Jump To: The Land Belongs to Israel

In Defense of Samson

by

Maurie Nord

After reading yet another judgmental harangue, I decided someone should stand up for the weird and wonderful long-haired Judge of ancient Israel.  Someone should point out God's sovereign right to raise up and shape an unusual weapon, for unusual times, to win unusual battles.  Someone should give warning to Christians to not disrespect an Old Testament hero of faith, flippantly referring to him as the "playboy muscle man", or the “dude with the long hair and the girlfriends”.

I was inspired to write this defence of Samson after reading a book which is currently a top seller in the Christian book market place.  Let me say first, that I do respect the author and thank God for his testimony of Jesus Christ.  Though his book, in my opinion, does an injustice to Samson who is dead, I believe that the author is sincere in his desire to minister to men who are living and I stand with him as a brother in that mission.    

This author, whom I will not name, refers to Samson as “the baddest boy in the Bible” even though the Apostle Paul claimed that title for himself.  (I Timothy 1:15)   After a few email conversations with him, the author confessed that it was his  publisher who came up with that irresistable aliteration for the book cover, and given the nature of the publishing business, I can't say as I blame him. 

The author uses witty, sarcastic and albeit entertaining writing, in a noble effort to warn strong men of the world about twelve sins or weaknesses common to their ilk.  However, he, like many others who love to slam Samson, shows a shallow understanding of the sovereignty of God, the miracle of Samson’s birth, and the curious but clear record of Judges thirteen to sixteen.  His portrait of Samson as a testosterone driven, Y2K style, sex maniac shows tremendous disrespect to an unusual man of God, and a man of incredible faith who laid down his life for the people of Israel. 

Probably, for reasons related more to the Christian book market place than anything else, the author uses Samson as a chief example, running him through a gauntlet of unfair criticism into which he reads the above, Hollywood image of Samson.  In his admirable zeal to help so-called strong men avoid Samson’s pitfalls, he errs by adding to scripture and by judging a ministry before the time as Paul, in the context of ministries, warned against:

"Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God."  (I Corinthians 4:5)

If it be argued that Paul is referring only to New Testament ministries here, I answer that the verses do not say that, rather, they imply that there will be a judgment by God of every man’s ministry, a perfectly just and transparent judgment which will take into consideration a person's life, upbringing, calling, faith, and the measure of grace given in consideration for deeds done while in the body, or while alive in the flesh on this earth.  Paul warns not to judge ministries, and goes so far as to say that he does not even judge himself, leaving God to have the final say on whether he has been a success or not.

³ But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court.  In fact, I do not even judge myself. ⁴ For I know of nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord. ⁵  

What about Samson then?  The author adds to the Word of God when he writes: "He (Samson) was handpicked by a gracious God to lead his people, the Israelites, in a revolt against the dreaded Philistines, who had been oppressing them without resistance for forty years."  The accusation is that Samson failed in this calling, but this is simply not true!  Samson's mission was never to lead a mass revolt, rather, he was to single-handedly begin to deliver the people of Israel.  He was not 'handpicked' he was Handshaped from the womb to be a living, breathing, object lesson to a stubborn people who had made up their minds that they not only had to serve the Philistines, but also some of them wanted to, and maybe some of them even liked it that way, so much had their minds fallen into deception.  When he began their deliverance, they even conspired to hand Samson over to the Philistines.

In prophesying to the mother of Samson, the angel of the Lord told her Samson's mission:

"For lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no rasor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines."  (Judges 13:5)

Note that the prophecy states that Samson, alone, would begin to deliver Israel.  Samson was called to strike as an unusual weapon in God’s hands, to be an object lesson to both Israel and the Philistines.  God wanted to throw a cold bucket of water into the faces of those who were mesmerized into believing lies.  Nothing is suggested in the prophecy about leading the people in a revolt.  Even if he could, to have done so would have been outside of his mission, and outside of God's timing.  So why does the author add to God’s word?  Because he badly needs to make his example (Samson) illustrate his teaching that “strong men” are often disobedient failures.  So, he makes Samson a disobedient failure in something he was not called to do, and that is not only bad exegesis, it is downright unfair.

He states flatly that Samson was a "disappointment to God.”  But how does he know this?  There is not one reference anywhere in the story of Samson that God was disappointed in him, or that he had sinned, or failed in any way.  The Lord, Himself, is actually silent throughout the entire narrative.  Knowing how deep the revelation of the Spirit can be in the inerrant scripture, the lack of mention of the Lord's displeasure is anything but coincidence and one has to wonder why.

