Jehovah's Witnesses and Jephthah's daughter

[Justin108]

What exactly happened to Jephthah's daughter according to Jehovah's Witnesses?

Reading Jehovah's Witnesses' interpretation in the link below,
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/book ... -daughter/

....it seems as though they believe Jephthah's daughter, instead of being sacrificed as a burnt offering, simply spent the rest of her life in service to God.

Judges 11 seems very clear on this, however.

Judges 11:30 Then Jephthah made a vowg to Jehovah and said: If you give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whoever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites will become Jehovahs, and I will offer that one up as a burnt offering.

Judges 11:34 Finally Jephthah came to his home in Mizpah, and look! his daughter was coming out to meet him, playing the tambourine and dancing!

Judges 11:39 At the end of two months, she returned to her father, after which he carried out the vow he had made regarding her.


Does Judges 11 not clearly state that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 3 by JehovahsWitness]

No, Judges chapter 11 v 40 explains that after He dedicated his daughter to God the her female companions would go and visit her once a year.

Quote:
Young's Literal Translation reads:
"from time to time the daughters of Israel go to talk to the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite, four days in a year."

I have things I'd like to ask
1) Why is it you went with Young's translation here, and did not stick to the NWT?
2) Why is Jephtha distraught when he sees his daughter coming out of his home? If offering to sacrifice someone as a burnt offering does not mean setting them on fire and killing them in honour of one's god, but instead...that daughter has to remain a virgin, why use language and reasoning that is that convoluted?
3) Did Jephtha initially mean to force his daughter to remain a perpetual virgin, or to set whoever came out of his house on fire?
3a) If Jephtha initially meant the perpetual virgin promise, what is the point of this story then? What happens to the lesson on being careful about what one promises to God?
3b) Why is the daughter bound by her father's promise? Was she a virgin literally all her life? Did she not have any say in her sexuality once she reached her majority?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 8 by Justin108]

The fact that Judges 11:40 states that Jephthah's daughter was commended doesn't mean that she was still alive.

In a nutshell, Judges 11:40 does not of a necessity mean that the daughter remained alive.
It's a valid interpretation, I'll give JW and the other Christians that...but automatically the one true interpretation? There's no other possible interpretation from verse 40?
Verse 40 can mean one of several things, and the only thing JW is citing are the intepretations themselves! He's not citing anything else to suggest that the daughter actually remained alive.
The text that the interpretations and commentaries are talking about does not in and of itself explain fully one way or the other whether the daughter remained alive.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 7 by JehovahsWitness]

Another reply to JW's post number 7. JW in that post references Gill's exposition. However, when I looked up Judges Chapter 11 Verse 40 on Biblehub, I got (from what I can tell is the full text of) the exposition.

For comparison, I will first post what JW quoted.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

That the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite,.... the word (p) used may signify to talk and discourse with her, to hold a confabulation with her, and comfort her, as Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret it; to bring her some news, and tell her some diverting stories, to cheer and refresh her in her solitude. [...] The meeting of the daughters of Israel, so long as the custom lasted, which perhaps was only during the life of Jephthah's daughter

Now compare and contrast that with what I found on biblehub
http://biblehub.com/judges/11-40.htm
(Scroll down the page until you see it)

That the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite,.... Either the death of her, as some, or her virginity, as others; though the word (p) used may signify to talk and discourse with her, to hold a confabulation with her, and comfort her, as Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret it; to bring her some news, and tell her some diverting stories, to cheer and refresh her in her solitude. De Dieu observes, that the word signifies in the Arabic language to "praise", or speak in commendation of a person or thing; and indeed in this sense it seems to be used in this book, Judges 5:11, "they shall rehearse", that is, with praise and thanksgiving, "the righteous acts of the Lord"; and so the daughters of Israel went every year to the place where the daughter of Jephthah was, to speak in the praise of her, of her heroism, in so cheerfully submitting to her father's vow, and expressing such gratitude and joy at the same time for victory over the enemies of Israel; and this they did in her presence and while she lived, to keep up her spirits; or it may be, in some public place, and even after her death, in memory of her, and to celebrate her praise. Epiphanius says (q), that in his time, at Sebaste, formerly called Samaria, they deified the daughter of Jephthah, and kept a feast for her every year. The meeting of the daughters of Israel, so long as the custom lasted, which perhaps was only during the life of Jephthah's daughter, was four days in a year; but whether they were four days running, or once in a quarter of a year, is not certain; the latter seems most probable.
(emphasis mine)

Indeed as I said up above, the only place it seems that this notion that the daughter remained alive is from the commentaries/interpretations themselves and not from the text.

