Judges 18:14Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Correspondence that lacks the delightful essence of nourishment—even if it could be likened to the flavoring of Apicius or the vapors from the teachings of contemporary scholars—is far from appealing. Nevertheless, since our discussion partner is eager to depart, I shall address the significant issue at hand as swiftly as I can: it is not merely the choice of words that is vital for engaging with the Holy Scriptures, but the depth of thought. If we desire eloquence, we should turn to the classic works of Demosthenes or Cicero; if we seek divine truths, we must consult our sacred texts, which do not always align perfectly with the Hebrew translations.

In the opening of your letter, you inquired about the passage from the First Book of Samuel: "And Samuel ministered before the Lord, being clothed with a linen ephod, and his mother made him a little robe and brought it to him year by year, when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly sacrifice" (1 Sam. 2:18-19). You question what is meant by "linen ephod" with which the future prophet was attired—whether it refers to a girdle, a censer, or some type of garment. If it is indeed a garment, how would Samuel wear it? And why is "linen" appended to it? Following that, you referenced another passage where a man of God approaches Elijah, claiming, "Thus says the Lord: ‘Did I not clearly reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt in Pharaoh's house? I chose him out of all the tribes of Israel to be My priest, to offer upon My altar, to burn incense, and to wear an ephod before Me’" (1 Sam. 2:27-28). You also noted the incident concerning Doeg the Edomite, who, under the king’s orders, executed the priests: "So Doeg the Edomite turned and struck the priests and killed on that day eighty-five men who wore a linen ephod" (1 Sam. 22:18). Nobe, the city of the priests, was devastated by the sword, with every male and female, young and old, slaughtered without distinction. One son of Ahimelech, named Abiathar, escaped and fled to David (1 Sam. 22:19-20). I must guide you through this series of inquiries; where we read "those who wear the linen ephod," the Hebrew denotes "those who wear the linen ephod." More on this will be revealed later.

And it came to pass that when Abiathar, son of Ahimelech, fled to David, he came down with David to Keilah, having the ephod in his hand. When it was reported to Saul that David had come to Keilah (1 Sam. 23:6-7), fearing the king's arrival and the city's siege, David instructed Abiathar to bring the ephod of the Lord (1 Sam. 23:9). After citing these extracts from the books of Kings, you transitioned to the Book of Judges, which narrates how Micah from the hill country of Ephraim returned one thousand one hundred pieces of silver he had taken from his mother, which she had devoted to the Lord, to make an idol and a trowel. You observe that these crafted items are called "ephod and teraphim" and conclude that if such were a girdle or garment, they could not have been molded or cast. I discern a prevalent misunderstanding among Latins who believe the ephod and teraphim described later on were crafted from the silver Micah presented to his mother; the Scripture, however, states: "Micah's mother took the silver and gave it to the silversmith, and he made a carved image and a metal image" (Judges 17:4-5).

If you posit that the same thing is crafted and then identified as "ephod and teraphim," know that this is not the case. For Micah created ephods and teraphim based on the idol of his mother, which was also manifest in the text that notes, "And the five men said to their brethren, 'Do you know that there is in this house an ephod and teraphim?'" (Judges 18:14). Further, it continues, stating that the five men came in, took the carved image, and "the ephod and teraphim" (Judges 18:16-18). Thus, the belief that associates the ephod with the silver, creating an unsolvable question, ought to be discarded. Notice too that ephods are exclusively associated with priestly duties. For instance, Samuel, who donned one, was a Levite, and so worn by the priests of Nob as a mark of their office.

And not to ignore what is absent in Latin manuscripts, when David, pursued by Saul, approached Ahimelech requesting a weapon, he said, "Do you have here a spear or a sword? For I brought neither my sword nor my weapons with me, and the priest answered, 'The sword of Goliath the Philistine, whom you killed in the Valley of Elah, is here, wrapped in a cloth behind the ephod'" (1 Sam. 21:8-9); certainly, the ephod was also stored there. When we refer to the ephod as we have, it implies the one mentioned concerning the shaped and combined items, even though the latter pertains to an idol. Yet, since the idol was misperceived as a deity, the symbols ephod and teraphim were employed to serve it, as well as to honor God. We will elucidate what teraphim signifies later, should we have the space.

