In Judges 11 did Jephthah really kill his daughter and give her as a burnt offering to the LORD? Or just bad translation? Or my poor understanding?
29Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah. He crossed Gilead and Manasseh, passed through Mizpah of Gilead, and from there he advanced against the Ammonites. 30And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: "If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering." 32Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. 33He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon. 34When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, "Oh! My daughter! You have made me miserable and wretched, because I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break." 36"My father," she replied, "you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37But grant me this one request," she said. "Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry." 38"You may go," he said. And he let her go for two months. She and the girls went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin. From this comes the Israelite custom 40that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.
By Francine Erre
The debate continues as to whether or not Jephthah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering. Since even Bible scholars are divided on the question, it is hard for laypeople to find the answer. The best way for us to seek a satisfying answer is to sort though the ideas presented by the scholars and to look at the facts in the Bible. I lean towards believing that Jephthah did not offer his daughter as a burnt offering and will show the reasons why I believe he didn't.
First, we need to look at an overview of the book of Judges. In the book, this cycle develops. The people would sin against God by worshiping the gods of the people in the land they failed to destroy. God would become angry with them. Usually, the country of the god they were worshiping at that time would come and bring oppression for many years. Then, the people would cry out to God for deliverance. God would hear their pleas and raise up a judge (ruler, leader) to free them, normally through a military battle of the oppressing nation.
As long as the judge was alive, the Israelites would be at peace, sometimes up to 40 years. However, when that judge died, they would go back to sinning and worshiping other gods. They just couldn't get the idea that God wanted them to follow Him through his prophets, and not just a human military leader.
Evidence exists that not all the tribes were being oppressed at the same time. Each of the judges mentioned ruled one or more tribes, but not all. The tribes at this time were very loosely knitted. It was almost as if they were 12 countries inside one country without a central head of government. This factor is important for us to know because while part of Israel was worshiping other gods, no doubt some of them stayed true to God. God has always had a group of loyal followers.
In I Kings 18, God used Obadiah to save a hundred prophets by hiding those fifty to a cave. In the book of Judges, although probably more, at least two prophets are mentioned--one was Deborah and one unnamed. Therefore, God still had His prophets to guide the people. Also, the Levites are never mentioned as part of the oppressed ones. Also, it never says the tabernacle was captured or destroyed during the time of the Judges. In fact, it was located in Ephraim during this time, which would indicate that priests and prophets still worshiped God in the land. When we study about Jephthah, this point is important to remember.
Some of the Biblical scholars point out that Jephthah lived during a time of semi-paganism. But, did he? The answer hinges on which part of the cycle they were in at the time his story takes place. As I mentioned earlier, the tribes would be in a cycle of sin, oppression, crying out to God for deliverance, and being delivered followed by living in peace. When the leader died, the cycle started over.
This cycle changed slightly in chapter 10 where the story of Jephthah began. Yes, they had sinned by worshiping other gods; and yes, they cried out to the LORD for deliverance. However, the wording is different in verse 10, "And the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, saying, 'We have sinned against You, because we have both forsaken our God and served the Baals!'" Here is the first time they have admitted their sin. Previously, they would just cry out for deliverance. The passage goes on with God telling them that each time they cried out to Him, He delivered them.
Then, God says a very startling thing in verses 13 and 14 when He tells them "Yet you have forsaken Me and served other gods which you have chosen; let them deliver you in your time of distress." Is God giving up on the Israelites? Not really. He wants them to prove they have truly repented and that they will follow Him. Again, they admit their sin and ask God to do with them as He will, but to deliver them that day. God had them where He wanted them. To show God they mean business this time, they ridded themselves of the foreign gods they had been worshiping. On their own, they began serving God. Now that they are showing their sincerity and commitment to God, He has mercy on them. Another difference is they didn't wait for God to choose a leader nor to deliver them. All other times, God chose the leader; but this time, He did not, at least not 'til later.
What kind of leader did the Israelites choose? Chapter 11 tells us he was a Gileadite, the son of a prostitute. His half brothers didn't like the idea of sharing their father's inheritance with him and threw him out. He became an outcast, not actually someone we would choose to be a leader. The first verse of the chapter tells us he was a mighty warrior.
