God And Human Sacrifices

[Rival]

Potato - potahto. The "oath" was made within the context of a deal:

"I, Jephthah, do solemnly swear that if you, god, help me defeat the Ammonites I will sacrifice the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory."​

Not at all. The story isn't mine, but that of the Bible as I related it in the OP. And because god did help Jephthah defeat the Ammonites he's obligated to carry out his part of the Bargain: Tit for tat.


Should have, Could have. Would have. It makes no difference. Jephthah didn't have his oath annulled.


And isn't this convenient. Another case where self-serving apologetics comes to the rescue by positing a "should be" so as to cover up an embarrassing piece of scripture. Give me a break.

If you tried to pay for an item with Monopoly money would it be accepted?

No.

Well then. Neither would a human sacrifice.

It's simple if you'd look outside your own box for a change. You're clearly not actually looking for answers, but only to rant about something as usual.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I only bring this up because Christians like to point out god's great goodness. As one source puts it:

"To say that God is good means that God always acts in accordance to what is right, true, and good. Goodness is part of God’s nature, and He cannot contradict His nature. Holiness and righteousness are part of God’s nature; He cannot do anything that is unholy or unrighteous. God is the standard of all that is good."
source​

Now I don't know about others here on RF, but I don't see making and accepting human sacrifices as a good thing. And, to be honest, I've never heard any Christian who said they were. Furthermore, I consider accepting a human sacrifice in payment for a promise also to be wrong, as I expect most Christians would. Yet the god of Abraham does just that. In the Bible he grants a favor to a guy named Jephthah in return for the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter. And as a burnt offering no less.

Judges 11: 29-39
29 Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah, and he passed through the area of Gilead and Manasseh. He went through the city of Mizpah in Gilead on his way to the land of the Ammonites.

30 Jephthah made a promise to the Lord. He said, “If you will let me defeat the Ammonites, 31 I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. I will give it to the Lord as a burnt offering.”

32 Then Jephthah went to the land of the Ammonites. He fought the Ammonites, and the Lord helped him defeat them. 33 He defeated them from the city of Aroer to the city of Minnith. Jephthah captured 20 cities. Then he fought the Ammonites to the city of Abel Keramim. The Israelites defeated them. It was a very great defeat for the Ammonites.

34 Jephthah went back to Mizpah. He went to his house, and his daughter came out to meet him. She was playing a tambourine and dancing. She was his only daughter, and Jephthah loved her very much. He did not have any other sons or daughters. 35 When Jephthah saw that his daughter was the first thing to come out of his house, he tore his clothes to show his sadness. Then he said, “Oh, my daughter! You have ruined me! You have made me very sad! I made a promise to the Lord, and I cannot change it!”

36 Then his daughter said to Jephthah, “Father, you have made a promise to the Lord, so keep your promise. Do what you said you would do. After all, the Lord did help you defeat your enemies, the Ammonites.”

37 Then Jephthah’s daughter said to her father, “But do this one thing for me first. Let me be alone for two months. Let me go to the mountains. I will not marry and have children, so let me and my friends go and cry together.”

38 Jephthah said, “Go.” He sent her away for two months. Jephthah’s daughter and her friends stayed in the mountains. They cried for her because she would not marry and have children.

39 At the end of two months, Jephthah’s daughter returned to her father, and Jephthah did what he had promised. ​

Now it may be objected that neither Jephthah nor god knew that Jephthah's daughter would be the first thing to come out of the house, but this simply isn't so. Being omniscient, god certainly knew that when Jephthah returned home the first thing to come out of the house would be his daughter, whom Jephthah would be obligated to sacrifice. In fact, god knew Jephthah’s daughter would be a burnt offering even before he granted him his request. And even if god was not omniscient, because of his divine goodness he would be morally bound to stop Jephthah from incinerating his daughter, just as he stopped Abraham from sacrificing his son. Wouldn't you feel morally bound to stop someone from sacrificing the life of another? Although, after reading that "God is the standard of all that is good" maybe human sacrifice isn't all that bad after all.

In any case, such an intervention never took place. Jephthah had made a deal with god for a favor, and in turn for granting this favor god accepted the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. Thing is, god had nothing to gain by the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter, yet he willingly accepted it. He could have said, No.


So, anyone up to defending god's inhumane action, or is it more convenient to forget about it and go on to some inane thread like TRUMP: The Movie?

