Juízes 11
Warren Wiersbe · Citado em PreceptAustin
Juízes 11
Wiersbe has an encouraging application writing that "No person should be blamed for the circumstances surrounding his or her birth. Why permit the things you cannot control to burden your life? Learn to accept them, and the Lord will work out His purposes in His own time (Ps. 139:13–16). Opposition will one day give way to opportunity. (See context With the Word: The Chapter-by-Chapter Bible Handbook or Borrow With the Word) Judges 11:6 and they said to Jephthah, "Come and be our chief that we may fight against the sons of Ammon." Related Passage: Joshua 10:24 When they brought these kings out to Joshua, Joshua called for all the men of Israel, and said to the chiefs (qatsin) of the men of war who had gone with him, “Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings.” So they came near and put their feet on their necks. JEPHTHAH CALLED TO COMMAND MILITARY ESV Study note is interesting - God did not “raise up” Jephthah, as he had raised up previous judges (Jdg 3:9, 15; 4:6; 6:14). Now, for the first time, a leader was commissioned by the people, without seeking God’s approval—another sign of their increasing apostasy. (See context ESV Study Bible or borrow the ESV study Bible) And they said to Jephthah, "Come and be our chief (qatsin) that we may fight against the sons of Ammon. They refers to the elders, those who had either looked the other way when he was cast out of town or possibly now including some of the very brothers who had cast him out. In either even here is a man not wanted earlier, but now actually needed! Talk about personal vindication! In contrast with the judgeship of Gideon, who was initially called by the Lord, Jephthah was initially called by men. But of course while that is true, clearly God was at work preparing him to the point that he became known as a valiant warrior. At one point they asked him to leave; now they come to him asking him to lead! What a change of mind! What a change of direction. -- Alan Carr George Bush - Come, and be our captain. The (PROVIDENTIAL) manner in which God overrules the ill-meant actions of men to the furtherance of His designs is here very observable. If Jephthah had not been, as he was, the object of his brethren’s unkindness, he would had lost the opportunity to exercise and improve his martial (MILITARY) genius, and would have failed to distinguish himself in the eyes of his countrymen. So it often happens that the providence which is by all appearance, our greatest misfortune, is necessary to fit us for the work for which God designs us (cf Ro 8:28)! (Judges 11 Commentary) THOUGHT - ONE LESSON IS DON'T WASTE YOUR [ADVERSE] CIRCUMSTANCES THINKING THINGS LIKE "NOW GOD COULD NEVER USE ME, ETC". OUR SOVEREIGN GOD CAN USE ANY CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING HIS PEOPLE IN FRUITFUL WORK FOR HIS KINGDOM.) A R Fausset - And they said unto Jephthah, Come and be our captain [Qatzin, in war here, as in Josh 10:24. Elsewhere ‘ruler’ or ‘prince’ in general: akin to the Arabic Kady (Isa 1:10, 3:6, 7; Mic. 3:1, 9)], that we may fight with the children of Ammon. (Judges 11 Commentary) Chief (07101)(qatsin) means a chief, ruler, commander, captain from a root meaning one who decides. Military sense = Josh 10:24; Jdg 11:6, 11; cf. Jdg. 11:9; Da 11:18. Non-military sense in Isa 3:6-7. Gilbrant - A masculine noun coming from qātsāh, qātsîn occurs twelve times in the OT. In Arabic, the cognate means "to decide," referring to a judge. Qātsîn appears as a military term describing a "commander" of an army responsible for recruiting and leading the force. Joshua had his commanders place their feet on the necks of five captured kings before executing them (Josh. 10:24). Daniel predicted the appearance of a commander who would put a stop to the campaign carried out by the king of the north (Da. 11:18). The word often moves beyond military leadership to include a place as head of a people in a more general sense. Jephthah is mentioned as chief of the Israelite forces as well as becoming their political leader (Judg. 11:6, 11). And Isaiah predicted that the rulers of Jerusalem would all flee and be captured (Isa. 22:3). Micah delivered a scourging rebuke of the civil leaders of Jerusalem, condemning them for rendering perverted court decisions, victimizing God's people and breaking the requirements of his covenant (Mic. 3:1, 9). When Isaiah called on the chiefs of Sodom to listen to his rebuke, he was undoubtedly delivering a message to the same Jewish leaders. The image of Sodom would be a fitting reminder of their wickedness and of the threat of total destruction that was hanging overhead (Isa. 1:10). In fact, one of the consequences of judgment would be that no one would be willing to accept the task of standing at the head of a broken people (Isa. 3:6f). Proverbs employs qātsîn twice, pointing out that a leader can be persuaded by a gentle approach, even though he wields great power (Prov. 25:15), and pointing to the diligence of ants who carry out their tasks even though they have no chieftain (Pr. 6:7). (Complete Biblical Library) Qatsin - 12 verses - chief(3), chiefs(1), commander(1), ruler(3), rulers(4). Jos. 10:24; Jdg. 11:6; Jdg. 11:11; Prov. 6:7; Prov. 25:15; Isa. 1:10; Isa. 3:6; Isa. 3:7; Isa. 22:3; Dan. 11:18; Mic. 3:1; Mic. 3:9 Alan Carr - Judges 11:4-8 AN ASTONISHING REQUEST - Judges 11:6 The Character Of The Request – The elders of his people come to him with the request that Jephthah come back and become their “captain” (qatsin) . This word means “commander, chief, or ruler”. At one point they asked him to leave; now they come to him asking him to lead! What a change of mind! What a change of direction. "When we serve Him faithfully today, He will look after our tomorrow’s!" THOUGHT: This is just a reminder that the call to service or leadership might come without notice. We are to be ready and prepared to answer His call when it comes. Our duty is to faithfully serve the Lord where we are. We should ever do His will where He has placed us. We must strive to learn all the lessons He wants to teach us. It is God’s responsibility to open the doors of ministry and opportunity. It is our responsibility to grow where we are planted, and to trust the Lord to use us when, where and how He sees fit. If we will make our hearts available to Him (ED: HERE IS THE KEY BELOVED - AVAILABILITY, NOT ABILITY!!!), He will give us plenty of opportunities for service in His kingdom’s work. When we serve Him faithfully today, He will look after our tomorrow’s! (Judges 11:1-11 - The Reject Who Became Ruler) Judges 11:7 Then Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "Did you not hate me and drive me from my father's house? So why have you come to me now when you are in trouble?" Did you not hate me and drive me: Ge 26:27 37:27 45:4,5 Pr 17:17 Isa 60:14 Ac 7:9-14 Rev 3:9 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH IS WARY Then - Marks progression in the narrative. Apparently elders of Gilead made a trip to Tob meet with Jephthah who reminded the leaders of his previous ostracism (v7). His complaint about being appealed to as a last resort is almost identical to the words of the Lord in [Jdg 10:14]. Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "Did you not hate me and drive me from (garas; Lxx - ekbállō) my father's house? So why have you come to me now when you are in trouble? Note that Jephthah says they hated him and drove in. So either the elders colluded with his brothers in the past or now some years later, some of his brothers were elders! Either way "what goes around, comes around!" Jephthah was wary and hesitant to jump on their offer. Why should he trust those who had treated him so badly in the past? This led to some hard-nosed negotiating in which Jephthah was offered, and accepted, the twin role of tribal leader and military commander (Jdg 11:8). The bargain thus struck was formally ratified in a ceremony held at Mizpah, the place at which the initial gathering had been (cf. Jdg 11:11 and Jdg 10:17). So the episode ended where it began, but with Jephthah now installed as leader. Hate in context refers not so much to the emotion per se, but to the action produced by the emotion. Their disdain for Jephthah prompted them to expel him from the family Arthur Cundall - His answer to their request implies that they were as blameworthy as his own brethren in his expulsion from the family, but in spite of the sting in his words, there is not the vindictiveness that is revealed in Jdg 12:1-6. Jephthah probably realized that the conventions of society left them no alternative but to acquiesce in the harsh action of his brethren. Illegitimacy remains a stigma upon the innocent, who are compelled to suffer for the sin of their parents. The elders of Gilead had swallowed their pride in approaching him and he was opportunist enough not to let his pride stand in the way, not only of advancement, but of acceptance into normal society. His reluctance was soon overcome after he had established the fact that he would be accepted as their leader after, and not only during, the Ammonite war. (Borrow Judges & Ruth: Tyndale Old Testament Commentary) John Trapp on why have you come to me now when you are in trouble - “May not God justly say as much to most of us? We seldom seek to him till needs must.” George Bush - Did ye not hate me and expel me, &c. Though the act of his expulsion was primarily that of Jephthah’s brethren, yet these elders had either actively aided in it, or by forbearing to prevent or punish the injury, had virtually made themselves partakers in the guilt of it; and with this he plainly charges them. ‘Magistrates that have power to protect those that are injured, if they do not do them right, really do them wrong.’ Henry. Why are ye come unto me now when ye are in distress? Not that Jephthah was unwilling to save his country, but he thought fit to give them a hint of their former unkindness, that they might repent of it, and in future be more sensible of their obligations. Thus Joseph humbled his brethren before he made himself known to them. The same language too may be applied by Christ to impenitent sinners, who after doing what in them lies to expel the Saviour from his inheritance in their own hearts, in the church, and in the world, still fly to him and supplicate him for succor in the day of their distress. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And Jephthah said unto the elders of Gilead, Did not ye hate me, and expel me out of my father’s house? [the elders of Gilead who came to Jephthah probably included some of his brethren who had expelled him. His fellow tribesmen and the elders had at least supported his brothers in the expulsion, and privation of sustenance, which was an unjust action (note, ver. 2). Still, it was not just to charge them all with the wrong act of his brethren]. And why are ye come unto me now when ye are in distress? (Judges 11 Commentary) Alan Carr - Judges 11:4-8 AN ASTONISHING REQUEST Judges 11:7-8 The Commitment Of The Request – In verse 7, Jephthah recounts their past attitude towards him. He reminds him that they were the ones who asked him to leave; now they want him to come back and be their ruler. In verse 8, they reissue their promise that Jephthah will be their “head” if he will only come back with them and deliver them from their enemies. The word “head” means “the top, the summit, the chief”. They want Jephthah to come back and take over! They want him to come back and be their boss. They are offering him control over their lives. There treatment of Jephthah in these verses is sad. They had no use for him when things were going well, but when the bottom fell out, they ran to him for the help they needed. By the way, this is how many people treat the Lord. They refuse to be faithful. They refuse to serve Him. They refuse to honor His word, His will or His house. They treat Him like He is an unwanted intruder in their lives. They treat Him like He is the spare tire on the car of their life. He is to stay in the trunk and keep quiet, but He better be ready when they have a flat and pull him out! What a shame! How much better it is to walk in the will of the Lord day by day. Then, when the bad days to come, you have the confidence that you have walked with Him, and now He will walk with you. If you leave Him out of your life, He may just let you deal with your problem on your own when it comes! If He did, who could blame him? (Judges 11:1-11 - The Reject Who Became Ruler) Judges 11:8 And the elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "For this reason we have now returned to you, that you may go with us and fight with the sons of Ammon and become head over all the inhabitants of Gilead." And the elders of Gilead: Ex 8:8,28 9:28 10:17 1Ki 13:6 Lk 17:3,4 we have now returned to you: Jdg 10:18 Judges 11 Resources THE ELDERS OF GILEAD "SWEETEN THE POT!" And the elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "For this reason we have now returned to you, that you may go with us and fight with the sons of Ammon and become head over all the inhabitants of Gilead - Can you imagine what his evil brothers must have been thinking at hearing this news! Head suggests that some type of political leadership is apparently in view, for in their initial offer to Jephthah to be their military commander they do not use the word "head," but "chief" (qatsin)(Jdg 11:6). They "sweeten the pot" to attract his interest. NET Note on become head over - Then you will become the leader. The leaders of Gilead now use the word רֹאשׁ (ro’sh, “head, leader”), the same term that appeared in their original, general offer (see 10:18). In their initial offer to Jephthah they had simply invited him to be their קָצִין (qatsin, “commander”; v. 6). When he resists they must offer him a more attractive reward—rulership over the region. See R. G. Boling, Judges (AB), 198. ESV Study note on go with us and fight - Cf. the language later used by the Israelites to ask Samuel for a king: “that our king may... go out before us and fight” (1 Sam. 8:20). In both cases, even though God acquiesced, the request was inappropriate. God, not any judge or any king, was to be Israel’s prime warrior. (See context ESV Study Bible or borrow the ESV study Bible) George Bush - Therefore we turn again unto thee. This cannot be meant of a local turning or returning to Jephthah, for the words were obviously spoken at the first interview, from which they had not yet retired. The phrase doubtless has reference to a change of mind, a turning again in the state of their feelings towards him. It is as if they had said, ‘We are convinced that we have done thee wrong, and that thou hast just ground of complaint; but we renounce the feelings we have formerly cherished, and we now come to acknowledge our fault and to make thee full reparation. As a proof of our sincerity we proffer thee this honor, which shall counterbalance the dishonor we have put upon thee.’ The incident may serve to remind us, (1) That the least we can do when we have injured a fellow-being, is to confess frankly our wrong, and ask his pardon. (2) That we should beware of despising or trampling upon any man, so as to make him our enemy, for we know not how much need we may have of his friendship and services before we die. (3) That men of worth who are undervalued, disparaged, and ill-treated, should bear it with meekness and cheerfulness, leaving it to God to vindicate their good name in his own way. Their judgment shall finally come forth as the noon-day. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And the elders of Gilead said unto Jephthah, Therefore [because thou wast formerly wronged, and we wish to make thee amends. Wisely they do not reason with a passionate and resentful man like Jephthah] we turn again to thee now, that thou mayest go with us, and fight against the children of Ammon, and be our head over all the inhabitants of Gilead [though as a Mamzer or illegitimate son (Deut. 23:2), he was ordinarily disqualified from entering the congregation of the Lord, yet under special circumstances God gives an extraordinary call. God imposes positive precepts as ordinarily binding on us, but not as a necessity binding Himself. The elders were divinely guided to choose as leader him whoever should begin to fight against the Ammonites (ch. 10:18). Jephthah fulfilled this requirement, in having probably already made inroads on Ammon. The law as to the exclusion of bastards, being made for Israel’s good, must give place to God’s choice of Jephthah, now that Israel’s good required him as the leader (compare Matt. 12:7)]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:9 So Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "If you take me back to fight against the sons of Ammon and the LORD gives them up to me, will I become your head?" If you take me back to fight Nu 32:20-29 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Joshua 10:12 (THE LORD GIVES THE VICTORY) Then Joshua spoke to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, “O sun, stand still at Gibeon, And O moon in the valley of Aijalon.” Deuteronomy 2:31 “The LORD said to me, ‘See, I have begun to deliver Sihon and his land over to you. Begin to occupy, that you may possess his land.’ JEPHTHAH NEGOTIATES A FAVORABLE ARRANGEMENT So Jephthah said to the elders of Gilead, "If you take me back to fight against the sons of Ammon and the LORD gives them up to me, will I become your head? - His reply although acknowledging God's power in the battle still appears to be motivated somewhat by self-interest. Nevertheless, one cannot help but appreciate the way Jephthah emphasized the LORD in all his negotiations with the leaders of Israel. He is clearly acknowledging that it is the the LORD Who gives the victory, not Jephthah. and the agreement between him and the elders must be ratified before the Lord at Mizpah. Although there may have been an element of self-interest in Jephthah's request, the writer of Hebrews makes it clear that Jephthah was indeed a man of faith, not simply an opportunist, placing him in the famous Hebrews 11 "Hall of Faith" writing "And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets," (Heb 11:32). Pulpit Commentary points out that "There is no interrogative in the Hebrew. The words may be taken as the laying down of the condition by Jephthah, to which in the following verse the elders express their assent." Guzik makes a good point - Jephthah was only will to assume leadership in the crisis if he could also remain a leader after the crisis. He didn’t want to be rejected again as a worthless man. George Bush - Shall I be your head? Not only your leader in this war, but permanent judge and chief magistrate. Having to deal with persons whom he had reason to distrust, he determines to bind them to their compact by the most unequivocal assurances. ‘Jephthah’s wisdom had not been answerable to his valor, if he had not made his match beforehand. He bargains therefore for his sovereignty ere he wins it.’ Bp. Hall. In all our agreements it is well to be explicit and solemn, that afterwards there may be no room for subterfuge or evasion. As the service before him was one in which he would naturally endanger his life, he deems it right that he should be duly rewarded, especially as he seems to have thought it was only in this way that he could effectually secure himself against the treacherous designs of his brethren, whose ill will and injuries he had once experienced. That there might also have been some tincture of ambition insinuating itself into his motives, is perhaps not improbable. The spirit of pious dependence, however, on the divine blessing, argues strongly in favor of his general spirit. He does not speak with confidence of his success, but qualifies it with a peradventure—‘if the Lord deliver them before me,’—as if intending to remind his countrymen, to look up to God, as he himself did, as the giver of victory. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And Jephthah said unto the elders of Gilead, If ye bring me home again to fight against the children of Ammon, and the LORD [JEHOVAH] deliver them before me [as in Josh. 10:12; Deut. 2:31], shall I be your head? [or as Keil explains (without a question which the impression in ver. 10, “according to thy words,” less suits; for it presupposes an affirmative statement on the part of Jephthah) “I will be your head;” the ‘I’ being emphatic as distinguished from ‘ye’].(Judges 11 Commentary) Gary Inrig - Unable to find the leader they had been looking for who would lead the charge against Ammon, the tribal leaders make a personal visit to recruit a man they would have considered the last candidate for the job a few years earlier. There must have been a huge sense of vindication when Jephthah heard the leaders of the people who had rejected him urging him to be the commander of the Israelite forces. But Jephthah was not too flattered to miss the fact that they had downgraded the job from “head” to “commander!” And he was still too angry and bitter about the way they had treated him to simply jump at the opportunity. He held all the cards, and if the leaders thought they could get him cheap, with a few flattering words, they were deeply mistaken. There was an opportunistic streak in Jephthah, and he was fully prepared to take advantage of the situation for his purposes. After all, they had come to him; he wasn’t applying for their job opening! By the time the interview ends, the elders have offered him the position of “head,” both political and military leader, and promised him their full support. And the entire Gilead community gathered at Mizpah to witness this arrangement become law. But although we are told that Jephthah entered into this role “before the Lord at Mizpah,” there is little indication that this was anything more than religious ceremonialism. The Lord had been left out of everything that had so far transpired. There is something to be learned, however, from Jephthah’s emergence. This was not a position for which he had applied or worked or to which he aspired. But, in God’s own time, a door opened, and Jephthah was elevated to the position God had purposed for him. My responsibility as a Christ-follower is to be fully involved and invested in the place where I find myself, doing the will of God where He has put me and learning the lessons He is teaching me. It is God’s job to open doors of opportunity. An available heart will always find lots to do for the Lord. As a young man, Charles Spurgeon was pondering his future, especially in relation to his education. A very valuable opportunity to gain admission to a coveted university position was lost because of someone’s foolish mistake. Spurgeon was deeply discouraged, but as he was pondering what had happened, replaying the events and the lost opportunities through his mind, he sensed the Holy Spirit bring to his mind the words of Scripture: “Seekest thou great things for thyself? Seek them not!” “At that moment,” he said, “I realized I would never go to Cambridge, and I would never amount to anything more than preaching to a congregation of two hundred people.” He committed himself to doing God’s will, whatever the cost. Six months later, through a totally unexpected chain of events and as a young man only nineteen years old, he was pastoring and preaching to 2,500 people a Sunday in London. That happened because he was willing to allow God to open the doors in his life and to be faithful where he was then. Live enthusiastically for Him in the present, and He will concern Himself with your future. (Borrow Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay) Alan Carr - III.Judges 11:9-11 AN AMAZING RESPONSE (Ill. I do not know what I would do if I were Jephthah and that bunch of yahoos came to me. I probably would not respond like he did. His is an amazing response. Let’s take a moment to examine it.) A. Judges 11:9-11a Jephthah’s Acceptance – After confirming that their offer is valid, Jephthah consents to go with them and to lead them to victory. His treatment of them is vastly different from their treatment of him! Even though they had abused him and treated him like dirt, Jephthah is not bitter. He was able to get over the things they did to him. He was able to see past their mean-spirited actions and he caught a glimpse of the hand of God at work in his life. One that will become clear as you read about Jephthah is that he was a man who honored the Lord in his life. He might have been an exile from Israel, but he was never and exile from God. Unlike his relatives, he proved his commitment to the Lord by his treatment of others! Whether we will accept it or not, how we treat others is a direct reflection of the place God holds in our hearts. If we can spitefully mistreat and attack those who are made in God’s image and bought by the blood of His Son, it does not say much for our opinion of Him. When we love Him as we should, we will love others as we should, Matt. 22:37-39; 1 John 3:14-16; 4:20. B. Judges 11:11b Jephthah’s Advancement – The people honored their word and they elevated the reject and made him their ruler. He became their “head” and he became their “captain”. C. Judges 11:11c Jephthah’s Acknowledgement – We are told that “Jephthah uttered all his words before the Lord in Mizpeh.” The word “Mizpeh” means “watchtower”. In Gen. 31:33-55 the place is called “Mizpah”. It was there that Jacob and Laban made an agreement that they would not attack the other. They called upon the Lord to witness their covenant. By the way, there’s was not a friendly parting! They parted as enemies. (Ill. The “Mizpah Coins” are supposed to express friendship. In reality, they represent perpetual enemies!) That is what Jephthah is doing here. He is calling on the Lord to look upon the promises made to him by his people. He is calling on the Lord to watch over him as he goes out to battle. He is acknowledging the Lord and looking to Him for the help he will need to win the victory. In verse 9, Jephthah knows that any victory they might enjoy will only come from the Lord. It would do us well to remember that any victories we might enjoy in this life will be our only if the Lord delights in us. Victory does not come from us, our efforts or our abilities. Victory comes from the Lord and from a relationship that is centered in Him and in Him alone! (Ill. 1 Cor. 15:57) It pays to acknowledge God in everything we do. It pays to call on Him, look to Him and trust Him for the victories we seek in life. Jephthah became a victor, but only because he was first a servant of God who looked to the Lord for the victory! Conclusion: The reject became the ruler! Most of us will not become rulers in our lifetime, but there are some lessons we can take away from this message on Jephthah. 1. We all have strengths and weaknesses, but the Lord can use us and make something special out of our lives. 2. There may be a cycle of sin in our background, but it can be broken today! 3. God can use you in spite of your past, your family or your failures. (Ill. A twenty dollar bill has the same value whether it is new, worn or torn. Its value never changes!) 4. Your treatment of others reveals how you really feel about God. 5. You can and should serve God faithfully today and trust Him with all your tomorrows. If He has touched you through the story of Jephthah, you should obey His voice and do exactly what He is calling you to do! (Judges 11:1-11 - The Reject Who Became Ruler) Judges 11:10 And the elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "The LORD is witness between us; surely we will do as you have said." The Lord: Ge 21:23 31:50 1Sa 12:5 Jer 29:23 42:5 Ro 1:9 2Co 11:31 witness: be the hearer, Ge 16:5 31:53 Dt 1:16 1Sa 24:12 surely we will do: Ex 20:7 Zec 5:4 Mal 3:5 Judges 11 Resources YAHWEH IS CALLED TO WITNESS THE AGREEMENT And the elders of Gilead said to Jephthah, "The LORD is witness between us; surely we will do as you have said. - Jehovah is Witness between us is a very suggestive of the picture of two parties making a covenant, Jehovah observing and listening to terms of both parties and holding both accountable for fulfilling their obligations and promises of the covenant. The elders in effect are making a vow to keep their agreement, which is intriguing in light of the later foolish vow by Jephthah! NET Note on the LORD is witness between us - The statement by the leaders of Gilead takes the form of a legally binding oath, which obligates them to the terms of the agreement. George Bush on The LORD is witness between us - Heb. שמע בנותינו shomaa benothënu, be the hearer between us. They confirm their promise by the solemnity of an oath, appealing to God’s omniscience as the judge of their present sincerity, and to his justice as an avenger, if they should afterwards prove false to their engagements. ‘Whatever we speak, it concerns us to remember that God is a hearer, and to speak accordingly.’ Henry. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And the elders of Gilead said unto Jephthah, The LORD [JEHOVAH] be witness [Heb., hearing, i.e., Judge (Gen. 31:48, 49)] between us, if we do not so according to thy words [Jephthah betrays a more self-seeking spirit than Gideon (Jdg 8:22, 23). But it was the elders’ own proposal that he should be head, and he took office at the risk of losing his life in the fulfilment of its responsibilities in the war. Therefore God, who is quick to discern the good side of His servants’ actions, commends Jephthah as an example of ‘faith’ (Heb. 11:32, 33)]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:11 Then Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and chief over them; and Jephthah spoke all his words before the LORD at Mizpah. head: Jdg 11:8 Jephthah spoke all his words : 1Sa 23:9-12 1Ki 3:7-9 2Co 3:5 Jas 1:5,17 before the LORD at Mizpah: Jdg 10:17 20:1 1Sa 10:17 11:15 Judges 11 Resources SOLEMN WORDS SPOKEN AT MIZPAH As alluded to above most writers think this passage is describing a sort of ratification ceremony of the agreement between the elders of Gilead and Jephthah and that would seem to be a reasonable interpretation from the context. Then - Marks progression in the narrative. Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead and the people made him head and chief over them - Note that the elders and people of Gilead make him their political leader (head - rosh) and military leader (chief - qatsin). Bush writes that his willingness to go with them shows "a generous forgetfulness of all their previous wrongs and indignities. No injuries should make us implacable. We must forgive as we hope to be forgiven (Mt 6:12+)." And Jephthah spoke all his words before the LORD at Mizpah - This Mizpah was east of Jordan (see map) in the mountains of Gilead (Ge 31:49); and hence called Mizpah of Gilead (Jdg 11:29), to distinguish it from another Mizpah, west of Jordan in the tribe of Judah (Jos 15:38) As alluded to above Spoke all his words seem to solemnize the agreement between Jephthah and the elders of Gilead that they would make him their ruler. This suggest that Jephthah was living his life in a conscious presence of the Lord. (Compare 1Sa 11:15 1Ki 12:1) THOUGHT - While the text does not say they cut a formal covenant, the fact that there is an offer by the elders and a reception by Jephthah certainly raises that possibility. In that regard it is interesting that the name Mizpah mean watchtower or "the look out." The first use of this name Mizpah is in the memorialization of the covenant between Jacob and Laban. Laban called the place Mizpah to memorialize, ratify and witness to the covenant he and Jacob had cut (Genesis 31:49). In the present context the agreement is in the presence of Yahweh at a place known as "watchtower." The implication is that Yahweh would be watching over the agreement to assure it was kept. The NJB has "Jephthah repeated all his conditions at Mizpah in Yahweh's presence." The NLT has "At Mizpah, in the presence of the LORD, Jephthah repeated what he had said to the elders." TLB paraphrases it "The contract was ratified before the Lord in Mizpah at a general assembly of all the people."
Juízes 11
Wiersbe points out that "There is every evidence that Jephthah was a sincere worshiper of the Lord. He negotiated with the elders in the hearing of the Lord and he knew the Scriptures. He was a man of faith and courage (Heb. 11:32) who depended on God’s power for victory (Jdg 11:29)." (See context With the Word: The Chapter-by-Chapter Bible Handbook) ESV Study note is a bit more critical of Jephthah than Wiersbe noting that "Jephthah represented a strange mixture of faith and foolishness. While he acknowledged God (cf. Jdg 11:21, 23, 27, 30-31; 12:3), overall his foolishness seemed to outstrip his faith (see Jdg 11:31). (See context ESV Study Bible or borrow the ESV study Bible) A R Fausset - Then Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and captain over them: and Jephthah uttered all his words [repeated the conditions and obligations under which he accepted the headship] before the LORD [JEHOVAH (compare Hezekiah, 2Ki 19:14)] in Mizpah [i.e., as in Jehovah’s presence, the Witness of oaths and Punisher of their violation. Not that the ark or altar was there, as the Speaker’s Commentary (Jdg 20:18) supposes, suggesting that whilst Shiloh was the chief residence of the ark (Jer. 7:12), yet the tabernacle, being movable, was as occasion required moved to where the judge and congregation were (1Sa 1:3, 4:3, 7:16). But there is no mention of the ark here in the context. The high priest with the ephod may have been summoned to Mizpeh or Ramoth Gilead, as being a Levitical city (Josh. 21:34, 38), but there is no clear proof that the words “before the LORD” express more than that he solemnly confirmed his engagement as before the omnipresent God of Israel. Jehovah was present especially when his people assembled (Dt. 23:14)] (Judges 11 Commentary) Related Resource: What is the importance of Mizpah in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Judges 11:12 Now Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the sons of Ammon, saying, "What is between you and me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?" What is between: 2Ki 14:8-12 Judges 11 Resources Related Passages: Numbers 21:21 Then Israel sent messengers to Sihon, king of the Amorites, saying, Deuteronomy 2:26 “So I sent messengers from the wilderness of Kedemoth to Sihon king of Heshbon with words of peace, saying, Deuteronomy 20:10-11 “When you approach a city to fight against it, you shall offer it terms of peace. 11 “If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, then all the people who are found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you. Proverbs 25:8-9 (Do not go out hastily to argue your case; Otherwise, what will you do in the end, When your neighbor humiliates you? 9 Argue your case with your neighbor, And do not reveal the secret of another, Judges 11:12-28 Jephthah's Diplomatic Discussion - 4 arguments he pursue in an attempt to arrive at a peaceful end (Judges 11:12-13) Ammonite Issue – The Land Rightfully Belongs to Us (Judges 11:14-20) Historical Justification – You Have the Facts All Wrong (Judges 11:21-24) Theological Justification – The Lord Gave Us This Land (Judges 11:25-26) Statue of Limitations Justification – 300 Years of Possession (Judges 11:27-28) Closing Summary – the Lord Determines Right and Wrong WHY ARE YOU IN MY LAND? Cundall observes that "Wrangling over frontiers and claims to prior possession of areas have been commonplace in relationships between countries since time immemorial, and almost invariably there has been no settlement short of war." Now Jephthah sent messengers to the king of the sons of Ammon, saying, "What is between you and me, that you have come to me to fight against my land?"- Although he is a valiant warrior, Jephthah speaking in the name of Israel (as head) first seeks a peaceful solution. The fact that he Sent messengers shows that Jephthah acted in accordance with the law of Moses; and hence the justice of his cause would appear more forcibly to the people. So before declaring war, Jephthah tried peaceful negotiations with the Ammonites, but as the story unfolds the negotiations failed. Nevertheless, this section does tell us that Jephthah knew the Scriptures and the history of his people, and he was not a hothead who was itching for a fight. He in essence accuses Ammon of violating his territory.
