Did Samson look physically strong?
- Thread starter Jason0047
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Whether he looked physically strong or not,the Bible says that the Spirit came upon him and he slew a 1000 Philistines,so if the Spirit comes upon you,you will be like Bruce Lee combined with a strong man competition man gone wild.
God likes to use people that do not appear to be able to pull off a feat,and then when they do God gets the praise,like David slaying Goliath.
God likes to use people that do not appear to be able to pull off a feat,and then when they do God gets the praise,like David slaying Goliath.
So are people claiming that Samson could have been muscular still because the text does not say? Would the story make any sense if he was muscular? If so, please explain why they needed to figure out the mystery to the source of his strength if he was muscular.
Raise your hand if you believe Samson could have been muscular. When I say the word "could" that means it is possible but it may not necessarily be so.
Raise your hand if you believe Samson could have been muscular. When I say the word "could" that means it is possible but it may not necessarily be so.
I think the story holds equal power both ways, with Sampson being "average" in size as the more likely.
But, I do hold that he could have been very muscular, with his strength still far outmatching his size, and deeds overshadowing his mortality.
It is just as miraculous either way, as no mortal could possess that amount of strength.
These feats have only been matched in modern times... and those by 300ft wrecking balls, TNT, and assault rifles.
Basically, it takes Faith to believe that the story of Sampson is true, regardless of how muscular we imagine him being.
Atheists still must say "it is either a lie, or a gross exaggeration", because the story is too fantastic for the unbeliever to accept.
But, I do hold that he could have been very muscular, with his strength still far outmatching his size, and deeds overshadowing his mortality.
It is just as miraculous either way, as no mortal could possess that amount of strength.
These feats have only been matched in modern times... and those by 300ft wrecking balls, TNT, and assault rifles.
Basically, it takes Faith to believe that the story of Sampson is true, regardless of how muscular we imagine him being.
Atheists still must say "it is either a lie, or a gross exaggeration", because the story is too fantastic for the unbeliever to accept.
Last edited:
i believe the scripture is inconclusive as to Samson's physique.
PeacefulBeliever pointed out way back on page 1 what evidence we could take to imply that he wasn't an abnormally large man, but that's not proof positive in and of itself, because his strength when the spirit came over him was such that it was not explained by any amount of human muscle, whether he had a lot of this or not.
compare the man possessed by many demons in Mark 5:
the implication here is that this strength to break chains wasn't because he was benchpressing tombstones night and day -- it was because of the spirit in him empowering him. even the naturally strongest humans can't break leg irons and snap chains and overpower everyone in town together trying to subdue him.
i think, same with Samson. he may have been a large man - he wasn't described as a giant or nephilim though - and he may have been an average man, or even relatively small. the point of his narrative is that he had strength given by God that was far greater than any natural ability that we could attribute to his physique.
it makes a nice object lesson for a sermon to take him as a small or average man, but it's not necessarily true, and it's not necessary to be true for God to have shown His power through him, or for the Philistines to be bewildered by this strength. i really think to have seen him "in action" would have been like a bad kung-fu movie, something unbelievable and supernatural, no matter how buff the man actually was.
it's an interesting question that i don't think we can know the answer to for sure, and an interesting question whose answer also doesn't really make any difference to the substance of who Samson was.
PeacefulBeliever pointed out way back on page 1 what evidence we could take to imply that he wasn't an abnormally large man, but that's not proof positive in and of itself, because his strength when the spirit came over him was such that it was not explained by any amount of human muscle, whether he had a lot of this or not.
compare the man possessed by many demons in Mark 5:
When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him.
the implication here is that this strength to break chains wasn't because he was benchpressing tombstones night and day -- it was because of the spirit in him empowering him. even the naturally strongest humans can't break leg irons and snap chains and overpower everyone in town together trying to subdue him.
i think, same with Samson. he may have been a large man - he wasn't described as a giant or nephilim though - and he may have been an average man, or even relatively small. the point of his narrative is that he had strength given by God that was far greater than any natural ability that we could attribute to his physique.
it makes a nice object lesson for a sermon to take him as a small or average man, but it's not necessarily true, and it's not necessary to be true for God to have shown His power through him, or for the Philistines to be bewildered by this strength. i really think to have seen him "in action" would have been like a bad kung-fu movie, something unbelievable and supernatural, no matter how buff the man actually was.
it's an interesting question that i don't think we can know the answer to for sure, and an interesting question whose answer also doesn't really make any difference to the substance of who Samson was.
Last edited:
You people huh? Sounds a little racial doesnt it...no actually we are saying that the bible does not say one way or another and to imply that something "makes sense" just because you think it makes sense means absolutely nothing at the end of the day as you have eloquently proven that you like to add to the text, disavow words in context, deny context and the very definitions of the inspired words that have been given so as to push your dogma and theology.....why not let the word speak for itself intstead of adding your flavor and twist?