Here's another commentary that touches upon one of the questions I asked JW up above
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/judges/11-40.htm
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
34-40. Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances"The return of the victors was hailed, as usual, by the joyous acclaim of a female band (1Sa 18:6), the leader of whom was Jephthah's daughter. The vow was full in his mind, and it is evident that it had not been communicated to anyone, otherwise precautions would doubtless have been taken to place another object at his door. The shriek, and other accompaniments of irrepressible grief, seem to indicate that her life was to be forfeited as a sacrifice; the nature of the sacrifice (which was abhorrent to the character of God) and distance from the tabernacle does not suffice to overturn this view, which the language and whole strain of the narrative plainly support; and although the lapse of two months might be supposed to have afforded time for reflection, and a better sense of his duty, there is but too much reason to conclude that he was impelled to the fulfilment by the dictates of a pious but unenlightened conscience.
If the vow of a burnt offering does not mean to set the offering on fire, but to dedicate the offering in lifelong servitude/perpetual virginity, then Jephtha's cries of horror and dismay make no sense. I mean...dedicating someone to God is a good thing, a great thing isn't it?

[ttruscott]

Essentially what you're saying is "it would be disgusting, and therefore it didn't happen". In other words, you're essentially dismissing it based on your own disapproval. This is what is known as selective interpretation. There is nothing within the text itself that suggests it was meant to be metaphorical.

Quote mining a text selected for a single purpose is not usually accepted as particularly good method of exegesis. Taken as a whole, the text includes
Deuteronomy 18:10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer

Leviticus 18:21 You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.

Deuteronomy 12:31 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the Lord hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.

These are the verses that must define and mitigate how the vow was kept. But even if Jephthah was so twisted as to burn his daughter, these versess make it plain his evil was his own and not shared by the LORD.

[onewithhim]

No, Judges chapter 11 v 40 explains that after He dedicated his daughter to God the her female companions would go and visit her once a year.

Quote:
Young's Literal Translation reads:
"from time to time the daughters of Israel go to talk to the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite, four days in a year."

Wow. The Young's Literal Translation? Really? Instead of using the New World Translation, the one Jehovah's Witnesses wrote themselves, you instead go for the Young's Literal Translation. I wonder why.

My guess would be because the NWT doesn't say a damn thing about talking to Jephthah's daughter.

"Judges 11:40 From year to year, the young women of Israel would go to give commendation to the daughter of Jephthah the Gile-ad-ite four days in the year."
- New World Translation

Although many bibles render this verse "lament" the Hebrew verb " (tanah, to tell; to repeat; to recount) is defined in A Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (edited by B. Davies, 1957, p. 693) as to repeat, to rehearse. At Judges 11:40 the King James Version renders the term lament, but the margin reads talk with.

Why are you even considering different translations? Are you suggesting that the NWT is flawed?

"the still further clause in the account of the fulfilment of the vow, "and she knew no man," is not in harmony with the assumption of a sacrificial death. This clause would add nothing to the description in that case

Dying a virgin is often considered to be particularly tragic. Pointing out that not only will she die, but she will die a virgin adds to the tragedy. And it's not an assumption of a sacrificial death when it is clearly spelled out that Jephthah fulfilled his vow to sacrifice as a burnt offering whoever came out of his house (in this case, his daughter). How can you call this an assumption?

The words only gain their proper sense if we connect them with the previous clause [...] i.e., he fulfilled the vow through the fact that she knew no man, but dedicated her life to the Lord [...] in a lifelong chastity." -- ibid

What if instead of his daughter, his wife came out the door? How would he possibly have fulfilled his vow of giving up someone for a lifelong chastity (since... apparently, that's what "burnt offering" means), if a non-virgin came out of the house?

If "burnt offering" means "give someone up for a lifelong of servitude", then surely you can reference a different instance of "burnt offering" being used this way? Otherwise, it becomes an ad hoc assumption.

It's funny you haven't noticed that JWs use other versions besides the NWT almost consistently here. Other versions are frequently quoted. Most often when quoting other versions it shows that other translators AGREE with our line of thinking as presented in the NWT. And by the way---we didn't write it ourselves. Please know what you are talking about before you make accusations.

[onewithhim]

JPS Tanakh 11:39-40 After 2 months' time, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he vowed. She had never known a man. So it became a custom in Isreal (40) for the maidens of Isreal to go evey year, for four days in the year, and chant dirges for the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.

So, he did it. But, the thing to remember is God did not ask or require it. He did.

This is one of 2 human sacrifices to God, unrequested, in the OT.

Not so. It has been explained to you in a most compelling way. If you would rather not accept the reasoning that has been presented to you, so be it. We don't lose any sleep over someone turning away from the truth of God's mercy and love. All we can do is try our best.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 13 by rikuoamero]

I wonder if you opposers of what JW and I are saying actually READ our posts. It is clear, from references even to other versions of the Bible AND other Bible commentaries, that Jepthah's daughter was not literally burned up. Yet you fight against that fact. I will stand with Jehovah and His witnesses on this, and with commentaries that have been presented from other Bible scholars....that Jepthah's daughter lived on to greet her friends every year who went to see her.

Why would women literally lament a person by going to the temple? Couldn't they be sad for her without going there, if she was literally dead? What could be the purpose of travelling there to be sad for her? That's laughable. Obviously they were going there to encourage her and satisfy their own needs to see their friend.