Juízes 11
Wiersbe - "Since he was met by his daughter, Jephthah gave her to the Lord to serve Him at the tabernacle (Ex38:8; 1Sa2:22). She remained a virgin, which meant that she would not know the joys of motherhood and perpetuate her father’s inheritance in Israel. This would be reason enough for her and her friends to spend two months grieving, for every daughter wanted a family and every father wanted grandchildren to maintain the family inheritance. Nowhere in the text are we told that Jephthah actually killed his daughter, nor do we find anybody bewailing the girl’s death. The emphasis in Jud11:37-40 is the fact that she remained a virgin. It’s difficult to believe that “the daughters of Israel” would establish a custom to celebrate (not “lament” as in KJV) the awful sacrifice of a human being, but we can well understand that they would commemorate the devotion and obedience of Jephthah’s daughter in helping her father fulfill his vow. She deserves to stand with Isaac as a faithful child, who was willing to obey both father and God, no matter what the cost." (See context The Bible Exposition Commentary) Burnt offering (05930)('olah) In all of the over 250 occurrences of the term used here, it refers to an actual sacrifice literally burnt on an altar. It is never used figuratively or symbolically. For a discussion of the burnt offering see comment on Leviticus 1:3–4. It is the word used in Genesis 22:2 and in 2 Kings 3:27, where human sacrifice is in view. George Bush - Whatsoever cometh forth. Or, Heb. אשר יצא asher yëtzë, whosoever cometh forth. The rendering given to these words will no doubt be governed in a great measure by the translator’s views of the real nature of the vow uttered on this occasion; as whether it had reference primarily to a human being or a brute animal. To us the former appears decidedly the most probable. Admitting that the Heb. היוצא hayotzë, which cometh forth, may apply equally to men or animals, yet the phrase, ‘cometh forth to meet,’ seems to imply an intelligent act, a coming forth with a design, which could scarcely be predicated of any but a human being. Sheep, bullocks, and other animals fit to be offered in sacrifice, are usually enclosed in pastures and stalls, and could not be expected to come out to meet him. How unlikely, then, was it that any of the animals allowed for sacrifice should come forth from ‘the doors of his house;’ to say nothing of the probability that a dog or some unclean animal might meet him, which could neither lawfully be consecrated to the Lord, nor offered as a burnt sacrifice. Shall surely be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. As much depends, in forming a judgment of the real character of Jephthah’s vow, upon the correct explication of the terms in which it was made, it will be proper here to advert to the leading opinions of commentators on this point. These may be ascertained from the four following proposed modes of rendering, each of which has had its zealous advocates, whose collective treatises on the subject would amount to several volumes. (1) The first is that given above; ‘Whosoever cometh out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return from the children of Ammon, shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer him up for a burnt offering.’ (2) The second is that adopted in the text of our common English Bibles;—‘Whatsoever cometh out of the doors of my house, &c., shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.’ (3) The third is that given in the margin of the English Bible;—‘Whatsoever cometh out of the doors of my house, &c., shall be the Lord’s, or I will offer it up for a burnt offering.’ (4) The fourth was proposed about sixty years since by Dr. Randolph, and is this;—‘Whosoever cometh out of the doors of my house, &c., shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer (to) Him (viz. the Lord) a burnt offering.’ Of these, the first is that adopted by the Septuagint and Vulgate versions, and is undoubtedly the sense which the words of the original, if viewed in themselves, apart from any moral considerations, do most naturally present. That this rendering supposes Jephthah to have had a human sacrifice in his thoughts when he made the vow, is undeniably true, and without doing violence to the letter we know not how to avoid this conclusion. We are aware that it is objected to this, that Jephthah was at this time undoubtedly a pious man, for it is said in the immediate connexion, that he was under the influence of the Spirit of God, and it cannot be supposed that such a man, under such an influence, could deliberately vow to God that he would commit murder—that he would vow to put to death the first person who should come forth to congratulate him, whether it might be man, woman, or child, yea, even if it should be his own, his only daughter. But to say nothing of the impropriety of applying the invidious term murder to Jephthah’s intention, we do not think much stress can be laid upon the fact of his being said to be at this time under the influence of the Spirit of God, for it does not appear that this phrase, as used by the Old Testament writers, indicates by any means such a kind of influence as is intended in the New Testament by one’s being led, prompted governed by the Holy Spirit. In the latter case it denotes mainly a moral, spiritual, sanctifying influence; in the former, it simply implies the divine bestowment of remarkable gifts, whether physical or intellectual, for the performance of a particular work, or the discharge of a particular office. The endowments indicated by it were seated rather in the head and the body, than in the heart, so that taken by itself it affords us no clew to the moral character or actions of the subject of it. A similar train of remark is applicable also to another objection urged on the ground of Jephthah’s being enrolled by Paul, in the eleventh of Hebrews, among the eminent men who had obtained a good report through faith. This is supposed to afford conclusive proof that he was a good man, and therefore that he could not have been guilty of a conduct so contrary to the divine law. But it is extremely doubtful whether the faith celebrated in that chapter, was in every instance a justifying and saving faith, in relation to the individuals mentioned. The apostle’s object seems to be merely to illustrate the power of a firm belief in the divine testimony, which may doubtless exist separate from a renewed heart. We learn elsewhere, from the same authority, that a man might have the faith of miracles so as to remove mountains, and yet not be a good man. We do not affirm that Jephthah was not a good man, yet we derive no absolute assurance from the simple fact of his putting a strong faith in the divine promises, that he was an eminent saint, and incapable of making such a vow as we have supposed above. The objections, therefore, drawn from these sources against the interpretation now recited do not seem to carry with them any great weight. Jepththah may still have meant to vow that he would offer up a human sacrifice. But that such a sacrifice was actually made does not, we conceive, necessarily follow from this admission. Of this, however, more in the sequel. The second rendering, which is that of the translators of the English Bible, is liable perhaps to no serious grammatical objection, though, we think, less punctiliously faithful to the original than the former, for the reasons stated in the previous note. It is, however, the view given by Josephus, who makes Jephthah promise to ‘offer in sacrifice what living creature soever should first meet him,’ and he affirms that the vow, in that sense, was executed by him; ‘he sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering, offering such an oblation as was neither conformable to the law, nor acceptable to God.’ The same sense is given by the Targum of Jonathan, and is perhaps the sense which has on its side the balance of authorities, both Jewish and Christian. But the question whether Jephthah actually sacrificed his daughter, is still to be decided on grounds independent of the balance of authority as to the literal purport of the vow. The celebrated Rabbi, David Kimchi, who flourished in the twelfth century, seems to have been the first who proposed the third translation, or that given in the margin of the English Bible. According to this interpretation, the Heb. copulative ו and, is to be translated or, and the sense of the vow will then be, ‘Whatsoever cometh out of the doors of my house, I will, if it be a thing fit for a burnt offering, make it one; or, if not, will consecrate it to his service.’ This would suppose him, in making the vow, to have had a mental reserve, which would allow him to act as the exigency of the case might require. It gives him an alternative which by the other mode of rendering is effectually precluded. This construction, however, is certainly liable to a very important grammatical objection. Though it is unquestionable that the particle ו is sometimes used as a disjunctive, and properly rendered ‘or,’ as Ex. 12:5, ‘hand or foot;’ 21:15, ‘father or mother;’ 2 Sam. 2:19, ‘right hand or left,’ yet it may be doubted whether it is ever used to disjoin things so completely as this translation supposes. Gussetius (Comm. Ling. Ebr.) contends that to give ו a disjunctive force, it is essential that the terms between which it stands should not be related as genus and species, or the one member comprehending the other, as otherwise it would be as absurd as to say, ‘Thou shalt not injure a man or his head,’ the one term evidently including the other. So in the present instance, the clause ‘It shall be the Lord’s,’ is obviously, he affirms, the general, while ‘It shall be offered up for a burnt offering,’ is merely the included particular, indicating the special manner in which it shall be the Lord’s. This we cannot but regard as the interpretation required on strict philological principles, and if the passage were rendered, ‘It shall, be the Lord’s, even I will offer it up for a burnt offering,’ it would come, we believe, still nearer to the genuine force of the original. We assent, therefore, to the remark of Noble, (Plen. Inspir.) that ‘this rendering is extremely forced and harsh, and one which critics have acquiesced in only to get rid of what they esteemed a greater difficulty. It also makes the second clause of the vow entirely unnecessary; for if Jephthah meant to say, that whatsoever came out of his house should be consecrated to the Lord, in such a manner as was suitable to its nature, this is fully conveyed in the first clause; and the addition of the second, separated by or, instead of helping to determine his meaning, is of no use but to perplex it.’ For these reasons we are compelled to reject the third hypothesis, as wholly unsustained by a just philological support. The fourth and last, is Dr. Randolph’s rendering, ‘Whosoever cometh out, &c., shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer (to) Him a burnt offering.’ According to this translation, Jephthah’s vow will consist of two parts. The first, that whatsoever person or object should come forth of his doors to meet him should surely be the Lord’s; i. e. should be dedicated, consecrated for ever to his service. The second, that he would, beside this, offer to Jehovah a burnt offering. According to the rendering in our common version, the very same object or person who should ‘surely be the Lord’s,’ was to be offered up for a burnt offering. According to that now proposed, they were to be different objects. This explanation appeared to Bp. Lowth so signally happy and conclusive, that he speaks of it as having ‘perfectly cleared up a difficulty, which for two thousand years had puzzled all the translators and expositors, had given occasion to dissertations without number, and caused endless disputes among the learned.’ such a commendation, from such a source, undoubtedly entitles the proposed explanation to great respect, but it has still failed to satisfy the mass of commentators, and as we think for very good reasons. The sense hereby given to the original is not warranted by common usage. The Hebrew, it will be observed, is והעליתיהו עולח vehaalithihu olâh, where the suffixed pronoun הו hu, is joined to the verb to express the thing offered, and not another example can be found, in which verbs of offering or sacrificing are accompanied with a suffix pronoun denoting the Being to whom the offering is made. On the contrary, instances of a precisely parallel usage to the present are of no uncommon occurrence. Thus 1 Sam. 7:9, ‘Then Samuel took a sucking lamb, and offered it (for) a burnt offering (ויעלהו עולה veyaalëhu olâh,) wholly to the Lord.’ See also 2 Kings 3:27, where we meet with a case exceedingly similar to this of Jephthah. What Jephthah, according to the most direct import of his words, is supposed to have promised to do, the king of Moab, when sore pressed by the kings of Israel, Judah, and Edom, is affirmed actually to have done; and in precisely the same words, joined in the same construction; ‘Then took he his eldest son, that should have reigned in his stead, and offered him (for) a burnt offering, (ויעלהו עולה) upon the wall.’ These words differ from Jephthah’s only in the mood, tense, and person of the verb, and in the common variety in spelling of the noun, the same suffix הו and apparently in the same relation being used in each. On the whole we are constrained to dissent from this, as well as the preceding interpretation, and to acknowledge, that after all the labors of the learned, nothing satisfactory has yet been produced to fix a sense upon the passage, which should exclude the idea that a human sacrifice was either intended by the vow, or might be its unintended result. It is still undeniable that the old common translation, sanctioned by the venerable Septuagint version, is that which naturally flows from the words, if taken in their legitimate construction. Certain too it is, that if Jephthah had spoken English, and had said, ‘Whosoever cometh out of the doors of my house, &c., shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer him up for a burnt offering;’ and these words had been translated from English into Hebrew, they could not otherwise have been exactly rendered than by the very words which now stand in the Hebrew Bible. At the same time, as we shall presently endeavor to show, though we do not doubt that this language expresses fairly what was in Jephthah’s mind at the time of making the vow, yet whether he actually executed the vow in this sense of it admits of very serious question. See farther on v. 39. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth [Heb., “that which (or whoever) coming forth shall have come forth”] of the doors of my house to meet me [he must mean a man or woman: for a beast would not “come forth of the doors of his house to meet him.” It would have been a paltry vow to promise to sacrifice the first beast that should meet him] when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord’s, and [the Hebrew can mean ‘or’: an alternative: or else. But it is better to translate ‘and,’ the second clause which follows defining more precisely the first] I will offer it up for a burnt-offering [Jephthah shrank from defining the person to be offered; this he leaves to God to order by His providence, no doubt hoping that his daughter (if indeed, in his ardent zeal for Israel against the oppressor, she entered his thoughts at the time) would not be demanded]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:32 So Jephthah crossed over to the sons of Ammon to fight against them; and the LORD gave them into his hand. the LORD gave them into his hand: Jdg 1:4 2:18 3:10 Judges 11 Resources See excellent map of Jephthah and the Ammonites So Jephthah crossed over to the sons of Ammon to fight against them; and the LORD gave them into his hand. Jephthah was led and controlled by the Holy Spirit (Jdg 11:29). This leading was not a quiet inactivity. Jephthah did not sit down and passively observe while God accomplished His will (i.e., not like the false teaching "Let go and let God! - not Biblical!). He traveled through the region to gather troops, organizing them, developing strategy and leading the attack. To be led by the Spirit is always to be led into activity and into the battle for God. He worked out what God worked in (see this basic principle in Php 2:12-note, Php 2:13-note). Gideon was a weak man that God transformed into a fearless warrior. Jephthah however was a valiant warrior and because of his tragic family history he had had to become strong to survive. The story of his life is of "God taking a strong man and by His Spirit turning him into a usable man. Whatever our strengths and weaknesses, the secret of our usefulness is our availability to our God. Note that there was not just one battle involved here but an entire military campaign which proved victorious over twenty cities. Why? Because the LORD gave them into his hand. They still had to engage in the warfare but the victory was from the Lord (as it always is!) You can mark it down = God's sovereignty does not release us from personal responsibility! George Bush - Jephthah passed over unto. That is, passed through or over the intermediate regions lying between him and the enemy. (Judges 11 Commentary) Gave them - Jehovah repeatedly gave Israel into the hands of their enemies. See notes Judges 2:14; Judges 6:1; Judges 11:32; Judges 13:1) A R Fausset - So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon [resumed from ver. 29, where he broke off to narrate his vow before the campaign] to fight against them; and the LORD [JEHOVAH] delivered them into his hands. (Judges 11 Commentary) Alan Carr - Judges 11:32-33 JEPHTHAH’S VICTORY (When the children of Israel faced the Ammonites on the field of battle, Israel carried the day. They defeated their enemy and won a great victory. A couple of thoughts regarding that victory are in order here.) A. Judges 11:32 It Was A Divine Victory – The battle was waged and the victory was won. The children of Ammon