Thus far, we considered that evilbible.com’s author has no premise, no basis, no ethos upon which to condemn anything at all and noted that the first considerations of “Why does God want me to burn animals and humans?” was one in which Abraham “didn’t kill his son” and yet, the argument from outrage ensued.
Now we finally come to “Bible Passages About Ritual Human Sacrifice” in which section evilbible.com’s author offers no commentary, except for the title, “Jephthah Burns His Daughter,” but merely quotes the following. The emphasis is in the original evilbible.com page and while up until now the author has quoted the Roman Catholic New American Bible we now switch to the New Living Translation“
“At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, “If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”
“So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith – twenty towns – and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter – his only child – ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. “My daughter!” he cried out. “My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back.” And she said, “Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin.” “You may go,” Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter.” (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)
I, again, empathize with how someone with virtually no knowledge of the Bible’s contents and no desire to understand them would conclude what evilbible.com’s author concluded, “Jephthah Burns His Daughter.”
But what else could it mean? Well, that is just the point: having been told what to think about it already and thinking that the texts is stating that conclusion, which it seems to be to the undiscerning, we must consider the text all the more carefully. I wish to present a few different ways of understanding what the text is saying by considering the immediate and greater context. This text either states that Jephthah took it upon himself to sacrifice his daughter or, more likely and in keeping with the text’s immediate context as well as the Bible’s greater context, he sacrificed an animal in her place.
The text seems clear enough after all; it does state, “Jephthah made a vow_I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering_kept his vow, and she died a virgin.” He does appear to have sacrificed her-even though the minutia of the Torah’s law not once allowed for human/child sacrifice and what kosher high priest would allow such a thing?
I did wonder why evilbible.com’s author switched translations but have learned that the author tends to pick the ones that serve a purpose and the NLT certainly does at this point, to some extent.
Let us spend a moment on v. 39 which the NLT renders as “she died a virgin.” Having checked 20 translations1 I can see why the NLT was chosen; none of the others say that she “died.” What is significant is not counting up translations but the fact that the reason that the 20 do not have “died” is that the word simply is not in the Hebrew (or the Greek Septuagint-LXX for that matter). Now you know why the NLT is not exactly considered a scholarly version. Yet, even if I were to grant that a word that is not actually there is there; evilbible.com’s author purposes are not met.
Let us consider the text further and come back to this point; which is at the end of the text. Another oddity with the NLT is that it states, “I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.” Yet, there is a Hebrew word between “triumph. I” that goes untranslated. Yet, it does appear in 18 other translations with the exception of the GOD’S WORD Translation which reads “_to the LORD. I will sacrifice_” and the Douay-Rheims Bible which reads “_return in peace from the children of Ammon, the same will I offer a holocaust to the Lord_”
The word, generally translated as “and,” consists of the Hebrew construct made up of two conjunctions for “either/or.”
shall surely be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. (KJV)
In fact, the Robert Young’s Literal Translation renders it as “or.”
to Jehovah, or I have offered up for it — a burnt-offering.
Why is this significant? Because it draws the distinction between the daughter and the animal which would have replaced her.
Clearly, if we do not pick and choose but consider the greater context of the Torah we know that if it was a clean animal that came out of his doorway first he would have offered it as a burnt offering and if a human then they would be consecrated to the LORD. This would be done by the daughter being sent, with her consent (v. 37 “You must do to me what you have promised”), to serve in the sanctuary.
Robert Young’s Literal Translation also alerts us to another detail in v. 40 by rendering it as,
And it was an ordinance in Israel that the daughters of Israel went from year to year to the daughter of Jephthah, that they might comfort her for four days in a year.
Rather than as,
So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter.
Yet, there is still no reason not to grant the NLT translation because, as we shall see, it is not ultimately problematic.
Let us wrap all of this up in noting that the fact is that nowhere does the text state anything about Jephthah sacrificing his daughter. The text merely states v. 39, “her father kept his vow.” But there is no mention of what he actually did.
But wait a moment, it states that he “kept his vow” and the vow was “I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.” So he does appear to have sacrificed her-even though the minutia of the Torah’s law not once allowed for human/child sacrifice and a kosher high priest would never allow such a thing.
As aforementioned, when we consider the greater context of the Torah clearly if it was a clean animal he would have offered it as a burnt-offering and if a human then they would be consecrated to the LORD. This would be done by the daughter serving in the sanctuary.
But then why does this come across as such a tragedy? Because since she was his one and only child and a virgin, she would have no children and he would have no lineage after him. Not to mention the Jewish woman’s dream to be the one through whom the Messiah is born. Note that the text does not focus at all upon a mourning of her death but her virginity: v. 37 “wept because she would never have children” v. 39 “she died a virgin.”
See, there it is “she died”! Yes, that is just the point when she did die she was a virgin in that she never copulated and thus, never had children.
Ok, why did I bother going through all of this detail?
In order to demonstrate that there are contextual reasons for thinking that she was not sacrificed and in order to demonstrate that even if she was it is not problematic to grant evilbible.com’s author the title and translation that was used.
This is because even if we grant that “Jephthah Burns His Daughter” and that “she died a virgin” means that she died then and there as a burnt sacrifice we simply have to note the end of the story.
Again: if she was not sacrificed the “young Israelite women” went “away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter”-that she would never had children-the reason she wept.
If she was sacrificed “young Israelite women” went “away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter”-Jephthah’s actions were considered so horrendous that it literally became an annual event to remember his terrible deed. Imagine being so condemnable that every year there is a festival to condemn you to the point that circa 3,000 years later we are still condemning him.
Thus, either way she either was not sacrificed and evilbible.com is wrong in claiming that she was or she was sacrificed and evilbible.com is wrong in that it is utterly condemned by the Bible.