2. On the other hand, it has been well replied that the text expressly, and in varied terms, alludes to the obligation of the girl to lead a life of perpetual A-irginity (ver. 37, 38, 39). Such a state was generally considered a calamity by the Israelitish women, probably on ac- count of the early prophecy of the incarnation (Gen. iii, 15). See Bakuknxkss. But, besides this, the celiba- cy of Jephthah's daughter involved the extinction of his whole house as well as dynasty, and removed from him his only child, the sole prop and solace of his de- clining years. For it was her duty, as the Lord's prop- erty, to dwell separately at Shiloh, in constant attend- ance on the service of the sanctuary (compare Luke iii, 37 ; 1 Cor. vii, 34), far from her father, the companions of her youth, and the beloved haunts of her childhood; all this was sufficient cause for lamentation. But the idea that she was put to death by her father as a con- sequence of his vow shociis all the feelings of human- ity, could onh' have horrified her as well as all other parties concerned, is inconsistent with the first princi- ples of the Mosaic law, and was impossible from the very nature of its requisitions in several points. For instance, human sacrifices were among the abominations for which the idolatrous nations of Canaan were devoted to destruction (Deut. xviii, 9-14); and the Israelites were expressly forbidden to act like them in sacrificing their sons and daughters by fire (Deut. xii, 29-31). Again, for the redemption of any person devoted to God (Exod. xiii, 11-13), and even for the very case of Jeph- thah's singular vow, if understood to refer to his daugh- ter's immolation; provision was expressly made (Lev. xxvii, 2-5), so that he might, with a safe conscience, have redeemed her from death by a small payment of money. It must be remembered, too, that by the law he could not offer any victim as a burnt-sacrifice except where the Lord had chosen to place his name (Deut. xvi, 2, G, 11, IG, compare with Lev. i, 2-13; xvii, 3-9), that is, in the tabernacle at Shiloh : moreover, none but a Levite could kill, and none but a priest could offer any victim; and the statement of the Chaldee para- phrast (ad loc.) that the sacrifice took place through a neglect to considt Phinehas, the high-priest, besides in- volving an anachronism, is utterly at variance with all the known conditions of the case. Moreover, none but a mule victim could be presented in sacrifice in any case. It is tme that if Jephthah had been an idolater he might have offered his daughter in any of the high- places to a false god ; but he was evidently made the deliverer of his people from the yoke of Ammon because he was not an idolater (see Judg. xi, 29-36 ; comp. Lev. XX, 1-5) ; and his whole conduct is commended by an inspired apostle (Heb. xi, 32: comp. 1 Sam. xii, 11) as an act of faith in the true God. Such sanction is very different from the express condemnation of the irregu- lar and mischievous proceeding on the part of Gideon (Judg. viii, 27), for there is nowhere the least intima- tion that Jephthah's conduct was other than entirely praiseworthy, although his vow is evidently recorded as a warning against inconsiderate oaths (Jarvis's Church of the Redeemed, p. 115-117). Indeed, it is verj- doubt- ful >vhether he had the power to sacrifice his daughter, and it is incredible that she should have been the first to claim the fulfilment of such a vow, as well as incon- ceivable how she should have so readily inferred so un- usual an import from the brief terms in which he first intimated to her his fatal pledge (ver. 35, 36) ; whereas it is altogethtff likely that (with her prompt consent) he
JEPHUNNE
820
JEREMIAH
hatl the right of dooming her to perpetual singleness of life and religious seclusion (compare 1 Cor. vii, 30-38). Sec Nazakitk. It is also -worthy of note that the term employed to express his promise of devotement in this case is I"!?, ne'dtr, a consecration, and not D'^Hj che' rem, destruction. See Vow; Anatiie.ma. Nor can we suppose (with Prof. Bush, ad loc.) that during the two months' respite he obtained better information, in consequence of which the immolation was avoided bv a ransom-price ; for it is stated that he literally fid- fiiled his vow, whatever it was (ver. 39). The word rendered "lament" in verse 40 is not the common one (pZl) translated "bewail" in verse 37, 38, but the rare expression (nir) rendered "rehearse" in ch. v, 11, and meaning to celebrate, as implying joy rather than grief.
For a full discussion of the question, see the notes of the Pictorial Bible, and Bush's Notes on Judrjes, ad loc. ; comp. Calmet's Dissertation sur le Vceu de Jep/ite, in his Comment. Litterul, torn, ii; Dresde, Votum Jephthm ex Antiq. Judaica illustr. (Lips. 1767, 1778) ; Kandolf, Er- Marung d. Geliibdes Jephtka, in Eichhorn's lieperforium, viii, 13 , Lightfoot's Harmony, under Judg. xi, Erubhin, cap. xvi. Sermon on Judg. xi, 39 , Bp. Kussell's Connec- tion of Sacred and Profane Ilistor;/, i, 479-492 ; Hales's Anali/sis of Chronology, ii, 288-2^2; Gleig's edition of Stackhouse, ii, 97 ; Clarke's Commentary, ad loc. ; Eosen- mliller, ad loc; Hengstenberg's Pentut. ii, 129; Markii Dissert. phil. theol. p. 530 ; Michaelis, Mos. Recht, iii, 30 ; Ziegler, Theolog. A bhandl. i, 337 ; Paulus, Conservat. ii, 197 ; Vatke, Bibl. Theolog. p. 275; Capellus, De voto .Tej)h. (Salmur. 1683) ; Dathe in Doderlein's Theolog. Bibl. iii, 327 ; Jahn, Einleit. ii, 198 , Eckermann, Theolog. Beitr. y, i, 62; Reland, Antiq. sacr. iii, 10, 6, p. 363; Vogel in Biedermann's Act. sckolasf. ii, 250; Georgi, De voto Jephtm (Yiteb. 1751) ; Heumann, Nov. sylloge dissert, ii, 476 ; Bernhold, De voto per Jiphtach. nuncupato (Altd. 1740) ; Schudt, Vita Jepht. (Groning. 1753), ii, 77 ; Bru- no in Eichhorn's Repertor. viii, 43 ; Buddiei Hist. V. T. i, 893 ; Hess, Gesch. Jos. n. der Heerfiihrer, ii, 156 ; Nie- meyer, Charakt. iii, 496 ; Ewald, Isr. Geschichte, ii, 397 ; Selden, Jus nat. et gent, i, 11 ; Anton, Comparat. libror. V. T. cef. pt. ii, iii ; F. Spanheim, De voto Jephthce, in his Dissert, theol. hist. p. 135-211 ; H. Benzel, De voto Jepth incruento (Lond. 1732 ) , liathlef's Theol. for 1755, p. 414 Seller, Gemei/niii/-. ISdir. 1779, p. 386; Hasche, Ueber Jeph. U.S. Geliihdi' (Drcsd. 1778; see in the Dresden An- zeig. 1787) ; Pfeiffer, De voto Jephthce, in his 0pp. p. 591 : Tieroff, id. (.Jena, 1657); Miinch, id. (Altd. 1740); Bib Repos. .Jan. 1843, p. 143 sq. ; Meth. Quart. Per. October 1855, p. 558 sq. ; Universalist Review, Jan. 1861 ; Evan- gelical Rev. Jidy, 1861 ; Cassel, in Herzog's Encykl. s. v. ; also the works cited by Darling, Cyclop, col. 284.