.

.

The story has to do with people who make foolish vows, the context is she wept for her status and lived in a "convent".

 

[Skwim]

If you tried to pay for an item with Monopoly money would it be accepted?

No.

Well then. Neither would a human sacrifice.

And if you didn't pay for the item you wouldn't get it, but Jephthah did get the item, god's help in securing victory over the Ammonites, which obligates Jephthah to pay for it with the "currency" he said he would use.

It's simple if you'd look outside your own box for a change.

And I suggest you start polishing your reasoning skills. They need it.

You're clearly not actually looking for answers, but only to rant about something as usual.

And clearly you're so embarrassed by what the Bible says that you've been reduced to using an ad hominem to defend it. This is truly sad, Rival.

.

 

[Skwim]

The story has to do with people who make foolish vows, the context is she wept for her status and lived in a "convent".

I see. Forget about the fact that god is quite alright with human sacrifices.

"I can't hear you!" At least you're staying true to form.

 

[ecco]

Sometimes you say that you are only directing your questions at Christians, so I wasn't sure. But whenever someone quotes from the Tanach, I somehow feel obligated to defend it.

Anyway, the language that Jephthah uses isn't that of a deal, but that of an oath. In other words, he's not making a deal with G-d, he's taking an oath on what he would do if G-d grants them victory. The dependency is the opposite of what you imply in the OP, their victory isn't brought about by Jephthah's oath, the fulfillment of Jephthah's oath is dependent on whether G-d will choose to grant them victory.

What he should have done was had his oath annulled at some point. The Talmud understands that both Jephthah and Phineas the High Priest are at fault here for not going to the other to annul the oath. It understands that for this reason, Gilead is singled out in Jer. 8:22, 'is there no healer in Gilead?" and is a reference to Phinehas who should have rectified this oath. It's also derived from verses elsewhere, that they were both punished for this.

Somewhat more salient to the OP, is that it's not clear whether he actually sacrificed her or not. Some commentaries point to the fact that his daughter goes to cry about her virginity rather than her impending death and the vague "and Jephthah did what he had promised" rather than "and he brought her as a burnt-offering" as implying that sacrifice wasn't the question here. Instead, those commentaries explain that the "and" of verse 31 (And it will be the thing that exits... and it shall be for G-d and I will sacrifice it for a burnt-offering) should be interpreted as "or", meaning, either that thing will be dedicated to G-d, or [if it's something that can be brought on the altar] it will be sacrificed as a burnt offering (see Ex. 21:15 it literally says 'he who strikes his father and mother' with the interpretation being 'father or mother'). Since his daughter is not able to be sacrificed, she would be dedicated to G-d for the rest of her life and would never get married (see 1 Sam. 1:22 for parents dedicating their children's lives).

The truth is, that this interpretation kind of makes more sense. There are laws for determining how to deal with things that are not allowed to be sacrificed on the altar. The only things that are sanctioned on the altar are pigeons, sheep, goats, cows, and meal offerings (see Lev. 1:2 and also see 1:10, 22 specifically for burnt-offerings). So for instance, what would happen if someone took an oath to bring his bed as a sacrifice? Would the Priests in the Sanctuary/Temple be required to take it? What about a deer? What about a pig? There obviously has to be some mechanism in place to account for this type of thing (and there is) and human beings would fall into that category as well.

So it's somewhat difficult to believe that the simple meaning of the passage is that he thought he would actually need to bring his daughter as a literal sacrifice and that he did (although the Talmud does seem to have had a tradition that he actually did).

Apologetics at its finest. Right off the bat: "Anyway, the language that Jephthah uses isn't that of a deal, but that of an oath."

Really? Let's see...

If you give me your car, I will give you $10,000.​

Is that a proposed deal, or is that an oath?

If you think it's an oath, give me your car.

 

[nPeace]

and Jephthah did what he had promised. ​

Yes. He kept his vow as a faithful man. What did he do?

And even if god was not omniscient, because of his divine goodness he would be morally bound to stop Jephthah from incinerating his daughter, just as he stopped Abraham from sacrificing his son. Wouldn't you feel morally bound to stop someone from sacrificing the life of another? Although, after reading that "God is the standard of all that is good" maybe human sacrifice isn't all that bad after all.