On the contrary, there are several occasions in the story of David, where the Lord specifically said that he was displeased with David's actions:  one of them was not when David, by faith, ate the "show bread" which was clearly forbidden by the law of Moses.  As well, God rebukes, or states that he is displeased with many other patriarchs including Moses, but in regard to Samson He is silent: no rebukes, no corrections...only a somewhat clinical observation of one whom He designed to carry out a 'special ops' task, and whatever the two of them talked about, during Samson's solitary walks between Zorah and Eshtaol, remains a mystery.     

The author goes on to unfairly contrast Samson’s strange life to the so-called ‘perfect’ life of Joseph (in truth it was not) who was sovereignly shaped for another purpose and, in scripture, was painted by the Holy Spirit as a beautiful type of Christ.

He seems to forget the sovereignty of God in this Bible story, that God can shape an individual to be anything He wants: He is the Potter we are the clay, and His time piece makes a Rolex look like a Mickey Mouse watch.  After twenty years of protecting Israel from Philistine domination in the north, (Ashkelon) the attention of the Lord turned south, to the Philistine stronghold of Gaza.  Leading him south, the Spirit of the Lord stirred up Samson again. 

While King David and Solomon, under what would seem to be the permission of the Lord, had whole harems of  'concubines', the author seems to be amazed that Samson, who lived in a time of far less light than those two kings, stopped to visit a concubine of his own.  When the men of the city lay in wait to kill him, the Lord warned him and he tore the city gate loose and carried this 4000 pound symbol of Philistine might twenty miles to Hebron. 

The author feels that this was a childish prank, but obviously, it was a miracle and a prophecy...a slap in the face for the Philistines, and a foretelling of the coming reign of David who first began his rule a sling's throw from where Samson threw down the gates of mighty Gaza.  The Philistines recited fables, but God wanted to show them what a real Hercules looked like.

Samson’s greatest and final mistake came after twenty years of success in judging (protecting) Israel, and note that the Judges author, under divine inspiration, underscores Samson's service by stating twice, "He judged Israel for twenty years".  When Samson, probably in a giddy midlife crisis compounded by loneliness, foolishly told Delilah about the real secret of his strength and allowed his seven locks to be cut,  "the Spirit of the Lord departed from him." 

This departure, I believe, had everything to do with Samson's loss of faith and nothing to do with the breaking of a Nazarite vow.  If it were due to breaking a  Nazarite vow, then why didn't the spirit depart from Samson when he drank wine and touched a dead body?  Because I don't believe that Samson ever took an 'official' Nazarite vow.  Before what priest would he have taken the vow?  In his confession to Delilah he simply stated that he had been set apart (by his mother from birth)  to be a Nazarite.

 There is no record of Samson taking a vow or receiving any training by a priest.  Eli may have been a priest in Shiloah at some point in Samson's life, but in the time of the Judges, it is implied that there were no priests and every man did as he himself saw fit.  In the bizarre times of the Judges, Samson was to be an unusual weapon in the Lord’s hand, as the jawbone of an ass was in Samson’s hand.  Israel’s heart had failed, and God used Samson as a shock treatment just as emergency room doctors apply electricity to the chest of a heart attack victim to get the organ beating again.  Post-emergency care was not Samson’s calling.

Scripture nowhere states that Samson's strength actually was in his long hair, however, Samson, believed that to be the case.  Therefore, when he realized that his hair had been cut, he lost faith, and without faith it is impossible to please God.  (Hebrews 11:6)  Certainly, as a last ditch effort, he tried to muster up something in the flesh, as we, ourselves often do:

"I will go out as at other times before, and shake myself."  (Judges 16:20)

But deep down, he knew that faith had gone and consequently, so had the Spirit of the Lord with whom Samson had shared an intimate secret.  This secret was the heart of Samson's faith, his hair was a tangible object, a point of contact for the truth that the Spirit of God was with him, and he sinned in damaging his faith by sharing that precious secret with a deceitful woman, for, just as it was King David's and King Solomon's, Samson's human weakness was women.