[Justin108]

Essentially what you're saying is "it would be disgusting, and therefore it didn't happen". In other words, you're essentially dismissing it based on your own disapproval. This is what is known as selective interpretation. There is nothing within the text itself that suggests it was meant to be metaphorical.

Quote mining a text selected for a single purpose is not usually accepted as particularly good method of exegesis. Taken as a whole, the text includes
Deuteronomy 18:10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer

Were Deuteronomy and Judges written by the same author? If not, then there is nothing wrong with my exegesis. Furthermore, it is also not a particularly good method of exegesis to assume a priori that what you are reading cannot have contradictions.

Essentially you and JW interpret the text thusly
- if Jephthah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering, then it would mean that the Bible contradicts itself.
- since I refuse to acknowledge the possibility that the Bible contradicts itself, it must mean that Jephthah only metaphorically sacrificed his daughter as a burns offering.

Then there is Judges 21:25 which I have pointed out repeatedly (note how Judges 21:25 was probably written by the same author as Judges 11). According to Judges 21:25, there was no king at the time and people acted as they saw fit, regardless of the law. So saying "Jephthah would be acting illegally and so he could not have sacrificed his daughter as a literal burns offering" is irrelevant, as Judges 21:25 clearly tells us that people did as they saw fit.

Leviticus 18:21 You shall not give any of your children to offer them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord.

Who said anything about Molech...?

These are the verses that must define and mitigate how the vow was kept. But even if Jephthah was so twisted as to burn his daughter, these versess make it plain his evil was his own and not shared by the LORD.

I never said otherwise. I never said nor implied that "Jephthah sacrificed his daughter to God, and so therefore God is evil". My critique is mainly Jehovah's Witnesses' sugarcoating of what actually happened in Judges 11.

[Justin108]

It's funny you haven't noticed that JWs use other versions besides the NWT almost consistently here.

Why would they? The only reason to ever use a different translation is if you doubt the one you normally use.

Most often when quoting other versions it shows that other translators AGREE with our line of thinking as presented in the NWT.

While also ignoring those that disagree with your line of thinking, right?

Judges 40:11 (International Standard Version) that for four days out of every year the Israeli women would go to mourn the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite in commemoration.

Of course JW wouldn't quote the International Standard Version because clearly it doesn't agree with his narrative.

And by the way---we didn't write it ourselves. Please know what you are talking about before you make accusations.

"In October 1946, the president of the Watch Tower Society, Nathan H. Knorr, proposed a fresh translation of the New Testament, which Jehovah's Witnesses usually refer to as the Christian Greek Scriptures. Work began on December 2, 1947 when the "New World Bible Translation Committee" was formed, composed of Jehovah's Witnesses who professed to be anointed."
https://alchetron.com/New-World-Transla ... Scriptures

[JehovahsWitness]

I have things I'd like to ask:

2) Why is Jephtha distraught when he sees his daughter coming out of his home?

Because no doubt, he understood the impact the vow, if carried out, would have on both their lives.

In Israel at that time having offspring was central to their culture, indeed the ancient Hebrews had no word for "bachelor" (much less for "bachelorette"), yet effectively Jephthah's vow meant his daughter would never marry and never have children which at that time and within this culture were (for respectable women) synonymous.

The narrative emphasises that Jephthah had but one child, meaning his family name would end with her. In Israel at that time the continuation of the family name was incredibly important as it constituted not only that a person would be remembered, it more importantly that their plot of land, considered God given, would stay in the family and tribe (Consider the lengths the nation took to ensure that the tribe of Benjamin not be cut off in Judges 21). It was considered a primary duty to add to Israel's multitudes and not having offspring a great tragedy*.

So even putting aside the evident emotional sacrifice involved, a life without children and grandchildren would have a huge impact on both their lives and Jephthah's reaction reflected he well understood this.

• * Although of the pre-Mosaic period the lengths to which Lot's daughters were willing to go in order to bear children and preserve the family line and barren Rachel's lament to her husband "Give me children, or Ill die!" might be considered as a cultural background for later Hebrew attitudes.

Who did Jephthah expect to greet him?

The narrative states Jephthah's vow to be concerning "the one coming out of the doors of my house to meet me"

It would be unlikely that an that would be an animal, the Israelites did not keep lower animals in their houses so that (as well a has been previously noted, the choice of language) seems reasonably to indicate Jephthah knew his vow would apply to a member of his household. Whether that would be a servant or a relative or (as the case turned out his own daughter) cannot be determined the text and Jephthah himself could not have known for sure who would be the first to greet him but the possibility it would be his daughter must have been present in his mind when he made the vow. NOTE: Note the ripping of one's garments was a sign of deep personal grief and not of "surpise" so although grievious circumstances often come unexpectedly the two should not be confused.



JEPHTHAH'S DAUGHTER [Index]

Why is Jephthah distraught when he sees his daughter coming out of his house?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 41#p900641

Did Jephthah kill his daughter
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 89#p900389

Various Commentaries
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 78#p900478

Burnt Offering: Literal or Methaphoric
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 93#p900493