Where did you see anything in the Bible saying that Jephthah incinerating his daughter?
God himself is against human sacrifice.
That's why Abraham's test was the ultimate test for him, because here was God asking Abraham to do something that God himself had said not to do.
Abraham could easily have argued, "But you said not to do this."
However, Abraham's faith and trust in God was so great, that he was not only willing to give up his son, for Jehovah, but do what God said, without question.
That is complete trust. Hence why Abraham came to be called Jehovah's friend.

In any case, such an intervention never took place. Jephthah had made a deal with god for a favor, and in turn for granting this favor god accepted the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. Thing is, god had nothing to gain by the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter, yet he willingly accepted it. He could have said, No.

So, anyone up to defending god's inhumane action, or is it more convenient to forget about it and go on to some inane thread like TRUMP: The Movie?

God accepted the sacrifice, because it was a good one. It showed that both Jephthah and his daughter loved God, and wanted to make sacrifices that would show their love for him - a love that was complete.
You still need to show what Jephthah did, and where in the Bible it says Jephthah incinerated, or burned his daughter.

 

[Skwim]

Yes. He kept his vow as a faithful man. What did he do?

Your answer lies in how he kept his vow as a faithful man.

Where did you see anything in the Bible saying that Jephthah incinerating his daughter?

Verse 31.

"I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. I will give it to the Lord as a burnt offering.”

burn
[burn]
.verb (used without object), burned or burnt, burn·ing.

1. to undergo rapid combustion or consume fuel in such a way as to give off heat, gases, and, usually, light; be on fire:


incinerate
[in-sin-uh-reyt]
verb (used with object), in·cin·er·at·ed, in·cin·er·at·ing.

1. to burn or reduce to ashes; cremate.

​

God himself is against human sacrifice.

Chapter and verse please, because according to the Jephthah story here god is just fine with it.

That's why Abraham's test was the ultimate test for him, because here was God asking Abraham to do something that God himself had said not to do.
Abraham could easily have argued, "But you said not to do this."
However, Abraham's faith and trust in God was so great, that he was not only willing to give up his son, for Jehovah, but do what God said, without question.

So what? Just because god decided not to hold Abraham to his promise in no way suggests that god doesn't feel human sacrifice is right.

God accepted the sacrifice, because it was a good one. It showed that both Jephthah and his daughter loved God, and wanted to make sacrifices that would show their love for him - a love that was complete.

Exactly! God feels human sacrifice is good.

You still need to show what Jephthah did, and where in the Bible it says Jephthah incinerated, or burned his daughter.

Sorry, but I'm not about to hold your hand through the story, but for what it's worth just answer the following: When verse 39 says, " . . .and Jephthah did what he had promised." what was that promise?

.

 

[nPeace]

Your answer lies in how he kept his vow as a faithful man.



Verse 31.

"I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. I will give it to the Lord as a burnt offering.”

burn
[burn]
.verb (used without object), burned or burnt, burn·ing.

1. to undergo rapid combustion or consume fuel in such a way as to give off heat, gases, and, usually, light; be on fire:


incinerate
[in-sin-uh-reyt]
verb (used with object), in·cin·er·at·ed, in·cin·er·at·ing.

1. to burn or reduce to ashes; cremate.

Chapter and verse please, because according to the Jephthah story here god is just fine with it.

Deuteronomy 12:31 You must not do this to Jehovah your God, because they do for their gods every detestable thing that Jehovah hates, even burning their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
Deuteronomy 18:9-13
9 “When you have entered into the land that Jehovah your God is giving you, you must not learn to imitate the detestable practices of those nations. 10 There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, anyone practicing magic, anyone who looks for omens, a sorcerer, 11 anyone binding others with a spell, anyone who consults a spirit medium or a fortune-teller, or anyone who inquires of the dead. 12 For whoever does these things is detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable practices Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you. 13 You should prove yourself blameless before Jehovah your God.

2 Kings 16:3 Instead, he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and he even made his own son pass through the fire, following the detestable practices of the nations that Jehovah had driven out from before the Israelites.

2 Chronicles 28:1, 3
1 Ahaz was 20 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem. He did not do what was right in Jehovah’s eyes as David his forefather had done.
3 Moreover, he made sacrificial smoke in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom and burned up his sons in the fire, following the detestable practices of the nations that Jehovah had driven out from before the Israelites.

Jeremiah 32:35 Furthermore, they built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, in order to make their sons and their daughters pass through the fire to Molech, something that I had not commanded them and that had never come into my heart to do such a detestable thing, causing Judah to sin.’

So what? Just because god decided not to hold Abraham to his promise in no way suggests that god doesn't feel human sacrifice is right.

Depends on what human sacrifice you have in mind.
People make sacrifices in behalf of others, which sometimes involves giving their life. Is that human sacrifice?
People past,and present have sacrificed their lives to God. Is that human sacrifice?
Jesus sacrificed his life in behalf of all mankind. Is that human sacrifice?

Exactly! God feels human sacrifice is good.

Yes. The right kind. See above.

Sorry, but I'm not about to hold your hand through the story, but for what it's worth just answer the following: When verse 39 says, " . . .and Jephthah did what he had promised." what was that promise?

.

Oh, sure, I'll let all my Christian friends know that whenever they need someone to hold their hand and walk them through the Bible, Ask an Agnostic. Only, don't expect any help. LOL.

So I take it then that's a, "There is no part in the Bible that says Jephthah incinerated his daughter. I only assume he did."
Well Skwim, he didn't.
Oh, and I am not going to hold your hand and walk you through where to find that... unless you ask.

 

[ecco]

Deuteronomy 12:31 You must not do this to Jehovah your God, because they do for their gods every detestable thing that Jehovah hates, even burning their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
Deuteronomy 18:9-13<snip>

So I take it then that's a, "There is no part in the Bible that says Jephthah incinerated his daughter. I only assume he did."
Well Skwim, he didn't.

Well, nPeace, he did...

"I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. I will give it to the Lord as a burnt offering.”

" . . .and Jephthah did what he had promised."​

One does not have to be an English Major to understand those two statements.

All of your apologist spinning just comes across as apologist spinning.


Quoting from a different section of the Bible that gives a different viewpoint than the Jephthah story just shows, once again, how the Bible is filled with internal contradictions. That's what happens when people haphazardly cobble together a bunch of stories that other people have written.

 

[viole]

I only bring this up because Christians like to point out god's great goodness. As one source puts it:

"To say that God is good means that God always acts in accordance to what is right, true, and good. Goodness is part of God’s nature, and He cannot contradict His nature. Holiness and righteousness are part of God’s nature; He cannot do anything that is unholy or unrighteous. God is the standard of all that is good."
source​

Now I don't know about others here on RF, but I don't see making and accepting human sacrifices as a good thing. And, to be honest, I've never heard any Christian who said they were. Furthermore, I consider accepting a human sacrifice in payment for a promise also to be wrong, as I expect most Christians would. Yet the god of Abraham does just that. In the Bible he grants a favor to a guy named Jephthah in return for the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter. And as a burnt offering no less.

Judges 11: 29-39
29 Then the Spirit of the Lord came on Jephthah, and he passed through the area of Gilead and Manasseh. He went through the city of Mizpah in Gilead on his way to the land of the Ammonites.

30 Jephthah made a promise to the Lord. He said, “If you will let me defeat the Ammonites, 31 I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. I will give it to the Lord as a burnt offering.”

32 Then Jephthah went to the land of the Ammonites. He fought the Ammonites, and the Lord helped him defeat them. 33 He defeated them from the city of Aroer to the city of Minnith. Jephthah captured 20 cities. Then he fought the Ammonites to the city of Abel Keramim. The Israelites defeated them. It was a very great defeat for the Ammonites.

34 Jephthah went back to Mizpah. He went to his house, and his daughter came out to meet him. She was playing a tambourine and dancing. She was his only daughter, and Jephthah loved her very much. He did not have any other sons or daughters. 35 When Jephthah saw that his daughter was the first thing to come out of his house, he tore his clothes to show his sadness. Then he said, “Oh, my daughter! You have ruined me! You have made me very sad! I made a promise to the Lord, and I cannot change it!”

36 Then his daughter said to Jephthah, “Father, you have made a promise to the Lord, so keep your promise. Do what you said you would do. After all, the Lord did help you defeat your enemies, the Ammonites.”

37 Then Jephthah’s daughter said to her father, “But do this one thing for me first. Let me be alone for two months. Let me go to the mountains. I will not marry and have children, so let me and my friends go and cry together.”

38 Jephthah said, “Go.” He sent her away for two months. Jephthah’s daughter and her friends stayed in the mountains. They cried for her because she would not marry and have children.

39 At the end of two months, Jephthah’s daughter returned to her father, and Jephthah did what he had promised. ​

Now it may be objected that neither Jephthah nor god knew that Jephthah's daughter would be the first thing to come out of the house, but this simply isn't so. Being omniscient, god certainly knew that when Jephthah returned home the first thing to come out of the house would be his daughter, whom Jephthah would be obligated to sacrifice. In fact, god knew Jephthah’s daughter would be a burnt offering even before he granted him his request. And even if god was not omniscient, because of his divine goodness he would be morally bound to stop Jephthah from incinerating his daughter, just as he stopped Abraham from sacrificing his son. Wouldn't you feel morally bound to stop someone from sacrificing the life of another? Although, after reading that "God is the standard of all that is good" maybe human sacrifice isn't all that bad after all.

In any case, such an intervention never took place. Jephthah had made a deal with god for a favor, and in turn for granting this favor god accepted the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter. Thing is, god had nothing to gain by the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter, yet he willingly accepted it. He could have said, No.


So, anyone up to defending god's inhumane action, or is it more convenient to forget about it and go on to some inane thread like TRUMP: The Movie?

.

.

Christianity is, by definition, a cult that celebrates the ultimate human sacrifice. And they insist on that.

Maybe they can escape to be associated to the Maya, or other cults liking to execute people to the gods, if they realized that it was no sacrifice at all. No sacrificed being is alive and kicking after three days.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Skwim]

Oh, sure, I'll let all my Christian friends know that whenever they need someone to hold their hand and walk them through the Bible, Ask an Agnostic. Only, don't expect any help. LOL.
So I take it then that's a, "There is no part in the Bible that says Jephthah incinerated his daughter. I only assume he did."
Well Skwim, he didn't.
Oh, and I am not going to hold your hand and walk you through where to find that... unless you ask.

Yet you still can't answer, "What was that promise?" which comes as no surprise. Note ecco's reply above where he says,

"One does not have to be an English Major to understand those two statements,".​

Nope, one doesn't. All one has to be is driven to:

Sorry for the loss of your integrity, nPeace.

.

 

[Kapalika]

Now I don't know about others here on RF, but I don't see making and accepting human sacrifices as a good thing.

Wait, why? I am not advocating or supporting or defending the breaking of the law, but in times and places where it was legal, even part of the society, I see nothing inherently wrong about it. The ancient world killed people for any manner of arbitrary or weird reasons. It's no more cruel than the rest of the ancient world IMO.

Potato - potahto. The "oath" was made within the context of a deal:

"I, Jephthah, do solemnly swear that if you, god, help me defeat the Ammonites I will sacrifice the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory."

But that is an oath... the honor was in upholding a hard promise to follow through with. He swore with divine witness as to how he would act in the future without knowing what that would be. An oath isn't always one sided you know, it's basically a divine promise.

I am not Christian or Jewish but I admire his ability to uphold himself despite the sorrow it brought him. It shows the depth of his character.

 

[Skwim]

Wait, why? I am not advocating or supporting or defending the breaking of the law, but in times and places where it was legal, even part of the society, I see nothing inherently wrong about it. The ancient world killed people for any manner of arbitrary or weird reasons. It's no more cruel than the rest of the ancient world IMO.

Of course you wouldn't. Your moral compass swings with the culture. Sure it's inherently fine to fry and eat human babies if that's what the culture does. . . . . . . . . . . What will you have, dear Kapalika, an arm or a leg?

But that is an oath...

As I phrased it, yes it would be.

the honor was in upholding a hard promise to follow through with.

And what a proud honor it was. All it took was the incineration of one's own daughter. No doubt god smiled in appreciation through the entire roasting.

He swore with divine witness as to how he would act in the future without knowing what that would be.

Come, come now. You're beginning to sound like a Jack Chick tract.

I am not Christian or Jewish but I admire his ability to uphold himself despite the sorrow it brought him. It shows the depth of his character.

Ah yes, can't have mercy and a sense of decency interfering with character. No siree. God's awaiting his pound of flesh, or whatever Jephthah's daughter weighed.

.

 

[nPeace]

Yet you still can't answer, "What was that promise?" which comes as no surprise. Note ecco's reply above where he says,

"One does not have to be an English Major to understand those two statements,".​

Nope, one doesn't. All one has to be is driven to:

Sorry for the loss of your integrity, nPeace.