 The author goes above and beyond the call of duty to denounce Samson as a loser, even through the scripture declares him to be a winner, who through faith, subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness was made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens (or enemy)."  (Hebrews 11:32-34)

He continually refers to Samson as a “strong man”, equating him to a cocky, sun-tanned, weight lifter on Muscle Beach.  Yet the scripture nowhere states that Samson was strong all the time, but only when the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him, otherwise he was an ordinary man.  This is so fitting a picture of our own lives in Christ, that without Him we are weak, but with Him all things are possible and He receives all the glory, praise His Holy Name!

The author wrongly reads into the character and ministry of Samson the kind of bull-headed, testosterone-driven, macho man image of Y2K.  I am sad to see this, but I am compelled to say that this is not proper biblical exegesis.  No better than the Philistines in Gaza, the author has made Samson an object of ridicule and entertainment (the imagined rippling muscles also make a very attractive book cover) but it is dangerous to approach scripture with an idea or image in mind and then proceed to make the verses fit that idea no matter what.

Since interviewing him by email, I have come to understand that he chose certain language to reach a target audience, namely, sports heroes and their worshipers.  So, that is why in relation to the story of Samson's first recorded visit to the Philistines, his sarcasm seems almost adolescent:  

"Our boy Samson is a perfect example.  He and his dream girl from Timnah were all wrong for each other.  They had absolutely nothing in common, and as far as we know, had never even had a conversation when Samson first told his parents he intended to marry her.  It was brainless physical attraction and it scared his parents to death.  They could see that their son was veering dangerously off course.  He was fraternizing with the enemy.  He was about to throw his integrity away, and with it, any chance the nation might have of being delivered from the dreaded Philistines.  It's easy to understand why they objected so strenuously.  It's easy to understand why they advised him to find a nice Israelite girl to marry.  It's easy to understand why Samson blew them off with a testy response:  'Get her for me.  She is the one I want'" (Judges 14:3)

Our boy Samson?  He and his dream girl from Timnah?  I'm sorry, but this is such a shallow view of an ocean-deep story.  First of all, it seems that the author, in his effort to make Samson the baddest boy in the Bible, somehow ignores the verse that clearly states that the Lord Himself intended that Samson marry the Philistine girl that He might use it as a way to cause an uproar which would serve to wake up His people, Israel, who were snake-eyed fascinated with serving the enemy.  If anyone would argue that God was against the marriage, but still used it for His purpose, I would answer that the verse does not say that, does it?  Without theological prejudice, the straightforward syntax of the sentence says that the marriage was 'of the Lord', that He might use it as an occasion against the Philistines. 

The author seems to think it was a grievous sin for Samson to marry a Philistine, but the de facto truth is that the Philistines, who were living in Canaan when Israel entered the land, were not included in the list of the seven nations whom God had forbidden Israel to marry.  Therefore, by the letter of the law, which some love to apply to Samson, his marriage was not illegal.  Jamieson, Fosset and Brown, in their commentary on the whole Bible agree with this position, and write the following observations:

Judges 14:1-5. SAMSON DESIRES A WIFE OF THE PHILISTINES.

1, 2. Timnath--now Tibna, about three miles from Zorah, his birthplace.
saw a woman . . . of the Philistines; and told his father and his mother, and said, . . . get her for me to wife--In the East parents did, and do in many cases still, negotiate the marriage alliances for their sons. During their period of ascendency, the Philistine invaders had settled in the towns; and the intercourse between them and the Israelites was often of such a friendly and familiar character as to issue in matrimonial relations. Moreover, the Philistines were not in the number of the seven devoted nations of Canaan [Deuteronomy 7:1-3]--with whom the law forbade them to marry.

Naturally, because she was a foreigner, Samson's father and mother were against the marriage to the Philistine girl, but they did not have the mind of God:

"But his father and his mother knew not that it (the marriage) was of the Lord that He sought an occasion against the Philistines: for at that time, the Philistines had dominion over Israel."  (Judges 14:4)

Who sought a chance to take a blow at the Philistines?  The simple, straight-forward syntax of the language, without prejudice, states that it was the Lord who wanted it.  Who was His unusual weapon to accomplish that blow?  It was Samson.  Why are some commentators so zealous to make God obey every jot and tittle of His own laws in cases where it benefits their theology, (Samson marries a Philistine) but in cases where is does not, they turn a blind eye?  (David unlawfully and with impunity eats the show bread).

