dado

this was just hashed out on another thread. G-d didn't hold anybody to anything - he simply chose not to intervene - it is not, after all, G-d's job to step in everytime a human tries to do something stupid - and in the end Jephthah and the high priest of the time were severely punished for their stupidity.

the whole point of the story is to create a sad ending to hammer home the "don't do that!" message.

this is not to say there weren't Hebrews of the time who did in fact still think blood sacrifice maybe wasn't such a bad idea - there almost certainly were - after all it took over 1000 years to finally(!) get rid of blood sacrifice completely.

oy - and then the x'ians came along...

(often wondered if x'ianity would have made it if the temple hadn't been destroyed. blood seems to have a tremendously alluring appeal to our species...)

Mageth

Actually, the promise Jephthah made was simply to sacrifice the first thing that came to greet him. He was perhaps expecting a goat or lamb, certainly not his daughter.

And God either arranged for or allowed (certainly did not prohibit) his daughter to be the first one to greet him. The text says nothing one way or the other.

I'd say God arranging for or at least not preventing him from sacrificing his daughter could be seen as "punishment." But not for the act of sacrificing his daughter; instead, apparently, for "testing" God.

Nope.

Nope. Significantly, not even his daughter. It's almost like this kind of thing wasn't that unusual.

Yes, God kept his side, apparently. But I don't think Jephthah necessarily expected a human being, and definitely did not expect his daughter.

dado

that is not my reading - but it most certainly is a defensible reading. there are many jews "of faith" who go down the atheist path. Torah and atheism are not incompatible.

where have i ever done that? my only objections are to atheists attempting to define what does and does not constitute *my* G-d and *my* faith. what you define for your own internal purposes is - unless you want to share - none of my business.

i have my own insight garnered from my own education and my own experience. and i have Torah and the Writings and the Prophets to draw on for inspiration. it's not a destination, it's a starting point.

Biff the unclean

As Yahzi said, you have already throw away your authority.
You have the Torah and the Writings but so what? You interpret them to mean only what you want them to say, and become as incensed and start name-calling at the suggestion of a straight reading of the text. So you reduce them from "the word of God" to your own fantasies. The Prophets are only there to inspire YOU. You, you, you. How ridiculous you show your 'faith' to be. It's an invisible friend to you. While it's nothing but your own imagination you still cannot grasp that it is imaginary.
I sincerely hope that you are still an undergraduate and have time to mature.

Yahzi

I realize that it was a different time and place, and things were done differently: but the probabilities that a person would come out your front door to greet you instead of an animal has to be pretty high for all cultures.

If one of Jep's servants had been the first out the door, we wouldn't be hearing this story. Which is pretty much the point.

Yahzi

But you keep insisting that your God and your faith have some objective reality. Worse, you insist that it's reasonable.

Admit that it's just fanciful poetry, with no possible significance to anyone but yourself, and we'll stop objecting.

So your knowledge of God comes from your own insight? You do understand the difference between "imagination" and "reality," right? Imagination is what is true for ourselves: reality is what is true for everybody.

If you want to describe God as a pretend character that exists only in your head, then I agree. If you want to assert that he has any objective, actual, real existance, then you need evidence. Not insight. Evidence.

This is the same standard you demand from others, on every topic other than God, so there's no use in complaining about it.

Yahzi

No.

By that standard, no text is false. Since you can always just add what you need to make it true.

Taking the position that no text is false is not only radical, but ultimately not very helpful.

Magdlyn

NO, Biff, dado is an educted Jew. He is practicing Judaism. Take a look at Judaism 101:

http://www.jewfaq.org/beliefs.htm

Mageth

Well, that's probably true. (Actually, I think the story is probably a made-up myth or morality "play" to teach a lesson, so a beloved daughter or son is a necessary device for the story).

Faith

Your opinions on equality and selective Bible quotation aside...as an atheist, which do you feel isn't "morally wrong"? Lying, cheating, stealing, harming others, killing?