Judges 17:5Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Letters that lack the essence of delightful confections and are devoid of the aromas associated with the teachings of this age are not enjoyable. Nevertheless, since our conversation’s mediator is eager to depart, I will address the pressing matter at hand promptly: in discussing the sacred Scriptures, one requires more than mere eloquence; true contemplation is essential. If our goal is rhetoric, we should study Demosthenes or Cicero; if we seek divine mysteries, we must delve into our holy text, which in its Latin translation does not fully align with the Hebrew original.

In your letter's opening, you inquired about the meaning of the passage in the first book of Samuel: “And Samuel was ministering before the Lord, clothed with a linen ephod. And his mother made him a little coat and brought it to him from year to year when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice” (1 Sam. 2:18-19). You raised questions about the term “ephod,” asking whether it refers to a belt, a censer, or a specific garment. If it is indeed a garment, how was Samuel adorned with it? Furthermore, you inquired why “bad” is paired with “ephod.” Following your quote, you mentioned: “And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house? And did I choose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be my priest, to offer upon mine altar, to burn incense, and to wear an ephod before me?” (1 Sam. 2:27-28). You systematically traced through the text, even referring to the account of Doeg the Edomite, as described in Scripture, who executed the priests at the king’s command: “And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he slew the priests of the Lord that day, and there fell on that day four score and five persons that did wear a linen ephod” (1 Sam. 22:18).

I feel compelled to remind you that we read about those who wear the ephod, where the Hebrew refers specifically to “those who wear the linen ephod.” This is something you will come to understand in due course. It is written that when Abiathar, son of Ahimelech, fled to David, he brought with him the ephod: “And it was told Saul that David was come to Keilah” (1 Sam. 23:6-7). As David faced the impending threat of the king and the siege of the city, he instructed Abiathar to bring the ephod of the Lord (1 Sam. 23:9).

Citing these passages from the book of Kings, you then transitioned to the book of Judges, where it recounts how Micah, a man from Mount Ephraim, gave his mother a significant sum of silver she had vowed to the Lord. She used this silver to craft an idol and make an ephod. You noted that this idol, having been shaped and cast, is referred to as an ephod and teraphim, and you argue that if it were a belt or garment, it could not have been shaped or fused in such a manner.

I see a common misunderstanding among the Latin interpreters, who believe erroneously that the ephod and teraphim were manufactured from the silver Micah presented to his mother. Yet, Scripture states explicitly: “And his mother took the silver and gave it to the silversmith, and he made a graven image and a molten image” (Judges 17:4-5). If you presume that the same object is referred to as both sculpted and fused, and later called ephod and teraphim, know that they are distinct. Micah created the ephod and teraphim after the idol his mother fashioned, as also indicated in the following passage: “And the five men went up and came to Laish, and saw the people that were therein, how they dwelt careless, after the manner of the Zidonians, quiet and secure; and there was no magistrate in the land, that might put them to shame in any thing” (Judges 18:14ff.), and further references mention how five men took the carved image, the ephod, and the teraphim.

Thus, the notion held by some that the ephod consists of silver renders the question insoluble and it must be rejected. It is also pertinent to note that the ephod is only associated with priestly duties. Samuel, who wore it, as noted, was a Levite, and it was worn by the priests at Nob, marking their honor. Moreover, when David sought a sword from Ahimelech as he fled from Saul, he asked: “And is there not here under thine hand a spear or sword? for I have neither brought my sword nor my weapons with me, because the king’s business required haste” (1 Sam. 21:8-9). The priest replied that he had the sword of Goliath, kept behind the ephod.

The term ephod as delineated here also appears linked to the sculpted and fused forms, though the latter involved idolatry. As this idol was worshiped in error, it was erroneously supported with the symbols of the ephod and teraphim meant to honor God. I will elaborate on the meaning of teraphim later if time permits. Now, regarding “ephod,” in Exodus, when Moses is instructed to make the priestly garments, Scripture includes: “And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a woven tunic” (Ex. 28:4). For the upper garment, seventy translators have rendered it in Greek as “epomida,” suggesting that it is a garment worn over the body.

Additionally, it states: “And they shall take gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen, the work of the skillful workman” (Ex. 28:5-6). This theme enriches throughout the book of Exodus, leading to the conclusion that the skilled craftsmen would create the ceremonial garments assigned to Aaron as instructed by the Lord.

In Leviticus, the process of Aaron being clothed in these priestly garments is detailed: “And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water. And he put upon him the coat and girded him with the girdle” (Lev. 8:6-7). Here, it is evident that Aaron too wore these significant garments, similar to Samuel’s ephod. Nonetheless, I wish to clarify that while some interpreters read “ephod” as “upper garment,” the Hebrew translated term is “Ephud.” The differences in translation practices may lead one to find words rendered differently in various contexts.

As for your inquiry regarding why “bad” appears in some instances, it is indicative of a historical linguistic divergence; with “bad” translating more accurately to linen. We note that both Samuel and the eighty-five priests donned linen robes, indicative of their priestly service, while only a high priest was permitted to wear the elaborate garments, which incorporated both gold and linen. These points reveal that the ephod, while significant, was not necessarily adorned with the same opulence as the high priest’s garment.

Before concluding, I wish to address the term “teraphim.” According to Aquila, it's rendered as “morphemata,” which might translate as “images.” For instance, when Saul dispatched messengers to capture David, and they reported he was ill, he commanded them to bring him on a bier, stating: “Bring him up to me in the bed, that I may slay him” (1 Sam. 19:15). Here, instead of “bier,” the Hebrew suggests “teraphim," representing figurative images in that context.

To summarize, regarding Hosea's announcement of divine judgment on adulterous Israel: “They shall be without a king and without a prince, and without a sacrifice and without an altar, and without an ephod or teraphim” (Hos. 3:4). This passage makes clear the spiritual implications of both ephod and teraphim, which encompass their function in priesthood and ritual. Thus it becomes evident that Micah created not only the priestly garments but also the teraphim as well. Although I would like to elaborate on the significance of these priestly items and their spiritual meanings, it seems I have exceeded reasonable length.

As you well know, various learned individuals, such as Josephus, Philo, and others, have extensively examined these subjects. Should you wish to continue this discussion personally, I am more than willing to engage, as I recognize our understanding might still be incomplete without consultation. I rejoice in the well-being of our common mother and pray that the Lord grant her good health. Amid my studies of Jewish texts, I find myself somewhat distanced from Latin, to the point that even my pronunciation may reflect this variance. Thus, I ask for your patience regarding the dryness of my expression. The apostle noted, “though I am untrained in speech, yet I am not in knowledge” (2 Cor. 11:6). In humility, he acknowledged a limitation he did not truly possess. In our case, we lack both fluency and complete understanding, reminiscent of the dog from Aesop's fable that lost its smaller prize while pursuing a greater.