Now let us consider the word "ephod." In Exodus, where Moses is commanded to fashion priestly garments, it says, "These are the garments they shall make: a breastplate, an ephod, a robe, a finely woven tunic, a turban, and a sash" (Ex. 28:4). The Greek version translates "the upper garment" as "epōmida," suggesting a robe worn on top. It continues with instructions for acquiring gold, blue, and purple yarns to produce the upper garment—a task executed by skilled craftsmen (Ex. 28:5-6). The entirety of Exodus abounds with descriptions of such garments. Moreover, the close of that book mentions, "And all the wise-hearted among them who worked made garments for Aaron the priest, as the Lord commanded Moses" (Ex. 36:8).

Thus, while in Exodus, there is a command to craft the garments which are thereafter created, Aaron has not yet donned them; Leviticus later elucidates how Aaron was clothed in the priestly attire. "And Moses brought Aaron and his sons and washed them with water, and he put the tunic on him, girded him with a sash, and clothed him with the robe, and put the ephod on him" (Lev. 8:6-7). Note that Aaron was also girded with this upper garment, just as Samuel bore what might have signified the linen ephod. In referring to the seventy translators—which also resonates in our texts—they translate "ephud" as "epōmis," implying "the upper garment." It's perplexing why this term is translated one way in one instance and left in Hebrew in another, though this inconsistency appears in many vocabulary interpretations as translators have grappled with Hebrew customs.

Aquila, another translator, refers to what others have rendered as "hypodytum" and "epōmida" as "eudama" and "epidama," which translates to garments and outer clothing. "Eudama" signifies underclothing in Hebrew, whereas "epidama," or "epōmis," refers to the priestly top robe. You might inquire why "bad" is included with "ephod" in certain contexts. Upon hearing "bad," I am reminded of the Jewish interpretation—those seventy translators mistakenly writing "bar" instead of "bad." In Hebrew, "bad" designates linen; thus, in passages such as, "You shall make for them linen trousers to cover their nakedness" (Ex. 28:42), "bad" is rightly understood as linen. The being that appeared to Daniel was attired similarly, as observed in, "And I lifted up my eyes and saw a certain man clothed in baddim" (Dan. 10:5)—which simply alludes to a linen robe.

Beyond this, it is noted that both Samuel and the eighty-five priests donned linen garments; only the high priest was permitted the ornate robe, fashioned of gold, linen, and vibrant colors. The others wore simpler ephods, crafted from plain, dazzling white linen. Although I initially promised a concise clarification, I will also touch on the term "teraphim." Aquila interprets "teraphim" as "morphōmata," which can be translated as "images." When Saul dispatched messengers to capture David, and following their report that David was ill, he instructed to carry him on a bier, stating, "When the messengers came in, behold, there was an image upon the bed" (1 Sam. 19:15). Here, "theraphim," signifying "morphōmata," might not refer to something made from goat's organs, as our texts suggest, but rather to an idol depiction resembling a man's head resting on a pillow crafted from goatskin.

To clarify both terms, I point to Hosea, where God condemns a sinful nation, declaring, "The days shall come when there will be no king nor prince, nor sacrifice nor sacred pillar, nor priests, nor teraphim" (Hos. 3:4)—here representing "ephod nor teraphim" in the Hebrew texts as rendered by Theodotion and Symmachus. Evidently, the seventy translators, valuing substance over the literal words, equate "ephud" with priestly roles, implying that "teraphim," or figures, refer to various articles bearing the name. In Exodus and elsewhere, where embroidery on cloth is portrayed, the term refers to "cherubim," denoting something ornate and multicolored; yet, in this sense, "cherubim" lacks its letter, expressing a living entity as opposed to a mere object. Hence, the conclusion is that Micah not only crafted the priestly garment but also created the teraphim as priestly adornments.

While I would love to expound on every priestly accessory and deepen your understanding of divine and mysterious symbolism in the vestments, I recognize I have already extended beyond my allotted discourse. Many scholars, such as Josephus and Philo, have explored these matters extensively, and should you wish to learn more from me personally, we can delve into any uncertainties without witnesses or judges present. I am glad if our shared mother is in good health; may the Lord bless her well-being. Engrossed in Jewish literature, I may have neglected Latin so thoroughly that I now convey my thoughts in a tone scarcely recognizable as Latin. Kindly excuse this abruptness in expression. The Apostle stated, “Even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not in knowledge” (2 Cor. 11:6), alluding to his humility when he denied possessing one aspect while being full of both. Yet we find ourselves amidst an absence of both—having forsaken the innocent joy of youth without attaining the desired wisdom—like the dog in Aesop’s fable, who, in pursuing a greater prize, lost what he initially possessed.