.

Tsk tsk.
You know what they say, "All bark and no bite."
Apparently that's all you have Skwim.
Bark - Jephthah incinerated his daughter.
Sent packing with a bite - my bite #1 - Nope. The Bible does not say that.
I really thought you would have put up a fight, but since you don't want to answer my three questions, for obvious reasons, of course,..
I'll have no mercy.

Turning and fleeing will not save you, but the tail between the legs is perfect. It doesn't get in the way.
Take this other bite - bite #2 Jephthah's daughter continued living all her days. Judges 11:38-40
38 At this he said: “Go!” So he sent her away for two months, and she went to the mountains with her companions to weep over her virginity. 39 At the end of two months, she returned to her father, after which he carried out the vow he had made regarding her. She never had relations with a man. And it became a custom in Israel: 40 From year to year, the young women of Israel would go to give commendation to the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year.

Jephthah kept, his promise. What promise?
...whoever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites will become Jehovah’s,
...and his daughter offered herself willingly. Deuteronomy 23:21-23

A human sacrifice can be made to Jehovah, in the context that the persons has made a dedication to serve God exclusively. God is pleased with such sacrifices.
Likewise, a burnt sacrifice.

You cannot just take a word or expression from the scriptures, and apply it however you wish, ignoring the context. That's unreasonable, isn't it?

For example, I could take this scripture John 16:23
In that day you will ask me no question at all. Most truly I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything, he will give it to you in my name.
... and I could say, Jesus said if you ask God for anything he will give it, so therefore, if I ask him to let me win the lottery, he should grant me that.
However, I ignore the fact that it is in the context, that it is anything that is in harmony with God's will. 1 John 5:14

Now if anyone doesn't care about taking the context into consideration, whether it comes from the same verse or not, that person is simply being unreasonable, and doesn't care what the Bible has to say, but is happy to jump all over the Bible and pick out what he likes to criticize. How reasonable is that?

To me, that's the same as a man looking at a beautiful painting with a woman, whose hair is sticking straight up, and exclaiming, "What nonsense! How could this woman's hair be defying gravity?"
All the while he doesn't care about any other part of the painting, so he ignores completely, the large spinning fan at the bottom of the painting.
That's one closed-minded critic.
Should anyone care what he thinks about anything? I certainly don't.

 

[Kapalika]

Of course you wouldn't. Your moral compass swings with the culture. Sure it's inherently fine to fry and eat human babies if that's what the culture does. . . . . . . . . . . What will you have, dear Kapalika, an arm or a leg?

You do know the ancient Kāpālika's were notorious for cannibalism right? More to the point, even in it's day they were very taboo and their use of Kapalas (skulls) came from the literal and or metaphorical killing priests and then using their skulls as begging bowls as penance.

It was even said that they sacrificed people too, although I've seen evidence that if true it was on a voluntary basis. They would wear the ashes of humans as well. Most likely like similar sects today they were more of scavengers of human remains than murderers.

And while I defend their practices in ancient times, it was not popular and very taboo at the time, utterly despised by many. They were heterodoxy, vamachara, Left Hand Path Tantra in the purest and one of the most original forms. They were supposedly hedonists who had giant orgies for Bhairava.

So it wasn't part of the mainstream culture, but within it's culture their practices had their place. Your point only so much holds up in cases of the Aztecs and the like.

But your point totally misses my point, in that moral arguments against a religion are pointless since morality is so often subjective and cultural.

And what a proud honor it was. All it took was the incineration of one's own daughter. No doubt god smiled in appreciation through the entire roasting.

Indeed it was, but I suspect you are being sarcastic.

Come, come now. You're beginning to sound like a Jack Chick tract.

Half of that sentence used the dictionary definition of an oath (the first half, "invoking a divine witness", but okay if you wanna assume such a thing. Google it, it's within the first few definitions and the kind meant by taking an oath as a judge, politician, in a court room, or any such position or situation.

Ah yes, can't have mercy and a sense of decency interfering with character. No siree. God's awaiting his pound of flesh, or whatever Jephthah's daughter weighed.

Of course you can have human decency, mercy and character at the same time (they are all tied in ways) but I guess Jephthah's daughter must of made a really good stew.