The Christian Answers website describes Jephthah as "a wild, daring Gilead mountaineer similar to a warrior Elijah. When he was thrown out of his father's house, he went to live in a country called Tob where he gathered a bunch of ruffians. The NIV calls them adventurers, and the KJV calls them vain men. In reality, they were raiders. Jephthah and his men attacked the enemy in raids on their camps, proving himself as a natural leader and a fighter. He would seem the logical choice to lead the Gileadites to war against the Ammonites. The problem, though, is that the Gileadites would have had to swallow their pride when they asked Jephthah to lead. They had thrown him out because they hated him even though he would have forgiven them. The irony is that he would become the leader of the very ones that would not share their inheritance with him.
From the wording in 11:9, he seems to be a man who knew God and leaned on Him for wisdom and action. He made them promise as an oath that he'd be their leader, which was a smart move indeed. First, he tried a diplomatic way by talking to the king of the Ammonites. Some commentaries say that Jephthah showed a weak nature through his diplomacy. In my opinion, however, it really showed his true leadership ability. He might have been able to have talked the king into reasoning that would end the war peacefully. It would also give him time to gather and prepare the army needed for battle if the talks failed, which they did. The message he sent to the Ammonites shows that he did know the history of the Israelites and how God protected them and their claim to the land. This part of the passage shows that he was an intelligent man that knew God, the history and the laws.
The people of Gilead had chosen him as their leader, and now God chooses him. The Spirit of the LORD came upon him even before he made his "rash" vow in which he said, "If You will indeed deliver the people of Ammon into my hands, then it will be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the people of Ammon shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering." (11:31). He wants to give God thanksgiving for the victory, but he doesn't seem to know what to give Him and is leaving it up to God to take what He wants. Jephthah trusted God for victory as well as leaving it up to Him to choose what He wants for a sacrifice.
What did he really mean when he said "and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering"? (NIV) The Interlinear Bible reads: "it shall be that anything which comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites, it shall belong to Jehovah, and I will offer it (instead of) a burnt offering." Also, according to some Hebrew scholars, the Hebrew word vav used here can be translated as "or" and a few other words such as "so, then, when, how, now, or, but and that." Apparently, no hard and fast rule says that vav should be translated by the word "and." If this statement is true, then a whole new meaning is given to his vow. It would then seem that the vow Jephthah made would be if God gave him the victory, he'd give what came out of his household either as a dedication offering if it was unclean, or a burnt offering if it was clean.
God, in His wisdom and mercy, knows that some times people will make irrational vows. He, in His wisdom and mercy has that covered in Lev. 27. Part of the chapter speaks about being able to redeem animals and people dedicated to God because of a vow. So, why didn't Jephthah just redeem his daughter? Probably, he didn't redeem her because he devoted her to the LORD. Lev 27:28 states that "nothing that the man owns and devotes to the LORD---whether man (in this case daughter) or family land---may be sold of redeemed; everything so devoted is most holy to the LORD.
Now for the part of "whatever" which came out the doors of his house. Their houses were built very different than ours. When they spoke about their house, the courtyard was included and was built around the house where they cooked and carried on many of their activities. It was also where many would keep their animals. In some of the houses, half the flooring in the house was dirt where the animals would stay at night for protection. In a time of war like they were then experiencing, they would do just that. Therefore, it could very well have been an animal that would come out of the "door."
Jephthah probably thought when he made the vow that it was more likely an animal that would be the first to greet him, not a human. However, his daughter came to greet him, happy and singing his praises for winning the battle. The way she greeted him was the normal way a victor was greeted returning from battle as seem often in the stories about David and his victories.
When he saw his daughter, he was in such grief that he tore his clothes and cried. Some may say the sorrow he showed was proof he would be killing her as a burnt offering. However, were his tears because she is about to die? Or, is something else in play here? Notice the Bible stresses she is his only child, "except for her he had neither son nor daughter." I believe the reason the Bible emphasizes this point is that it has something to do with the inheritance laws. Since Jephthah had no sons and she was the only child, she would be the one to inherit his property, receive the blessing and carry the family name. If for some reason she didn't have children, such as death, or remaining a virgin all her life, then the land would be left to his hated half-brothers, the ones that kicked Jephthah out of his inheritance. Now, some would say that her being alone would be proof that she was offered as a burnt offering.
