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 Jephʹthah made a vowg to Jehovah and said: “If you give the Amʹmonites into my hand, 31 then whoever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Amʹmonites will become Jehovah’s, and I will offer that one up as a burnt offering.�

Judges 11:34 Finally Jephʹthah came to his home in Mizʹpah, 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 Jephʹthah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering?

[Justin108]

Justin, the reason we use different translations is that they AGREE with what the NWT says about a subject under discussion. We quote them largely because other people here would respect those other versions more than the NWT.

We would use the International Version that you referred to, that says the women mourned Jepthah's daughter, because they did indeed mourn her loss of the possibility of ever marrying. As was pointed out, an Israelite woman would have her heart set on marriage and having children. This was taken from the daughter because she chose to honor her father's vow (which she didn't have to do). Giving up marriage and children, to Israelite women, was something very much worth mourning.

Do you agree with the Young's Literal Translation in its entirety? Or do you just like this verse in particular because it agrees with you?

[2timothy316]

I still beleive she died. But, remember , God never asked for or required such a thing and is silent in this whole account.(His silence should be deafening)

His silence is deafening because Jepthah's daughter didn't die and no one centuries ago would have thought she did. I guess people in ancient times knew God better than they do today. He never would have countenanced a literal burnt sacrifice to Himself.

I agree that Jepthah was rash and made a stupid vow. I agree that it behooves us to think very deeply before we make a vow.

It helps do know what a burnt offering means. A burnt offering is where the entire animal is given to Jehovah and none of it is kept by the worshiper.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001077043

Jepthah's sacrifice is no different than Samuel's mother's sacrifice in 1 Samuel 1:11, 24. Samuel's mother gave Samuel to Jehovah as a burnt offering. Yet we know Samuel didn't die after he was weaned. He did after all, go on to write books of the Bible. A burnt offering to Jehovah when it comes to a person is not literal. But the whole life is given to Jehovah in service not in death. Samson, Samuel and Jepthah's daughter can all be considered 'living burnt offerings'.

Jepthah's story has two lessons. First keep your vows. De 23:21, Ps 76:11, Mt 5:33. Second, do not vow something only to give thought to it later what you have vowed. Pr 20:25. For it is better to never have vowed at all then vow and not pay. Ecc 5:5.

[onewithhim]

Justin, the reason we use different translations is that they AGREE with what the NWT says about a subject under discussion. We quote them largely because other people here would respect those other versions more than the NWT.

We would use the International Version that you referred to, that says the women mourned Jepthah's daughter, because they did indeed mourn her loss of the possibility of ever marrying. As was pointed out, an Israelite woman would have her heart set on marriage and having children. This was taken from the daughter because she chose to honor her father's vow (which she didn't have to do). Giving up marriage and children, to Israelite women, was something very much worth mourning.

Do you agree with the Young's Literal Translation in its entirety? Or do you just like this verse in particular because it agrees with you?

I very much like the Young's Translation in its entirety, though I think their New Testament renderings could use more scholarly attention. As I look through their Greek Scriptures, I see, for example, at Hebrews 1:8,9 (quoted from Psalm 45:6 and 7), where they have gone with the least likely rendering of those verses, esp. verse 8, and show a contradiction that should not be there if translated properly. "Throne" means the source of power. The verse should read, "God is thy throne forever." Verse 9 goes on to say that Jesus has a God, so he could not BE God.

"Thou hast loved righteousness and hatest wickedness, Therefore God, THY GOD, hath anointed thee, Oil of joy above thy companions."

Obviously verse 6 in Psalm 45 and verse 8 in Hebrews should be translated according to the most likely word order, and obviously that translation is in error. Sometimes we have to use our common sense.

That's one example of something I don't agree with Young's concerning. But they get a majority of Scriptures right. They use Jehovah's name where it originally appears in the Hebrew text, around 7,000 times, so that's excellent.

[Justin108]

Justin, the reason we use different translations is that they AGREE with what the NWT says about a subject under discussion. We quote them largely because other people here would respect those other versions more than the NWT.

We would use the International Version that you referred to, that says the women mourned Jepthah's daughter, because they did indeed mourn her loss of the possibility of ever marrying. As was pointed out, an Israelite woman would have her heart set on marriage and having children. This was taken from the daughter because she chose to honor her father's vow (which she didn't have to do). Giving up marriage and children, to Israelite women, was something very much worth mourning.

Do you agree with the Young's Literal Translation in its entirety? Or do you just like this verse in particular because it agrees with you?

I very much like the Young's Translation in its entirety, though I think their New Testament renderings could use more scholarly attention. As I look through their Greek Scriptures, I see, for example, at Hebrews 1:8,9 (quoted from Psalm 45:6 and 7), where they have gone with the least likely rendering of those verses

Based on that, what makes you think Young's is accurate in this instance?

esp. verse 8, and show a contradiction that should not be there if translated properly. "Throne" means the source of power. The verse should read, "God is thy throne forever." Verse 9 goes on to say that Jesus has a God, so he could not BE God.