The author misinterprets a verse to make Samson appear arrogant: "Get her for me.  She is the one I want."  Which, in the original Hebrew, really means, "she is the right one, or she fits my purpose".  The right one for what?  She is the right one to carry out God's plan to deal a blow to the Philistines.  She is the right one to show their deceit, their selfishness, and their unjust rule over Israel.  The author accuses Samson of, "brainless, physical attraction," whereas Jamieson, Fosset, and Brown interpret the passage this way:

"Samson said . . . Get her for me; for she pleaseth me well--literally, "she is right in mine eyes"; not by her beautiful countenance or handsome figure, but right or fit for his purpose. And this throws light on the historian's remark in reference to the resistance of his parents: they "knew not that it was of the Lord, that he sought an occasion against the Philistines"--rather, "from the Philistines"--originating on their side. The Lord, by a course of retributive proceedings, was about to destroy the Philistine power, and the means which He meant to employ was not the forces of a numerous army, as in the case of the preceding judges, but the miraculous prowess of the single-handed champion of Israel. In these circumstances, the provocation to hostilities could only spring out of a private quarrel, and this marriage scheme was doubtless suggested by the secret influence of the Spirit as the best way of accomplishing the intended result."

 John Wesley seems to think that the Lord suspended the letter of the law and gave Samson secret permission to marry the woman:

"Get her - This action of Samson's, though against common rules, seems to be warranted, by the direction of God, (mentioned in the following words) which was known to Samson, but not to his parents. Pleaseth me - Not so much for her beauty, as for the design mentioned in the next verse."

Although Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, sees Samson as erring in the marriage, does admit the exceptional nature of Samson's mission and the Lord's providence in the matter:

"Here, Samson, under the extraordinary guidance of Providence, seeks an occasion of quarrelling with the Philistines, by joining in affinity with them—a strange method, but the truth is Samson was himself a riddle, a paradox of a man, did that which was really great and good, by that which was seemingly weak and evil, because he was designed not to be a pattern to us (who must walk by rule, not by example), but a type of him who, though he knew no sin, was made sin for us, and appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh, that he might condemn and destroy sin in the flesh, Rom. 8:3. 1."

Matthew Henry's interpretation of the resulting consequence, and others who follow it, does not make sense:  namely, that his parents, who were personally admonished by an angel of Almighty God, spoiled Samson and let him have his wicked way.  What does make sense is this: that Samson's parents went ahead and carried out his request to arrange the marriage because they had come to discern that God was in this plan.  Otherwise, why did they agree to it?  Why did they not tell him, "We cannot do this for you, Samson, you are breaking your Nazarite vow...we will be sinning to arrange this marriage for you"?  

I believe Matthew Henry is most accurate in this statement:  "Here, Samson, under the extraordinary guidance of Providence..." 

The author unfairly accuses Samson of "brainless physical attraction” and says he was veering "dangerously off course".  No sir, the above three commentators agree that Samson was right on course for what he was specifically and miraculously shaped from the womb to do: to cause an up roar in the Philistine camp and to shock the Israelites back into faith in God and His plan.

Here is the bottom line:  Samson's mother was barren all her marriage.  In fulfillment of an angelic prophecy, she miraculously conceived.  God sovereignly saw to it that Samson, chosen from the strange and shunned tribe of Dan, was shaped in his mother’s womb to be exactly as God wanted him to be, having all the bizarre characteristics needed to fulfill His purpose in those bizarre times.

In the marriage story, the author accuses Samson of pride and stubbornness, character flaws of so-called "strong men".  He accuses Samson's parents of "spoiling" their son, as though they were raising him in twenty-first century Disney World, Florida.  He writes: 

"I can just see them doting on him and making sure he had the best of everything." 

But there is no evidence of Samson being spoiled.  On the contrary, the scripture says that "the Lord blessed Samson" and "Spirit of the Lord began to move on him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol".  This scripture implies a deep, spiritual interaction between Samson and God in which the Lord must have communicated plans to him.  After all, he did so with other Judges such as Gideon.