What puzzles me is her reaction. Why would she be more concerned that she would not get married and have children than she was about dying? Why would she want to cry for two months with her friends about "not being married"? Why delay her death any longer than necessary unless she knew that it was not death she was facing but never having children? Jewish girls longed to become a mother and be called the "mother of Israel" who gave birth to the son promised in Genesis. It was a blessing from God to have children and not having a child brought overwhelming sadness. Looking at the lives of Sarah, Rebecca, Hannah, and others, we agree. Without a child from her, the family would be wiped out. Likewise, she knew the land her father owned would go to his half-brothers, wiping out his name along with hers and causing a double tragedy.
Now, did he offer her up as a burnt offering? Some would say yes because of the semi-pagan time in which they lived. I trust I have shown they were living in a time of serving God, not the Baals. Actually, more proof exists that he couldn't have used his daughter as a burnt offering. Remember, they were back to worshiping God, even before he was chosen as leader and went to battle, not after.
Also, a priest would have had to be in the land to accept the burnt offering to offer to the Lord. Burnt offerings were given voluntarily to make atonement for the offerer, not for thanksgiving. (11:30). All burnt offerings had to be a male lamb or bull, or birds for a sweet aroma before the Lord. (Lev. 1). However, most importantly, human sacrifices were strictly forbidden in Deut. 12:31. "You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods." Not only would no priest in the land accept the girl as a sacrifice, but God, himself, would not accept it. God cannot go against his own laws, and He hates the sacrificing of children.
If she was not sacrificed as burnt offering, was a sacrifice made? Yes, her life would be dedicated to God. She would become a servant of God, serving at the Tabernacle's door. This dedication vow is much like Hannah's when she vowed to give God the child if He would let her give birth to a son. Hannah kept her vow, and so did Jephthah. Both of their children were dedicated to God for the service of the Tabernacle.
Exodus 38:8 speaks of the women assembling in the KJV or "the women who served" in the NIV. The Hebrew word translated as either assembling or serving means guarding. Another alternative definition for the word is "ministering." God had a strict rule that the women who guarded, ministered, or served at the Tabernacle were not to become prostitutes. Jephthah's daughter was a virgin at the time she was "devoted" to God and would remain so as long as she stayed at the temple.
This rule both protected the women and kept them from tarnishing God's name. He did not want His women that served him (and in reality all the Israelite women) treated like prostitutes (Lev. 19:29). According to The Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible, fertility religions (which included Baal and his counterpart Astaroth) placed great emphasis on reproduction of both the land and humans. They stressed expressing this reproduction in sexual unions. They had their "holy ones," which were homosexual priests and priestesses who acted as prostitutes. God, on the other hand, was against this practice.
Deuteronomy 23:17 states, "No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute." The Bible points to just how God felt about turning His women that served in the Tabernacle into shrine prostitutes. In I Samuel 2:22, God killed Eli's sons because they were having sex with God's women serving at the door of the Tabernacle. These women were God's "holy ones" and were as close to being a priest as a woman could be.
The Hebrew word lamed is attached to the noun "daughter" in verse 40 of Judges 11 and is often translated as the word "to." It could mean that the women would go yearly to the Tabernacle "to recount" to the daughter of Jephthah. A living person can't talk to a dead person! Another consideration is that Jephthah was one of the faithful mentioned in Hebrews 13. If he had given his daughter as a burnt offering contrary to God's specifications, the Lord would not have honored him by including him in that great "hall of faith."
Although people may disagree with me, I trust I have shown the reasons why I believe she was not offered up as a burnt offering.
__________________
Jesus said, "he who stands firm to the end will be saved" Mark 13:13.
Live Life in such a way that those who do not know Christ will come to know Him because they know you
Verse 30-31:
When Jephthah went forth to battle against the Ammonites, he vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said:
[blockquote]"If thou wilt surely give the children of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be that whatsoever cometh out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall either be the Lord's, or I will offer it up (for) a burnt-offering" (Judges 11:30, 31). [/blockquote]
According to this rendering of the two conjunctions, 'either,' 'or,' (which is justified by the Hebrew idiom thus, "He that curseth his father AND his mother" (Exodus 21:17), is necessarily rendered disjunctively, "His father OR his mother" by the Septuagint, Vulgate, Chaldee, and English, confirmed by Matthew 15:4, the paucity of connecting particles in that language making it necessary that this conjunction should often be understood disjunctively) the vow consisted of two parts:
[blockquote]
[ol][*]That what person soever met him should be the Lord's or be dedicated to his service; and,
[*]That what beast soever met him, if clean, should be offered up for a burnt-offering unto the Lord. [/ol][/blockquote]
This rendering and this interpretation is warranted by the Levitical law about vows. Leviticus 27:1-5 is where the Lord prescribes the price at which either males or females, who had been vowed to the Lord, might be redeemed. This also is an argument that the daughter of Jephthah was not sacrificed; as the father had it in his power, at a very moderate price, to have redeemed her: and surely the blood of his daughter must have been of more value in his sight than thirty shekels of silver.
