Sheshbazzar

Come, come now, DBT, "The text states that Jephthah did as he vowed". PERIOD.
The statement, "that he did indeed sacrifice his daughter." came from your own fingers, not from the text.
You are reading -into- the text your own interpretation of what you think is the meaning, and the "correct" interpretation of the few words actually written in the text.
No, there quite naturally would be "no mention of YHWH taking a hand to stop the act", if that "alleged act" never was, and what was, is not at all what you are alleging it to have been.

You have your own "interpretation" of the story, and others also have their "interpretation" of the same story.
You condemn the Bible for not condemning Jephthah, based upon your own interpretation, reasoning, and by your "words" and your "thoughts" that you are adding into the texts actual words written.

Others, (such as myself) commend the Bible for NOT condemning Jephthah, finding him by information provided within the Bible, to be innocent of this false charge, holding that this is the reason that the Bible contains no rebuke or condemnation of Jephthah, but rather upholds him as both as a hero, and as a man of faith.

Make no mistake, I am not a "Christian", nor a Bible "believer", and I myself can find thousands of faults and reasons to reject the Bible as infallible.

Yet based on my knowledge and understanding of the Bible, I most sincerely believe that you are "reading into" this story of Jephthah, and are thus falling into the very moral trap and reproach that it was composed to elicit. The "story" was and yet is a clever trap, a snare for the unwary.
Certainly, you don't have to believe me, but I have done my best to warn you against this cleverly laid "snare". Do not be so easily seduced by appearances. what "appears to be", is in this instance, only a camouflage.

Sheshbazzar

The problem with "that he did indeed sacrifice his daughter." is that just as back in post #97, the word "sacrifice" as used in this sentence is obviously intended to be taken in a prejudicial sense, not as of one simply "giving up" or "surrendering" a valued thing, but with the negative connotation of such "sacrifice" necessarily being a human-sacrifice by death.
Jephthah -surrendered- his daughter to fulfill his vow, and that "surrender" and the "handing over of " was his 'sacrifice", an insinuation of ritualized slaughter and burning is not a necessary conclusion to be drawn.

makerowner

But I still don't see anything to justify this! I'm going to write a stupid story as an analogy of why this doesn't make sense to me:

Jim and Bob are playing basketball. Jim is down by two and sets up for a three-point shot. Before he shoots, he whispers "If I make this shot, I'll sell my car and donate the money to charity". He shoots and sinks it. Later that day, he fulfilled his promise.

Is there any reason in this story to believe that Jim didn't sell his car and donate it to charity? I can't see any. How does Jephthah's story differ from this one in logical structure?

Sheshbazzar

Jephthah was an Israelite, which by its very definition comes with a load of associated baggage, Whereas, your literary constructs, Jim and Bob are not so carefully situated into such a particular and peculiar Sitz im Leben.

As it is often said, "we are the products of our environment"

Jephthah the Israelite, of the Tribe of Manasseh, the son of Gilead, of the city of Gilead, was a member of a particular culture, identifiable by their holding of a certain set of distinctive beliefs.
Something of the character of the strength, and of zeal, with which these men of Gilead preserved and defended their peculiar identity against any perceived foreign incursion may be seen in Judges 12:4-6 where even their near tribal kinsmen are tested and found to be unworthy by as little as a seemingly slight verbal variation on a single word.
Your method of "reasoning" strips Jephthah of his distinctive YHWH cultural identity, and his close personal alliance with the YHWH cult, and further assumes that he would carry out an act that was deemed to be an "abomination" by YHWH his Elohim.
Thus putting him by insinuation, among those degenerates who disobeyed The Law of YHWH and went whoring after the ways of other nations, in giving their children as burnt-offerings.

A little more on the technical side of translating the Hebrew text may be found here; http://www.jba.gr/Articles/jbadec06b.htm

DBT

I'm sorry but your interpretation simply does not fit the text.

Here are the main points..yet again;

1 -Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.


2 - And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she [was his] only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter
3 - And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back.

4- Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.

5 -And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her [according] to his vow which he had vowed

The whole point to this morality tale is that one cannot go back on one's vow to God...and Jepthath clearly promised his God - not his daughters virginity - but a burnt offering.

Jepthath's daughter bewails her virginty because she shall never know love, sex, womanhood, children, family...all of which is represented by her ''virginity'' - as after two months Her father did as he had vowed, and gave God the burnt offering he had been promised.

That is essentially the account of events as they are presented to us.

Sheshbazzar

A much more detailed analysis of that text than what you are presenting;

http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/vi...ud&chapter=011

There have been presented quite a few objections to your overly simplistic analysis, which you have thus far avoided answering.

WVIncagold

Okay but explain why the daughter has to suffer for the acts of the father? How is this a moral tale? regardless of whether Jephthah did or did not kill his daughter she is having to bear the brunt of his oath. why didn't the idiot promise his own life? the tale smacks more to me of the constant ancient women are chattel do with them what you will type crap more than anything else. Besides the over arching sacrifice of children it makes someone else responsible for your deads, good or bad. Why was Jephthah's life not given instead? Why was he even able to use another soul to bargain with his god? He did not own it did he? So under the same lines I could bargain with god that i will sacrifice to him the next poster on this forum if he grants me a win in court next week? Random yes but circumstances are still there. I am bargaining with anothers life not my own. This is not a moral high ground no matter how you look at it.

Sheshbazzar

Ah, but I agree with the ethical points that you are pointing out in this post.

DBT

Well, it is a simple account. Jepthath did not promise his God the perpetual viginity of his daughter, but a burnt offering of whoever first met him at his door.

Where was his honor if he went back on his word? To deny God his vowed offering and give Him his daughters viginity instead? It would make him nothing less than a liar and a cheat.

When Abraham received the call from God to sacrifice his innocent son he made no protest whatsoever, but proceeded with the act until he was stopped. Why would Jepthath have done any less?

reniaa

It's not really a simple account at all but If you read the analysis link that sheshbazzar brought forward (and it's exactly the sort of link we needed for proper information) it looks at the full account showing the language usage and the whole meaning to the oblique parts, why would she weep for her virginity if she was losing her life? why would her sisters visit four times in the year if she was dead? I think this link adequately answers all the questions brought forth from this post if anyone takes the time to read it, well done shesh and thankyou.