One would think that surely a Bible teacher and author could expound on the twelve weaknesses listed in his book without having to judge, mock, and ridicule a man of God who, currently in glory, is unable to tell his own side of the story?  Sad to say, it is no exaggeration that the author does this all through his book.  I am amazed that he shows so little grace or sympathy for this man, Samson, who lived so long ago, in such incredibly different times from our own: with our fine churches on every street corner, and Christian book stores filled with the Word of God, commentaries, and insights.  The author even comes close to discrediting the mention of Samson among the heroes of faith in Hebrews chapter eleven.  He writes:

"You might think that Samson's appearance in such a list indicates a greater degree of faith and obedience than I've given him credit for in this book.  Maybe he wasn't such a bad guy after all.  Maybe he was just misunderstood.  Maybe the writer of Judges didn't give him a fair shake..." 

No sir, it was you who didn't give Samson a fair shake when you read into and even added unto what the Word of God has to say about Samson.  Samson's position in the list of the heroes of faith is no greater nor any less than any other name mentioned.  His name is there as a tribute to God’s grace, yes, just as every other name is there for the same reason.  Samson exhibited faith (not perfect obedience) but the kind of faith that pleases God.  The author's statement: "than I've given him credit for," reveals a seemingly prideful tone as though Samson, or anyone for that matter, needs his credit, since as stated earlier, it is the Lord Himself who will judge all ministries.

I wrote that the author added to the Word in order to prove his thesis that the "strong man", Samson, was the baddest boy in the Bible.  Here is an example:  In the story of the wedding of Samson to the Philistine girl, he writes that Samson was puffed with pride about the riddle which he initiated during a "drunken bash".  He even implies that Samson himself was drunk.  Where does he get this from?  Certainly a 'misteh' involved drinking, but there is no scriptural evidence that Samson was even drinking let alone drunk.  In the story which follows,  I portray Samson as partaking in wine because of the occasion and the tough position of whom he was dealing with.

Jesus, a nazarite's nazarite, attended the same kind of feast in Cana.  In that case, the guests had "well drunk", (were drunk) ran out of wine, Jesus made them some more and confessed to the Pharisees, on a least one occasion, that He Himself came "freely eating and drinking".

The author imagines a mountain in Samson's supposed anger problem, as his premise forces him to shape Samson into a macho man of the nineties needing to get some anger management counseling and to get his ducks in a row etc.

In the riddle story, Samson showed no surprise when his wife’s people answered his riddle.  In fact, his response was immediate, matter of fact, and with no hint of anger whatever.  Why?  Because he knew that his wife was going to tell her people the answer.  It was all a part of God's plan to "have an occasion" against the Philistines. 

The narrative does not say that Samson boiled with rage when they told him the answer to the riddle.  The author says that Samson was furious, but the narrative does not.  Rather, it states that first, "the Spirit of the Lord came upon Samson".  If he were boiling with the uncontrollable rage that the author accuses him of, he surely would have killed the deceitful riddle masters right there on the spot.  Instead, Samson rather calmly got up (under the power of the Holy Spirit) and walked down to the Philistine city of Ashkelon where he killed thirty Philistines to get their garments to pay his debt.  In their commentary, Jamieson, Faucet and Brown write:

"19, 20. went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them--This town was about twenty-four miles west by southwest from Timnah; and his selection of this place, which was dictated by the Divine Spirit, was probably owing to its bitter hostility to Israel."

After killing these men under the power of the Spirit and paying the debt, it is implied that the Spirit of the Lord subsided in him and only then was Samson’s anger kindled because he had mistakenly given his heart to the girl.  He went home to his parents because it was not intended for him to stay with his Philistine bride.  God accomplished His purpose and gave Samson an annulment.  Samson's work, for the time being, was finished, and his anger ‘was kindled’ when he faced the truth of his wife's deceit.  It must have been a tough mission: to marry someone whom you knew would betray you, but with the intent that it be an occasion for the Lord to exact vengeance against the enemies of Israel.

Incidentally, this work which God had prepared and intended for Samson, the killing of the thirty Philistines, the author describes as a "murderous rampage" as though Samson were some road-rage criminal of twenty-first century Miami, Florida.  A murderous rampage?  The killing of Israel's brutal enemies?  Like it or not, these killings were the work of God, and it is unlikely that the victims were saints.  The Spirit of the Lord came upon Samson enabling him to carry out this task faithfully. 

The author goes on to give some irrelevant parallel in his own life when he "lost his temper" and pushed someone down as though his story compares to, or has anything at all to do with Samson's mission and the plan of God for His people Israel.