This was a wise regulation to remedy rash vows. But if the vow was accompanied with devotement, it was irredeemable, as in the following case,
[blockquote]Leviticus 27:28, "Notwithstanding, no devotement which a man shall devote unto the Lord, (either) of man, or beast, or of land of his own property, shall be sold or redeemed. Every thing devoted is most holy to the Lord." [/blockquote]
There are three distinct subjects of devotement to be applied to distinct uses,
[blockquote]
[ol][*]The man to be dedicated to the service of the Lord, as Samuel by his mother Hannah (1 Samuel 1:11);
[*]The cattle, if clean, such as oxen, sheep, goats, turtle-doves, or pigeons, to be sacrificed;
[*]And if unclean, as camels, horses, asses, to be employed for carrying burdens in the service of the tabernacle or temple; and the lands, to be sacred property. [/ol][/blockquote]
This law therefore expressly applied to Jephthah's case, who had devoted his daughter to the Lord, or opened his mouth to the Lord, and therefore could not go back, as he declared in his grief at seeing his daughter and only child coming to meet him with timbrels and dances: she was, therefore necessarily devoted, but with her own consent to perpetual virginity in the service of the tabernacle (Judges 11:36, 37).
This instance appears to be decisive of the nature of her devotement. Her father's extreme grief on the occasion (Judges 11:35) and her requisition of a respite for two months to bewail her virginity (Judges 11:38), are both perfectly natural. Having no other offspring, he could only look forward to the extinction of his name or family; and a state of celibacy, which is reproachful among women everywhere, was peculiarly so among the Israelites, and was therefore no ordinary sacrifice on her part; who, though she generously gave up, could not but regret the loss of, becoming 'a mother in Israel.' And he did with her according to his vow which he had vowed, and she knew no man, or remained a virgin, all her life (Judges 11:34-39). Verse 35:
"Thou hast brought me very low." He was greatly distressed to think that his daughter, who was his only child, should be, in consequence of his vow, prevented from continuing his family in Israel; for it is evident that he had not any other child, for besides her, says the text, he had neither son nor daughter (Judges 11:34). He might, therefore, well be grieved that thus his family was to become extinct in Israel. Verse 36:
"And she said unto him." She was at once obedient. A woman to have no offspring was considered to be in a state of the utmost degradation among the Hebrews; but she is regardless of all this, seeing her father is in safety, and her country delivered. Verse 37:
His daughter said, "that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows." Notice that she bewailed not her death, which would have been the chief cause of lamentation if that had been vowed, but her virginity. She was to live and die without being married and having children, which Jewish women very much regreted. It is plain, from the language of the sacred writer, that she was devoted to God in such a way as required her to remain unmarried and childless. The word "fellows" in this verse, in the Hebrew, refers strictly to "female companions" (maidens) only. Verse 39:
It appears evident that Jephthah's daughter was not sacrificed to God, but consecrated to him in a state of perpetual virginity; for the text says, "her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed..." then adds, by way of declaring the matter of that vow, "and she knew no man. for this was a statute in Israel." Those thus dedicated or consecrated to God would live in a state of unchangeable celibacy. Therefore, she continued a virgin all the days of her life. Verse 40:
This Verse says, "And it was an ordinance in Israel that the daughters of Israel went from year to year to the daughter of Jephthah, that they might comfort her for four days in a year." This verse also gives evidence that the daughter of Jephthah was not sacrificed: nor does it appear that the custom or statute referred to here lasted after the death of Jephthah's daughter.
Other Considerations why Jephthah could not possibly have sacrificed his daughter
[ol][*]The sacrifice of children to Molech was an abomination to the Lord, of which in numberless passages he expresses his detestation, and it was prohibited by an express law, under pain of death, as a defilement of God's sanctuary, and a profanation of his holy name (Leviticus 20:2, 3). Such a sacrifice, therefore, unto the Lord himself, must be a still higher abomination, and there is no precedent of any such under the law in the Old Testament. [*]No father, merely by his own authority, could put an offending, much less an innocent, child to death upon any account, without the sentence of the magistrate (Deuteronomy 21:18-21) and the consent of the people. [*]The Mischna, or traditional law of the Jews, is pointedly against it; ver. 212, 'If a Jew should devote his son or daughter, his man or maid servant, who are Hebrews, the devotement would be void, because no man can devote what is not his own, or whose life he has not the absolute disposal of." [/ol]
These arguments appear to be decisive against the sacrifice; and that Jephthah could not have devoted his daughter to celibacy against her will is evident from the history, and from the high estimation in which she was always held by the daughters of Israel for her filial duty and her hapless fate, which they celebrated by a regular anniversary commemoration four days in the year (Judges 11:40).
Jephthah's Vow
Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD. The text is "vehayah layhovah, vehaalithihu olah"; the translation of which, according to the most accurate Hebrew scholars, is this: "I will consecrate it to the Lord, or I will offer it for a burnt-offering;" that is, "If it be a thing fit for a burnt-offering, it shall be made one; if fit for the service of God, it shall be consecrated to him." That conditions of this kind must have been implied in the vow, is evident enough; to have been made without them, it must have been the vow of a heathen, or a madman. If a dog had met him, this could not have been made a burnt-offering; and if his neighbor or friend's wife, son, or daughter, etc., had been returning from a visit to his family, his vow gave him no right over them. Besides, human sacrifices were ever an abomination to the Lord; and this was one of the grand reasons why God drove out the Canaanites, etc., because they offered their sons and daughters to Molech in the fire, i.e., made burnt-offerings of them, as is generally supposed.
Hebrews 11:32 lists Jephthah among the men of faith. That Jephthah was a deeply pious man, appears in the whole of his conduct; and that he was well acquainted with the law of Moses, which prohibited all such sacrifices, and stated what was to be offered in sacrifice, is evident enough from his expostulation with the king and people of Ammon (Judges 11:14-27). Therefore it must be granted that he never made that rash vow which several suppose he did; nor was he capable, if he had, of executing it in that most shocking manner which some people have contended for. He could not commit a crime which himself had just now been an executor of God's justice to punish in others. Those who assert that Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter attempt to justify the opinion from the barbarous usages of those times: but in answer to this it may be justly observed, that Jephthah was now under the influence of the Spirit of God (Judges 11:29); and that Spirit could not permit him to imbrue his hands in the blood of his own child; and especially under the pretense of offering a pleasing sacrifice to that God who is the Father of mankind, and the Fountain of love, mercy, and compassion.
It has been supposed that the text itself might have been read differently in former times; if instead of the words "I will offer IT a burnt-offering," we read, "I will offer HIM (i.e., the Lord) a burnt-offering": this will make a widely different sense, more consistent with everything that is sacred; and it is formed by the addition of only a single letter, (aleph) and the separation of the pronoun from the verb. Now the letter aleph is so like the letter ain, which immediately follows it in the word olah, that the one might easily have been lost in the other, and thus the pronoun be joined to the verb as at present, where it expresses the thing to be sacrificed instead of the person to whom the sacrifice was to be made. With this emendation the passage will read thus: Whatsoever cometh forth of the doors or my house to meet me-shall be the Lord's; and I will offer HIM a burnt-offering."
For this criticism there is no absolute need, because the pronoun hu, in the above Verse, may with as much propriety be translated him as it. The latter part of the Verse is, literally, "And I will offer him a burnt-offering (olah)," not leolah, "FOR a burnt-offering," which is the common Hebrew form when for is intended to be expressed. This is strong presumption that the text should be thus understood: and this avoids the very disputable construction which is put on the vau, in vehaalithihu, "OR I will offer IT up," instead of "AND I will offer HIM a burnt-offering."
And that is My Jewish Interpretation according to our idyocincracy.
__________________
"Blessed is He who Comes in The Name of The Lord"
Judges 11 (sacrifice his daughter)????