 

[Tumah]

Potato - potahto. The "oath" was made within the context of a deal:

"I, Jephthah, do solemnly swear that if you, god, help me defeat the Ammonites I will sacrifice the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory."​

Your interpretation of it is as a deal, but the context does not force that interpretation. There was no treaty here between them. Just a man taking an oath to perform an action if the outcome is favorable towards him. The fact that he stated it in second person, doesn't change that. If you can prove that G-d would not have granted them victory had Jephthah not said it, than I'd have to agree with you. Otherwise, I only see you trying to push a narrative that suits you.

Not at all. The story isn't mine, but that of the Bible as I related it in the OP. And because god did help Jephthah defeat the Ammonites he's obligated to carry out his part of the Bargain: Tit for tat.

I agree that since G-d helped Jephthah, Jephthah was obligated to fulfill the terms of his oath (so long as he didn't annul it). My disagreement is that while you are claiming that G-d acted because of Jephthah's oath, I am arguing that G-d's actions were independent of Jephthah's oath, while Jephthah's oath were dependent on G-d's actions.

Should have, Could have. Would have. It makes no difference. Jephthah didn't have his oath annulled.

Right.

And isn't this convenient. Another case where self-serving apologetics comes to the rescue by positing a "should be" so as to cover up an embarrassing piece of scripture. Give me a break.

That's not an argument. I cited another instance where this type of translation is used for this word (well, letter) - and I explained why that translation makes the passage more consistent with itself. If the best argument you have is "apologetics!", then you may as well have not responded.

 

[Tumah]

Apologetics at its finest. Right off the bat: "Anyway, the language that Jephthah uses isn't that of a deal, but that of an oath."

Really? Let's see...

If you give me your car, I will give you $10,000.​

Is that a proposed deal, or is that an oath?

If you think it's an oath, give me your car.

What you said, is a deal. What Jephthah said, is not.

ecco quietly repeats to himself "I swear! If Tumah doesn't respond, I'm going to leave RF forever!"​

Is that a proposed deal or is that an oath?
If you think it's a deal, I can delete this response.

 

[oldbadger]

I
So, anyone up to defending god's inhumane action, or is it more convenient to forget about it and go on to some inane thread like TRUMP: The Movie?.

God And Human Sacrifices

Oh come on, Skwim...... you moan about inane threads and then post up this stuff.,....

Let's stop worrying about human sacrifice from thousands of years ago and focus upon the millions of human sacrifices that have occurred in the last century or so, why not?

I once heard that a whole string of US Presidents would not pull out of Vietnam because they didn't want to be remembered as 'The President that gave up' and the sacrificial cost for these self interested leaders was........ how many?

I've just thought of the unbelievable waste of human life that was sacrificed into the front lines of WW1 ........ for what? And after each dreadful day of losses I expect that the inept generals would dress for dinner?

Human sacrifice is happening now, today, every day, Skwim, so a story about a yet another stupid warrior's daughter giving up herself for sacrifice because he was such a fool to make such a promise is old news.

In fact the Trump Movie might be more interesting.... I didn't open that, might do now.

 

[Estro Felino]

We know for certain that the Greeks of Sicily in the V cent. BC were horrified by the fact that Carthaginians still performed human sacrifices. And Gelo I forbade the Punics to perform them.
And Carthaginians are Phoenicians like Jezebel (whose story takes place by the time of the foundation of Carthage and the Phoenician supremacy in the Mediterranean).

The ethnic similarities between Jews and Phoenicians are surprising. In the Bible virgins and babies sacrifices are frequent.

 

[Skwim]

I agree that since G-d helped Jephthah, Jephthah was obligated to fulfill the terms of his oath (so long as he didn't annul it). My disagreement is that while you are claiming that G-d acted because of Jephthah's oath, I am arguing that G-d's actions were independent of Jephthah's oath, while Jephthah's oath were dependent on G-d's actions.

So it's just one big coincidence that after Jephthah said to the Lord “If you will let me defeat the Ammonites, I will give you the first thing that comes out of my house when I come back from the victory. . . ." that the "Lord helped [Jephthah] defeat them."

Is that what you want me to believe? REALLY? . . . . . REALLY? .............................................I think it's past your bed time, Tumah.




In any case, being omniscient god knew that Jephthah made the promise to him, and that to keep it meant he would incinerate his daughter. Yet god did nothing to stop Jephthah as he had stopped Abraham.

God certainly does like a good sacrifice now and then, doesn't he. Even when he hasn't agreed to it.


.