Thread: Judges 11:30-31... Jephthah's sacrifice of his daughter Board: Chapter & Worse / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=76;t=000019

---

Posted by Simon (# 1) on :
 
Verse nominated by Paul M

"And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD: 'If you give the Ammonites into my hands, whatever 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.' Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the LORD gave them into his hands. He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon. When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines!" (Judges 11:30-31, in context)

Paul M comments: Human sacrifice is bad enough, but human sacrifice because God is going to hold you to an idiotic vow is just stupid as well as bad and wrong.

Orlando comments: What was he expecting to come out of his house to greet him??? Following on from this, he goes right ahead and sacrifices her -- this is the main example of human sacrifice in the Bible, I think.

How much of a problem is this verse? Click "Vote Now" to cast your vote!

[ 03. August 2009, 20:07: Message edited by: Simon ]
 

---

Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on :
 
I think this verse shows the idiocy of the culture of vows in those days. God never required people to make oaths to him. All righteous covenants were initiated by God, not man. This oath smacks of superstition rather than a proper relationship with God. It shows a dangerous and stupid idea of our relationship with God, in that we can make deals with him, ‘if you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’. People make deals now, if you give me what I want then I’ll pray to you every day, or go to church every week, or whatever. This is taken to extremes in this case. But the principle is the same. God wants to give us gifts, not deals. And our proper response should be praise and worship, not trying to turn a loving relationship into some stupid business arrangement. Jesus instructed, do not make vows, let your yes be yes and your no be no. You can see why he thought vows were a stupid idea when you look at passages like this.

God never required the vow, and he never required human sacrifice. In fact he explicitly banned it. Jephtha’s response is purely cultural, not Godly. A properly righteous response would have been to admit his idiocy and pray to God for forgiveness.

Or, of course, you have to ask, since his daughter is coming out to meet him with tambourines, why doesn’t he just sacrifice the tambourines? That's what I’d do.
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 
This kind of "rash promise" story is a cautionary tale that appears in the folklore of many cultures (some of them, no doubt, tracing their origins back to this form of the story). Basically it's a fable whose moral is "be careful what promises you make".

In my own part of the world there's the story of the Lambton Worm. What the linked article omits is that young Lambton tried to "fix" the deal he made with the witch by arranging to have one of the household dogs let loose to meet him on his return home. Unfortunately his poor old dad was so thrilled at the Worm's demise, he ran out of the castle to meet his son, with Dreadful Consequences.

It's a moralising fable, that's all, and that's how it should be read. If there ever was a Jephthah, I doubt we're meant to regard him as anything but an idiot.

[Edited for typo]

[ 31. July 2009, 13:12: Message edited by: Adeodatus ]
 

---

Posted by Joan_of_Quark (# 9887) on :
 
Hawk, I think you are onto something there. I have always thought tambourines were EEEVIL.
 

---

Posted by Orlando098 (# 14930) on :
 
I guess these comments make sense, but it is not a veery edifying tale to have ended up in the Bible all the same - with no commentary to suggest we are not meant to see this as admirable loyalty to his vow...

The reaction of the daughter is pretty surprising too -- "OK Dad if you've promised God you have to kill me as a burnt offering that's fine, you can't let him down, just let me go and bewail my virginity for a couple of months and walk up and down the mountains with my friends." That's one pretty dutiful daughter
 

---

Posted by Hawk (# 14289) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
I guess these comments make sense, but it is not a veery edifying tale to have ended up in the Bible all the same - with no commentary to suggest we are not meant to see this as admirable loyalty to his vow...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
I guess these comments make sense, but it is not a veery edifying tale to have ended up in the Bible all the same - with no commentary to suggest we are not meant to see this as admirable loyalty to his vow...

---

Oh, come on, if you need the author to tell you it's not admirable to kill your own daughter then you've got problems no amount of commentary is going to fix!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
Playing at another tack, do we know that this story is necessarily about morality, that these characters are supposed to be understand as moral exemplars, be they Goofus or Gallant?

---

I am quite prepared that it is an actual account of an actual dumb guy making and actual dumb decision, because the world is full of them, aye unto every age.

