture of the real woman Delilah? Certainly not. But it is a caricaturized, you could even say mythologized (not in the sense of being untrue, but in the sense of capturing the nugget of a universal story or phenomena), look at what women can do to men with the power of sexual temptation. 

That said, I'd like to take a closer look at another element, the repeated descriptions of Samson's two main love interests "torment(ing) him with (their) nagging day after day until he was sick to death of it." Nagging is an interesting type of offense that is highly correlated with women in usage. Why is this so? I think it is because nagging can really only be done by someone who does not have the power to command. Nagging probably happens most often when a person agrees in principle to the request of someone who has no authority over them, (or in some sense allows that it would be right to do), but does not do it. Of course, a determined "nag" might continue to make requests even if she were outright refused. But in either case, it has historically often been women who are not in a power position to stand over a man and enforce his behavior, and therefore must resort to nagging or continuing to request. In contrast, if a man asks a woman or another man to do something, and then it is not done, the refusal comes across more like disobedience, and I think the man feels more permission to call to account without being accused of nagging. More generally, if a person in authority continues to request that someone under their authority do something without result, they will not be called a nag, but be seen as giving instructions or warnings that are being disregarded. You can only really nag if there is no way to enforce.

In the cases of Samson and his women, the nagging plays out in two different ways. In the first case, Samson doesn't agree to share the requested information with his wife, and she simply cries for days on end. Without the power to demand that he tell her the information, she simply continues her request, and in some sense keeps the conversation open, until he breaks down. In Delilah's case, we see what I think is the more classic scenario, where Samson does agree to tell her what she asks, but then he doesn't really tell her. "You still (still!) haven't told me" she says in verse 15, we could add, even though you said you would! Samson becomes "sick to death of it." So he finally tells her.

The irony of this is that nagging can only be done be someone without power to enforce . . . and yet it sometimes works to enforce! Perhaps this is why it is often met with an aggressive response, as the power of the continued request is felt. It even makes me think of Jesus's parable of the widow and the unjust judge. In this parable, a widow continually asks a judge, who is unjust and doesn't care about her, for justice. He eventually takes Samson's line: "this woman is driving me crazy. I'm going to see that she gets justice because she is wearing me out with her requests!" (Luke 18:5) Jesus says we are to learn from the story that we can continue to cry out to God day and night for justice, and he, unlike the unjust judge, will grant us justice quickly. Here the power dynamic inherent in nagging is hugely magnified when the relationship is between human beings and their God. We surely do not have the ability to enforce our will upon God, but there is power in continuing to request from him. I did not expect the result of this rabbit trail to be the idea that nagging is a God-ordained way to bring about justice! But here we are. : ) I suppose the application isn't perfect since these two Philistine gals were not seeking justice, but malice, with their nagging. Perhaps their fault was not in the nagging behavior but in the content of their requests. Much food for thought!

So was Delilah's real power over Samson due to her sexuality or her persistent nagging? I think it's hard to say. But before leaving this story let's take one final look at Delilah and the way she creates a foil for Samson's other major relationship partner, his first wife. Though their nagging in service of their countrymen is a parallel, the way their stories end could not be more different. If Samson deserves judgement for his abandonment of his first wife and the way he stokes tension with her people, he certainly gets it in this second story. Where his first wife is brutally murdered by her people, after failing in her relationship with Samson, Delilah laughs all the way to the bank after succeeding in hers. It does not bring any justice to Samson's wife, but it is in some way satisfying to see this other woman get the better of him in the same circumstances where his first wife was pushed around, abandoned, and terribly punished. Is that horrible and vindictive? Sometimes it's so hard to see what God is doing with these wild men he calls to greatness. 

This story with all of it's puzzles is certainly another example in Judges of women serving as foils to highlight the failings of men who should have done better for God. How sad that this role seems so common for women in our fallen world. 

 

Samson's wife: the worst wedding ever (Judges 14:1-15:8)

What we learn about women:

• Women, as weaker members in the world's power structure, can become the horrible incarnation of the suffering which is the inherent result of evil.
• We see an example of a woman faced with a choice between two bad options choose the worse one and suffer more than she might have otherwise.
• Beauty is not an unmitigated good. Though we see it as offering a measure of power to women who possess it, it can also be a magnet that draws attention from even more powerful people who want to exploit.

What I'm wondering: (If you aren't familiar with these stories, read below first to make sense of the questions.)

• Samson's wife appears to be a mere pawn in this story. Could she have used the little agency she had for a better outcome?
• Is there an echo of this kind of conflict in the current horrific events in Palestine? What are the women who are "pawns" under the authority and power of the violent men of Gaza to do? 

