Featured Did Jephthah actually kill his daughter?

There’s a previous thread on the topic done quite a while ago.

For now I’ll just say I agree.

Rob

 

I also consider that his daughter was sacrificed.

Human sacrifice was not unnatural throughout history.

Our own sensibilities need to be set aside at times just as some missionaries must when bringing the gospel to foreign thinking folks.

Frankly, I am thankful that God sweetly allowed for the details to be silent.

 

Yes, I believe so. I would prefer to believe he did not, but taking the text as is indicates he did. Judges 11:30-31 tells us that Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, which included offering up "whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me" for a burnt offering. Judges 11:34 says his only daughter came forth to meet him. Judges 11:39 says Jephthah did with his daughter "according to his vow which he had vowed."

That said, I have known more people who believed and taught the opposite, taking the last part of verse 39 -- and she knew no man -- to mean that in place of the burnt offering, she was devoted as a celibate life to the Lord. Matthew Henry answers that this way:

 

Here is the older thread on the topic ==> Jephthah's Vow [LINK]

 

What did Jephthah think would come forth through the doors of his house to congratulate him for his victory? A bull?

The law of the burnt offering says that the offering must be a male, so his daughter is disqualified, number one (and God is not going to bend the rules of the sacrifices because of a foolish vow).

It must be an animal, of the herd or of the flock, second of all, so his daughter is disqualified, number two.

Anyone who knows the law, and knows God's manner with the elect according thereto, at this point will have to concede that Jephthah's vow, if it was to kill the first thing that came to him from the doors of his house, would have been an illegal and invalid vow. He might as well have said, "I promise to rape the first thing I see."

But there's more.

The law states that the burnt offering must be killed, skinned and dismembered at the door of the tabernacle, in the presence of the priests and other worshippers. Even if the priests were so ignorant of the Big Ten as to allow murder at the door of the tabernacle, they wouldn't accept the burnt offering on account of the technicalities of Jephthah's offering not being a male of the herd or flock.

But let's say they did. Now you've entered La La Land to think that God would have let this melee go on in tabernacle worship with nary a peep, killing a woman, flaying her, cutting off her head, burning her entrails and body parts on the brazen altar and thinking it was acceptable, because Jephthah vowed a vow.

No. You have to concede that "Burnt Offering" became a metaphor in common usage for something wholly dedicated to God. And that's what Jephthah meant, and that's what happened to his daughter.

He did not kill her.

 

She was not made a burnt offering. But she could though have been put to death according to Leviticus 27:28-29. Otherwise according to Judges 11:39-40 is what we are told.

 

I think that he gave her up to perpetual virginity, and so ended his family line!

 

Aarron, I believe you presume too much about the Israelites of that time.
What exactly makes you think that the general populous of Israelites in that time knew or respected the Law?

Following this story in Judges is a story about Samson. Certainly a great hero, a worthy example for our kids to follow in the faith. How did he set an example in following the Law?
Failure after failure after failure...

In this episode (and in the chapters surrounding it) the emphasis is on how the LORD cared for his errant people. The LORD is the super-hero, not the judges… no, not the judges!

Rob

10.9 Jephthah (Judges 10:6–12:7)

a introduction: Israel’s oppression and cry for help (10:6–16)

• chronological note

b diplomacy in response to Ammonite threat (10:17–11:28)
• begins: Ammonites called to arms (wayyiṣṣāʿăqū)
• Ammonites cross over to Gilead to fight (lěhillāḥēm; 11:12)
• why have you come against me to fight against my land? (11:12)
• Jephthah first resorts to diplomacy, which fails

c Jephthah’s vow (11:29–31)

d TURNING POINT: Yahweh gives victory (11:32–33)*
​

c′ Jephthah’s vow sadly fulfilled (11:34–40)
​

b′ diplomacy in response to Israelite threat; tragic civil war (12:1–6)
• begins: Ephraimites called to arms (wayyiṣṣāʿēq; 12:1)
• Ephraimites cross over to Gilead to fight (lěhillāḥēm)
• why have you come up against me today to fight against me? (12:3)
• Jephthah first resorts to diplomacy, which fails
​

a′ conclusion: summary of Jephthah’s rule; his death and burial (12:7)

• chronological note
​

David A. Dorsey, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis–Malachi (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004), 112.

 

And had it been an animal unsuited for a burnt offering, what does the Law command?

 

I am not sure there is a great reason to believe they were strict in following the law, in this time of turmoil, apostasy, and every man doing that which was right in his own eyes.

 

The failures of Samson and David and other men of faith (among whom is Jephthah according to Hebrews 11) were nothing on the level of abomination, and certainly not the final acts of their testimony.

But Jephthah's was?

My argument isn't what regard men have to the law, but God's in His responses to the actions of the elect. He would not suffer the abomination of human sacrifice for the sake of an invalid vow. If the curse causeless will not come, how much more an unlawful vow?

 

Did Jephthah actually kill his daughter? The word of God does not tell us he did.

 

Based on God’s dealings with Abraham & Isaac, I would vote no!

 

Wrong.

[30] And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, [31] then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” (Judges 11:30–31 ESV)

[39] And at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow that he had made. She had never known a man, and it became a custom in Israel (Judges 11:39 ESV, emphasis mine)​

The Archangel

 

Indeed that might mean he did have her to die. But the written word of God does not say she had died because of that vow. That is the whole reason for this thread. The truth of Judges 11:39 is not at issue.

 

How does “he did to her...” get the eisegeted “maybe?” The text seems quite clear.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Ok. What is the clear justification in Law for a human burnt offering?