שופטים, פרק י״א, פסוק כ״ה

A historical and legal dispute stands at the center of Jephthah's defense against the Ammonite king, as he uses a precedent from the past to dismantle the enemy's territorial claims. Jephthah compares the Ammonite king to Balak, the king of Moab, challenging his arrogance. He asks whether the Ammonite king is truly stronger, greater, or more famous for his bravery than Balak, who had conquered many nations. To expose the flaw in the Ammonite claim, Jephthah raises two central questions regarding Balak's past behavior: did Balak ever initiate a legal quarrel over this specific district, and did he ever launch a physical military campaign against the Israelites to take the territory back ([מצודת דוד], [מצודת ציון], [רד"ק], [שטיינזלץ])? While other historical accounts mention that Balak fought against Israel, commentators clarify that this was strictly a spiritual conflict in which he sent Balaam to curse them, rather than a conventional military battle over land ([רד"ק]).

Through this argument, Jephthah preemptively dismantles the Ammonite claim that the land was simply stolen by Sihon the Amorite and must now be returned to its original owners. The primary approach among commentators is that if this claim were valid, Balak would have demanded the territory immediately. The fact that both Moab and Ammon remained silent for three hundred years while the Israelites inhabited the region proves that they had completely lost their right to the land. Jephthah further emphasizes that the Ammonites' recent control over Israel does not prove the justice of their territorial claims. Instead, this recent subjugation was merely a temporary punishment from God for the sins of the Israelites. Now that the people have repented, God Himself will act as the ultimate judge ([אלשיך], [רלב"ג]).

Alongside the physical struggle over territory, some commentators identify hidden motives driving the conflict. One approach suggests that the Ammonite king went to war because he saw an astrological sign indicating that an Ammonite descendant was destined to rule over Israel. He mistakenly assumed this vision referred to his own military conquest, when in reality, the prophecy pointed to the future reign of Rehoboam, whose mother was Naamah the Ammonite. Jephthah counters this hidden motive by noting that Israelite royalty also emerged from Moab through King David, a descendant of Ruth the Moabite, yet Balak never used this as a reason to fight Israel. Another perspective explains that the Ammonites believed the Israelites had forfeited their right to the land due to their severe transgression at Baal Peor. In response, Jephthah reminds the Ammonite king that Balak himself was present during that event, yet even he did not use the sin as an excuse to declare war ([אהבת יהונתן]).