In 15.4-5 Samson has been acting alone. Now the Philistines come on the scene, so some versions begin a new paragraph here (Contemporary English Version, New International Version). It seems to be common knowledge that one of their group actually gave a wedded daughter to another man.
Then the Philistines said: Then renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which some versions leave untranslated (Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible). Since it introduces a result here, it may also be translated “So” or “And.” Throughout this incident there is a distinction made between the family of Samson’s wife in Timnah, who are themselves Philistines, and the rest of the Philistines who interact with Samson. Contemporary English Version shows the distinction by rendering the Philistines as “Some of the Philistines.” We may also say “the rest of the Philistines” or “the Philistine authorities/leaders.” In this context the general verb said may be rendered “asked” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “demanded” (Revised English Bible).
Who has done this?: This question expresses the strong emotion of the Philistines because of the extensive devastation. If necessary, this direct quote may be expressed indirectly by saying “So the Philistine leaders asked who had done this.” Good News Translation is similar with “When the Philistines asked who had done this.” However, using indirect speech robs the narrative of its strong impact.
And they said: The referent for the pronoun they is not immediately clear. It must refer to other Philistines, not those who asked the question. So this pronoun may be rendered “some others.” Another possibility is to use a passive expression, for example, “they were told” (New International Version, New American Bible). Good News Translation suggests “they learned.” In both these renderings the pronoun “they” refers to the same Philistines as in the first sentence.
Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite: This is the answer to the question, Who has done this? Many languages will be able to follow the Hebrew here, which has no verb, but some may need to say “It was Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite [who did this].” This clause seems to remove any doubt about the marriage having taken place or not, since Samson is referred to as the son-in-law of the woman’s father. The Timnite means Samson’s father-in-law was from the town of Timnah. Contemporary English Version calls him “that man in Timnah.”
Because he has taken his wife and given her to his companion: Because renders well the Hebrew particle ki, which introduces the reason Samson destroyed the crops of the Philistines. The pronoun he refers to the father-in-law of Samson, and the two occurrences of the pronoun his refer to Samson. As in verse 1.12, the verb given carries the sense of “give in marriage.” For his companion, see verse 14.20. If the receptor language has a special verb tense for flashbacks, it may be used here, for example, “for that man from Timnah had taken Samson’s wife and had given her to Samson’s [best] friend.” Another possible model is “That man took Samson’s wife and married her to Samson’s friend. That is why Samson did this.” It seems clear here that the community recognizes this was not the right thing to do.
And the Philistines came up, and burned her and her father with fire: This sentence shows that it did not help Samson’s wife to reveal the solution to the riddle, since the threat against her and her family is now carried out (verse 14.15). It also shows that the solidarity among the Philistine people was not too strong. Instead of siding with the father-in-law against Samson, these people turn against him even though he was a fellow Philistine. They punish Samson’s father-in-law for bringing this trouble upon their people. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces their reaction, so it might translated “So” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “then” (New Jerusalem Bible). New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh uses a stronger conjunction, “Thereupon.” The Philistines may be rendered “those Philistines,” since this phrase appears to refer to yet another group. Came up renders the key Hebrew verb ʿalah meaning “go up,” which is often used in military contexts (see verse 1.1). Here it introduces the violent act of burning. In some languages it may be rendered simply “went” (Good News Translation, New Living Translation). Contemporary English Version says “went to Timnah,” which is probable, but not in the text.
For burned her and her father with fire, see verse 14.15. Burned … with fire is redundant in many languages, but since the word fire is emphasized here and throughout the book of Judges, it should be kept it if possible. The pronoun her refers to Samson’s wife, which Contemporary English Version makes explicit. Instead of her father, the Septuagint and some other ancient versions have “her father’s house.” They add the word “house” to harmonize the text with verse 14.15. This is the reading followed by Good News Translation. However, despite this smoother text, there seems no reason to make this change here. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating to the Hebrew text, so it should be maintained. We might say “burned Samson’s wife and her father to death.”
Translation models for this verse are:
• Then the Philistine leaders asked, “Who did this?” and they were told, “It was Samson, the son-in-law of that man from Timnah. He gave his daughter in marriage to Samson’s friend. That’s why Samson did this.” So the Philistines went to Timnah and burned to death the woman and her father.
• Then the Philistines said, “Who did this?” And they learned it was Samson, the son-in-law of the man from Timnah—the man who had taken Samson’s wife and given her to Samson’s friend. So they went to Timnah, and they set fire to the father and his daughter, burning them both to death.
Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .