one of the judges of Israel, was the son of Gilead by a concubine, Jdg 11:1-2. His father having several other children by his lawful wife, they conspired to expel Jephthah from among them, insisting that he who was the son of a strange woman should have no part of the inheritance with them. Like Ishmael, therefore, he withdrew, and took up his residence beyond Jordan, in the land of Tob, where he appears to have become the chief of a banditti, or marauding party, who probably lived by plunder, Jdg 11:3. In process of time, a war broke out between the Ammonites and the children of Israel who inhabited the country beyond Jordan; and the latter, finding their want of an intrepid and skilful leader, applied to Jephthah to take the command of them. He at first reproached them with the injustice they had done him, in banishing him from his father’s house; but he at length yielded to their importunity, on an agreement that, should he be successful in the war against the Ammonites, the Israelites should acknowledge him for their chief, Jdg 11:4-11.
As soon as Jephthah was invested with the command of the Israelites he sent a deputation to the Ammonites, demanding to know on what principle the latter had taken up arms against them. They answered that it was to recover the territory which the former had taken from them on their first coming out of Egypt. Jephthah replied that they had made no conquests in that quarter but from the Amorites; adding, “If you think you have a right to all that Chemosh, your god, hath given you, why should not we possess all that the Lord our God hath conferred on us by right of conquest?” Jephthah’s reasoning availed nothing with the Ammonites; and as the latter persisted in waging war, the former collected his troops together and put himself at their head. The Spirit of the Lord is said to have now come upon Jephthah; by which we are here to understand, that the Lord endowed him with a spirit of valour and fortitude, adequate to the exigence of the situation in which he was placed, animating him with courage for the battle, and especially inspired him with unshaken confidence in the God of the armies of Israel, Jdg 11:17; Heb 11:32; 1Sa 11:6; Num 24:2. Jephthah at this time made a vow to the Lord that if he delivered the Ammonites into his hand, whatever came forth out of the doors of his house to meet him when he returned should be the Lord’s; it is also added in our English version, “and I will offer it up for a burnt- offering,” Jdg 11:31. The battle terminated auspiciously for Jephthah; the Ammonites were defeated, and the Israelites ravaged their country. But on returning toward his own house, his daughter, an only child, came out to meet her father with timbrels and dances, accompanied by a chorus of virgins, to celebrate his victory. On seeing her, Jephthah rent his clothes, and said, “Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low; for I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and cannot go back.” His daughter intimated her readiness to accede to any vow he might have made in which she was personally interested; only claiming a respite of two months, during which she might go up to the mountains and bewail her virginity with her companions. Jephthah yielded to this request, and at the end of two months, according to the opinion of many, her father offered her up in sacrifice, as a burnt-offering to the Lord, Jdg 11:34-39. It is, however, scarcely necessary to mention, that almost from the days of Jephthah to the present time, it has been a subject of warm contest among the critics and commentators, whether the judge of Israel really sacrificed his daughter, or only devoted her to a state of celibacy. Among those who contend for the former opinion, may be particularly mentioned the very learned Professor Michaelis, who insists most peremptorily that the words, “did with her as he had vowed,” cannot mean any thing else but that her father put her to death, and burned her body as a burnt-offering. On this point, however, the remarks of Dr. Hales are of great weight:—When Jephthah went forth to battle against the Ammonites “he vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou wilt surely give the children of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall either be the Lord’s, or I will offer it up [for] a burnt-offering,”
Jdg 11:30-31. According to this rendering of the two conjunctions,
“Notwithstanding, no devotement which a man shall devote unto the Lord, [either] of man, or of beast, or of land of his own property, shall be sold or redeemed. Every thing devoted is most holy unto the Lord,” Lev 27:28. Here the three vaus in the original should necessarily be rendered disjunctively, or, as the last actually is in our public translation, because there are three distinct subjects of devotement, to be applied to distinct uses; the man, to be dedicated to the service of the Lord, as Samuel by his mother, Hannah, 1Sa 1:11; the cattle, if clean, such as oxen, sheep, goats, turtle doves, or pigeon’s, to be sacrificed; and if unclean, as camels, horses, asses, to be employed for carrying burdens in the service of the tabernacle or temple; and the lands, to be sacred property. This law, therefore, expressly applied, in its first branch, to Jephthah’s case, who had devoted his daughter to the Lord, or opened his mouth unto the Lord, and therefore could not go back; as he declared in his grief at seeing his daughter, and his only child, coming to meet him with timbrels and dances. She was, therefore, necessarily devoted, but with her own consent, to perpetual virginity, in the service of the tabernacle, Jdg 11:36-37. And such service was customary; for in the division of the spoils taken in the first Midianite war, of the whole number of captive virgins, “the Lord’s tribute was thirty-two persons,” Num 31:35-40. This instance appears to be decisive of the nature of her devotement. Her father’s extreme grief on this occasion, and her requisition of a respite of two months to bewail her virginity, are both perfectly natural: having no other issue, he could only look forward to the extinction of his name or family; and a state of celibacy, which is reproachful among women every where, was peculiarly so among the Israelites; and was therefore no ordinary sacrifice on her part, who, though she generously gave up, could not but regret the loss of becoming “a mother in Israel.” “And he did with her according to his vow which he had vowed, and she knew no man,” or remained a virgin all her life, Jdg 11:34-40. There was also another case of devotement which was irredeemable, and follows the former: “No one devoted, who shall be devoted of man, shall be redeemed, but shall surely be put to death,” Lev 27:29. This case differs materially from the former:
1. It is confined to persons devoted, omitting beasts and lands.
2. It does not relate to private property, as in the foregoing.
3. The subject of it was to be utterly destroyed, instead of being “most holy unto the Lord.”
This law, therefore, related to aliens or public enemies devoted to destruction, either by God, by the people, or by the magistrate. Of all these we have instances in the Scriptures:
1. The Amalekites and Canaanites were devoted by God himself. Saul, therefore, was guilty of a breach of this law for sparing Agag, the king of the Amalekites, as Samuel reproached him, 1Sa 15:23: and “Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord,” not as a sacrifice, according to Voltaire, but as a criminal, “whose sword had made many women childless.” By this law the Midianite women, who had been spared in battle, were slain, Num 31:14-17.
2. In Mount Hor, when the Israelites were attacked by Arad, king of the southern Canaanites, who took some of them prisoners, they vowed a vow unto the Lord, that they would utterly destroy these Canaanites, and their cities, if the Lord should deliver them into their hand; which the Lord ratified. Whence the place was called Hhormah, because the vow was accompanied by cherem, or devotement to destruction, Num 21:1-3. And the vow was accomplished,
3. In the Philistine war, Saul adjured the people, and cursed any one that should taste food until the evening. His own son, Jonathan, inadvertently ate a honey comb, not knowing of his father’s oath, for which Saul sentenced him to die. But the people interposed, and rescued him, for his public services; thus assuming the power of
dispensing, in their collective capacity, with an unreasonable oath, 1Sa 14:24-45. This latter case, therefore, is utterly irrelative to Jephthah’s vow, which did not regard a foreign enemy, or a domestic transgressor, devoted to destruction, but, on the contrary, was a vow of thanksgiving, and therefore properly came under the former case.
And that Jephthah could not possibly have sacrificed his daughter, according to the vulgar opinion, founded on incorrect translation, may appear from the following considerations:
1. The sacrifice of children to Moloch was an abomination to the Lord, of which in numberless passages, he expresses his detestation; and it was prohibited by an express law, under pain of death, as “a defilement of God’s sanctuary, and a profanation of his holy name,” Leviticus
Jdg 20:2-3. Such a sacrifice, therefore, unto the Lord himself, must be a still higher abomination. And there is no precedent of any such under the law, in the Old Testament.
2. The case of Isaac before the law, is irrelevant; for Isaac was not sacrificed; and it was only proposed for a trial of Abraham’s faith.
3. No father, merely by his own authority, could put an offending, much less an innocent, child to death, upon any account, without the sentence of the magistrates, Deu 21:18-21, and the consent of the people, as in Jonathan’s case.
4. The Mischna, or traditional law of the Jews, is pointedly against it: “If a Jew should devote his son or daughter, his man or maid servant, who are Hebrews, the devotement would be void; because no man can devote what is not his own, or of whose life he has not the absolute disposal.”
These arguments appear to be decisive against the sacrifice; and that Jephthah could not even have devoted his daughter to celibacy against her will, is evident from the history, and from the high estimation in which she was always held by the daughters of Israel, for her filial duty, and her hapless fate, which they celebrated by a regular anniversary commemoration four days in the year, Jdg 11:40. We may, however, remark, that, if it could be more clearly established that Jephthah actually immolated his daughter, there is not the least evidence that his conduct was sanctioned by God. Jephthah was manifestly a superstitious and ill-instructed man, and, like Samson, an instrument of God’s power, rather than an example of his grace.
Jeph´thah (opener), ninth judge of Israel, of the tribe of Manasseh. He was the son of a person named Gilead by a concubine. After the death of his father he was expelled from his home by the envy of his brothers, who refused him any share of the heritage, and he withdrew to the land of Tob, beyond the frontier of the Hebrew territories. It is clear that he had before this distinguished himself by his daring character and skill in arms; for no sooner was his withdrawal known than a great number of men of desperate fortunes repaired to him, and he became their chief. His position was now very similar to that of David when he withdrew from the court of Saul. To maintain the people who had thus linked their fortunes with his, there was no other resource than that sort of brigandage which is accounted honorable in the East, so long as it is exercised against public or private enemies, and is not marked by needless cruelty or outrage.
Jephthah led this kind of life for some years during which his dashing exploits and successful enterprises procured him a higher military reputation than any other man of his time enjoyed.
After the death of Jair the Israelites gradually fell into their favorite idolatries, and were punished by subjection to the Philistines on the west of the Jordan, and to the Ammonites on the east of that river. The oppression which they sustained for eighteen years became at length so heavy that they recovered their senses and returned to the God of their fathers with humiliation and tears; and He was appeased, and promised them deliverance from their affliction (B.C. 1143).
The tribes beyond the Jordan having resolved to oppose the Ammonites, Jephthah seems to occur to everyone as the most fitting leader. A deputation was accordingly sent to invite him to take the command. After some demur, on account of the treatment he had formerly received, he consented. The rude hero commenced his operations with a degree of diplomatic consideration and dignity for which we are not prepared. The Ammonites being assembled in force for one of those ravaging incursions by which they had repeatedly desolated the land, he sent to their camp a formal complaint of the invasion, and a demand of the ground of their proceeding. Their answer was, that the land of the Israelites beyond the Jordan was theirs. It had originally belonged to them, from whom it had been taken by the Amorites, who had been dispossessed by the Israelites: and on this ground they claimed the restitution of these lands. Jephthah’s reply laid down the just principle which has been followed out in the practice of civilized nations, and is maintained by all the great writers on the law of nations. The land belonged to the Israelites by right of conquest from the actual possessors; and they could not be expected to recognize any antecedent claim of former possessors, for whom they had not acted, who had rendered them no assistance, and who had themselves displayed hostility against the Israelites. But the Ammonites re-asserted their former views, and on this issue they took the field.
When Jephthah set forth against the Ammonites he solemnly vowed to the Lord, ’If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into my hands, 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.’ He was victorious. The Ammonites sustained a terrible overthrow. He did return in peace to his house in Mizpeh. As he drew nigh his house, the one that came forth to meet him was his own daughter, his only child, in whom his heart was bound up. She, with her fair companions, came to greet the triumphant hero ’with timbrels and with dances.’ But he no sooner saw her than he rent his robes, and cried, ’Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low;… for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and cannot go back.’ Nor did she ask it. She replied, ’My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the Lord, do to me according to that which has proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as the Lord hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, the children of Ammon.’ But after a pause she added, ’Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.’ Her father of course assented; and when the time expired she returned, and, we are told, ’he did with her according to his vow.’ It is then added that it became ’a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite three days in the year.’
The victory over the Ammonites was followed by a quarrel with the proud and powerful Ephraimites on the west of the Jordan. This tribe was displeased at having had no share in the glory of the recent victory, and a large body of men belonging to it, who had crossed the river to share in the action, used very high and threatening language when they found their services were not required. Jephthah, finding his remonstrances had no effect, re-assembled some of his disbanded troops and gave the Ephraimites battle, when they were defeated with much loss. The victors seized the fords of the Jordan, and when any one came to pass over, they made him pronounce the word Shibboleth [an ear of corn], but if he could not give the aspiration, and pronounced the word as Sibboleth, they knew him for an Ephraimite, and slew him on the spot.
Jephthah judged Israel six years, during which we have reason to conclude that the exercise of his authority was almost if not altogether confined to the country east of the Jordan.
Volumes have been written on the subject of ’Jephthah’s rash vow;’ the question being whether, in doing to his daughter ’according to his vow,’ he really did offer her in sacrifice or not. The negative has been stoutly maintained by many able pens, from a natural anxiety to clear the character of one of the heroes in Israel from so dark a stain. But the more the plain rules of common sense have been exercised in our view of biblical transactions, and the better we have succeeded in realizing a distinct idea of the times in which Jephthah lived and of the position which he occupied, the less reluctance there has been to admit the interpretation which the first view of the passage suggests to every reader, which is, that he really did offer her in sacrifice. The explanation which denies this maintains that she was rather doomed to perpetual celibacy; but to live unmarried was required by no law, custom, or devotement among the Jews: no one had a right to impose so odious a condition on another, nor is any such condition implied or expressed in the vow which Jephthah uttered. The Jewish commentators themselves generally admit that Jephthah really sacrificed his daughter; and even go so far as to allege that the change in the pontifical dynasty from the house of Eleazar to that of Ithamar was caused by the high-priest of the time having suffered this transaction to take place.
It is very true that human sacrifices were forbidden by the law. But in the rude and unsettled age in which the judges lived, when the Israelites had adopted a vast number of erroneous notions and practices from their heathen neighbors, many things were done, even by good men, which the law forbade quite as positively as human sacrifice.
Again, Jephthah vows that whatsoever came forth from the door of his house to meet him ’shall surely be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering,’ which, in fact, was the regular way of making a thing wholly the Lord’s. Afterwards we are told that ’he did with her according to his vow,’ that is, according to the plain meaning of plain words, offered her for a burnt-offering. Then follows the intimation that the daughters of Israel lamented her four days every year. People lament the dead, not the living. The whole story is consistent and intelligible, while the sacrifice is understood to have actually taken place; but becomes perplexed and difficult as soon as we begin to turn aside from this obvious meaning in search of recondite explanations.
Professor Bush, in his elaborate note on the text, maintains with us that a human sacrifice was all along contemplated. But he suggests that during the two months Jephthah might have obtained better information respecting the nature of vows, by which he would have learned that his daughter could not be legally offered, but might be redeemed at a valuation (Lev 27:2-12). This is possible, and is much more likely than the popular alternative of perpetual celibacy; but we have serious doubts whether even this meets the conclusion that ’he did with her according to his vow.’ Besides, in this case, where was the ground for the annual ’lamentations’ of the daughters of Israel, or even for the ’celebrations’ which some understand the word to mean?
The son of Gilead, was a judge of Israel, and successor to Jair. His history is told in Jdg 11:1-12:15. A most affecting incident in it is his devoting his daughter to God as a sacrifice, in consequence of a rash vow.\par The arguments on the question whether Jephthah’s daughter was actually sacrificed or not, cannot here be cited. The natural repugnance we feel to such a vow and its fulfillment has led many interpreters to adopt the less obvious theory that she was only condemned to live and die unmarried. There is no intimation in Scripture that God approved of his vow, whatever it was. Paul numbers Jephthah among the saints of the Old Testament distinguished for their faith, Heb 11:32 .\par
Jeph’thah. (whom God sets free). A judge about B.C. 1143-1137. His history is contained in Jdg 11:1; Jdg 12:8. He was a Gileadite, the son of Gilead and a concubine. Driven by the legitimate sons from his father’s inheritance, he went to Tob and became the head of a company of freebooters , in a debatable land , probably , belonging to Ammon. 2Sa 10:6. (This land was east of Jordan and southeast of Gilead, and bordered on the desert of Arabia. -- Editor).
His fame as a bold and successful captain was carried back to his native Gilead; and when the time was ripe for throwing off the yoke of Ammon, Jephthah consented to become the captain of the Gileadite bands, on the condition, solemnly ratified before the Lord in Mizpeh, that in the event of his success against Ammon, he should still remain as their acknowledged head. Vowing his vow unto God, Jdg 11:31, that he would offer up as a burn offering , whatsoever should come out to meet him if successful, he went forth to battle.
The Ammonites were routed with great slaughter; but as the conqueror returned to Mizpeh, there came out to meet him his daughter, his only child, with timbrels and dancing. The father is heart-stricken; but the maiden asks only for a respite of two months , in which to prepare for death. When that time was ended, she returned to her father, who "did with her according to his vow."
The tribe of Ephraim challenged Jephthah’s right to go to war as he had done, without their concurrence, against Ammon. He first defeated them, then intercepted the fugitives at the fords of Jordan, and there put forty-two thousand men to the sword. He judged Israel six years, and died.
It is generally conjectured that his jurisdiction was limited to the TransJordanic region. That the daughter of Jephthah was really offered up to God in sacrifice is a conclusion which it seems impossible to avoid. (But there is no word of approval, as if such a sacrifice was acceptable to God. Josephus well says that "the sacrifice was neither sanctioned by the Mosaic ritual nor acceptable to God." The vow and the fulfillment were the mistaken conceptions of a rude chieftain, not acts pleasing to God. -- Editor).
Son of Gilead by an harlot, the father bearing the same name as the famous Gilead his ancestor. Gilead’s sons by his wife drove Jephthah out from share of the father’s inheritance as being "son of a strange woman," just as Ishmael and Keturah’s sons were sent away by Abraham, so as not to inherit with Isaac (Gen 21:10, etc.; Gen 25:6). Jephthah went to the land of Tob, N.E. of Persea, between Syria and Ammon (2Sa 10:6-8,
Then the princes ("elders") of Gilead with Israel encamped at Mizpeh (Jdg 10:17-18; Jdg 11:5-11), having resolved to make "head" (civil) and "captain" (military) over all Israelite Gilead (the Israelites in Persea) whatever warrior they could find able to lead them against Ammon, applied to Jephthah in Tob. Jephthah, whose temper seems to have been resentful (compare Jdg 11:12), upbraided them with having hated and expelled him out of his father’s house; yet it was not just to charge them all with what was the wrong of his brethren alone, except in so far as they connived at and allowed his brethren’s act. Passion is unreasoning. They did not reason with him the matter, but acknowledged the wrong done him and said, "therefore (to make amends for this wrong) we turn again to thee now, and if thou go with us and fight against Ammon thou shalt be our head, namely over all Gilead."
Jephthah accepted the terms, and "uttered all his words (repeated the conditions and obligations under which he accepted the headship) before Jehovah (as in His presence; not that the ark or any altar of Jehovah was there; simply Jephthah confirmed his engagement by an oath as before Jehovah) in Mizpeh," where the people were met in assembly, Ramoth Mizpeh in Gilead, now Salt. Jephthah before appealing to the sword sent remonstrances to the Ammonite king respecting his invasion of Israel. The marked agreement of Jephthah’s appeal with the Pentateuch account proves his having that record before him; compare Jdg 11:17; Jdg 11:19-22 agreeing almost verbatim with Num 20:1; Num 21:21-25. He adds from independent sources (such as the national lays commemorating Israel’s victories, quoted by Moses Num 21:14; Num 21:17; Num 21:27) that Israel begged from the king of Moab leave to go through his land (Num 21:17).
The Pentateuch omitted this as having no direct bearing on Israel’s further course. The Ammonite king replied that what he claimed was that Israel should restore his land between the Arnon, Jabbok, and Jordan. This claim was so far true that Israel had taken all the Amorite Sihon’s land (because of his wanton assault in answer to Israel’s peaceable request for leave to pass through unto "his place," i.e. to Israel’s appointed possession), including a portion formerly belonging to Moab and Ammon, but wrested from them by Sihon (Num 21:26; Num 21:28-29); for Jos 13:25-26 shows that Sihon’s conquests must have included, besides the Moabite land mentioned in the Pentateuch, half the Ammonite land E. of Moab and Gilead and W. of the upper Jabbok. But Israel, according to God’s prohibition, had not meddled with Edom, Moab, or Ammon (Deu 2:5; Deu 2:9; Deu 2:19), i.e. with the land which they possessed in Moses’ time.
What was no longer Ammon’s, having been taken from them by Sihon, the prohibition did not debar Israel from. Israel, as Jephthah rejoindered, went round Edom add Moab, along the eastern boundary by Ije Abarim (Num 21:11-13), on the upper Arnon, the boundary between Moab and the Amorites.
Ammon having rejected his remonstrances, Jephthah gathered his army out of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (northern Gilead and Bashan), and went to (translated Jdg 11:29 "passed over to") Mizpeh Gilead, the encampment and rendezvous of Israel (Jdg 10:17), and thence to Ammon. He smote them from Aroer to Minnith, 20 cities, "with a very great slaughter," so that Ammon was completely subdued. Jephthah had vowed, in the event of Jehovah giving him victory, to "offer as a burnt offering whatsoever (rather whosoever) should come forth from the doors of his house to meet him"; certainly not a beast or sheep, for it is human beings not brutes that come forth from a general’s doors to meet and congratulate him on his victory. Jephthah intended a hard vow, which the sacrifice of one animal would not be. He left it to Providence to choose what human being should first come forth to meet him.
"In his eagerness to smite the foe and thank God for it Jephthah could not think of any particular object to name, great enough to dedicate. He shrank from measuring what was dearest to God, and left this for Him to decide" (Cassel in Herzog Encyclopedia). He hoped (if he thought of his daughter at the time) that Jehovah would not require this hardest of sacrifices. She was his only child; so on her coming out to meet him with timbrels and dances (Exo 15:20) Jephthah rent his clothes, and exclaimed: "Thou hast brought me very low, for I have opened my mouth (vowing) unto the Lord, and I cannot go back" (Num 30:2-3; Ecc 5:2-5; Psa 15:4 end, Psa 66:14). Her filial obedience, patriotic devotion, and self sacrificing piety shine brightly in her reply: "My father (compare Isaac’s reverent submission, Gen 22:6-7; Gen 22:10), do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth, forasmuch as the Lord hath taken vengeance for thee of ... Ammon."
She only begged two months to bewail with her fellows her virginity, amidst the surrounding valleys and mountains (margin 37). Afterward he did with her according to his vow, namely, doomed her forever to "virginity," as her lamentation on ibis account proves, as also what follows, "she knew no man." So it became "a custom in Israel that the daughters of Israel went yearly to praise (
His vow was made, not in the heat of battle without weighing his words, but before he set out. Jephthah, though a freebooter (the godly David was one too), was one who looked to Jehovah as the only Giver of victory, and uttered all his words of engagement with the princes of Gilead "before Jehovah." He showed in his message to Ammon his knowledge of the Pentateuch, therefore he must have known that a human sacrifice was against the spirit of the worship of Jehovah. "The Spirit of Jehovah came upon Jephthah" moreover, which shows he was no Moloch worshipper. Above all Jephthah is made an instance of FAITH for our imitation, in Heb 11:32. Therefore the sense in which he fulfilled his vow was "she knew no man," words adverse to the notion of a sacrificial death. He dedicated her life to Jehovah as a spiritual "burnt offering" in a lifelong "virginity." Her willingness to sacrifice herself and her natural aspirations as a virgin, who as the conqueror’s daughter might have held the highest place among Israel’s matrons, to become like a Gibeonite menial of the sanctuary (Jos 9:23), as the price of her country’s deliverance, is what the virgins used yearly to come to celebrate in praises.
They would never have come to praise a human sacrifice; Scripture would never have recorded without censure an anti-theocratic abomination. Moreover literal burnt offerings could only be offered at the altar of the tabernacle. This spiritual burnt offering answers somewhat to Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac (Heb 11:17) in will though not in deed, and to the Israelites redeeming their firstborn belonging to Jehovah instead of sacrificing them (Exo 13:1-13; Num 18:15-16), and to Aaron’s offering the Levites to the Lord for an offering for Israel (Num 8:10-16), and redeeming vowed persons at an estimation (1Sa 1:11-20; 1Sa 1:22; 1Sa 1:28; 1Sa 2:20; Lev 27:1, etc.). After the victory was won over Ammon, the tribe of Ephraim, ever jealous of any rival and claiming the supremacy, threatened Jephthah.
"Wherefore passedst thou over to fight against ... Ammon, and didst not call us to go with thee? We will burn thine house upon thee with fire." Jephthah did not show Gideon’s magnanimity in dealing with their perversity. He did not give the "soft answer" that "turneth away wrath," but let their "grievous words stir up strife" (Pro 15:1). Herein Gideon was superior, for "he that is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city" (Pro 16:32). (For "Ephraim gathered ... and went northward." Keil translated it "went to Zaphon, the city of Gad in the Jordan valley": Jos 13:27; Jdg 12:1). Jephthah however answered truly that he had "called them" but they had refused, doubtless because the Gileadites had made Jephthah their commander without consulting Ephraim. They fared as they richly deserved.
Besides threats of destroying Jephthah they insultingly had called the Gileadites whom Jephthah led "fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites and Manassites," i.e. a mob of runaway Ephraimites in the midst of the two noblest tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh (compare 1Sa 25:10). They who began the strife paid the bitter penalty (Pro 17:14). "Shibboleth," a stream, was the test whereby the Gileadites detected the fugitive Ephraimites when trying to cross the Jordan fords, in the hands of their conquerors; 42,000 were slain who betrayed their birth by saying Sibboleth (compare on the Galilean dialect Mat 26:73; Luk 22:59; Act 2:7). They who first flung the taunt "fugitives" perished as fugitives at the hands of those they taunted (Pro 26:17). Jephthah judged Israel E. of the Jordan six years, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.
Jephthah (jĕph’thah), whom God sets free. A judge about b.c. 1143-1137. His history is contained in Jdg 11:1 to Jdg 12:8. He was a Gileadite, the son of Gilead and a concubine. Driven by the other sons from his father’s inheritance, he went to Tob and became the head of a marauding party in a debatable land, probably belonging to Ammon. 2Sa 10:6. When a war broke out between the children of Israel and the Ammonites, he signalized himself for courage and enterprise. This led the Israelites to seek his aid as their commander-in-chief; and though he objected at first on the ground of their ill-usage of him, yet, upon their solemn covenant to regard him as their leader, in case they succeeded against the Ammonites, he took command of their army. After some preliminary negotiations with the Ammonites, in which the question of the right to the country is discussed with great force and ingenuity, and finding every attempt to conciliate them vain, the two armies met; the Ammonites were defeated with great loss of life, and their country scoured by the Israelites. On the eve of the battle Jephthah made a vow, that if he obtained the victory, he would devote to God whatever should come forth from his house to meet him on his return home. His daughter, an only child, welcomed his return with music and dancing. Jephthah was greatly afflicted by this occurrence; but his daughter cheerfully consented to the performance of his vow, which took place at the expiration of two months; and the commemoration of the event by the daughters of Israel was required by a public ordinance. Whether Jephthah actually offered up his daughter as a burnt-offering is a question that continues to be much disputed. Those who maintain the negative allege, that by translating the Hebrew prefix or, rendered and in our version, all difficulty will be removed. His vow will then read, "shall surely be the Lord’s, or, I will offer a burnt-offering;" and not unfrequently the sense requires that the Hebrew should be thus rendered. Moreover, when Jephthah made this vow, he could not have intended to insult the Lord by promising a sacrifice of which he had expressed the utmost abhorrence, Lev 20:2-5; Deu 12:31; especially as it is recorded that the Spirit of the Lord was upon him when he uttered his vow. Suppose a dog had come out of the house of Jephthah, can any one suppose that he would have offered this unclean animal as a burnt-offering to the Lord? And why, then, should we suppose that he would offer a human sacrifice, which would have been so much more abominable? It is, moreover, argued that no mention is made of any bloody sacrifice of the young woman. But merely that he did with her according to his vow which he had vowed; and she knew no man; or, "she had not known man." R. V. These last words seem to convey, not obscurely, the idea that Jephthah devoted his daughter to the Lord, by consecrating her to a life of celibacy. And it should not be forgotten, that in the Epistle to the Hebrews (ch. 11), Jephthah is placed among the worthies who were distinguished for their faith. Now can we suppose that such a man would be guilty of the crime of sacrificing his own daughter? Compare Heb 11:32 with 2Sa 12:9; 1Ki 11:5; 1Ki 11:7. Hence, against the view that he offered his daughter as a burnt-offering, the sums of the argument are: 1. Jephthah must have known that human sacrifices were contrary to God’s law. 2. That, being under the influence of the Spirit, Jdg 11:29, he would be prevented from slaying his child, as Abraham was. 3. The law allowed him to redeem his daughter for 30 shekels. Lev 27:4. 4 No account of the bloody sacrifice is given, but another disposition of her case is intimated. 5. Jephthah is in the list of worthies named in Heb 11:1-40 for their faith. Those who urge the strict literal interpretation think these arguments inconclusive; and urge that Jephthah was a wild character in a rude period, and that there is not a particle of evidence that God approved his rash vow, or this part ’of his conduct. In the early period there are instances of persons guilty of some great sins, yet who were generally eminent for their piety. Josephus says: "Such an oblation was neither conformable to the law, nor acceptable to God." His next act was one of severity in dealing with the Ephraimites, who were not invited to war against the Ammonites, hence had a battle with the Gileadites, and were defeated; and the latter, seizing the fords of the Jordan, slew every Ephraimite who attempted to escape by crossing the river; and the method employed to ascertain whether they belonged to Ephraim was, to cause them to pronounce the word "shibboleth," which they sounded "sibboleth;" for, it seems that, by this time, a difference in the manner of pronouncing at least one Hebrew letter had arisen between the inhabitants on the different sides of the Jordan. On this occasion 42,000 men of Ephraim were slain; which was a punishment for commencing a war with so small a provocation. Jdg 11:1-40; Jdg 12:1-15. Jephthah died after judging six years, and was buried among his people, the Gileadites, in one of their cities. Jdg 12:7.
(
).
By: Emil G. Hirsch, M. Seligsohn, Solomon Schechter, George A. Barton
—Biblical Data:
Judge of Israel during six years (Judges xii. 7); conqueror of the Ammonites. According to Judges xi. 1, he was a Gileadite, son of Gilead and a harlot. Driven from his father's house by his father's legitimate sons, he settled in the land of Tob as chief of a band of freebooters (Judges xi. 3). On the occasion of the war with the Ammonites, Jephthah's aid was sought by the elders of Gilead and obtained on the condition that they would accept him as their chief; and he was accordingly solemnly invested with authority at Mizpah (Judges xi. 4-11). Before taking the field, Jephthah resorted to diplomacy, sending an embassy to the King of Ammon. This failing, Jephthah attacked and completely defeated him, taking from him twenty cities (Judges xi. 12-33).
The most prominent act in Jephthah's life was his vow to sacrifice to Yhwh whatsoever came first out of his house to meet him if he should return victorious. His vow fell upon his only daughter, who came out to meet him dancing to the sound of timbrels. Jephthah, having given her a respite of two months, consummated his vow. After this it became the custom for the daughters of Israel to lament four days in every year the death of Jephthah's daughter (Judges xi. 34-40). After the war a quarrel broke out between Jephthah and the Ephraimites, who reproached him for not having called them to take part. Having seized the fords of the Jordan, Jephthah required every fugitive who attempted to cross to pronounce the word "shibboleth." Those who betrayed their Ephraimite origin by saying "sibboleth" were put to death; in this manner 42,000 Ephraimites fell (Judges xii. 1-6).
E. G. H. M. Sel.—In Rabbinical Literature:
Jephthah is represented by the Rabbis as an insignificant person. That vain men gathered about him (Judges xi. 3) was an illustration of the proverb that a sterile date-palm associates with fruitless trees (B. Ḳ. 92b). His name being mentioned in connection with Samuel's (I Sam. xii. 11) shows that even the most insignificant man, when appointed to a position of importance,must be treated by his contemporaries as if his character were equal to his office (R. H. 25b). He is classed with the fools who do not distinguish between vows (Eccl. R. iv. 7); he was one of the three men (Ta'an. 4a), or according to other authorities one of the four men (Gen. R. lx. 3), who made imprudent vows, but he was the only one who had occasion to deplore his imprudence. According to some commentators, among whom were Ḳimḥi and Levi b. Gershom, Jephthah only kept his daughter in seclusion. But in Targ. Yer. to Judges xi. 39 and the Midrash it is taken for granted that Jephthah immolated his daughter on the altar, which is regarded as a criminal act; for he might have applied to Phinehas to absolve him from his vow. But Jephthah was proud: "I, a judge of Israel, will not humiliate myself to my inferior." Neither was Phinehas, the high priest, willing to go to Jephthah. Both were punished: Jephthah died by an unnatural decaying of his body; fragments of flesh fell from his bones at intervals, and were buried where they fell, so that his body was distributed in many places (comp. Judges xii. 7, Hebr.). Phinehas was abandoned by the Holy Spirit (Gen. R. l.c.).
The Rabbis concluded also that Jephthah was an ignorant man, else he would have known that a vow of that kind is not valid; according to R. Johanan, Jephthah had merely to pay a certain sum to the sacred treasury of the Temple in order to be freed from the vow; according to R. Simeon ben Laḳish, he was free even without such a payment (Gen. R. l.c.; comp. Lev. R. xxxvii. 3). According to Tan., Beḥuḳḳotai, 7, and Midrash Haggadah to Lev. xxvii. 2, even when Jephthah made the vow God was irritated against him: "What will Jephthah do if an unclean animal comes out to meet him?" Later, when he was on the point of immolating his daughter, she inquired, "Is it written in the Torah that human beings should be brought as burnt offerings?" He replied, "My daughter, my vow was, 'whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house.'" She answered, "But Jacob, too, vowed that he would give to Yhwh the tenth part of all that Yhwh gave him (Gen. xxviii. 22); did he sacrifice any of his sons?" But Jephthah remained inflexible. His daughter then declared that she would go herself to the Sanhedrin to consult them about the vow, and for this purpose asked her father for a delay of two months (comp. Judges xi. 37). The Sanhedrin, however, could not absolve her father from the vow, for God made them forget the Law in order that Jephthah should be punished for having put to death 42,000 Ephraimites (Judges xii. 6).
S. S. M. Sel.—Critical View:
The story of Jephthah (Judges x. 17-xii. 7) does not, in the opinion of most critics, consist of a uniform account. The following four views are held respecting it:
(1) The main narrative is held to be derived from a single source into which a long interpolation (ib. xi. 12-28) has been introduced. This interpolation has really nothing to do with Jephthah, but discusses Israel's title to the land between the Arnon and the Jabbok. Jephthah is an eponymous hero; the narrative is introduced because of the story of the sacrifice of his daughter; and the whole tale is unhistorical. This hypothesis is adopted by Wellhausen ("Die Composition des Hexateuchs," etc., 1889, pp. 228 et seq.) and Stade ("Gesch. des Volkes Israel," 1889, i. 68).
(2) Another view supposes, like the foregoing, that the narrative is derived from one source, with an interpolation as above, but regards either the whole story or the main thread of the narrative as historical. Some of its supporters hold that the myth connected with the women's festival of Gilead has attached itself to this historical portion. This view is supported by Kuenen ("Die Historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments," 1890, pp. 13, 18, et seq.), Budde ("Richter und Samuel," 1890, pp. 125 et seq.), and Moore ("Judges," in "International Critical Commentary," 1895, pp. 282 et seq.).
(3) A third view regards the story as composed of two narratives from J and E respectively. E pictured Jephthah as residing at Mizpah, from which he made war on some foreign people who had done him great injury, and as winning a victory at the cost of his daughter. J represented him as a free-booter on foreign soil, who was commissioned by the Gileadites to avenge their wrongs, which he did without the help of the west-Jordanic tribes. This view, put forth by Holzinger in an unpublished manuscript, has been elaborated and defended by Budde ("Richter," in "K. H. C." pp. 80 et seq.), and is adopted by Nowack ("Richter," in his "Hand-Kommentar," 1902). Supporters of this hypothesis see evidence of a mixture of sources in Judges xi. 12-28, and make a stronger argument than do the adherents of the second view for the historical character of the whole story.
(4) Cheyne ("Encyc. Bibl." s.v.) adopts the two-source theory, but supposes that only one of the original narratives concerned itself with Jephthah. He thinks that the other was a story about Jair.Of these views the second is, perhaps, the most probable.
Bibliography:
In addition to the works cited, W. Frankenberg, Die Composition des Deuteronomischen Richterbuches, 1895.
JEPHTHAH.—Spoken of simply as ‘the Gileadite,’ and as being a ‘mighty man of valour.’ In Jdg 11:1 it is said that he was ‘the son of a harlot,’ for which cause he was driven out from his home in Gilead by his brethren. Hereupon he gathers a band of followers, and leads the life of a freebooter in the land of Tob. Some time after this, Gilead is threatened with an attack by the Ammonites, and Jephthah is besought to return to his country in order to defend it; he promises to lead his countrymen against the Ammonites on condition of his being made chief (king?) if he returns victorious. Not only is this agreed to, but he is forthwith made head of his people (Jdg 11:4-11).
In the long passage which follows, Jdg 11:12-28, Israel’s claim to possess Gilead is urged by messengers who are sent by Jephthah to the Ammonite king; the passage, however, is concerned mostly with the Moabites (cf. Num 20:1-29; Num 21:1-35), and is clearly out of place here.
The ‘spirit of the Lord’ comes upon Jephthah, and he marches out to attack the Ammonites. On his way he makes a vow that if he returns from the battle victorious, he will offer up, as a thanksgiving to Jahweh, whoever comes out of his house to welcome him. He defeats the Ammonites, and, on his return, his daughter, an only child, comes out to meet him. The father beholds his child, according to our present text, with horror and grief, but cannot go back upon his word. The daughter begs for two months’ respite, in order to go into the mountains to ‘bewail her virginity.’ At the end of this period she returns, and Jephthah fulfils his vow (an archæological note is here appended, Jdg 11:40, concerning which see below). There follows then an episode which recalls Jdg 8:1-3; the Ephraimites resent not having been called by Jephthah to fight against the Ammonites, just as they resented not being called by Gideon to fight against the Midianites; in the present case, however, the matter is not settled amicably; a battle follows, in which Jephthah is again victorious; the Ephraimites flee, but are intercepted at the fords of Jordan, and, being recognized by their inability to pronounce the ‘sh’ in the word Shibboleth, are slain. Jephthah, after continuing his leadership for six years, dies, and is buried in Gilead, but the precise locality is not indicated.