were defeated because the Lord “delivered” them up to the Israelites. It was a divine victory and God was given all the glory. B. Judges 11:33 It Was A Decisive Victory – The language of this verse tells us how complete this victory was. We are told that Jephthah “smote” the Ammonites. This word means “to strike, smite, hit, beat, slay, kill”. We are told that Jephthah “smote” them with “a great slaughter”. This phrase refers to “a great blow, wound, beating, or conquest.” It has the idea of being “overcome with a plague”. The children of Israel swept down on the Ammonites and cut them down like a plague. It was an astounding and complete victory. (Note: Just as reminder let me say that our God can still give His people great and decisive victories in this life. He is still defeating enemies and overcoming all foes so that we can experience his power and deliverance in our lives. Regardless of what you might be facing today, the Lord can give you victory over it for His glory! I would encourage you to remember that any victories we might enjoy in this life are divine in origin. They come to us through God because of our relationship with His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Cor. 15:57. When there is victory over some sin, over some enemy, over some difficult period of life, we should always be quick to praise the Lord and thank Him for the victory. If victory came our way, it came to us through Him, and He deserves all the glory for it! We should never take any credit for any of the victories in our lives. (Ill. Rom. 8:37; 2 Cor. 2:14) (Sermon) Judges 11:33 And he struck them with a very great slaughter from Aroer to the entrance of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim. So the sons of Ammon were subdued before the sons of Israel. Aroer: Dt 2:36 Minnith: Situated, according to Eusebius, four miles from Heshbon, towards Philadelphia or Rabbath. Eze 27:17 Judges 11 Resources See excellent map of Jephthah and the Ammonites And he struck them with a very great slaughter from Aroer to the entrance of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim. So the sons of Ammon were subdued before the sons of Israel. The Lord gave Israel a stunning victory over Ammon, and Israel was able to capture twenty cities. These included Aroer, at Reuben's southern border just north of the Arnon, and Abel Keramim, tentatively located about five miles north of Heshbon. Thus the bulk of the region between the Arnon and the Jabbok once again belonged to Israel. George Bush - Thus the children of Ammon were subdued, &c. Heb. יכרעו yikkâreu, were greatly humbled, or, if we may be allowed to fabricate a term for the purpose, ‘were Canaanized,’ i. e. made to share the fate of the Canaanites; which to a Hebrew ear would be precisely the import of the original. How far his success on this occasion is to be construed as an answer to his prayers, and a token of the divine acceptance of his vow, it is not possible to determine. By some it is considered a strong argument in favor of the milder view which is taken of the vow. ‘Would God,’ it is asked, ‘have sanctioned in this manner a gross act of deliberate murder? Would not this have been the very way to deceive his people, and to make them think he was pleased with such offerings as the heathen presented unto Moloch? And when, in future ages, he punished his people for offering human sacrifices, might they not justly have pleaded, that he, in this instance, had both approved and rewarded them?’ To this we answer, that the public interest of the whole Jewish people was more regarded in the bestowment of the victory, than the private hopes or wishes of Jephthah. Unworthy or faulty instruments were often employed by the Most High in effecting his kind purposes for Israel, and we see no reason to doubt that the result would have been the same with the same means, even had no vow whatever been uttered. Moreover, it is a high presumption in weak mortals to read in the events of providence a proof, that God makes himself a party to compacts of their own voluntary proposing, let them be ever so well intended. His counsels are a great deep, and it is at our peril that we put such unauthorized constructions upon his dispensations. ‘No man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them.’ (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And he smote them from Aroer [an Israelite town (ver. 26) which the Ammonites had seized: so that Israel was fighting in self-defence, to expel the enemy from the land given by Jehovah to His people], even till thou come to Minnith [at the fourth milestone on the way from Heshbon to Rabbah of Ammon, according to Eusebius. Famous for wheat (Ezek. 27:17)], (even) twenty cities, and unto the plain of the vineyards [rather Abel Keramim: Abela, seven miles from Rabbath Ammon or Philadelphia, according to Eusebius and Jerome. Thus Jephthah’s pursuit of the foe was first southwards to the neighbourhood of Heshbon, then northwards to the border of Bashan], with a very great slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:34 When Jephthah came to his house at Mizpah, behold, his daughter was coming out to meet him with tambourines and with dancing. Now she was his one and only child; besides her he had neither son nor daughter. When Jephthah came to his house at Mizpah: Jdg 11:11 10:17 his daughter: Jdg 5:1-31 Ex 15:20 1Sa 18:6,7 Ps 68:25 148:11,12 150:4 Jer 31:4,13 neither: Zec 12:10 Lk 7:12 8:42 9:38 Judges 11 Resources ONE OF THE SADDEST EPILOGUES IN ALL LITERATURE When Jephthah came to his house at Mizpah, behold, his daughter was coming out to meet him with tambourines and with dancing. Now she was his one and only child; besides her he had neither son nor daughter - Jephthah's words flash before him, words he wished could have retracted (or redacted) - "whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon, it shall be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering." (Jdg 11:31) IVP Background Commentary - The practice of maidens going out to greet returning victors with song and dance is attested in the celebration for Saul and David (1 Sam 18:6–7) and partly by Miriam’s song in Exodus 15:20–21. The “tambourine” his daughter played has been identified in archaeological reliefs as the tambour, a small drum (leather stretched over a hoop) that would not have the tinny rattle sound of modern tambourines. (See context The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament) George Bush - With timbrels and with dances. From this, and from 1 Sam. 18:6, where David’s triumphal return from the defeat of Goliath and the Philistines is mentioned, it appears to have been an ancient custom for women to go forth to meet returning conquerors with musical instruments, songs, and dances. Jephthah’s daughter, on this occasion, undoubtedly came forth, not alone, but at the head of a band or choir of maidens, who joined with her in these joyful congratulations. She was his only child. This circumstance is mentioned to point out an additional cause of the poignancy of his distress. It is well known how intensely anxious the Hebrews were for posterity, and as Jephthah could only hope for descendants through his daughter, the sorrow he expressed is quite natural, even under the milder interpretation of his vow. Besides her he had neither son nor daughter. Or, Heb. ‘there was not to himself either son or daughter;’ implying, as some of the Jewish commentators think, that though he had no other children of his own, yet his wife, the widow of a former husband, had. Others take the original ממנו mimmenu, with our translators, as used for ממנה mimmenâh, besides her, a view of the phrase which Rosenmüller seems to approve. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And Jephthah came to Mizpeh [of Gilead, his home (ch. 11:11)] unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances [as Miriam and all the women after her with timbrels and dances celebrated Moses’ victory at the Red Sea (Exod. 15:20; so 1 Sam. 18:6, 7)]; and she (was his) only child: beside her [Heb., masculine used for feminine, as the idea of child in general was in the writer’s mind] he had neither son nor daughter.(Judges 11 Commentary) The New Unger's Bible Dictionary - Volumes have been written on what is generally termed “Jephthah’s rash vow”; the question is whether, in doing to his daughter according to his vow, he actually offered her as a sacrifice. That he really did so is a horrible conclusion but one that it seems impossible to avoid. The following may be taken as a summary of the arguments on both sides. In favor of actual sacrifice, the following arguments are urged: (1) The express terms of the narrative, “I will offer it up as a burnt offering,” and he “did to her according to the vow.” (2) The fact that Jephthah was half heathen and that the circumstances took place where the heathen dwelt in great numbers and where human sacrifices were not unknown. (3) That Jephthah’s excessive grief on seeing his daughter come forth to meet him can only be accounted for on the supposition that he considered her devoted to death. (4) That the mourning for Jephthah’s daughter for four days in the year can be reconciled only with the supposition that she was an actual sacrifice. (5) That there is nothing in the history to show that his conduct was sanctioned by God. In opposition it is urged: (1) By translating the Heb. prefix (which is rendered and in our version) to or, all difficulty will be removed. His words would then read, “shall be the Lord’s, or I will offer it up as a burnt offering”; and not infrequently the sense requires that the Heb. should be thus rendered (Lv 27:28) where there is a similar meaning of the conjunctive waw. (2) He cannot be understood as declaring an intention to offer a burnt offering whatever might come forth to meet him, since he might have been met by what no law or custom permitted to be so offered. (3) The sacrifice of children to Molech is expressly forbidden and declared an abomination to the Lord (Lv 20:2,v3); and it would be a yet higher insult to offer them to the Lord. (4) There is no precedent for such an offering. (5) No father by his own authority could put even an offending child to death, much less one that was innocent (Dt 21:18-21; 1Sa 14:24-45). (6) It is said he did to her “according to the vow which he had made,” and “she had no relations with a man,” which conveys the idea that she was devoted to a life of celibacy; and that what the daughters of Israel bewailed was not her death, but her celibacy, for she “wept on the mountains because of her virginity” (Jdg 11:38-40). There appears to have been a class of women devoted exclusively to the Temple service who were Nazirites (Ex 38:8); to this company of females reference is made in 1Sa 2:22 (see Lu 2:37). To such a company of devoted women Jephthah’s daughter might be set apart. One of the strongest points on this side of the argument is that the Heb. word lethanoth, rendered “wept,” rather meant “to celebrate.” Therefore, these daughters of Israel went yearly, not to lament, but with songs of praise to celebrate the daughter of Jephthah. The prominence given to the daughter’s virginity, as an argument against Jephthah’s sacrifice, we think is hardly warranted. It is probably mentioned to give greater force to the sacrifice, as it would leave him without descendants, which in the East was considered a special misfortune (G. H. A. von Ewald, Hist. of Israel; K. & D., Com.; Robertson, Early Religion of Israel; McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia; Smith, Bib. Dict.; and others). Related Resources: Numerous hits in a Google search on Jephthah's vow Jephthah and His Daughter - Whyte's Bible Characters Did Jephthah sacrifice his daughter to the Lord? | GotQuestions.org Alan Carr - Judges 11:34-40 JEPHTHAH’S VIGILANCE (The battle is over and the victory is secured. Jephthah returns home as a conquering hero. I am sure the vow he made to the Lord was fresh in his mind. He fully intended to carry out his vow. Among other things, Jephthah was a man of his word and he would not fail to do all that he promised to the Lord. Let’s watch this man as he fulfills his promises to God.) A. Judges 11:34-35a Jephthah’s Pain – When he arrives home, the first person who comes out to meet him is his daughter. She is his only child. She comes out to greet her father with songs of celebration because of the victory the Lord had given to His people. She is excited that her father has returned home safe, and that he is a hero. How appropriate that this young lady should be filled with pride and come out to greet her father. When Jephthah sees her, his heart is broken. He has promised to give up “whatsoever cometh forth of the doors” of his house “to meet” him when he returned home, Judges 11:31. He sees his only child coming to meet him, his precious daughter, and it breaks his heart because he knows what he has to do to her, and he fully intends to do it. He tears his clothes in a sign of mourning and cries “Alas! My daughter…” the word “alas” is an expression of pain. It is the same as crying “Oh!” in the midst of a tragedy. Then he tells her that she has “brought” him “very low”. This phrase means “to bring one to his knees.” The thought of what he must do to his own daughter fills Jephthah with grief. The life is forced out of him. The thrill of his victory vanishes completely away and he is left with the searing pain of loss, and the overwhelming agony of loss. (Ill. Imagine what you would feel like if it were you and your only child!) B.Judges 11:35b Jephthah’s Problem – When Jephthah sees his daughter, he tells that he has made a vow concerning her. Jephthah knows that vow made to the Lord must be fulfilled. Apparently, Jephthah is a man of his word. Jephthah’s actions should speak to us today. We should also be a people of our word. When we tell someone we will do something, we should do it. When we tell someone we will be somewhere at a given time, we should be there. We should always do what we say we are going to do regardless of the personal cost or inconvenience. There was a time in our nation when a person’s word was their bond. Business deals were made, livestock was traded, and cops were sold all on a good word and a handshake. There was a time when people said what they meant, meant what they said and did what they promised. Those days are passed! No, you have to have a contract signed by both parties. That contract has to be notarized and filed with the courts. A person’s word is no longer taken at face value and people cover themselves so that they can sue when someone reneges on a deal. That should never be true of a child of God! When we give our word, we ought to be a people of our word. We ought to say what we mean, mean what we say and stand by our promises. This is especially true when the Person to Whom we have made our vow is the Lord. We are to be a people marked by truth! Eph 4:25 says, “Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.” Col 3:9 says, “Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds.” C. Judges 11:36-40 Jephthah’s Performance – Jephthah’s daughter encourages her father to do all that he has promised the Lord he would do. She only asks for some time to mourn her virginity. This girl was willing to make a huge sacrifice to help her father honor his vow to the Lord. She willingly gave up the joy of becoming a wife and mother. She sacrificed the dream of every Israelite girl that was the dream of giving birth to the Messiah. She sacrificed her dreams to help her father fulfill his vow to God. She goes away with her friends for two months and they “bewailed her virginity”. That is, they mourned with her that she would never be a wife or a mother. When she returned home, her father fulfilled his vow to the Lord and did with her the thing he promised to do. After that, v. 39 tells us that “she knew no man”. And her friends came every year for “four days” to “lament the daughter of Jephthah”, v. 40. Now, here is the question: did Jephthah really offer his daughter up as a burnt offering to the Lord? Or, is there some other explanation for these events? This has been a hotly debated issue among theologians for thousands of years. Many good men believe that Jephthah offered his daughter up as a burnt offering to the Lord. Of course, other equally great men teach that he fulfilled his vow by dedicating his daughter to serve in the Tabernacle for the rest of her life. Personally, I do not believe that Jephthah offered his daughter as a burnt offering. I lean toward the second interpretation. I believe that he dedicated her to serve the Lord at the Tabernacle. I believe that she remained there all her days. I believe that she remained a virgin all her life and gave herself to the will of the Lord. Here are the reasons why I believe this is the correct interpretation. · The language Jephthah uses in verse 31 is ambiguous. He says “Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” The word “whatsoever” suggests that he did not know who or what he would see first. So, it was a rash vow. Then, when he says, “…shall surely be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” The word “and” can also be translated as “or”. This means that if it is a person he meets, he will dedicate that person to the Lord. If it is an animal that he sees first, he will offer that animal as a burnt offering. · God would never have approved of, or accepted, a burnt offering. Jephthah would have known about Abraham and Isaac, Gen. 22, and how the Lord intervened and prevented Abraham from actually offering up Isaac as a burnt offering. He would have known the various teachings in the Law that prevented human sacrifice, Lev. 18:21; Lev. 20:1-5; Deut. 12:30-31; Deut. 18:9-12. God would not have honored a human sacrifice, and it would be doubtful that a man guilty of such a despicable crime would be listed among the “Heroes of the Faith” in Heb. 11:32. · While the days of the judges were a lawless time, I cannot conceive of how the men of Israel would allow Jephthah sacrifice his own daughter. When Saul made a rash vow and threatened to kill Jonathon his son, his own soldiers intervened and stopped him from killing Jonathan, 1 Sam. 14:24-46. · Where would he have offered the sacrifice? God only accepted sacrifices offered at the Tabernacle, Lev. 17:1-9. God only accepted sacrifices offered up by Levitical priests, Deut. 16:2, 6, 11, 16. No priest would have participated in such a wicked sacrifice. Even if he had taken his daughter to Shiloh to sacrifice her, any priest there would have told him that he could spare his daughter by redeeming her for a sum of money, Lev. 27:1-8. · I think it stands to reason that Jephthah gave his daughter to the Lord to serve in the Tabernacle with the other women who served there, Ex. 38:8; 1 Sam. 2:22. She remained a virgin for the rest of her life, v. 39. Every year, her friends came and spent four days with her helping her mourn for her unmarried, childless condition, v. 40. The word “lament” has the idea of “recounting, of telling again; of celebrating”. It is doubtful that they would gather to celebrate a sinful act, which it would have been had she been offered as a burnt offering by Jephthah. If she was going to die, why would she spend two months prolonging that the agony of knowing that her death was coming? · Jephthah’s daughter joins Isaac as a picture of the submissive, obedient child. She sacrificed family and motherhood to honor her father. By the way, Jephthah’s daughter proves that it is harder to live for the Lord than to die for Him, Rom. 12:1. · Jephthah sacrificed too. Jephthah saw his line come to an end. There would be no grandchildren because he gave his daughter to serve the Lord all her days. · Of course, there is the possibility that I could be wrong. He might have offered his daughter as a burnt offering! Here is Martin Luther’s blunt statement, “One would like to think that he did not sacrifice her, but the text clearly says that he did.”