He does not consider the prophetic story of the Lion and the honey with any depth whatever.  To him, a lion just happens to come along and attack Samson, the Spirit of the Lord just happens to come upon Samson, who just happens to kill the lion, and he just happens to visit the corpse later to find that bees just happened to have made a nest and  produced honey, of which Samson just happened to have ‘selfishly and disobediently’ eaten and given to his parents. 

He does not stop to consider that God sent the Lion, God empowered Sampson to kill it, God sent the Bees, God enabled them to make Honey, and God caused Samson to turn aside to go and see it.  God also inspired Samson with the riddle which He intended to use as an occasion against the Philistines.  And I believe, that God used this incident as a word of prophecy to Samson that his service to God was going to cost him his life, but out of that cost, the way would be prepared to win the freedom of his people Israel.  Remember, Samson's mission was to "begin" to deliver the people from the Philistines.  In a greater, global picture of the salvation of all mankind, the Lion portrays Christ and the sweetness that his sacrifice would bring.

"Out of the eater came forth meat, and out of the strong came forth sweetness." 

The Lion is Samson, the Lord kills him or causes him to see his wretchedness and to repent of his sin (although the author judges Samson as to have not truly repented) and his death results in something sweet: the death of more Philistines than Samson had killed during his whole ministry, including the five Philistine lords of the country, and the setting of the stage for liberation. 

His book describes Samson's effort as feeble and a failure.  However, scripture twice says that Samson judged Israel for twenty years and the Philistines described him as the "destroyer of their country".  The bottom line was that before thousands of witnesses,  their god Dagon, was proven to be helpless and false, the temple came down, and the stage was set for the Honey, the liberation of Israel under the priestly leadership of Samuel and on to the reigns of Saul, David, and Solomon who finally defeated the Philistines. 

Samson completed his mission when he laid down his life.  The author unfairly calls it a forced suicide.  I disagree and so do Jamieson, Fosset and Brown:

"Samson called unto the Lord--His penitent and prayerful spirit seems clearly to indicate that this meditated act was not that of a vindictive suicide, and that he regarded himself as putting forth his strength in his capacity of a public magistrate. He must be considered, in fact, as dying for his country's cause. His death was not designed or sought, except as it might be the inevitable consequence of his great effort. His prayer must have been a silent ejaculation, and, from its being revealed to the historian, approved and accepted of God."

God calls it faith, and lists Samson among the heroes.  Even though the epilogue of Judges is not necessarily chronological, it is still significant that for the remainder of the book, there is not one further mention of trouble with the Philistines.  In fact, during Samson's twenty years as a judge, there was no trouble because the Philistines did not want to give Samson any more 'occasions'.

            In summary, I would say that although I agree with the correction of the twelve faults of so-called ‘strong men’, I think this correction and teaching could have been done effectively without disrespecting an Old Testament saint such as Samson who now in glory, is a member of the "cloud of witnesses."  

Pointing out Samson's mistakes is not unjust, but judging his mission as a failure is not only unjust, but also it is a dangerous presumption.  If the author could not resist having a human example, why not turn to someone closer to his own times and culture?  Why not have a look at Hollywood or the sports world?  Baseball hero, Micky Mantle, 1931-1995, would have done nicely.  He could have titled the book, 'The Micky Syndrome', giving Micky the title of, 'the baddest boy in baseball'.  With Micky on the cover, the book might have sold more copies than Samson, and the twelve strong-man character faults would have had a more recent, relevant and accurate application.  From what I have read on the subject, Micky himself, and his family and friends would  have been in full agreement with using him as an example.

Back to Top

THE LAND BELONGS TO ISRAEL

By Maurie Nord

The land belongs to Israel, period.  It is theirs by the testimony and declaration of the Word of God, and it is theirs de facto by the testimony of history.  There is nothing to dispute, nothing is nebulous or grey, it is their land.  The Arabs know it and hate them for it.  The British know it and should be bloody ashamed they did not declare it when God handed them the power to do so, but they opted for the easy out to win Arab favour and Arab oil.  The United States of America knew it 1948, and only they had the Cowboy sand to say so.  They have had the world’s hypocritical wrath to deal with ever since.

And the world knows the land belongs to Israel, that is the irony and the hypocrisy.  Let’s leave the religious aspect out of this argument, for the time being, and say that even though anyone who can read history can see what has happened there, still there are those who believe the nation of Israel began in 1948!  Poof!  Suddenly Jews appeared on the land and unjustly took it away from Arabs.  For those ignorant few, the following is a brief history written by the Israel Science and Technology Directory.  Whoever would deny these facts can also deny that Columbus sailed the ocean blue.

