Did Abraham Know

[inquiringmind]

I said it was a contested passage, yes? Jephthah obviously felt that an animal would have come out to greet him, possibly a dog and not a person and certainly not his daughter. Personally I agree that Jephthah was foolish in making his oath to God, but having made it felt compelled to comply with it as did his daughter. Making the vow does not mean that God coerced him in any way to have made it, therefore, as the many rabbis have mentioned the sin is upon Jephthah head and not on God. Compare this story with the legend of Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter on the eve of his campaign against Troy.

I can't remember where I read it, but I think Joseph Smith (or one of the other LDS prophets or GAs) commented on this passage, and interpreted it tto mean that Jepthah's daughter never married (but wasn't sacrificed as a burnt offering.)

I'm pretty sure some LDS authority said this, and I think it was Joseph.

Edited August 19, 2012 by inquiringmind

[DH]

Maybe he failed the test. Maybe God was looking for his ability to say no to a blatant disregard for common sense and earlier commandments. Maybe God was just testing him to see if he was just a yes man. So Abraham was going to go through with it and God said OK I will give you a pat on the back for simple obedience but I was really looking for some backbone.

+1

And/or it was a teaching moment, to explain and make very clear to Abraham that human sacrifice is not acceptable.

[Ron Beron]

I can't remember where I read it, but I think Joseph Smith (or one of the other LDS prophets or GAs) commented on this passage, and interpreted it tto mean that Jepthah's daughter never married (but wasn't sacrificed as a burnt offering.)

I'm pretty sure some LDS authority said this, and I think it was Joseph.

While it is not generally accepted there is a line of thought that she was dedicated to a life of celibacy as an "offering" to God. The evidence seems to suggest that she was indeed killed. In this case we are dealing with the stupidity of her father and not with any requirement of God who prohibited such ritual. Did such rituals occur? Yes, but they weren't condoned by God. I posted this before, but here it is again. Great article.

"Did Jephthah Kill His Daughter?" by Solomon Landers Bible Review 7:04, Aug 1991.

http://members.bib-a...=4&ArticleID=15

Bruce R. McConkie mentioned this...

Of all Paul's illustrations, that of using Jephthah as an example of great faith is the most difficult to understand. That this captain of Israelitish hosts was guided by Deity in his triumphs over the armies of the Ammonites is not open to question. Born the son of an harlot,Jephthah had nonetheless grown to that spiritual maturity where "the Spirit of the Lord came upon" him and where, by faith, he was led of the Lord in "a very great slaughter" of the people of Ammon. But his rash vow to offer as a burnt offering whatever should first come forth and meet him after his victories, and the resultant sacrifice of his only daughter, is either gross and unbelievable wickedness or the Old Testament account is false. In view of Paul's use of this one of Israel's Judges as an example of faith, the presumption is that there is something amiss in the Old Testament record, as we have it, and that Jephthah's vow and sacrifice were of a different nature than our present record indicates. 1 Sam. 12:11.)

Edited August 19, 2012 by Ron Beron

[USU78]

My wife bought me the OT on CD set at Desydoesbooks a bit over a week ago. Just finished up listening to Leviticus this morning, and the last chapter struck me in connection with the Jephthah incident, discussed above.

This chapter [27] has to do with determining value of persons, real estate, and other things donated to the Lord. There's a set value for persons, and a set value for most things, including real property.

I'm wondering if this chapter might not be the key to understanding Jephthah: Like Samuel's mother, Jephthah pledges his child to the Lord's service, neither to be redeemed even though Leviticus 27 allows for the redemption of pledged humans based upon their value plus a 20% redemption fee. Neither is redeemed, and I don't recall that there is any mention of Samuel being married or having children . . .

This little understood chapter, and its parallel in 1 Samuel, is obviously important and communicates pre-First Temple Jahweh worship in the interstices of the Torah.

[Ron Beron]

My wife bought me the OT on CD set at Desydoesbooks a bit over a week ago. Just finished up listening to Leviticus this morning, and the last chapter struck me in connection with the Jephthah incident, discussed above.

This chapter [27] has to do with determining value of persons, real estate, and other things donated to the Lord. There's a set value for persons, and a set value for most things, including real property.

I'm wondering if this chapter might not be the key to understanding Jephthah: Like Samuel's mother, Jephthah pledges his child to the Lord's service, neither to be redeemed even though Leviticus 27 allows for the redemption of pledged humans based upon their value plus a 20% redemption fee. Neither is redeemed, and I don't recall that there is any mention of Samuel being married or having children . . .

This little understood chapter, and its parallel in 1 Samuel, is obviously important and communicates pre-First Temple Jahweh worship in the interstices of the Torah.

Interesting take. Was this mentioned in their commentary? Hard to imagine that humans are regarded in the same category as used bottles.

[USU78]

Interesting take. Was this mentioned in their commentary? Hard to imagine that humans are regarded in the same category as used bottles.

No commentaries. Just the scriptures and chapter headings read by a woman [the headings] and a man [the scriptures themselves].

Redemption is a legal term. Nothing wrong with a slave "buying himself" just like happened in the bad ol' days here in the USA. Twain talks about Jim, the slave, speculating on what it would take to "buy myself," if I'm remembering it accurately. That would be consistent with Biblical practice, since there's a fair bit in Leviticus about people selling themselves for debt, but being freed in the Jubilee Year. Same concept with pledged property/people, and a father no doubt had the right to pledge/sell his children, as Jephthah and, later, Hannah did.

I've read a speculation that the women who "served in the temple" were pledged persons who went unredeemed.

In our two instances in scripture, both Jephthah and Hannah made the pledge with an implicit promise not to redeem.