However, the fact that the previous verse blames his dumbness on the Holy Spirit, makes this verse suddenly dangerous. Leaning me toward "Get it out!"

(Sorry if that comes off as flip, but I have always thought Jepthah was a waste of space, textual or otherwise.)

[ 31. July 2009, 20:50: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
 

---

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
Unapologetic Double Post

Hold the phone!

Maybe we are focusing on the wrong person in this little melodrama-- maybe the point of the story is not Jephthah's vow, but the response of the daughter. Maybe the point is, "Look how joyfully and heroically she surrendered to the fate her father's dumb vow consigned her to."

I guess I could hang with that. A little soapy, but still.

(Wow, did you know Spellcheck has Jephthah? Doesn't have gevalt, but it has Jephthah. Hm.)
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Jephthah was a freak, and they should have held him back the way the army held Saul back when he made a similar stupid vow to execute an unknown person who turned out to be his own son Jonathan (1 Samuel 14).

As far as the Holy Spirit thing goes, it's equally clear in the Saul passage that God was involved and displeased about SOMETHING. He refuses to communicate with Saul at a critical point and Saul gets the message--somebody has sinned, and the matter needs sorting out. He was right about that, though almost tragically wrong about who the sinner was.

So was God upset that Saul didn't keep his vow? I really don't think so. I think he was angry with Saul for making the stupid vow, witness the fact that he gave Saul every assistance in discovering his own fuckwittery (by indicating Jonathan's danger through a lottery).

But that's as far as God goes. When the men forcibly prevent Saul from killing Jonathan, God appears to do absolutely nothing further after that point. There is no retribution for the vow getting broken. It's as if the Lord breathed a sigh of relief that SOMEONE had the good sense to stop that idiot.

Indeed, the very next chapter is back to business as usual, with God giving Saul instructions through the prophet Samuel.

So from this I suspect that Jephthah would have suffered no consequences at all for breaking his stupid vow. Indeed, I wonder what he suffered for keeping it!
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
Loss of chattel. It's not like she were a son.

Okay, okay, she was an only child and the jerk was upset. Whom or what did he expect to come out the door? His wife? A servant? His favorite dog? Anyway you look at it, Not So Good.

[ 01. August 2009, 03:08: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]
 

---

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
Still and all, she had a pretty good attitude about the whole thing. No "Pleeease, daddy, don't kill me!" but "No sweat, but listen, can I have three days with my girls?"
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
I dunno. I think I'd have been happier if she'd taken off into the back country and never came back. Who knows, maybe dumb Dad was hoping for it too....
 

---

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
I think I read one commentator-- Ryrie?-- who suggested that her "sacrifice" was a situational one, that she committed herself to perpetual chastity and service to the temple, something like that. Can't remember how he backed it up.

(random)Wouldn't it be trippy if we teleported back in time and discovered all this was the backstory for a Job's Daughters --type organization?

[ 01. August 2009, 04:40: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
 

---

Posted by Orlando098 (# 14930) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I think I read one commentator-- Ryrie?-- who suggested that her "sacrifice" was a situational one, that she committed herself to perpetual chastity and service to the temple, something like that. Can't remember how he backed it up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon:
Maybe it could be renamed the Book of Duh.

---

yes, or at least it could say at the start "warning: contains nuts" or something


(fixed code)

[ 02. August 2009, 03:04: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
 

---

Posted by Bullfrog. (# 11014) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
The main problem with this text though is that surely if God had wanted he would have arranged for something else to come out or would have told Jephthah not to stick to his vow -- I mean either he is all-powerful and his will has an effect on the outcome of events sometimes (as he is certainly portrayed in the OT), or he is more a Deist-type God does not or cannot ever intervene. In the story of Abraham and Isaac, for example, he stepped in to stop Abraham killing his son

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
if we take God as truly all-powerful and assume nothing ever happens that is not his will, then it might even look as if he arranged for the daughter to come out first, perhaps to tick Jephthah off for making a rash vow, or to make him pay really dearly for his great military victory

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon:
Maybe the lesson here is: be careful what you wish for. And also: even if you're full of the Spirit, you can still be full of shit and do stupid things which destroy other people.