It's time to talk about Samson and the women in his life. If you grew up in church, you probably encountered Samson as some sort of a strongman superhero in Sunday school. But the passages in the book of Judges that tell his story are not so fun and kid-friendly. These passages do have two interesting female characters that will contribute to our project. One is Samson's wife, though his marriage is of no significant length due to the chaos and tragedy that typify Judges. The other is his lover, also implicated in dark drama. Both women are crucial for moving his story forward. Neither knows God. But we are told repeatedly that in the context of the untrustworthy women and evil events that characterize Samson's life, God's Spirit is with him and helping him. This post will focus on Samson's wife, the next one on the notorious Delilah.

I have to confess that on first reading, the horror of everything that Samson is involved with makes me want to shut the book. These chapters recount mass killing, deceit upon deceit, animal cruelty, and burning alive to name a few. I'm sticking with it to try to keep to this task of putting together the whole biblical picture of women in the Bible without avoiding inconvenient parts. I read Matthew Henry's commentary to get some additional perspective, and I was surprised to see that though he acknowledged plainly the evil inherent in much of the action, he was not as squeamish as I felt about the totality of the story. He focused in on the fact that many of the people who are doing and receiving evil in the story are self-designated enemies of God. (Samson excluded.) Henry is able to look at Samson as a super hero fighting bad guys who deserve it. I think that context is important to keep in mind for those of us who are accustomed to a post-Christ way of seeing everyone in the world as a possible redeemed child of God. That was still true back in the days of the Judges. But this story focuses more on the deliverance of the people of God from those who do not chose to be redeemed than the redemption and turning of God's enemies into friends. Maybe it shouldn't be so surprising to see God's judgment on display in a book entitled, "Judges."

Samson chooses for his wife a Philistine babe who "looked good to him." His parents warn him about marrying outside of God's people but he does not take their advice. From Matthew Henry's point of view, everything that follows results from the ungodly character of the Philistines with whom he will keep company for the rest of his story. 

Samson's wife, we've already noted, was lovely enough to draw Samson's eye from afar. She is unlucky in the rest of her circumstances, and one has to wonder if she would have even seen the beauty that drew Samson to her as luck in the end. At her wedding, Samson challenges his male Philistine companions to answer a riddle, with 30 outfits of clothing on the line. They can't do it. They force his fiance to get the answer out of him and tell it to them, or else they threaten to burn her and her father in their home. And with that, we start to see the mood of these stories play out. 

Samson's poor fiance has been put into a terrible position. She must betray her new husband, or else face a threat of horrific violence from the thugs she grew up with. What would have happened if she had allied herself with her super-hero husband? We don't have that story. But one does feel pity for her when she approaches Samson "in tears" and asks him to reveal his answer if he really loves her. This is the first part of a pattern that repeats with the other woman in his life Delilah later. They are both described as nagging him until he gives in and tells the information his enemies need to get the better of him. Then they both promptly give that information to his enemies. 

After the riddle ends in this way, Samson flies off in a rage to collect 30 outfits from 30 people in Ashkelon, by killing them. The Spirit of the Lord enables him to do this. We are to see it as a feat which helps to deliver Israel from its oppressors. But it sure does ruin the wedding. Everyone leaves, Samson and his bride go home. Her father figures the marriage is off and gives his daughter in marriage to the best man. But later Samson comes back to make up with her, and wants to visit her in her bedroom. This is now impossible. Samson is furious, and the situation escalates through the burning of Philistine fields, the burning of Samson's bride and her father in their house as previously threatened, a great slaughter executed by Samson on the Philistines in response, and then Samson going to live alone in a cave. The Philistines will continue to try to capture him unsuccessfully until they get in league with a true femme fatale, Delilah.

Samson's first wife is a simple tragic character. She's a beautiful pawn who is taken advantage of by her people, and meets a terrible end. What can we learn from her? For one thing, she is an example of how the power structure within which women exist can be used for evil. Women find ourselves weaker physically and socially often in the world. When there is no love, respect, or protection offered to the weak by the strong, they often become a horribly vivid incarnation of suffering and oppression. This testifies loudly to the appalling evil that is done when the strong exploit and abuse the weak. We hate to see and hear of these kind of events. Those who perpetrate them are clearly exposed in their inhumanity and demand to be judged.  

Second, in the question of how this woman might have used her limited agency, there is a call to those who find themselves in positions of weakness to look at what power for good and for influence they still have. No human being is a completely passive recipient, unless this has been their choice. When we find ourselves in impossible circumstances, what can we do? With whom should we ally ourselves for security? When we look to thugs and bullies rather than God and his people, we take the side of evil which opposes God and will ultimately be overcome by him. It is vital for human beings, whatever their level of power amongst their peers, to ally ourselves with the ultimate power for good. God can be trusted to work for goodness in the end, regardless of the intermediate timeline. He can also be trusted to work against those who oppose him. 

