Peculiar Bible Story: Jephthah's vow and how it affected his daughter

Judges 11 has the peculiar story of a man named Jephthah the Gileadite. Since his mother was a prostitute, his half-siblings didn't want him to inherit anything so he left their region and settled with a bunch of adventurers who followed him. His reputation must have been one of a great fighting machine for when the Gileadites were troubled, they - yes, they who had previously not wanted him to have part of their inheritance - came to ask him to help get rid of the enemy.

 ⁷ Jephthah said to them, "Didn't you hate me and drive me from my father's house? Why do you come to me now, when you're in trouble?"

Good question!  You didn't want me before, but now that you are in trouble, you do.  Hmmmm.

 ⁸ The elders of Gilead said to him, "Nevertheless, we are turning to you now; come with us to fight the Ammonites, and you will be our head over all who live in Gilead."

So Jephthah was not good enough to inherit from the family, but when everything was threatened by an enemy, what good would any inheritance do for the Gileadites? So they told Jeph if he would rid the enemies, he would be their leader!

Jeph agreed.


The next several verses tell about the diplomatic, letter writing approach Jeph took.  Why are you troubling Israel? and such things.  The exchange is recorded as well as the fact that no solution was reached this way.

Then Jephthah did something we may call crazy. Or maybe not.

³⁰ And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD : "If you give the Ammonites into my hands, ³¹ 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."

I know people often vow things to the Lord when they are in trouble, but would you make such an offer as this one?

What exactly does he mean? Did he think the family dog* would be the one to greet him?

The chapter concludes with Jephthah's great military success and his ride home.  And these potentially troubling verses. 

 ³² Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the LORD gave them into his hands. ³³ He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.

 ³⁴ When 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. ³⁵ When 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. ³⁷ But 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. ³⁹ After 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 ⁴⁰ that each year the young women of Israel go out for four days to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.

What do you think? Did he kill his daughter? Why would a man make such a vow as he did?  How do you reconcile this passage?  What were you taught about it? 

I have some answers, but I want to hear your thoughts first.



* In Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes the author said animals were often kept in the first floor of the house as a kind of shelter and Jephthah thought a sheep or goat would come out to greet him...not a human!  Certainly not his only child.

This post is related to something I read in A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., pg. 279.  For more information on this book, see this. 

Peculiar Bible Story: An explanation of Jephthah's vow

So in this post, I asked y'all about Jephthah's story as told in Judges 11.  The most troubling part was his rash vow to God that if God granted him military success (which equaled his being promoted to leader of the Gileadites who previously shunned him), he would return home and sacrifice whatever came out of the door of his house to meet him as a burnt offering!

This is incredibly troubling because it seems his only child - a daughter - would suffer for his selfishness!

Why would he even make such a vow? 

One author I read said Middle Easterners often kept animals on the lower levels of their houses.  This area was like a stable of sorts to shelter them from outside elements such as bad weather or wild animals or thieves. So Jephthah naturally assumed a goat or sheep would hear him and greet him first. 

This makes better sense than thinking a man would actually chance a wife or child being sacrificed.

And truly from his sorrow I can imagine he never thought a loved one would be the first to greet his return.

So I always thought growing up that God was serious about vows. He didn't require them, but if you made one, you had to keep it.  This made me take vows seriously.

I was reading A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. the other day and he mentions this story. I was pleasantly surprised at his interpretation of it...which he actually got from Keil and Delitzsch's work. It was like a relief for me to not have to take this story literally. Now he may be wrong, but this interpretation was at least worth sharing.  Read it and then tell me if you think it has any merit.

The term for "burnt offering" is 'olah, which everywhere else signifies a blood sacrifice wholly consumed by the fire upon the altar.  But, as Keil and Delitzsch show, this interpretation as a literal human sacrifice cannot stand in the light of the context.

1. Human sacrifice was always understood, from the days of Abraham (for whose son, Isaac, a ram was substituted by God) to be an offense and an abomination to Jehovah, being expressly denounced and forbidden in Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5; Deuteronomy 12:31; 18:10.  There is no evidence that any Israelite ever offered human sacrifice prior to the days of Ahaz (743-728 B.C.).  It is inconceivable that God-fearing Jephthah could have supposed he would please the Lord by perpetuating such a crime and abomination.

2.  His daughter was allowed two months of mourning, not to bewail her approaching loss of life, but only to bewail her virginity (betulim) (Judges 11:37-38).

3.  It is stated in verse 39 that after Jephthah had performed his vow and offered her as a "burnt offering," "she knew not a man." This would be a very pointless and inane remark if she had been put to death. But it has perfect relevance if she was devoted to the service of Jehovah at the door of the tabernacle the rest of her life.  (For references to the devoted women who performed service in connection with the national cultus, cf. Ex. 38:8 and I Sa. 2:22; also Anna in the days of Jesus -- Lk 2:36-37.)  The pathos of the situation in this instance did not lie in Jephthah's daughter devoting herself to divine service, but rather in the sure extinction of Jephthah's line, since she was his only child.  Hence, both he and she bewailed her virginity.  There was no human sacrifice here.

(pg. 278-279)


What do you think?   

August Books

I guess I'll go ahead and record the books I finished reading this month.  Can't believe it's almost September!

Painted Dresses by Patricia Hickman -- Following the death of their father, sisters Gaylen and Delia head out on an unexpected road trip that brings them closer as they seek to untangle buried childhood memories and better understand their mysterious mother. This story takes place is NC, Texas and Louisiana.  I got it from my church friend, Cindy.


A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. -- borrowed from my dad -- see notes on Moses being the author of the Torah,  and  the reinterpretation of Jephthah's daughter being sacrificed.  , why suffering though doing good , does God allow Himself to look weak , King David and Jesus on the topic of enemies.


The Mending String by Cliff Coon -- book I borrowed from church friend, Cindy; I liked this book.  The main character Ellie reminded me of my blogging friend Amber because of her love of books and her stubborn, doesn't-take-junk from anyone ways. I enjoyed her character.  This book deals with Ellie and her pastor father, Clayton, and the way an incident with the law along with a a long-ago secret serves to bridge the gap between them.  A main theme in this book was truth -- telling the truth yet being compassionate.


Adelaide Piper by Beth Webb Hart -- this book follows the college life of Adelaide as she eagerly leaves the Low Country of SC for what she hopes will be a more enlightening time. It's not until she reaches college in the mountains of Virginia, meets people from the Northeast and has a horrible experience that she realizes how she really misses some things about home.  This book introduces characters with interesting names such as Jif, Dizzy, Juliabelle and Brother Benton.  One thing that stuck out to me was one character thought she wasn't bad enough to need a Savior while another thought she was so bad no one could save her.  I got this book from Cindy.


An Historical Survey of the Old Testament by Eugene H. Merrill -- The author reviews the Old Testament and shares some background on people and nations and events that shaped the Israelite nation among other things. I borrow this from my dad. --  see previous posts for more details

King David and Enemies Revisited

The Bible and those bats-as-birds things

Just Some Notes



"That's Just YOUR Interpretation" by Paul Copan  -- see previous posts; author dealt with some interesting topics such as reincarnation, who made God, why would God send people to hell, the Trinity, genocide and slavery in the Bible, supposed contradictions in the Bible and so forth.  Another of Cindy's books.

"Rather than embracing the view that God has picked out individuals for salvation and allowed (or destined) others to be damned, we can affirm that God has chosen a body of people in Christ, and they become part of the chosen people as they embrace Christ by faith. ... His election is corporate and general rather than individual and specific." (pg. 89)  The author said this would make more sense in a Middle Eastern context since they are more corporate than Westerners who are more individualistic.

And, yes, God did choose individuals to carry out His plans for a particular mission. Just as he chose Jacob over his twin Esau. This didn't mean Esau was unable to repent and come to personal salvation. God chose Judah for a mission bypassing his more righteous brother Joseph. (see note 4 on pg. 211)


Hadassah by Tommy Tenney -- this is the story of Queen Esther; yes, this seems to be the year to read books about her, but my friend had this at her house so I decided to read it

Two things that I remember -- Esther finding that it is GOD in whom she should delight and also how she would sometimes forget all that God had done for her while going through some scary situation.  She had to remind herself of God's past faithfulness instead of focusing on her problems.


Chasing Fireflies by Charles Martin -- this was a good book (from Cindy) that made me cry; it helped me understand foster children a bit better and gave me more of a heart for little ones who have been passed over and not adopted into forever families. This book was told from the point of view of a reporter, Chase, who grew up in a foster home.  The book seeks to solve the mystery of his beginnings, his foster parents and the little foster child, Sketch, who is unable to speak yet communicates by drawing and writing.  It also tells of Tommye and the things she does in order to die in peace.