“The people of Israel (also called the "Jewish People") trace their origin to Abraham, who established the belief that there is only one God, the creator of the universe (see Old Testament). Abraham, his son Yitshak (Isaac), and grandson Jacob (Israel), are referred to as the patriarchs of the Israelites. All three patriarchs lived in the Land of Canaan, that later came to be known as the Land of Israel. They and their wives are buried in the Ma'arat HaMachpela, the Tomb of the Patriarchs, in Hebron.

The name Israel derives from the name given to Jacob (see Old Testament). His 12 sons were the kernels of 12 tribes that later developed into the Jewish nation. The name Jew derives from Yehuda (Judah) one of the 12 sons of Jacob. So, the names Israel, Israeli or Jewish refer to people of the same origin.

The descendants of Abraham crystallized into a nation at about 1300 BCE after their Exodus from Egypt under the leadership of Moses (Moshe in Hebrew). Soon after the Exodus, Moses transmitted to the people of this new emerging nation, the Torah, and the Ten Commandments. After 40 years in the Sinai desert, Moses led them to the Land of Israel, that is cited in The Bible as the land promised by G-d to the descendants of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

The people of modern day Israel share the same language and culture shaped by the Jewish heritage and religion passed through generations starting with the founding father Abraham (ca. 1800 BCE). Thus, Jews have had continuous presence in the land of Israel for the past 3,300 years.

The rule of Israelites in the land of Israel starts with the conquests of Joshua (ca. 1250 BCE). The period from 1000-587 BCE is known as the "Period of the Kings". The most noteworthy kings were King David (1010-970 BCE), who made Jerusalem the Capital of Israel, and his son Solomon (Shlomo, 970-931 BCE), who built the first Temple in Jerusalem as prescribed in the Tanach (Old Testament).

In 587 BCE, Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar's army captured Jerusalem, destroyed the Temple, and exiled the Jews to Babylon (modern day Iraq).

The year 587 BCE marks a turning point in the history of the region. From this year onwards, the region was ruled or controlled by a succession of superpower empires of the time in the following order: Babylonian, Persian, Greek Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Empires, Islamic and Christian crusaders, Ottoman Empire, and the British Empire.

After the exile by the Romans, the Jewish people migrated (were hounded and scattered) to Europe and North Africa. In the Diaspora (scattered outside of the Land of Israel), they established rich cultural and economic lives, and contributed greatly to the societies where they lived. Yet, they continued their national attachments and prayed to return to Israel through centuries. In the first half of the 20th century there were major waves of immigration of Jews back to Israel from Arab countries and from Europe. During the British rule in Palestine, the Jewish people were subject to great violence and massacres directed by Arab civilians or forces of the neighboring Arab states. During World War II, the Nazi regime in Germany decimated about 6 million Jews creating the great tragedy of The Holocaust.

In 1948, Jewish Community in Israel under the leadership of David Ben-Gurion reestablished sovereignty over their ancient homeland. Declaration of independence of the modern State of Israel was announced on the day that the last British forces left Israel (May 14, 1948).”

It is easy to see what happened to the nation of Israel, is it not?  Invasion after invasion and occupation after occupation.  Yet after all this oppression and worldwide dispersion the world screams, “Foul!” The Jews are somehow occupying what is not their own.

Just because the Roman Empire marched south and decimated their country does not mean that they should lose it.  The same Empire marched northward and conquered Germany, France, and England.  Did Germany lose their land?  Would any sane person say to a Frenchman, “France is not your land”?  What lunatic would declare the British their claim to their beloved Island?  Yet in their hypocrisy and lust for Arab oil, the world points at Israel and says, “Not your land, get off!”

The Jews were dispersed worldwide by the Romans, but there has always been a remnant living in the land to watch empires use it as a meeting ground to fight.  The invading forces of Mohammed, 636-1099 had no rightful claim to it then, neither do they have one today.  Before the turn of the century, and before the current conflict, the Jews were called by a different name:  Palestinians.  There were also some migrant Arab people on this land of Israel which the Romans sarcastically renamed Palestine after Israel’s arch enemies, the Philistines.

