Judges 1:25
And when he shewed them the entrance into the city, they smote the city with the edge of the sword; but they let go the man and all his family.
Original Language Analysis
Historical Context
The conquest of Beth-el shows standard ancient Near Eastern siege warfare patterns: intelligence gathering, insider betrayal, assault through weaknesses, and total destruction. This pattern appears throughout ancient military history—Troy's fall via the wooden horse, Jericho's fall after Rahab's help, and numerous similar examples. Cities' survival often depended on maintaining population loyalty and preventing insider betrayal.
The phrase 'smote with the edge of the sword' appears throughout Joshua-Judges-Samuel describing military conquests. This formulaic language doesn't necessarily indicate identical circumstances but employs standard Hebrew expression for military defeat. The extent of destruction varied—sometimes complete annihilation (herem), sometimes military defeat with population dispersion, sometimes subjugation with tribute. Context determines specifics, though the phrase consistently indicates decisive military victory.
Sparing collaborators while destroying cities raises ethical questions about collective punishment versus individual mercy. Ancient warfare typically treated cities corporately—rebellion meant corporate punishment, submission meant corporate mercy. However, biblical law distinguished between combatants and non-combatants (Deuteronomy 20:10-18), women and children (Numbers 31:17-18), and provided asylum cities for unintentional killers (Numbers 35). The tension between herem commands and mercy for collaborators reflects the unique nature of Israel's conquest as divine judgment on Canaanite sin while establishing holy nation.
Questions for Reflection
- When have pragmatic considerations or human obligations tempted you to compromise complete obedience to God's clear commands?
- How does the contrast between Rahab (who joined Israel) and this informant (who rebuilt Canaanite culture) illustrate different responses to divine mercy?
- What modern 'mercies' or 'tolerance' might actually be compromises that preserve worldly influences God commands us to eliminate?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
And when he shewed them the entrance into the city, they smote the city with the edge of the sword; but they let go the man and all his family.
The informant fulfilled his bargain, and Joseph's house honored their word—'they let go the man and all his family' (ve'et-ha'ish ve'et-kol-mishpachto shillechu, וְאֶת־הָאִישׁ וְאֶת־כָּל־מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ שִׁלֵּחוּ). The verb shalach (שָׁלַח, 'to send away, release') indicates deliberate, formal release, not mere escape. This parallels Rahab's deliverance (Joshua 6:22-25), yet crucial differences emerge in subsequent verses. Rahab integrated into Israel; this man rebuilt Canaanite culture.
The phrase 'smote the city with the edge of the sword' (vayakku et-ha'ir lefi-charev, וַיַּכּוּ אֶת־הָעִיר לְפִי־חָרֶב) is the standard biblical idiom for total military defeat, typically indicating herem (חֵרֶם) devoted destruction. However, releasing the informant's family violates complete herem, showing Joseph's partial obedience. Compare Joshua at Jericho: only Rahab's household was spared (Joshua 6:17, 22-25), with everyone else devoted to destruction. Here, military victory occurred, but incomplete obedience created future problems (v. 26).
Theologically, this illustrates how pragmatic compromises undermine complete obedience. Joseph's house reasoned that sparing one family was justified given his assistance, showing more concern for human obligation than divine command. This mirrors modern pragmatism valuing 'what works' over what God commands. Yet God's commands exist for purposes beyond immediate pragmatic benefits—herem prevented Canaanite religious-cultural influence from corrupting Israel. Sparing this family seemed merciful but enabled Canaanite culture's continuation, demonstrating how incomplete obedience births lasting consequences.