Whether the story of the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter be historical or not, its mention is of considerable interest, inasmuch as it bears witness to the prevalence among the early Israelites of practices which were widely recognized among ancient peoples as belonging to the essentials of religion. In the story before us we obviously must not expect to see the original form; it is a compilation from more than one source, and has been worked over in the interests of later religious conceptions; that two totally distinct practices have, therefore, got mixed up together need cause no surprise. The first of these practices was the sacrifice of a human being at times of special stress (the sacrifice of the firstborn belongs to a different category); the second is that known as the ‘Weeping for Tammuz.’ Among early peoples there were certain rites which represented the death and resurrection of vegetation, in connexion with which various myths arose. In their original form (in which human sacrifice played a part) these rites were intended, and believed, to be the means of assisting Nature to bring forth the fruits of the earth. Among such rites was that known as ‘the Weeping for Tammuz’ (= Adonis), cf. Eze 8:14; the rite was based on the myth that Tammuz, a beautiful youth, was killed by a boar; Tammuz was the personification of the principle of vegetation, and represented the Summer, while the boar represented the Winter. This death of Tammuz was celebrated annually with bitter wailing, chiefly by women (Jdg 11:40); often (though not always, for the rite differed in different localities) his resurrection was celebrated the next day, thus ensuring by means of imitative magic the re-appearance of fresh vegetation in its time.
The ‘bewailing of virginity’ (Jdg 11:37), and the note, ‘she had not known a man’ (Jdg 11:39), are inserted to lay stress on the fact that if Jephthah’s daughter had had a husband, or had been a mother, her father would have had no power over her; since, in the one case, her husband would have been her possessor, and in the other, she could have claimed protection from the father of the child, whether the latter were alive or not.
W. O. E.Oesterley.
The Israelites beyond the Jordan being in danger of an invasion by the Ammonites, Jephthah was invited by the elders of Gilead to be their leader (Jdg 11:5, Jdg 11:6). Remembering how they had expelled him from their territory and his heritage, Jephthah demanded of them that in the event of success in the struggle with the Ammonites, he was to be continued as leader. This condition being accepted he returned to Gilead (Jdg 11:7-11). The account of the diplomacy used by Jephthah to prevent the Ammonites from invading Gilead is possibly an interpolation, and is thought by many interpreters to be a compilation from Nu 20 through 21. It is of great interest, however, not only because of the fairness of the argument used (Jdg 11:12-28), but also by virtue of the fact that it contains a history of the journey of the Israelites from Lower Egypt to the banks of the Jordan. This history is distinguished from that of the Pentateuch chiefly by the things omitted. If diplomacy was tried, it failed to dissuade the Ammonites from seeking to invade Israel. Jephthah prepared for battle, but before taking the field paused at Mizpeh of Gilead, and registered a vow that if he were successful in battle, he would offer as a burnt offering to Yahweh whatsoever should first come from his doors to greet him upon his return (Jdg 11:29-31). The battle is fought, Jephthah is the victor, and now his vow returns to him with anguish and sorrow. Returning to his home, the first to greet him is his daughter and only child. The father’s sorrow and the courage of the daughter are the only bright lights on this sordid, cruel conception of God and of the nature of sacrifice. That the sacrifice was made seems certain from the narrative, although some critics choose to substitute for the actual death of the maiden the setting the girl apart for a life of perpetual virginity. The Israelite laws concerning sacrifices and the language used in Jdg 11:39 are the chief arguments for the latter interpretation. The entire narrative, however, will hardly bear this construction (Jdg 11:34-40).
Jephthah was judge in Israel for 6 years, but appears only once more in the Scripture narrative. The men of Ephraim, offended because they had had no share in the victory over the Ammonites, made war upon Gilead, but were put to rout by the forces under Jephthah (Jdg 12:1-6).
(ἸåöèÜå)
Jephthah, the Gileadite warrior who became the conqueror of the Ammonites, and whose vow compelled him to sacrifice his own daughter (Judges 11-12), is named among the men of the OT who achieved great things by faith (Heb_11:32). He is mentioned after Samson, though he was historically earlier, the author probably trusting his memory, or not being over-studious of minute accuracy.
James Strahan.
Born of a prostitute and cast out by his family, Jephthah grew up in a tough and bitter world (Jdg 11:13). When the people of his tribe decided to overthrow the Ammonites (who had oppressed them for eighteen years; Jdg 10:7-8; Jdg 10:17-18), Jephthah was the man they asked to be their leader. Jephthah accepted only after the tribal elders had agreed to his conditions, which were that after he had defeated the enemy, he would remain their leader and rule them as a civil governor (Jdg 11:4-10).
Jephthah had sufficient faith to believe that God would give Israel victory (Heb 11:32-34). He was, however, only a recently reformed bandit, and he had little knowledge of the character of God or the law of God. By vowing, and then offering, his daughter as a human sacrifice in return for God’s help towards victory, he was following the religion of the false gods whom Israel worshipped (Jdg 11:29-40; cf. 2Ki 3:27). He was certainly not following the teachings of Yahweh (cf. Lev 18:21; Deu 12:31).
When Jephthah attacked the enemy, he did not invite soldiers from the tribe of Ephraim to join in the main battle. The Ephraimites were offended and threatened him with violence. Jephthah responded in typically uncompromising fashion. He launched a furious attack and slaughtered the Ephraimites in thousands (Jdg 12:1-6). He then settled down to the civilian rule that he had wanted, but after only six years rule he died (Jdg 12:7).