Let’s look at the Arab / Israeli conflict, and again, I quote my reliable, well-written source, The Israel Science and Technology Directory.

THE ARAB / ISRAELI WARS

“A day after the declaration of independence of the State of Israel, armies of five Arab countries, Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq, invaded Israel. This marked the beginning of the War of Independence. Arab states have jointly waged four full scale wars against Israel:

• 1948 War of Independence

• 1956 Sinai War

• 1967 Six Day War

• 1973 Yom Kippur War

Despite the numerical superiority of the Arab armies, Israel defended itself each time and won. After each war Israeli army withdrew from most of the areas it captured (see maps). This is unprecedented in World history and shows Israel's willingness to reach peace even at the risk of fighting for its very existence each time anew.”

The survival of the nation of Israel is a miracle, and this is where I come to the ‘’religious’’ argument.  The Bible declares emphatically that the land belongs to Israel.  In fact, God declares the land to be His own, and He chose to GIVE it to the descendants of Abraham.  There are so many scriptures that attest to this fact that it would be ridiculous to list them all.  I do not need quotes to prove the world is round. Let the reader pick up a Bible and read it for himself!

Where does this intolerable hatred come from then?  Why do the Arabs, already masters of oil-drenched trillions of square miles of land want this little strip of Israel’s too?  Because God CHOSE the nation of Israel, therefore God’s enemies HATE the nation of Israel.

The Bible has prophesied all this.  Abraham became the father of both the Jewish and Arab people through his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.  Ishmael, the son of a slave woman is the father of the Arabs, Isaac, the son of Abraham’s legitimate wife, Sarah, is the father of the Jews, and it was upon Isaac, not Ishmael, that God through Abraham placed His blessing.  Ishmael and his mother hated Isaac for this and the hatred continues to this day. 

Mohammed, angered by Jewish rejection, plagiarized their ancient scriptures in the Koran (written 610-632) and reversed all truth concerning the matters of the blessing of Isaac and placed the blessing upon Ishmael.  If anyone fails to see that the Koran is plagiarism, logic clearly dictates, the newer work (600 AD) is always a plagiarism of the older (The Torah, 1400 B.C)

God chose Israel.  Satan hates God.  Satan hates Israel.  The world and the Arabs are deceived by Satan.  The world and the Arabs hate Israel.  It is as simple as that.

God is still FOR Israel, even though He turned His back on them for awhile when as a nation they rejected His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ as their Messiah.  They were dispersed throughout the world, but as the Bible prophesied, God has called them back to their land for the final showdown between good and evil.

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.  And he shall set up and ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH.  (Upper case letters, mine) They shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; (Gaza) they shall spoil them of the east together:  they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab (The West Bank) and the children of Ammon shall obey them.”  Isaiah 11:11

Israel is back in THEIR land.  God is FOR them.  And they will never again be defeated, uprooted, and scattered for the Word of God has declared it.

Where will it all end?  In Armageddon, just as prophesied by the Word of the Lord through the prophet Joel:

“For behold, in those days and in that time, (our time) when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem, (the regathering to modern Israel) I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and PARTED my land.  (Upper case, mine)  Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles, Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up:  Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears; let the weak say, I am strong.  Assemble yourselves, and come, all ye heathen, and gather yourselves together round about: thither cause your mighty ones to come down, O Lord.  Let the heathen be wakened, and come up to the valley of Jehoshaphat: for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about.  Put ye in the sickle for the harvest is ripe: come get you down; for the press is full, the vats overflow; for their wickedness is great.  Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision for the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision.  The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.  The Lord also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake; but the Lord will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.  So shall ye know that I am the Lord your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.”  Joel 3:1-17

At the height of this final and terrible trial for the people of Israel, the eyes of their understanding shall be opened and they will, as a nation, at last recognize that Jesus was and IS their Messiah.

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.  And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications:  and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced (Jesus on the cross) and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.”  Zechariah 12:9,10.

Israel will repent, believe, and cry out to their Messiah for help.  And help they shall receive:

“And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.  His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew but he himself.  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood; and his name is called The Word of God.  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.  And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.”

And so, at last it will be settled, the land belongs to Israel, let every mouth be silent!

Now, in these days of the grace of God, His offer is extended to all people, Jews, Arabs, and those of all races His offer of forgiveness and salvation:

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”  John 3:16

Peace be upon you, O Jerusalem.

Even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus.