{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021844660194174758, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01699029126213592, 'mean_word_length': 5.25, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Narrative Obscurity of Samson’s [ILLEGIBLE] in Judges 14.14 and 18

Scholars have often found Judg. 14.18 to be an unsatisfactory solution to Samson’s riddle in 14.14. This situation has prompted a number of alternative scholarly proposals, which attempt to settle the riddle’s unresolved aspects and restore a solution. Yet the complex relationship between the riddle and the narrative that surrounds it has received little attention. The information provided by the surrounding narrative obscures the riddle’s meaning and resists any attempt to locate an unambiguous solution. While it should help to clarify the riddle’s solution, the narrative actually creates an obscuring atmosphere that calls the reader to respond to the riddle by following a variety of interpretive trajectories running throughout the Samson story.