I think that really the Book of Judges should be classed in the Old Testament under the Wisdom books, rather than the Historical books. If it has any value it's not about history, but human stupidity. Maybe it could be renamed the Book of Duh.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon:
I think that really the Book of Judges should be classed in the Old Testament under the Wisdom books, rather than the Historical books. If it has any value it's not about history, but human stupidity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
The main problem with this text though is that surely if God had wanted he would have arranged for something else to come out or would have told Jephthah not to stick to his vow -- I mean either he is all-powerful and his will has an effect on the outcome of events sometimes (as he is certainly portrayed in the OT), or he is more a Deist-type God does not or cannot ever intervene. In the story of Abraham and Isaac, for example, he stepped in to stop Abraham killing his son

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
In the next chapter he has forgotten all about his daughter and just goes on about his great victory over the Amonites.

---

Well, actually, in the next chapter he goes on about his victory over the Ammonites, handles some diplomacy spectacularly badly and ends up killing 42,000 fellow Israelites. So it seems that he continues being a bit of a muppet.
 

---

Posted by TomOfTarsus (# 3053) on :
 
Is there any chance that he didn't actually kill her, that as a consequence of his vow, she remained a virgin in his house (hence, the mourning of her virginity)? That the text doesn't explicitly mention the actual 'sacrifice' has always struck me as odd.

I agree w/further up, her submission is more the point of the story. Secondary point: men are impulsive idiots!

Anyway, just a thought.



[ 07. August 2009, 19:23: Message edited by: TomOfTarsus ]
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
I've heard this theory, but never heard any supporting evidence for it. IMHO lifelong virginity is not equivalent to death.

Though the lifelong virginity of one's only child MIGHT BE in the eyes of an Israelite father who didn't want to see his line die out--but it's a bit odd to be building much on a female child in that respect anyway, and we've no indication that Jephthah couldn't marry again and possibly father other children.

I'd like to believe it, though. Beats the alternative.
 

---

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:
Rabbinical tradition has generally seen Jephthah as being a silly billy. OTOH, the Epistle to the Hebrews cites him as a hero of faith. So perhaps it's the relevant verse in Hebrews we should be chopping?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orlando098:
I guess these comments make sense, but it is not a veery edifying tale to have ended up in the Bible all the same - with no commentary to suggest we are not meant to see this as admirable loyalty to his vow...

---

On the contrary, it's very edifying. Along with most of the other accounts of the Judges, it shows what a poor job God's people were doing of following His law. In fact, I can't think of a Judge offhand who really behaves as he's supposed to; Gideon's ephod causes an apostasy (and he allows an asherah to be put on his property), Jephthah sacrifices his daughter, Samson thinks with the wrong head...of the big names, only Deborah seems to have escaped major misbehavior.

I think that's part of the lesson we're supposed to take away from the book. That the editor/author of Judges doesn't comment on the behavior can be interpreted as giving us credit for knowing the difference between right and wrong; I don't see any implicit approval of any of these actions.
 

---

Posted by DagonSlaveII (# 15162) on :
 
Ah...a text wall...

Personally, I tend to take it as a history lesson. You learn from it or otherwise you repeat it. I take a lot of the books of history, where I am not being commanded to do anything, in just that manner.

Also, I try to keep a few thoughts in mind:

In both Greek and in Hebrew,there is no space between words and paragraphs. With Hebrew, there's no vowels. Thankfully, when the Septuagint was made, those men were speaking both Greek and Hebrew, otherwise there would be a lot of gross mistranslations between the two (compared to the few minor ones we are bound to have). What this means is that where chapters, verses, and even modern habit of paragraphing the Bible, all of it is guesswork--most of it very educated and likely right guesswork, but it can still fail. As it is, the sentence made of verse 29 is pretty self-contained and straightforward: The Spirit of the Lord directed him where to journey. Not necessarily that it stayed with him when he made his vow. Besides, I like looking at continuity.

