Amaleq13

Subsequent apologetics not withstanding, the fact that Jephthah believed God would accept the sacrifice of his daughter and the fact that the agreement appears to have been fulfilled on God's end (Jephthah wins the battle), from a simply rational "perspective", clearly calls into question the claim that the God of the Hebrew Bible held a consistent view on human sacrifice.

The story seems to me to be about the inherent dangers of making deals with god. And the issue of human sacrifice apparently was not "taken care" of as far as Jephthah, the author of the story, and the editor who chose to include it were concerned. The first does not behave as though that were the case, the second does not depict his behavior as though that were the case, and the third does not choose to alter that depiction.

Jephthah is not punished for offering a human sacrifice. He is punished by being compelled by his promise to sacrifice his daughter.

Subsequent apologetics do not change what was originally written.

dado

"accept" is the wrong word because it implies a possibility of G-d intervening. it wasn't G-d's to "accept", it was Jethtah's to give, the daughter is at the mercy of her father - no one else.

except the chronology doesn't work. Jephthoah never offered his daughter, he offered the first living being to come out the door of his home. that it turned out to be his daughter isn't realized until *after* the victories. at no time is there a quid pro quo based on the daughter's life.

you are entitled to this opinion.

partly. also about making open-ended promises and a whole host of other issues.

nor is he supposed to...

as should be expected since his inappropriate behavior is the point of the story...

this is only true if the text is valued from a x'ian perspective.

but he is punished - again, unless the text is valued from a x'ian perspective.

since you have no way of knowing when the story was even written - nor do we know the original form of the story - your accusation of "subsequent" is without foundation and simply willfull speculation.

Magdlyn

Forgive me if I do not have this quite right, but Jewish tradition holds that oral Torah (with further elucidation of the written text) was given at the same time as the written Torah. The oral Torah was finally written down post 2nd Temple destruction. But it is not viewed as subsequent apologetics.

chimaira

thank you toto and with the others to have informed me on the question. The fact that Yahvé reprimand not Jephthah for its sacrifice does want to say that God did not disapprove the act of Jephthah? like was Abraham justified by works? (sacrifice of Isaac) .

Bye bye !!!

dado

he was reprimanded rather severely - he was put to death.

magdlyn - some oral torah was encapsulated in Talmud - and later Shulkan Aruch - but oral torah isn't a "thing" that can be written down in finality because it isn't a "thing", it is a process. it continues to be written today.

Magdlyn

Okay, I this:

http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm#Talmud



So, if the oral torah was not written down until the 2nd century CE, and continues to be created today, who was/is qualified to do this?

And why is or is it not "subsequent apologetics?"

I know Jews (even "Orthodox") seem to have more leeway to interpret their scriptures than Xtians seem to think they do. Could some think of this as "the Jewish new testament?"

chimaira

please the référence dado ?

NOGO

Still, this g~d trades a victory in battle where thousands die for the sacrifice of what ever comes out of the victor's home. Both ways this g~d loves blood.

On another level.
This g~d is supposed to know all including the future, therefore, He knew what He was being offered even if Jephthoah didn't. Surely a g~d who can alter the outcome of a battle can get an animal to come out of the guy's home rather than his daughter.

Like all apologists you just keep going around the issues and never addressing them.

dado

no, he is not. you are confusing (one version of) the c'ian conception of G-d with the Jewish one.

with all due respect, i think you should work on getting some very basic facts right before making such sweeping assertions.

NOGO

Is prophecy a Christian concept?