The Bible and those bats-as birds-things

Guess what, y'all!  I'm reading a new book! Surprising, I know.  :)

I finally finished the 500+ page A Survey of Old Testament Introduction by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. that I've discussed in recent days. It inspired posts on these topics.

Moses being the author of the Torah  
The reinterpretation of Jephthah's daughter being sacrificed for his rash vow
Why suffering though doing good
Does God allow Himself to look weak
King David and Jesus on the topic of enemies

(those are clickable links if you want to read them and add your own thoughts)

Thanks to all who left feedback on those posts!  Enjoyed it all as usual!

Now I'm reading another of my dad's books, An Historical Survey of the Old Testament by Eugene H. Merrill.  In the introductory chapter I found three statements that I wanted to record and discuss. 

Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible.

Jesus and the Apostles mention Mosaic authorship many times.  If one argued Jesus erroneously attributed Moses to the Pentateuch, this "is a reflection of His Divine omniscience" (not there) "or that He 'accommodated Himself to the ignorance of the people of His time,' which constitutes an assault upon His integrity."  -- pg.18

I just thought this was interesting as I posted about this Mosaic authorship not long ago.  If you don't believe Moses wrote the Torah, how do you explain Jesus and the apostles and their "error" in attributing the Torah to Moses?

On the inspiration of the Bible.

"[The biblical authors] were not permitted to invent their message, but they were permitted to express it within the bounds of their own intellectual and cultural resources, at the same time being divinely shielded from error of message content.  An uneducated, roughhewn Amos was given a divine message, but he was not expected to express it in a style and with words which were beyond his experience.  On the other hand a refined, cultured, poetic Isaiah was entrusted with revelation and permitted to express it in the inimical manner so much admired in his writings." -- pg. 9

I really liked this because it doesn't mean God dictated word for word what each person would say as if each author were a robot. If that were the case, you may not find the variety of styles presented in the Old Testament. And it would be hard to explain why a bat was considered a bird!  However, the message was not invented.  The divine message. Which doesn't rely on whether or not a bat can be scientifically categorized as a bird.  Compare this to the Quran which supposedly is word-for-word revelation from God. Does this leave any room for bats-as-birds scenarios? I'm not saying they are there, but what if those scrutinizing the Quran found such things?  Can they attribute it to a human messenger expressing himself within the bounds of his own intellect and cultural resources or do they explain it as God speaking in what was known by the humans at the time or something else entirely?

Historical and scientific matters.

"We certainly should expect the Old Testament, if it be the inspired Word of God, to be accurate in all historical and scientific matters with which it deals. Yet, and this is vitally important, we must always bear in mind the fact that the Old Testament does not always profess to speak in twentieth century scientific terms, but often employs the prescientific language of the day in which it was written." -- pg. 18

Maybe this is a bit contradictory from the above quote, but I still found it of interest for some reason. And now I found this when I googled "bat as bird in Old Testament." 

Question

When is a bat a bird? (Leviticus 11:13-19)
Leviticus 11:13-19 states that bats are birds. How can this be?

---

Answer

The Bible did not look forward and use modern biological categories, just like we in this century do not look 8000 years into the future and use names they will use then. In 8000 more years a bird may be called a ‘flycat,’ or some other unusual name, but for the time being we still call them birds. The Bible is using a rather generic category in which to group bats, as modern science uses a different classification system than the Ancient Near East. To the ancients, creatures such as a bat were considered birds since they categorized all flying animals as birds (and bats were a similar size, etc.).

We must to read the Bible from the view of its original audience (exegesis) and not bring modern categories, etc and read them upon it (isogesis). This is a common error made by many. Once, at a funeral, a person told me that baptism had to be done by dunking someone all the way under the water – as Jesus was buried 6’ under the ground. While this question is not meant to answer this specific question, what the person was doing was reading an American custom upon something that happened 2000 years ago – besides Jesus was not buried 6’ under – but sideways in a tomb! I then asked him if he baptized people sideways in a tomb, etc. … which laid his argument to rest.

The Ancient Near East categorized bats as birds in that time.


Source

Do you have any thoughts on any of this?