Latest Study Article: Was Jephthah surprised at his daughter coming out?

by garbonzo 41 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Sic Semper Tyrannis

  The man shouldn't have made the oath, whether or not it was his own daughter or a servant girl. It's a disgusting practice regardless of what period of time he lived in. Upon finding his daughter coming out first, Jephthah should have offered up his own sorry ass in her place.

  As I remember in My Book of Bible Stories, it said that he gave his daughter to Jehovah, as in sending her to the temple as a servant for the rest of her life. But the Bible specifically mentions that he offered her up as a burnt sacrifice. Maybe that's where this confusion comes from. I looked up the wiki page on it, and although most Jewish scholars insist she was sacrificed, some suggest that she was kept to a perpetual vow of celibacy.
• 

  undercover

  You can argue over human sacrifice or temple service all you want. There's no real proof one way or the other (if it even happened).

  In the end that part of the story really doesn't matter as much as to what it shows about the treatment of women in that culture. I've never seen anyone really comment on that part of the story.

  Who the hell is Jepthah to make a promise to send his daughter into servitude at the temple for life? Who is he to deny her the choice of having a family? She didn't make any promises. She obviously didn't want to serve at the temple (and obviously wouldn't have been too keen on the sacrifice bit either, I'm sure) thus crying over her virginity (if she was even a virgin to begin with. Dad was off to war...who knows what went on in his absence...).

  Just another story from a time period and culture where women were property with no choices in how they were to live their life. That's the reprehensible part of the whole thing.
• 

  No Room For George

  Was Samuel sacrificed as a death offering according to Hannah's vow?
• 

  rocketman

  @ James Woods - No Room For George's question, above, helps to determine the answer - Hannah also spoke of offering Samuel ("I will give him to the Lord all the days of his life"), and we know it was not a human sacrifice she was referring to.

  As mentioned earlier, the mention of his daughter's virginity is likely pointless unless the idea that she would live as a virgin perpetually is being conveyed. The idea doesn't seem to be 'I'm going to die, but I have never had sex and never will'. The two just don't jibe.

  It's extremely unlikely that any attempt to offer a human as an actual burnt sacrifice would have been tolerated in Israel at this time. It's highly doubtful that Jepthah could have pulled it off.
• 

  james_woods

  I understand the arguments for and against, but the reality is that we just do not know for sure. Not, like Undercover says, do we know for sure if any of this ever happened to real people or if it was just a story.

  BTW - ("I will give him to the Lord all the days of his life") is not saying the same thing as ("I will offer up as a burnt offering"). Why didn't Jepthah say the first phrase, if that was what he really meant?
• 

  Sulla

  It was not a human sacrifice. Jepthah would have exercised the option of redeeming his daughter by means of a lamb as an offering instead.

  That was an option? So, I promise a tasty virgin, saignant, and deliver a lamb? Where's that written?
• 

  No Room For George

  This might be slightly off topic, but has the Watchtower ever referred to Jesus as the, Greater Daughter of Jepthah or similar? They love taking the preterist view on everything.
• 

  Sulla

  Jesus, do you guys read much?

  Was Samuel sacrificed as a death offering according to Hannah's vow?

  Well, let's see. Book says Jeptha makes a promise to take the first thing that comes out the door and make it "belong to Yahweh, and I shall sacrifice it as a burnt offering."

  Compare this with Hannah's vow that she would give a boy "to Yahweh for the whole of his life and no razor shall ever touch his head."

  A careful reader will note the distinction.

  As mentioned earlier, the mention of his daughter's virginity is likely pointless unless the idea that she would live as a virgin perpetually is being conveyed. The idea doesn't seem to be 'I'm going to die, but I have never had sex and never will'. The two just don't jibe.

  Hmm. No. This was not mourning because she was never going to get laid, this was mourning because she would die childless. That was a pretty big deal 1,000 years BC in the region. Nobody gave a damn whether a chick was sexually fulfilled or not. What doesn't jibe is applying 21st century attitudes to 11th century BC realities.

  It's extremely unlikely that any attempt to offer a human as an actual burnt sacrifice would have been tolerated in Israel at this time. It's highly doubtful that Jepthah could have pulled it off.

  Who, precisely, was going to stop the warlord who just kicked the hell out of the Amorites from doing anything? Part of the deal he struck with the elders of Gilead was that, if he was successful, he would be the chief. Again, it is important to look at the historical context when thinking about these stories.
• 

  bioflex

  Well sounds retarded right? typical of WT$ ,it baffles me how they expect people to shove things like that into their throats knowing very well that it does not make sense?
• 

  bioflex

  Sic Semper Tyrannis:The man shouldn't have made the oath, whether or not it was his own daughter or a servant girl. It's a disgusting practice regardless of what period of time he lived in. Upon finding his daughter coming out first, Jephthah should have offered up his own sorry ass in her place.

  exactly, he should not have make the oath, he thought making the oath would cause God to give him victory, he didnt know God would have given him the victory regardless of any oath.

  undercover:Who the hell is Jepthah to make a promise to send his daughter into servitude at the temple for life? Who is he to deny her the choice of having a family? She didn't make any promises. She obviously didn't want to serve at the temple (and obviously wouldn't have been too keen on the sacrifice bit either, I'm sure) thus crying over her virginity (if she was even a virgin to begin with. Dad was off to war...who knows what went on in his absence...

  what makes you think gender played any role over here? the outcome would have been the same regardless of who came to meet him first, it could even have been his dad or bros.