Oh, and the same Greek word is used in both places (Septuagint, can't stand using interactive Hebrew for most of the OT), where in 29 it's translated Then/Now and in 30 it's either and or not used in the English at all: Kai Which means that something of the following: that word is more ambiguous in meaning in Greek or 29 doesn't start a new thought, as it appears in the English. I suspect that verse 29 and verse 30 might not even belong to the same thought...which leads me to something else I keep in mind:

Much of the OT and at least the first 5 NT books (non-Apocrypha) are compilations of a lot of short narrations. It looks like there's possibly 3 on Jephthah, and not one continuous text (as is indicated by the daughter not being mentioned past her part of the narration), and those were the ones that they thought were relevant enough to record, although all are obviously close enough to read as one account.

*shrugs* Just possibilities.
 

---

Posted by A.Pilgrim (# 15044) on :
 
I like the description of the Book of Judges as the ‘Book of Duh’. (Acknowledgement to Simon.) What is the book’s main theme? The consequences of wandering off from the path of truly following God’s commands. In contrast to the godly way that the book of Joshua ends, the book of Judges documents the disobedience of Israel and the progressive moral debasement of the nation through apostasy and adopting the gods and behaviour of the Canaanites. (See Judges chapter 2 and start of chapter 3).

So the book of Judges is full of accounts of the evil that is done when God’s people abandon His ways and instead follow ungodliness. The exact character of that evil may well be culturally determined – I doubt that sacrificing as a burnt offering the first thing that comes out of your house on your return to it is something that will occur to modern minds – but whatever it is may well still have similarly destructive and woeful consequences. The question then to ask is: in what ways is the 21stC church being syncretistic with the values and attitudes of the secular ungodly world around it, in the same way that Israel did with Canaanite beliefs and practices? - importing into the church the beliefs of the world in order to appear ‘relevant’ and ‘up-to-date’?

And being ‘Spirit-filled’ is no guarantee of doing right. Jephthah had the Spirit of the Lord upon him, to carry out God’s commands, but that didn’t stop him from getting it wrong by making his vow. (Where did this practice come from? Is there any precedent from the OT? Was he following a practice of the Canaanites?) The Holy Spirit is a guide to influence the follower of God to do right, not a guarantee that the disciple will always get it right. Do people who have been filled with the Spirit to serve God nowadays also do stupid and disobedient things? Hmm, seems quite likely.

Incidentally, Jephthah didn’t have to carry out his vow, the laws of Leviticus (5:4-6) allowed for this circumstance, but he failed to follow the law. I suspect that within his own mind, within his own time and culture, he thought he was doing the right thing. (As Judges 17:6 says.) We might do the same today, in our own time and culture, in ignoring God’s law and doing what we think is ‘right in our own eyes’. I wonder if the history of the Christian church, if written, could be described as the ‘Book of Duh’ with all the things that the church has got wrong over the years, and will continue to do whenever we depart from God's way?
 

---

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :
 
A.Pilgrim:

Scripture is descriptive, at least as often if not more so than it is prescriptive. In this story, Jephthah is a thoughtless jackass, and at least to me it's obvious that that was the intent of the authors/redactors. This is, among other things, a cautionary tale about making rash, theologically unsupportable promises to God. I can't help reading it and thinking back to last week's epistle lesson from James, warning the Christian community about the destructive power of unmindful, undisciplined speech.

[ 20. September 2009, 22:41: Message edited by: LutheranChik ]
 

---

Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
It seems absurd to suggest that Jephthah's daughter might have become a temple servant, as the temple had not yet been built.
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
There was a tabernacle, though, and women did serve at it. Eli the high priest's two sons got into trouble with God for molesting them.
 

---

Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
There is an interesting analysis of this story in the book "Biblical Games" by Steven Brams.
 

---

Posted by BWSmith (# 2981) on :
 
The explanation of this passages is the same as the other Judges passages.

Judges demonstrates the long moral decline of Israel before the time of kings.

Jephthah's rash vow belongs with his origin as a son of a prostitute - it demonstrates that Israel's faithful leaders were in increasingly short supply.
 

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0