This story could apply to women when we are pushed and pulled by conflicting obligations with potentially terrible consequences attending whatever choice we make, and we do not have the ability to ensure a good result through our own power. When we have these choices to make, it is vital to ally ourselves with God and his work even if it comes with a large social cost. Letting the loudest and most familiar voices dictate her behavior led to disaster for Samson's wife. If she had been able to see that God was at work in the life of her new husband and taken his side instead of her old community, her story might have ended differently, and God's wrath might not have been poured out on so many others. That's the simpler way to look at this story. The other angle which could be taken is to throw up our hands and weep at the tragedy that was so typical of the time of the Judges, where there was so much violence and immorality and "Israel had no king; all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes."

Manoah's wife hears it right (Judges 13:1-24)

What we learn about women:

• God often communicates with women about their children directly, especially their conceptions and births. They are privileged to be the first to know about the lives of their children, sometimes directly from the mouths of angels. 
• This kind of message is often personal, just for women, but sometimes God gives them the responsibility of sharing his messages with the men in their lives.
• God is very concerned with the birth of new people and the effects they will bring in the world as well as the lives of their mothers and families.

What I'm wondering: (If you aren't familiar with these stories, read below first to make sense of the questions.)

• Samson is called by God from before his birth to be holy and to rescue Israel. Why does God allow such chaos in the course of his life?
• What does this relationship between Samson's parents mean for how women should explain to the skeptical men in their lives what God is calling them to do? 

Samson is a familiar biblical hero, at least in the sense of "hero" appropriate to the mythological mood of the book of Judges. But a part of his story you may be less familiar with is the visit to his parents from an angel of the Lord who announces he will be born. Samson's mother, the wife of Manoa, is another woman in a long line of biblical women who can't conceive until their prayers are answered by God in a specific message, and not infrequently in a personal visit! 

An angel visits Manoah's wife and explains to her that she will have a son who is to be dedicated to God as a Nazirite. Because of this, she must not have any alcohol or forbidden food, and her son's hair must never be cut. And the angel promises that this son will deliver Israel from the Philistines. 

It's a bit unwieldy to keep typing "Manoah's wife," but she's unnamed, even though she has the primary role in this story. This irony is part of an underlying comic mood throughout the episode related to the dynamic between Manoah and his wife, where He is continually trying to catch up with her in understanding of what is going on. I think it counts as another example of women in Judges being cast in an honored position, specifically in contrast with their corresponding men. 

After the angel's visit, Manoah's wife runs to tell her husband what has happened. His reaction is to politely ask God if he could please send the angel again to tell them how to raise the boy. He is clearly wanting to get some confirmation about this, maybe not fully trusting what his wife has said. To be fair, many of us might feel the same. 

God does send the angel again, but again, the angel comes to Manoah's wife when she is not with her husband. This is funny. God answers Manoah's prayer, but in a way that reiterates that his message is for Manoah's wife herself. She goes running off to get him to come see the angel as well this time. The angel waits.

Manoah feels the need to confirm, "Are you the man who talked to my wife?" "I am." replies the angel. Manoah then asks, "What is to be the rule that governs the boy's life and work?" And the angel replies, basically: what I just told your wife. I just love how the angel is patient with Manoah, but continually affirms that his wife has correctly received a genuine message.

Manoah's next move is to invite the angel to stay for a meal. It makes me think of Peter wanting to build shelters for Elijah and Moses at the transfiguration. Since you're here, can we all hang out?? The angel says he will not eat, but they can make an offering to the Lord. Manoah continues to try to direct the encounter, asking the angel's name. "It is beyond understanding." Manoah is not getting it. But he finally realizes who he's talking to and what is going on when the angel ascends in the flames that consume the offering they have prepared. At this point, we might say, he freaks out. "We are doomed to die! We have seen God!" Manoah's wife, still more in touch with the situation, says in a tone of voice I can hear across the ages, "If the Lord had meant to kill us, he would not have accepted a burnt offering and grain offering from our hands, nor shown us all these things or now told us this." 

And then, Samson is born. "And the Lord blessed him as he grew up." Samson's parents continue to figure into the story of his life. We hear more about them regarding his troubled first marriage, and you can tell he must have a fairly close relationship with them. The text makes several mentions of things happening to Samson and the fact that "he didn't tell his father or mother about it," as if this were unusual. 

I'll have more to say about Samson in another post, but I love the story of his mother's visits from the angel. I think it reflects a familiar pattern in the world where God interacts deeply and intimately with mothers, whose experience of this can be written off as unrelated to the world of men where the important things happen, and can too often be doubted until sanctioned by men. This story is told to a larger degree from the other side, the feminine perspective. In this instance, God was willing to offer the appearance of an angel to substantiate that perspective, and it feels satisfying. Though this doesn't always happen, to say the least, it does make me think of another situation where an angel first appeared to women to give them a very important message about the salvation of Israel and the world, and then substantiated it with follow-up angelic testimony to men. This happened at the resurrection of Christ.