[i] Conclusion: The fact is, we will never settle the issue of what actually happened to Jephthah’s daughter until we arrive home in glory. So then, what can we take away from this passage? There are a few lessons here that we need to take to heart today. · We must be a people characterized by the truth. Let it never be said that any child of God every failed to keep his or her word. · Vows made to God are sacred. They must be kept. Be careful what you promise God. He will expect you to fulfill every promise to the letter, Deut. 23:21-23; Num. 30:2; Psalm 34:13; Eccl. 5:4-6. Be aware that you will pay every vow you make to God! Be very careful not to make rash promises to God. You will be called on to fulfill those vows. · It is always evil to fulfill an evil vow. While God expects us to do what we say, He does not expect us to violate His Law in the process. It is a sinful thing to make a vow that involves evil, and it would be even more evil to actually carry it out. If Jephthah had promised to sacrifice his daughter, God would not have accepted that vow, and he would have never expected him to fulfill it. · Never try to strike a bargain with God. Your plan will not change His plan. Regardless of what you offer Him it will not change His mind about what He plans to do. Our God is sovereign and He will not be coerced into anything that is not part of His perfect plan! We are to walk by faith and trust the Lord to do with us as He pleases. Don’t bargain, simply obey! If the Lord has spoken to you about your honesty and about the vows you have made to Him, you ought to come before Him and deal with that today. Remember that vow to love Him, serve Him and obey Him forever? How’s that going for you? Remember that vow to honor Him with your life and income? How’s that coming along? Listen to Him and do what He is telling you to do today. (Judges 11:29-40 BE CAREFUL LITTLE MOUTH WHAT YOU SAY) Paul Apple's Outline Commentary notes on Judges 11:34-40 I. (Judges 11:34-40) THE COMMITMENT MAINTAINED DESPITE THE GREAT COST A. (Judges 11:34-35) Commitments Can Be Costly Brensinger: In the traditional role of jubilant women welcoming home their heroes, this unsuspecting child dances in total celebration (Exod. 15:20-21; Judg. 5:28-30; 1 Sam. 18:6-7). “tore his clothes” – Lev. 10:6 – sign of intense mourning at time of death B. (Judges 11:36) Commitments Call For Submission C. (Judges 11:37-40) Commitments Worth Commemorating Block: No memorials were erected for Jephthah, but the memory of his daughter was immortalized in a festival celebrated in her honor. Nothing specific is known of this festival, except that it was observed four days each year by the women of Israel. It is doubtful this observance ever became a national event. The absence of any external attestation probably may be attributed to the fact that the events described to this point have all concerned only the Transjordanian tribes, whom their Cisjordanian countrymen tended to marginalize from the beginning. CONCLUSION: 1 Thess. 5:24 “Faithful is He who calls you, and He will also bring it to pass.” Look at all the passages that speak to the faithfulness of God Not saying “Don’t make any commitments to the Lord” But be careful in what you pledge and follow through and keep your commitments; don’t make commitments as part of some bargaining interaction with a God who graciously gives good gifts to His children. “O Jesus I have promised to serve Thee to the end” DEVOTIONAL QUESTIONS: 1) What are some other Scripture passages that urge us to count the cost? 2) When have we tried to bargain with the Lord? What was our motivation? What lessons did we learn? 3) When have we kept our word and suffered some hard consequences as a result? 4) Why was Jephthah included in the Faith Hall of Fame in Hebrews 11? QUOTES FOR REFLECTION: Keil & Delitzcsh: the two clauses “he shall be the Lord’s” and “I will offer him up for a burnt offering,” cannot be taken disjunctively in such a sense as this, it shall either be dedicated to the Lord, or, if it should be a sacrificial animal, I will offer it up as a burnt-offering, but the second clause simply contains a more precise definition of the first, -- Jephthah must at the very outset have contemplated the possibility of a human sacrifice. Motyer: If you have made a promise, you keep it. He should never have made that promise. He should have realized that keeping it might mean the breaking of other basic rules. But amid the welter of contradictory voices he had heard the voice of God saying, “You keep your word,” and he heeded the vice. It was a mark of paganism to shut one’s ears to inconvenient messages, as he knew: “the king of the Ammonites did not heed the message of Jephthah” (Jdg 11:28). But Jephthah was a man of faith, and he did heed at any rate the message of God concerning faithfulness, whatever confusions may have accompanied it. What he did (the sacrifice of his daughter) is a thing all Scripture condemns; why he did it (in order to keep his word) is a thing all Scripture commends. Dennis Bratcher: We are supposed to recoil from the monstrosity of Jephthah’s actions. The later community of Israel who included this story in the biblical traditions knew how wrong child sacrifice was, so there would be no mistaking this for a model of right behavior. It would be another example of what happens when God’s people become confused in their thinking about who is really God and how God works in the world. This becomes another lesson for Israel that God will not be manipulated by magical incantations or bargains that we strike with him on our own terms. That is precisely what Jephthah tried to do in making his vow to sacrifice the first thing that met him on his return home, if only God would help him win a battle. God did not need that bargain to aid Jephthah. Jephthah was yet another tragic figure in Judges who had not yet learned enough about God to know that God does not respond to magic or bargains, which lay at the heart of Ba’al worship. Jephthah’s battle against the Ammonites was not won because of his vow, but because of God’s presence (11:32). His lack of faith in God, and understanding of who God is, cost him his daughter. http://www.crivoice.org/jephthah.html Tim McQuade: When people face a challenge they are tempted to bargain with God. The greater the challenge the more tempting it is to try to make a deal with God. Jephthah tried it, we mustn't. There are problems with trying to make a deal with God. The first problem is that God doesn't care for it. Rather than an attempted bribe, God would much rather see faith. A second reason is that you can't, or won't keep the promise you made. If you promised to go to church every Sunday, for example, you cannot keep it. You will, eventually, miss a Sunday. Things will work initially, but over time you'll forget the deal you made. . . Trust God. Don't try to manipulate Him. Don't bargain because you cannot keep it. Don't bargain because God is unimpressed. Don't bargain because God wants your faith. http://www.christianity.com/SermonHelps/11599536/ Woodrow Kroll: I think the daughter may be the real story here. You're right--she is courageous, she is obedient, she is loyal to her father (to his ill-conceived vow). And I think that what she teaches us is that there is honor in courage and obedience and loyalty, and that's a lesson that many people apparently have forgotten today. http://www.backtothebible.org/index.php/Back-to-the-Bible-Radio-Program/Jephthah-s-TragicMistake-2010.html (Paul Apple - Judges Commentary) Judges 11:35 And it came about when he saw her, that he tore his clothes and said, "Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low, and you are among those who trouble me; for I have given my word to the LORD, and I cannot take it back." he tore his clothes: Ge 37:29,30,34,35 42:36-38 2Sa 13:30,31 18:33 Job 1:20 for I have given my word to the LORD: Lev 27:28,29 Nu 30:2-5 Ps 15:4 Ec 5:2-6 I cannot take it back: Jdg 21:1-7 1Sa 14:44,45 Mt 14:7-9 Ac 23:14 Judges 11 Resources NATIONAL VICTORY PERSONAL DEFEAT And it came about when he saw her, that he tore his clothes and said, "Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low, and you are among those who trouble me; for I have given my word to the LORD, and I cannot take it back." The joy of victory was suddenly turned to sorrow when Jephthah saw his daughter and remembered his vow. IVP Background Commentary - Since a vow is a religious act, drawing the deity into compact with the worshiper, it may not be broken under penalty of God’s displeasure (see Ex 20:7 and the injunction not to “misuse” God’s name). Though a vow could not be broken, the law allowed for the mitigation of vows, especially those involving persons (see comment on Lev 27:2–8). This loophole was apparently unknown to Jephthah. (See context The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament) Wiersbe feels that "Jephthah knew that God’s law prohibited human sacrifices, and certainly the Lord would not have given victory on the basis of such an offer. Jephthah’s daughter was dedicated to serve the Lord at the tabernacle and therefore remained unmarried. As a result, Jephthah had no descendants to carry on his great name. If she had been sacrificed, it is not likely that the maidens would have been allowed to commemorate the event annually, for that would have been imitating the heathen around them. (See context With the Word: The Chapter-by-Chapter Bible Handbook) George Bush - Alas, my daughter, thou hast brought me very low. Heb. חכרע חכרעתני hakraa hikrateni, bowing thou hast made me to bow; generally spoken of bowing down upon the knees for purposes of religious reverence, or from feebleness and exhaustion, especially when overcome in battle. Here the idea seems to be, that from being highly elated by the recent victory, he had now, in meeting his daughter under the present circumstances, been suddenly and wofully depressed and struck down, as it were, to the earth. His exultation was changed to humiliation and grief. His daughter had done to him what the Ammonites could not. The evident bitterness of emotion which he betrayed, on meeting his daughter, clearly shows that he then looked upon himself as bound by the tenor of his vow to make her life a sacrifice. Although the idea of consigning her to a state of perpetual celibacy and seclusion, of being bereft of her society, and seeing the extinction of his name in Israel certain, could not but greatly affect the heart of a father, yet the anguish which he now expressed appears too intense and excruciating to be caused by any thing but the conviction that she must die—die a martyred victim to his precipitate vow. Thou art one of them that trouble me. Heb. ‘thou hast become among my troublers.’ This language might, in reality, have been more properly addressed by the daughter to her father, but his meaning obviously is, that she had innocently and involuntarily become a source of unspeakable distress to him. ‘He answers the measures of her feet with the knockings of his breast. Her joy alone hath changed the day, and lost the comfort of that victory which she enjoyed to see won. It falls out often, that those times and occasions which promise most contentment, prove most doleful in the issue; the heart of this virgin was never lifted up so high as now, neither did any day of her life seem happy but this; and this only proves the day of her solemn and perpetual mourning. It is good, in a fair morning, to think of the storm that may arise are night, and to enjoy both good and evil fearfully.’—Bp. Hall. I have opened my mouth unto the Lord. I have solemnly vowed to him; implying that the vow was not only conceived in the mind, but uttered with the lips. Vows, unless they were verbally enounced, seem not to have been regarded as binding, Num. 30:3, 7, 9, 13; Deut. 23:22, 23. Although the narrative does not represent him as informing her specifically of the burden of the vow, yet from what follows it is plain that she soon became aware of it, either from the extreme distress which he now manifested, or from his subsequent explicit disclosures. The sacred writers frequently omit the mention of minor circumstances, contenting themselves with the statement of leading facts, and leaving it to the judgment of the reader to supply the omitted links of the chain. I cannot go back. I cannot recall the vow myself, now that it is solemnly uttered, nor can any power on earth release me from its obligation. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas! my daughter! thou hast brought me very low [after having been raised so high by the victory: compare the Antitype weeping in the very hour of triumph (Luke 19:38–41)], and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth [in a vow] unto the LORD [JEHOVAH], and I cannot go back [Ps. 66:13, 14; Nu 30:2; Deut. 23:21–23]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:36 So she said to him, "My father, you have given your word to the LORD; do to me as you have said, since the LORD has avenged you of your enemies, the sons of Ammon." since the LORD has avenged you of your enemies: Jdg 16:28-30 2Sa 18:19,31 19:30 Ac 20:24 21:13 Ro 16:4 Php 2:30 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH'S LOYAL DAUGHTER So she said to him, "My father, you have given your word to the LORD; do to me as you have said, since the LORD has avenged you of your enemies, the sons of Ammon. - The daughter's fidelity sealed her fate. George Bush - My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth, &c. A striking pattern of filial piety and obedience, and of heroic zeal for what she conceived the honor of God and of Israel. So rejoiced was she at the victory, as redounding to the good of her country, that she is willing to be herself offered up as a thank-offering for it, and thinks her life well bestowed when laid down for such a purpose. True indeed it is, that if her father’s conduct was wrong in making the vow, hers, when viewed intrinsically in itself, could not be right in concurring in it; the same moral character would attach to both; but it were vain to expect that her knowledge in such a matter would go beyond that of her father. How can it be supposed that a youthful maiden should have had clear views of the import of the divine law on such a subject, when her father’s mind was enveloped in darkness? Her generous self-devotion, therefore, is still entitled to our highest commendation. Her involuntary ignorance excuses her infirmity, and if she believed when she uttered these words, that she was to be put to death, neither Greece nor Rome, with all their heroes and heroines, can furnish an instance of sublimer self-sacrifice than this of the humble maid of Israel. Had it occurred among these boasting people, instead of the plain unvarnished tale of the sacred historian, we should have had it pressed on our admiration with all the pomp of eloquence. Indeed it cannot be doubted, had but Jephthah and his daughter been heathens, that the very persons, who now find in the transaction nothing but a pretence for vilifying the Scriptures, would then have extolled the whole as exhibiting the finest example of the most noble constancy, the most disinterested virtue. (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And she said unto him, My father, (if) thou hast opened thy mouth unto the LORD [JEHOVAH], do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth [compare Isaac’s submission to his father (Gen. 22:7, 9); filial obedience, piety, and patriotism appear in her reply]; forasmuch as the LORD [JEHOVAH] hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, (even) of the children of Ammon. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:37 And she said to her father, "Let this thing be done for me; let me alone two months, that I may go to the mountains and weep because of my virginity, I and my companions." weep because of my virginity: 1Sa 1:6 Lk 1:25 Judges 11 Resources THE DAUGHTER'S WILLINGNESS And she said to her father, "Let this thing be done for me; let me alone two months, that I may go to the mountains and weep because of my virginity, I and my companions." - Is she saying go ahead and sacrifice me? We will not know definitively until we get to heaven. George Bush - Let me alone for two months. The word in the original is that used for slacking, relaxing, loosing one’s hold upon any thing; see Note on Josh. 1:4. The whole narrative affords nothing more obscure and remarkable than this request. On what custom was it founded? Is there an intimation of any thing similar in any other part of the Scriptures, or in any thing relative to oriental manners and usages? We know of nothing, and must sit down resigned in our ignorance. Yet we think the inference fair, that children, both sons and daughters, were occasionally dedicated by Jewish parents to the perpetual service of God at the tabernacle or temple, as we know was the case with Samuel, though he, in after life, seems to have obtained a dispensation from the vow of his mother. Where this was the case with youthful females, it is probable the custom obtained of their retiring for a season in groups from domestic scenes to sequestered places, in token of regret at being thereby excluded the privilege of a place among the ancestors of the future generations of Israel, and perhaps of the Messiah. Not that we can suppose that companies of unprotected maidens would forsake for days and weeks the habitations of men, and spend their time in roving about over hill and dale in the open air, for they would surely stand in need of food and shelter, and how on this supposition were they to procure them? but they probably withdrew to some retired places of abode, remote from populous villages, where, under the care of pious matrons, they passed the allotted time in the observance of such rites and ceremonies, as were appointed for the purpose; occasionally, perhaps, walking abroad in solemn and mournful processions. It is at least difficult to conceive, in a civilized and religious state of society, and especially in Eastern countries, of any other mode, in which a company of youthful damsels could, without a very ill appearance, spend a season of retirement from their usual place of residence. Let the question be put to any reflecting mind, in what other light can a transaction of this nature, be viewed? Did the Jewish maidens, under these circumstances, sojourn unattended for weeks and months, wandering up and down on the mountains? Is it conceivable that they should have adopted a measure so utterly abhorrent to female decorum and so completely at war with the very first rudiments of oriental prejudice? If then, upon abandoning their own homes, they must have resorted to some kind of habitations, what were they? what, but a species of abode designed for the purpose? For ourselves, the narrated facts of the Scripture allow us to come to no other conclusion. If then such a custom existed at the time to which our narrative refers, it is very supposable, that Jephthah’s daughter on an occasion like the present, with her impending fate full before her, should have been desirous to avail herself of a usage, originally indeed designed for another purpose, but not inappropriate to this, and so have requested a respite of a few weeks from the doom that awaited her. What more fitting employment during that dread interval, than to mingle her regrets with those whose lot her own in one respect so much resembled, though they were exempted from the destiny to which she had meekly submitted? (Judges 11 Commentary) A R Fausset - And she said unto her father, Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down [Heb., “go and go down”: i.e., go down from the Mizpeh height of her home to the valley and then go up] upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows [to become a wife and mother was the great desire of Israelite women. To be unwedded and childless was deemed a great calamity and reproach (compare Isa. 4:1; 1 Sam. 1:6; Luke 1:25; Gen. 30:23). The seed of the woman, according to the protevangelical promise (Gen. 3:15), was to crush the serpent’s head: hence arose the yearning desire of maternity]. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:38 Then he said, "Go." So he sent her away for two months; and she left with her companions, and wept on the mountains because of her virginity. JEPHTHAH'S TWO AGONIZING MONTHS Then he said, "Go." So he sent her away for two months; and she left with her companions, and wept on the mountains because of her virginity. - One can only imagine what went through Jephthah's heart and mind and soul in these 2 months. Judges 11:39 And it came about at the end of two months that she returned to her father, who did to her according to the vow which he had made; and she had no relations with a man. Thus it became a custom in Israel, who did to her Jdg 11:31 Lev 27:28,29 Dt 12:31 Isa 66:3 vow: 1Sa 1:11,22,24,28 2:18 Judges 11 Resources JEPHTHAH KEEPS HIS VOW And it came about at the end of two months that she returned to her father, who did to her according to the vow which he had made; and she had no relations with a man. Thus it became a custom in Israel, In view of the divine commands in the Mosaic law against human sacrifice (Lv 18:21; 20:2 -5; Dt 12:31; 18:10), a question has been raised about Jephthah's action. However as discussed above, there is debate as to what he actually did. Those who think that he slew his daughter see no divine approval of the act, but rather attribute it to his rash vow. Others do not believe that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter, but that he set her apart to perpetual virginity. The latter view emphasizes the unusual expression in [Jdg 11:31]: "will be the LORD's," and the stress upon virginity instead of death in [Jdg 11:37,39]. Gary Inrig points out the real tragedy was Jephthah's ignorance of the Word of God - even at this point, Jephthah’s ignorance was pernicious. He could not take back his vow. He was committed before God. But there were other options. First, he could have ignored the vow and taken the consequences on himself, making himself the victim of his own folly. Or, more appropriately, he could have carried it out biblically. You see, God had clearly spelled out a solution to Jephthah’s problem in Leviticus 27. It explains that when a person is committed to the Lord, that person’s life can be redeemed by the payment of a certain amount of money. If only Jephthah had known God’s Word, if only someone had taught him God’s Word, his daughter need never have died! He could have paid the ransom price and spared her. One Jewish commentary on Judges tells us that the reason they held the annual mourning for Jephthah’s daughter was “in order that none should make his son or daughter a burnt offering, as Jephthah did, and did not consult Phineas the priest. Had he done so, he would have redeemed her with money.” Do you see how devastating ignorance of the Word of God is? Jephthah’s daughter died because he did not know the Word of God. Our ignorance may not have such tragic consequences, but there will be tragic consequences. Ignorance of God is the greatest ignorance of all. (Borrow Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay) Treasury of Scripture note - That Jephthah did not sacrifice his daughter, but consecrated her to the service of God in the tabernacle, in a state of celibacy, will we imagine be evident from the following consideration:--1. Human sacrifices were ever an abomination to Jehovah, of which Jephthah could not be ignorant; and consequently he would neither have made such a vow, nor carried it into execution. 2. We are expressly told (ver. 29) that Jephthah was under the influence of the Spirit of God, which would effectually prevent him from embruing his hands in the blood of his own child. 3. He had it in his power to redeem his daughter, (Lev 27:4;) and surely his only child must have been of more value than thirty shekles. 4. Besides, who was to perform the horrid rite? Not Jephthah himself, who was no priest, and in whom it would have been most unnatural and inhuman; and the priests would certainly have dissuaded him from it. 5. The sacred historian informs us, that she bewailed her virginity, that she knew no man, and that the Israelitish women went yearly to comfort or lament with her. George Bush - Did with her according to his vow. Heb. ויעש לה את נדרו vayaas lâh eth nidro, did to her his vow. The original, if we mistake not, affords some more latitude of construction, in respect to the mode of executing the vow, than is allowed by our present rendering. According to the latter, we are required to believe that he adhered to the very letter of the vow, and actually offered her as a burnt offering, which we have endeavored to show is the unforced legitimate sense of the vow itself. According to the former, which is more general and indefinite, we are not, we conceive, absolutely shut up to the adoption of this sense. The phrase, ‘he did to her his vow,’ strikes us as not specifying the precise manner in which the vow was performed, but as leaving us at liberty, provided the exigency of the case requires it, to understand the writer as saying, that he did to her what was equivalent to his original vow, what was accepted in lieu of it, instead of the identical thing which the vow contemplated. The verisimilitude of this rendering will be just in proportion to the probability, derived from other sources, that he did not actually put his daughter to death; that in the interval of the two months’ respite which she besought, he had come to a different view of the demands of duty in the case, the amount of which was, a clear conviction that the literal fulfilment of the vow was not obligatory upon him. In support of this hypothesis, which we think to be the true one, we offer the following considerations. (1) It is not expressly stated that she was offered up for a burnt offering. Instead of saying, as would naturally, on that supposition; have been expected in a transaction of such moment, ‘He did with her according to his vow, and offered her up for a burnt offering to the Lord,’ the writer simply affirms, ‘He did to her his vow, and she knew no man;’ as if this were intended to be explanatory of the manner in which the doing of the vow was accomplished, viz. by devoting her to a life of celibacy. Why else is this latter circumstance mentioned, but to show wherein the accomplishment of the vow consisted? If she were really put to death, is it not strange that the fact of her death is not once spoken of? But if she were only doomed to a state of perpetual virginity, the reason of the expression is at once obvious. It may indeed be objected that no other instance of devoting a person to virginity occurs, nor have we evidence that parents possessed any such right. This we admit; but neither, on the other hand, does the Scripture afford evidence, that parents possessed the right of devoting their children to death, nor exhibit, among the chosen people, an example of the fact of such a devotement. The intrinsic probability, therefore, is as strong on the one side as the other. Nor is the objection more valid, that supposing her only devoted to God, there was no reason why she should remain unmarried; since Samson and Samuel, both of whom were devoted to God from the womb, were both married. But the case is extremely different between a man and a woman. The former was at liberty to serve God, in any way that he judged agreeable to his will; but the latter, if she had married, would have been under the control of her husband, who might in a variety of ways have interfered with the discharge of the duties which the vow implied. It was therefore necessary that she should remain unmarried, and that she should also be secluded in a great measure from society itself; that being the way in which the object of entire consecration could be most effectually attained. Moreover, such a sentence would come the nearest of any other to the letter of his vow. She would henceforth become dead to the world, and in her perpetual celibacy the line of his posterity become extinct for ever. It would therefore almost amount to a positive immolation of her. (2) It does not appear by whose hands such a sacrifice could have been offered. Not by the high priest, or any regular member of the priesthood, for with all the deplorable laxness, ignorance, and degeneracy that prevailed, it is incredible that any officiating priest should have tolerated for a moment, in the face of such explicit prohibitions as Moses had given, the oblation of a human sacrifice. And not by Jephthah himself, for this would have been a transgression of the Levitical law, which enjoined that every offering should be made by the hand of the priest, and at the place where the tabernacle and altar stood. This is rendered still more certain by an important circumstance mentioned in the beginning of the next chapter. It will be remembered that the tabernacle was at this time at Shiloh, in the tribe of Ephraim. Now immediately after the conclusion of the war with the Ammonites, we find Jephthah engaged in a bitter war with the Ephraimites. This makes it in the highest degree improbable that he should, in the very heat of the quarrel, have gone into the heart of that tribe to offer such a sacrifice, even had it been lawful. If then, there is the utmost reason to believe that such an offering was not made by the high priest or any inferior priest—that it was not made by Jephthah himself—and that it was not made at Shiloh, the appointed place of sacrifice, what reason is there to suppose it was made at all? (3) From all the circumstances, the probability, we think, is very strong that Jephthah availed himself of the provisions of the law, in respect to devoted persons and things; in other words, that during the two months’ interval, he had become better instructed in regard to the subject of vows in general under the Mosaic statutes, and ascertained that a dispensation, in his case, was practicable. We have already remarked that vows were encouraged under the law, and that besides the ’herem or anathema, persons or things might be devoted to God. But where this was the case, the law permitted that a valuation should be made of the devoted person or thing, and that the money should be regarded as a ransom for it, or an offering be presented in its stead. If a human being were devoted, the estimation was to vary according to the sex or age of the person, Lev. 27:2–13, but for an adult female, it was thirty shekels of silver. Now supposing that Jephthah, at the time of making the vow, had no distinct recollection or knowledge of this law; supposing even that the vow, as it emanated from his lips, partook more of the character of the ’herem than the neder; yet is it conceivable, that when the execution of it was postponed for two months, and the affair had become notorious throughout the nation, and was the subject of general discussion and great lamentation, there was no person in all Israel who once thought of this law? Would not the agonized father, besides devoting to it his own intensest study, consult the priests on the subject? And would not the priests acquaint him with the provisions of the law in reference to a case of casuistry like the present? And what would naturally be the result? Could he fail to come to the conclusion, that such a sacrifice as he first intended was not only unlawful, but in the face of the numerous pointed prohibitions against it would amount to nothing short of downright murder? Would he not learn, that as an offering (עילה, the term he had employed in his vow) was in its own nature incompatible with a ’herem (חרם), and that the law having made no provision for the latter being substituted for the former, he was even, according to the very terms of his vow, rightly understood, not only released, but prohibited from performing it? Under these circumstances, would he, could he persevere in his original intention? Is it not more probable, that after deep deliberation in concert with the authorised expounders of the law, he yielded to the conviction, that although his solemn pledge did not originally contemplate any such alternative, yet it might be embraced in the provisions now alluded to—that it might come under the class of redeemable vows? He would be more encouraged to avail himself of this dispensation, on the ground of the darkness of his mind at the time of coming under the engagement. It was not an act of wilful disregard of the divine statutes relative to this point, but one rather of misapprehension and infirmity, though from its rash and reckless character by no means innocent. He was still, we may suppose, ready to humble himself before God in view of his precipitancy, and while he paid the ransom price that delivered his daughter from death, piously resolved, by way of punishing himself for his rashness, to fulfil his vow in her civil excision from among the living. He accordingly, we conceive, consigned her henceforth to a state of perpetual seclusion and celibacy—of living consecration to God—and in this manner ‘did unto her his vow,’ though in a mode of execution, which did not, in the first instance, enter into his thoughts. Thus, on the whole, after weighing all the circumstances and arguments bearing upon the case, we are led to decide upon the much disputed point, whether Jephthah really sacrificed his daughter. To our mind the evidence for the negative clearly preponderates. At the same time, we do not, as will be seen, deduce it from the terms of the vow, or any fancied contingency of purpose in Jephthah’s mind at the time of making it. We believe that it was made under the prevailing impression that a human sacrifice would be the result; but that, although his conduct was contrary to the Scriptural precept forbidding men ‘after vows to make inquiry,’ he became subsequently more enlightened, and by a careful study of the law, aided by its proper ministers, he ascertained the possibility of being released from the dilemma in which he had so thoughtlessly ensnared himself. Perhaps the most valid objection to the view given above, is that which would assume the form of the question, Why, if such were the fact, is the narrative so constructed as to give rise almost inevitably to the impression, that the literal immolation of Jephthah’s daughter actually took place? Without allowing that an inability to answer this question satisfactorily ought to be considered as essentially weakening the force of the arguments adduced above, we may suggest in reply, that the Spirit of inspiration may have framed the record as it now stands, marked by a somewhat ambiguous asspect, in order to guard against a light estimate of the obligation of vows. We do not affirm this to have been the design, but it is certainly conceivable that if it had been expressly stated that the vow in its literal sense had not been performed, it might have gone to relax somewhat of the apprehended sacredness of all such votive engagements, and led men to think that God himself might easily dispense with them. Whereas, as it is now worded, and would be perhaps most naturally understood, it would inspire far other sentiments, and lead men at once to be very cautious in making, and very punctilious in performing their vows. (Judges 11 Commentary) Bush - And it was a custom in Israel. Heb. ותהי חק בישראל vattehi ’hok be-yisraël. The phraseology of the original is peculiar, the verb being of the fem., the noun of the masc. gender. The literal rendering we take to be, ‘and she became an ordinance in Israel;’ i. e. her case became a precedent; it gave rise to an established custom in Israel. But what particular custom is alluded to, whether that of dedicating maidens to God, as Gusset supposes, or that of going at stated times to commemorate the fate of Jephthah’s daughter, as others contend, is not clear. The latter appears, on the whole, most probable. (Judges 11 Commentary) Judges 11:40 that the daughters of Israel went yearly to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah Jdg 5:11 four days in the year: 1Ki 9:25 Judges 11 Resources ANNUAL COMMEMORATION OF JEPHTHAH'S DAUGHTER that the daughters of Israel went yearly to commemorate the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year. One of the few Jewish commentaries on Judges says that the reason they held the annual mourning for Jephthah's daughter was "in order that none should make his son or daughter a burnt offering as Jephthah did and did not consult Phineas the priest. Had he done so, he would have redeemed her with money." George Bush - Went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah. Heb. מימים ימימח miyâmim yâmimâh, from days to days; but a day in Scriptural idiom is often used for a year; for which reason the marginal reading is properly ‘from year to year.’ The original for ‘to lament,’ (לתנות lethannoth), is a term of very questionable import. It is rendered differently according to the different opinions of expositors, as to the nature of the vow, and the mode of its fulfilment. Those who think that she was sacrificed, are satisfied with the present version; those who dissent from this, contend earnestly for the marginal rendering, ‘to talk with,’—meaning that the daughters of Israel went yearly to condole with and to comfort her. It must be admitted, that the evidence for this latter sense of the word is by no means slight, if we refer to the only other instance in which it occurs, Judg. 5:11, where, though translated ‘to rehearse’—‘there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the Lord,’—yet the idea of colloquy, of mutual address, is clearly involved. This is confirmed by Kimchi, the Jewish commentator, who thus paraphrases the words before us, ‘That indeed, with their friendly discourse they might comfort her concerning her virginity and her solitary state of life.’ The ancient versions, however, with one accord, give the sense of lamenting, bewailing, a circumstance undoubtedly to us of no small weight, though not absolutely decisive in estimating the true import of the term. The probability is, that the word means in its most general sense, ‘to praise, to celebrate, to commemorate,’ and would therefore denote that the daughters of Israel kept a few days’ anniversary to commemorate this transaction, whatever were its result. For aught that appears from the language itself, she might have been living at the time. Indeed take the passage as it reads; ‘The daughters of Israel went to lament the daughter of Jephthah;’ and the question is, what in her, or respecting her, did they lament? It is not said they lamented her death; and to affirm that they did, is to beg the question. ‘They might have lamented only what they and Jephthah’s daughter had lamented before, viz. her virginity. On the whole, though some difficulties attend every interpretation hitherto advanced of Jephthah’s vow and its consequences, yet the foregoing has perhaps the fewest and the least, and receives most countenance both from philological and moral considerations. We may close our observations on this remarkable portion of holy writ by suggesting, (1) That we be cautious in making vows. ‘Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God; for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth; therefore let thy words be few.’ It may sometimes be useful to bind ourselves by solemn vows, to evince our gratitude and confirm our regard for the divine glory. But such vows should be deliberately and discreetly made, and should extend to those things only that are clearly lawful in themselves, and serviceable to the interests of religion. Strict inquiry should be made into the nature and extent of the proposed engagements, before we enter into them. Thus Solomon declares, ‘It is a snare to a man to devour that which is holy, and after vows to make inquiry.’ If we have rashly pledged ourselves to do what the law of God prohibits, we must recede from our vow, and humble ourselves before our Maker for our precipitance. The forty conspirators, who swore that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul, and Herod, who swore that he would give his daughter whatsoever she should ask of him, had no right to bind themselves to such an extent, and would have sinned less in violating than in keeping their engagements. Let their case be a warning to us. (2) That we be conscientious in performing them. Where our vows are lawful and practicable they should be religiously kept. Better is it not to vow, than to vow and not perform. So Solomon exhorts; ‘When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it, for he hath no pleasure in fools. Pay that which thou hast vowed.’ Even though the rigid observance of our vows should subject us to great sacrifices, expense, and trouble, yet the obligation should be considered sacred, and the attempt to set them aside by the plea of inadvertence or of difficulty in the performance will only serve to bring upon us the heavy displeasure of God. If Jephthah, after having precipitately bound himself by a solemn engagement, felt constrained to adhere to its spirit, though released from the letter, and would not go back, notwithstanding the sacrifice was so great, so neither should we decline the performance of the most difficult of our vows. Let us remind ourselves of the sacredness uniformly attached in the Scriptures to obligations of this sort, and say with David, ‘I will go into thy house with burnt offerings; I will pay thee my vows which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble.’ And who is there that has not the responsibility of vows of some kind resting upon him? Who has not, in a time of sickness, or danger, or trouble, or alarm, determined with himself, that if he should be delivered, he would devote himself to the Lord and to the pursuit of heavenly things? Let all such look back and call to mind the vows that are upon them, and be admonished that Jephthah will rise up in judgment against the violation of them. Especially let us remember that in making a profession of religion, we have vowed to be the Lord’s in a perpetual covenant of love, trust, and obedience. We have opened our mouths to him, and now we cannot go back without the shipwreck of truth, honor, conscience, and probably of salvation. Again therefore we say, let us be faithful to covenant engagements. (3) Others’ sorrows should be our own, and by partaking we should seek to alleviate them. So was it with the companions of Jephthah’s daughter, and so should it be with the sons and daughters of the true Israel, in all ages and climes. (Judges 11 Commentary) JUDGES 11 JEPHTHAH F B Meyer… Judges 11:1-3 Jephthah had a very base origin. -- But men ought not to be reproached with their parentage, if their own character is sweet and noble. Let us so live as to cast a halo of light on our origin, however lowly. Is not this also an illustration of God's constant action (1 Cor. 1:27)? Judges 11:4-11 The terms of agreement. -- How often it has happened that in our extremity we, like the elders of Gilead, have turned to Him whom we refused. But there is only one condition on which the Lord will fight for us against our over-mastering foes. He must be our Head; we must put Him on the throne. Judges 11:12-28 The meeting. -- This was consistent with Deut. 20:10-11. The land had not belonged to the Ammonites, but to the Amorites, from whom Israel had taken it at God's command; Ammon, therefore, had no claim to it whatever. It is important that we should vindicate the cause we espouse, that those who oppose us may know that they are in conflict not with us alone, but with the eternal principles of God's righteousness. It is a great thing to be able to say, "I have not sinned against thee, but thou doest me wrong" (Judges 11:27). Even if we do not wrong people by act, let us guard against speaking treacherously or unkindly. Judges 11:29-40 His vow. -- There was no need of such a vow to obtain God's favor. Our vows should not be made to win God's help, but as an expression of our gratitude and love. We do not need to bribe Him to do aught for us. Not the burnt-offering as an inducement for God to deliver, but God's deliverance an inducement to the burnt-offering. Whether or not Jephthah did really offer his child is not material to our present consideration, for it must have been as great an agony to shut her away from the cherished hope of an Oriental woman, as to see her consumed on a funeral pyre. (F. B. Meyer. CHOICE NOTES ON JOSHUA THROUGH 2 KINGS) JEPHTHAH’S VOW Jdg. 11:30, 31 Charles Simeon VOWS were common under the Mosaic dispensation: they were even encouraged by God himself, in order that his people might have opportunities of manifesting the love that was in their hearts by offerings that were not enjoined, and services that were not commanded. In cases of difficulty, where it appeared of more than ordinary importance to secure the divine favour and protection, the patriarchs had resorted to vows, and bound themselves, in case he should vouchsafe to them the desired blessing, to render unto him according to the benefits he should confer upon them. Thus Jacob, when he had just left his father and family in order to seek in a foreign land a refuge from his brother’s vengeance, vowed, that, if the Lord would be with him and restore him to his home in peace, he would take God entirely for his God, and devote to him a tenth of all that he should possess. (Ge 28:20, 21, 22.) In the time of Moses, the whole people of Israel resorted to the same measure, in order to obtain success against the Canaanites. (Nu. 21:2) This, it must be confessed, has a legal appearance, and looks like offering to make a bargain with God: but vows may certainly be made in perfect consistency with the liberal spirit of the Gospel: for it is intimated, that under the Gospel, yea even in the millennial age, such a practice should obtain; (Is 19:21) and we know that Paul both made a vow himself (Acts 18:18), and united with others in services to which by a voluntary engagement they had bound themselves. (Acts 21:23, 24) The vow of Jephthah has engaged the attention of learned men in all ages: but they are by no means agreed as to the import of it. We propose, I. To explain his vow— It must be confessed, that the Jewish writers in general, together with their great historian Josephus, were of opinion, that Jephthah offered his daughter to the Lord as a burnt-offering. Of the same opinion also were the generality of writers in the early ages of the Christian Church. Multitudes also of the most approved authors amongst the moderns take the same side of the question. But we are constrained to differ from them; and the more attentively we have weighed their arguments, the more fully are we persuaded that Jephthah did not offer up his daughter as a burnt-offering, but only devoted her to the service, the exclusive service, of the Lord. In confirmation of this opinion, we would call your attention to the particular circumstances of the vow: 1. The making of it— [In opposition to the idea of his offering her up for a burnt-offering, we say, that No pious man would have made such a vow. Jephthah was undoubtedly a pious man, as his whole history declares: for at his first acceding to the proposals of his countrymen to stand forth for their deliverance, he laid the matter before the Lord (Jdg 11:11): and his vow was expressive of his affiance alone in God for success: besides which, he is celebrated by St. Paul (Ed: I don't agree that Paul was the author of Hebrews) as one of those eminent men who obtained a good report through their faith (Heb. 11:32). Moreover, he was at this time under the influence of the Spirit of God (Jdg 11:29). Now can we suppose that such a man, under such influence, should deliberately vow to God that he would commit murder? that he would murder the first person who should come forth to congratulate him, whether it might be man, woman, or child, yea even if it should be his own, his only daughter? or, if a dog or other unclean animal should come forth, he would offer it up for a burnt-offering? Could he conceive that this would be pleasing to the Deity, and that such a vow as this would be likely to procure success? Had not the law said, “Thou shalt not kill?” (Ex 20:13) and had not God expressly forbidden his people to imitate the heathen in offering human sacrifices? (Dt. 12:31) Had not the law prescribed, that if a man should unintentionally kill his slave, he should be punished? and could he imagine that the law permitted him intentionally and deliberately to kill his own daughter? It may be said, that the Spirit ordered him to offer up this sacrifice, just as God commanded Abraham to offer up his son Isaac: but I ask, Where if any such thing expressed in this history? and why, if the Sprit of God had ordered a human sacrifice to be made, and he under the influence of the Spirit had vowed to offer one, whence came the rending of his garment, and all his vehement lamentation, upon finding that his daughter was the appointed victim? If he had been called to Abraham’s trial, we may well suppose that God would have given to him the faith of Abraham; or at least, that, if he had so greatly failed in this duty, he would not have been so highly commended as an example of faith. But, we say again, that there is not the smallest intimation that the Spirit of God did give any such order to him: nor can we conceive that if, for the trial of his faith, God had given it, he would have ever suffered it to be carried into execution; but would rather have interposed to prevent it, as he did in the case of Isaac. But, as no pious man would have made such a vow, so, if Jephthah had made it, the law itself had provided a ransom for her. We have before said, that vows were encouraged under the law; and persons, as well as things, might be devoted to God. But if either persons, or things, were devoted to him, the law permitted that a valuation should be made of the devoted thing or person, and that the money should be regarded as a ransom for it, or an offering be presented in its stead. If a human being were devoted, the estimation should vary according to the sex and age of the person: but if it were a beast, then the offerer should give in addition one fifth more than the estimated value as the price of its redemption. (Lev 27:2-13) When the enemies of God and their cities or possessions were, as accursed things, devoted to destruction, they were not to be redeemed at all: they were accursed of God himself, as the Amalekites and Canaanites were, and were therefore not to be spared (Lev. 27:29): and Saul, in sparing Agag, whom God had devoted to destruction, sinned as much as if he had murdered one whom God had ordered to be spared. (1Sa 15:3, 9, 22, 23, 32, 33) Now, if we call to mind how eminently conversant Jephthah was with the history of Israel, so as to be able to refute all the claims of the king of Ammon (Jdg 11:12-27), we can feel no doubt but that he was well acquainted with the law that prescribed the mode in which devoted things were to be redeemed: indeed his vow was evidently founded on the knowledge of that law: for if a dog had met him first, he would never have dared to offer that in sacrifice to God: consequently he would never have made his vow so indefinitely, if he had not known that the law admitted of an exchange, in case the devoted thing should be improper to be offered. But supposing that he was ignorant of this law, were the high-priest and all the priests in the kingdom ignorant of it? and, when the execution of the vow was postponed for two months, and great lamentation was made all that time throughout the kingdom on account of the vow, was there no person in all Israel who once thought of this law? If but one person had thought of it, would he not have been very glad to mention it? and would not the mention of it have been most acceptable to Jephthah, when it would have put an immediate end to all his mourning and lamentation? Would he not have been glad enough to pay thirty shekels, about 3l. 8s. 6d., the sum prescribed by the law, to save the life of his daughter? But it may be said, that this was a period of gross darkness; and that idolatry with all its horrid rites prevailed to a great extent. (Jdg 10:6) To this I answer, that though idolatry had recently prevailed, this was a time of singular reformation; for the people had put away the strange gods from among them, and served the Lord:” (Jdg 10:16) and in such a state of mind, considering what obligations they felt to Jephthah, even if they had not thought of this law, they would have interposed to rescue his innocent daughter from destruction; just as the people, at a later period of their history, rescued Jonathan from the hands of Saul, when the sentence, to which his father’s oath had doomed him, was just ready to be executed. (1Sa 14:45) These arguments, we grant, would have no weight against an express declaration of Holy Writ: but it is no-where said, that such a vow as doomed her to death was ever made. On the contrary we affirm, that the terms used by Jephthah do not imply any such thing. The word that is translated And, is not unfrequently used in a disjunctive sense, and should be translated Or. In many places it must of necessity be translated Or, and actually is so translated in our Bible (See Ex. 21:16, 17; Lev 6:3, 5; 2Sa 2:19): and in the margin of our Bibles it is so translated in the very passage before us. Thus translated, the words of Jephthah involve no difficulty: he says, Whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, shall surely be the Lord’s, or I will offer it up for a burnt-offering;” (Jdg 11:31) that is, it shall be consecrated to the Lord; or, if it be fit to be offered in sacrifice to the Lord, (as a lamb or kid would be,) it shall be offered to him as a burnt-offering. It is really strange, that, when so easy and obvious a translation occurs, any one should prefer one so replete with difficulties, as that which has been usually received. Thus in relation to the making of the vow, we have shewn, that no good man would make such a vow as this is supposed to be; that, if made, the law admitted of an exchange; and that the terms used on the occasion do not imply that she should be put to death.] 