Right. So when they agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses narrative, then they're right. Otherwise, they're wrong.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 34 by Justin108]

If you have a point to make, would you be specific, please, and explain just why you disagree with a certain viewpoint about a particular scripture?

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 34 by Justin108]

If you have a point to make, would you be specific, please, and explain just why you disagree with a certain viewpoint about a particular scripture?

You cherry pick verses from other translations whenever it fits your narrative. Of all the translations I could find regarding Judges 11:40, Young's is literally the only one that translates it as "talk". Pointing to Young's as proof that women talked to Jephthah's daughter is cherry picking.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 34 by Justin108]

If you have a point to make, would you be specific, please, and explain just why you disagree with a certain viewpoint about a particular scripture?

You cherry pick verses from other translations whenever it fits your narrative. Of all the translations I could find regarding Judges 11:40, Young's is literally the only one that translates it as "talk". Pointing to Young's as proof that women talked to Jephthah's daughter is cherry picking.

OK, I respect your opinion. And thanks for being specific.

I look at it as what I get from the NWT and Other sources about Jepthah's daughter....they harmonize with Young's, and to me this shows that the meaning that I find acceptable warrants respect. The translators of Young's recognized the true meaning of the "burnt offering" reference. This would stop the criticism of some who would say "Jehovah's Witnesses are the only ones who look at the account that way."

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 37 by onewithhim]

I look at it as what I get from the NWT and Other sources about Jepthah's daughter....they harmonize with Young's, and to me this shows that the meaning that I find acceptable warrants respect.

http://biblehub.com/judges/11-40.htm

If you go to that page, you will see that what Justin said is correct. Young's is the ONLY one that says "talk".
Every other translation says either "commemorate", "mourn", "lament", "celebrate", none of which carry a necessary connotation of communicating directly with the person being mourned, etc.
Heck, even the NWT itself is like that.

From year to year, the young women of Israel would go to give commendation to the daughter of Jephʹthah the Gilʹe·ad·ite four days in the year.

Another question is one I don't think has been answered in this thread (not entirely sure)

What exactly did Jephtha mean when he made his vow? When Jephtha makes his vow to give up that which comes out of his house as a burnt offering to Jehovah, how is it that that is NOT a reference to setting it on fire, as previous generations of Hebrews did with their offerings to God?
Even Young uses burnt offering.

And Jephthah voweth a vow to Jehovah, and saith, `If Thou dost at all give the Bene-Ammon into my hand -- 31 then it hath been, that which at all cometh out from the doors of my house to meet me in my turning back in peace from the Bene-Ammon -- it hath been to Jehovah, or I have offered up for it -- a burnt-offering.'

Since when has 'burnt offering' meant in either Hebrew or English offering something up and NOT setting it on fire?

Basically, from what I'm seeing, pointing to Young's doesn't really solve this dilemma over whether or not the daughter was killed in a sacrificial ritual. The text, even translated literally, is unclear. There's mention of a burnt offering, but there's also mention of the daughter weeping for her virginity (and not for being killed). Then there's mention that her father did as he vowed.

EDIT:
I also found this on Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnt_offering_(Judaism)
No mention of not killing and not burning what is being sacrificed.

[2timothy316]

EDIT:
I also found this on Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnt_offering_(Judaism)
No mention of not killing and not burning what is being sacrificed.

Jesus was likened to a 'burnt offering'. In fact all burnt offerings were a foreshadowing of what Jesus would do for all mankind. (Heb 10:5-10) Jesus wasn't set on fire. Jesus was murdered by the priesthood of his own people. However, Jesus did serve Jehovah his whole life even to the end of his life. Jephthah's daughter did the same. So did Samuel. The fire isn't the real focus of the offering but the giving of the whole life and body. It never leaves the alter and nothing is kept by the offerer. (Le 6:8-13)

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 39 by 2timothy316]

Jesus was likened to a 'burnt offering'.

I'm going to have to ask for a quote on that, and also, I have to point out...it's still death, the person or thing being sacrificed being killed.

Heb 10:5-10

Doesn't say anything about the thing or person being sacrificed not being killed...just that according to Hebrews, Jesus claims that God was not pleased by the burnt offering.

You have to realise, it is possible to do something for someone else, even if that person does not approve of it. One's wife's disapproval of her physically lame husband's cleaning of the gutters doesn't change the fact that last weekend, the husband cleaned the gutters.

Jesus wasn't set on fire. Jesus was murdered by the priesthood of his own people.

Apparently so. He was still killed.

However, Jesus did serve Jehovah his whole life even to the end of his life. Jephthah's daughter did the same.

I can agree this is what the story indicates. It's just not fully clear as to when her life ended. A natural life, old and on her deathbed, or young in a ritual of some sort?

The fire isn't the real focus of the offering but the giving of the whole life and body. It never leaves the alter and nothing is kept by the offerer.

These two sentences doesn't refute the claim that the daughter was ritualistically killed. Neither do the verses from Leviticus.