Thanks to all for your responses; they have calmed me a bit. It doesn’t say that God was pleased. That makes a big difference. What kind of world did these people live in that a guy would slay his own daughter (or any other innocent) who accidently walks out a door?
Glennonite
There are several things to consider here; it doesn’t say that Jephthe was a full Israelite, but a Galaadite, the son of a “harlot” and his father was “Galaad”/ so he isn’t subject to God’s normal rules. Sadly, even the sacrifice of an enemy (human sacrifice) was permitted in the israelite temple for those who refused worship to God and who were taken in war against Israel. If you will, they were executed publicly as an act of worship.
In the case of Jephte, his honor rested on his valor, and the truth of his word. His reputation was not all that good otherwise – as it says: “there were gathered to him needy and robbers, and they followed him as their prince”. (Judge 11:2)
Yet, there is no honor among thieves – and so Jephte had to have something which set him apart.
In judges 11:25, Jepthe brings up “Balac”, who is tied to a particular sexual sin of israel with Balaam – The NON Israelite prophet of God; So God showed favor to some who were totally outside of Israel – and occasionally these chosen would sin against God for money. It is important to note that the women of these rival tribes were sent into the tribe of Israel to seduce the priests by sexual acts of worship in order to get them to sin against God so that God would no longer show favor to Israel.
Jephte – is already an incident with a Harlot; robbers and needy; so, there is a risk that his rise to power would be associated with Idolatry. In effect, Jephte represents sinful Israel of the Past at war with Moab; This is a historical cameo appearance, and the question being asked is – what is to become of sinful Israel?
If Jephte were associated only with robbers, and not with the needy as well – the answer would have to be merciless destruction; but as it is – Jephte is a man of mixed good and evil.
Judges 11:29 says “the spirit of the Lord” came upon Jephte – so it really isn’t proper to say that what comes from Jephte isn’t inspired of God. Or that God isn’t pleased with it. Notice, his daughter is his only child – and when he made his vow he said “the first to come fourth out of doors of my house” he knew full well that he had only one child.
The context of his making the vow, is that he went around to Manasses, Maspha, of the true Israelites and half tribes, to rally them to go to war under his direction. The only thing they despised about him was his pedigree, and like moses, they feared he would be king. His vow, then, is calculated to calm their fears and avert a tragedy that would kill them all.
In the following passage, the author again alludes to the spoils of war – for to humble an enemy often meant to take it’s women into Israelite homes as war trophies and second wives; As Moses said, “If you DO humble her – you shall not sell her, but she shall have the rights of a wife”. It is that exact word that is used of Ammon, it being said : The children of Ammon were humbled by the children of Israel.
And this happened under Jephte.
So when Jephte comes home, and is surprised by his daughter – he says “you have deceived me” (as was said of Eve) – which doesn’t make much sense unless she already knew what was to come and chose to do it any way.
Notice also that she assents afterward; and her motive is the stature of her father’s name – that he was “revenged on his enemies” – which isn’t a motive God approves of.
The upshot is not that she bewails her coming “death”, but rather she bewails her “virginity”. An Israelite was not allowed to sacrifice their
own child. Consider what is said of the firstborn – you shall not sacrifice it, but redeem it. The law, then, from the time of Abraham is that a child could be redeemed by the holocost of an animal; The idea of an “equivalent sacrifice” is part of the law.
However, if you need to understand this more deeply – there is a double consequence for a rash oath. God doesn’t permit the substitute sacrifice to mean that the original sacrifice is not his as well – only that it is to be dedicated rather than killed. The item to be sacrificed in the first place also had to be forfeit in some manner – in this case it appears that she would have been given into service at the temple as a perpetual virgin, or some equivalent service – and that Jephte would have no child with which to carry on his name.
Nowhere in the text does it explicitly say “Jephte burned his daughter” but it does say to the very end, “She knew no man”. Precisely the same words spoken of Mary in the new testament. Some speculate he burned her because it says “He did to her as he had vowed” – but as she came “first” from his house, or side (thigh?) the place of the sword, she is automatically protected by the law. No firstborn daughter was to be sacrificed any more than a firstborn son, but they must be redeemed.