2. The execution of it— [Observe the language used by all parties on this occasion, and it will manifestly lead to a very different conclusion from that which has been usually adopted. Observe the language of his daughter’s acquiescence. There is a delicacy in it which throws considerable light on the subject. In noticing the effect of the vow upon herself, she studiously avoids the mention of it. This, if we understand the vow as subjecting her to a state of perpetual virginity, is what might have been expected from her; but, if she was to be offered in sacrifice to God, there is no reason whatever why so solemn an event should not have been expressed in plainer terms. In requesting a respite of the sentence, which involved in it a seclusion from the world, somewhat like that which has been practised by Nuns in later ages, she does express what in the first instance she had only glanced at; “Let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.” Here she mentions that which constituted the substance of the vow. Had she been consigned to death, she would rather have bewailed her premature death, and not merely her virginity. If it be thought, that her piety kept her from bemoaning her death, and that she bemoaned her virginity merely as a circumstance that seemed to render her death opprobrious; I answer, that the same piety that reconciled her to death, would certainly have reconciled her to the opprobrium of dying in a virgin state; exactly as Isaac was willing to forego his prospects in relation to the promised Seed, when he yielded up himself to be slain in sacrifice to God. If it be said, that, on a supposition she was doomed only to a state of perpetual virginity, there was no occasion for her having two months given her to bewail her fate, since she would have had her whole life wherein to bewail it; I answer, that, in the apprehension of Jewish women, it was a great calamity to be childless, since they had not the honour of increasing the number of the Lord’s people, or a hope that the Messiah might spring from them: and this was a peculiarly heavy calamity to her, because she was the only child of Jephthah (Jdg 11:34); and her doom cut her off from all prospect of raising up a seed who should inherit his honours, and follow his example. Therefore it was proper that there should be a public kind of mourning observed, not only in honour of her who thus freely sacrificed all her prospects in life, but in honour of Jephthah also, who in this instance exercised most eminent self-denial, and might be considered as almost dead. Next observe the language in which is recorded his performance of his vow: “Her father did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man.” Why is this latter circumstance mentioned, but to shew wherein the accomplishment of the vow consisted? Is it not strange that this should be mentioned so often, and her death be never once noticed, if indeed she was put to death? But, if she was only doomed to a state of perpetual virginity, the reason of the expression is clear enough. In addition to all this, observe the language in which the commemoration of the event is mentioned: “It was a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.” If she was dead, there was scarcely any adequate reason for the daughters of Israel to go four times a year to one particular place to lament her; for they might as well have lamented her at home: but if she was alive, and secluded from company all the rest of the year, there was reason enough why they should visit her then. But the word which we translate to lament, is in the margin of the Bible translated to talk with: and this assigns the true reason of those stated convocations: her female friends went to condole with her on the occasion, and to do her honour. Even the manner in which she is mentioned in this passage seems to bespeak her a living person; they went to talk with “the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.” Had she been offered in sacrifice to God, there would probably have been something more descriptive of her character; but, if she was still living, this is the only description of her that we should expect to find.] But there is yet a third source from whence we may derive arguments in confirmation of this point. We have noticed the vow in reference both to the making, and the execution of it: let us now proceed to notice, 3. The honour God put upon it— [In consequence of this vow, “God delivered the Ammonites into the hands” of Jephthah. (Jdg 11:32, 33) But would God have sanctioned in this manner a gross act of deliberate murder? Would not this have been the very way to deceive his people, and to make them think that he was pleased with such offerings as the heathen presented unto Moloch? And when in future ages he punished his people for offering human sacrifices, might they not justly have pleaded, that he in this instance had both approved and rewarded them? Again: St. Paul, in his catalogue of eminent believers, particularly mentions Jephthah, and with an express reference to this event. Jephthah had shewn his faith by looking to God for victory, and by going forth against the Ammonites in an assured dependence upon him, as the protector of Israel, and the rewarder of all that trust in him: and this act of his is a subject of high commendation with God himself. Now I ask, Would this act have been so commended, if it had been ushered in with such an impious vow, and been followed by such a deliberate murder? But if the vow imported only that whatsoever met him first at his return should be consecrated to God, and if, in consequence of that vow, he did with such steady self-denial proceed to the performance of it, then is God’s approbation easily accounted for, even whilst we condemn the indefiniteness and rashness with which the vow was made. It may be objected to this, that no other instance of devoting a person to virginity occurs. It is true: but neither does any other instance of devoting a person to death. The instance of Abraham and Isaac is not at all in point: for there the determination to offer Isaac was not the result of a rash vow, but of a divine command: and God had a right to dispose of Isaac’s life in any way he pleased; but Jephthah had no right whatever over his daughter’s life. The right usurped by wicked Saul over his son Jonathan (which however was properly and successfully resisted) will scarcely be brought in justification and support of such a claim. It may further be objected, that parents had no right to devote a daughter to perpetual virginity. This also may be true; but much less had they any right to devote her unto death. (See Ex 21:16, 17; Lev 6:3, 5; 2Sa 2:19) The most specious objection however against our interpretation is, that, supposing he only devoted her to God, there was no reason why she should remain unmarried; since Samson and Samuel, both of whom were devoted to God from the womb, were both married. But the case is extremely different between a man and a woman: they were at liberty to serve God in any way that they judged to be agreeable to his will; but she, if she had married, would have been under the control of her husband, who might in a variety of ways have interfered with such a discharge of her duties as the vow implied: and therefore it was necessary that she should remain unmarried, and that she should also be secluded in a great measure from society itself; that being the way in which a woman might serve the Lord, as men served him by waiting on him continually in the tabernacle. As to the objection, that if he had only devoted her in the sense that we maintain, he would not have so deplored her fate, it has no weight; for as she was his only child, all the distress occasioned to her came with double force on him, who was thereby doomed, and by his own folly too, to have his name and posterity cut off from Israel.] Such, we are persuaded, was the vow that Jephthah made: we proceed, II. To suggest some instruction from it— Both the father and the daughter afford us very instructive lessons. We may learn, 1. To avoid the rashness of Jephthah— [We cannot be wrong in condemning this, since Jephthah himself lamented it. It may be thought that we are in no danger of imitating it: but what do we in rash oaths? do we not tread in the very steps of Jephthah? There is scarcely an office to which we can be introduced, whether civil or religious, that is not entered upon by first taking an oath to fulfil the duties of it. Yet if there be a post of honour or profit to be obtained, how little do men in general think of the oaths by which they are to gain access to it! Would to God that this matter were considered by the legislature; and that penalties were substituted in the place of oaths! Verily “by reason of oaths the land mourneth,” and the consciences of thousands are greatly burthened. I cannot but consider the frequency of oaths, the ease with which they are administered, and the indifference with which they are taken, as among the most crying sins of the nation. There is another way also in which we follow the steps of Jephthah, namely, by undertaking so lightly the office of sponsors for the children of our friends. The providing of sponsors to supply the place of parents who shall be removed, or disqualified for the instruction of their children in the fear of God, is excellent: but the engaging solemnly before God to perform their office is no light matter. Let any one read the baptismal service, and see what it is that he undertakes; and then let him see what little attention is paid to these vows in general, or, perhaps, what little attention he himself has paid to them. It will be well if we lay this to heart in future. Peradventure we have, like Jephthah, inconsiderately opened our mouths to the Lord: let us then at least, like Jephthah, proceed to the performance of our vows. The duty we have undertaken may be difficult and self-denying; but if he, after having unintentionally devoted his only daughter to the Lord, would not go back, notwithstanding the sacrifice was so exceeding great, so neither should we hesitate to perform the most difficult of our vows. But there is yet another way in which we follow the steps of Jephthah. Who has not in a time of sickness, or danger, or trouble, or alarm, determined with himself, that, if he should be delivered, he would devote himself more unto the Lord, and to the pursuit of heavenly things? Look back, all ye who have been restored from sickness, ye who have been delivered from the pangs of childbirth, ye who have seen your friends or relatives cut off by death, ye who have been in a storm at sea, or been alarmed by thunder and lightning; look back, and call to mind the vows that are upon you; and see how Jephthah will rise up in judgment against you for your violation of them. How this subject applies to Ministers, I need not say: but if I were addressing them, methinks the subject would apply with ten-fold force to them, seeing that their vows were all taken with foresight and solemnity, and involve duties more important than pertain to any other situation under heaven. But, whatever be their office or character, two things I would say to all: first, Be cautious in making vows; and next, Be conscientious in performing them. Inquire into the nature and extent of any engagements before you enter into them: for, as Solomon says, “It is a snare to a man to devour that which is holy, and after vows to make inquiry.” (Pr. 20:25) If we have rashly engaged ourselves to do what the law of God positively prohibits, we must recede from our vow, and humble ourselves before God for our temerity. The forty conspirators who swore that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul, and Herod who swore that he would give his daughter whatsoever she should ask of him, had no right to bind themselves to such an extent, and would have sinned less in violating, than they did in keeping, their engagements. But where our vows are practicable, they must be kept, even though the observance of them be attended with great cost and trouble: (Dt. 23:21, 22, 23) and the attempting to set them aside by the plea of inadvertence or of difficulties attending the observance of them, will only deceive our own souls, and bring upon us the heavy displeasure of our God. (Eccl 5:4, 5, 6) We remember the judgments which God inflicted upon the whole Jewish nation in the time of David, for Saul’s impiety in violating an engagement which had been hastily contracted by Joshua four hundred years before in favour of the Gibeonites: (Josh 9:19 with 2Sa 21:1) and much more will God visit upon us in the eternal world the violation of engagements entered into by ourselves. “Vow then unto the Lord,” (Ps. 76:11-note) if ye see it good, “but pay it;” and say with David, “I will go into thy house with burnt-offerings; I will pay thee my vows, which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble.” (Ps 66:13, 14-note)] 2. To imitate the piety of his daughter— [Very eminent was her deportment on this occasion. Great was her love of her country, great her love towards her father, great her reverence for an oath, and great her zeal for God. O that there were such a spirit in all the daughters of our land! Assuredly the conduct of this pious female may lead them to consider how much they are bound to consult the judgment of their parents in relation to marriage: for though we do not think that a parent’s authority extends to a prohibition of marriage, which is an ordinance instituted by God himself, yet we have no doubt but that it is the duty of children to pay a deference to the judgment of their parents, and never, unless in extreme cases, to form a connexion contrary to their commands. Need I say however, that when engagements are formed, they are not to be broken? The whole world unites in condemning so base, so iniquitous a conduct, as that of repudiating a person betrothed. But it has been thought by some, that if one who has in his unconverted state formed an engagement, becomes converted, he may then break his engagement, because he is “not to be unequally yoked with an unbeliever.” (2Cor 6:14) But does religion justify the violation of our vows? God forbid! The very thought is a libel upon God himself. None but the person with whom the engagement is made, can liberate us from our vows. If indeed a woman to whom one was engaged, were to disgrace herself by some gross misconduct, it might be a reason for refusing to continue the engagement with her, because she has ceased to be the person with whom the engagement was formed. So, if an engagement were formed with a person on account of his supposed piety, and he were to cast off all regard for piety, his change of character would warrant a termination of the contract that had been made with him; because the very grounds of the engagement are subverted. But where, for the gratifying of our own inclination, excuses are sought out for receding from an engagement, God himself will be the avenger of the injured party. There is one point in particular which the conduct of this pious virgin may well impress on the minds of all who belong to the Established Church; I mean, the observance of those vows which were made for us in baptism — — — Of those vows our parents will never have reason to repent; nor can we ever regret that they were made for us. No mournings, no lamentations will ever be excited by our performance of them. The ungodly world indeed may regret that we have renounced its ways and vanities; and Satan may regret that we have cast off his yoke; but all the saints and angels will rejoice; yea, “there is joy among the angels in the presence of God over one sinner that repenteth.” Even God himself will “be glad and make merry with us,” and will “rejoice over us to do us good.” True it is, that such a consecration of ourselves to God is difficult and self-denying; but it is our truest wisdom, and our highest joy. To all of you then I say, “Dedicate yourselves to God by a perpetual covenant not to be forgotten;” (Jer 50:5) yea, “I beseech you by the mercies of God that ye yield yourselves to God a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.” (Ro 12:1-note)] (Simeon, C. 1832-63. Horae Homileticae)