EatTheRich
President
My understanding is that it had to do with their populist politics.
Why it’s pointless to help “moderate muslims”
- Thread starter as seen on tv
- Start date
EatTheRich
President
Judges 11:30-39.
30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord: “If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”
32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the Lord gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon.
34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of timbrels! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter.35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, “Oh no, my daughter! You have brought me down and I am devastated. I have made a vow to the Lord that I cannot break.”
36 “My father,” she replied, “you have given your word to the Lord. Do to me just as you promised, now that the Lord has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37 But grant me this one request,” she said. “Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry.”
38 “You may go,” he said. And he let her go for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39 After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin.
resident_evil
Senator
Was Jephthah a Jew? Was the lesson don't make promises to God your ass has to cash? Does it say his oath was a good thing?
OR.................................. Was an only child set into servitude to God thus ending J.'s chances to have progeny?
Bible Answer: There are at least two major views about the promise Jephthah made and what happened to his daughter later. Judges 11:29-40 tells us that Jephthah made a deal with God. People do this all the time. "Lord if you will do this for me, then I will do this for you." So Jephthah asked God to give him victory over the Ammonites and he would give something to God. So the Lord gave him victory, and as he was coming home his daughter came out of the door. The Bible says something happened to her, but some people are confused. The confusion can be resolved by a careful translation and by not assuming things that are not said in the passage, as is commonly done.
Views. The first major view says that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter because of a commitment or a vow he made to God. The second major view is that Jephthah only promised an animal sacrifice. Here is his promise.
And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, “If Thou wilt indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon, it shall be the LORD’S, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering.” (NASB) Judges 11:30-31
Translation. Unfortunately, our understanding of what he really promised hinges mainly on one letter in the Hebrew alphabet,
And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, “If Thou wilt indeed give the sons of Ammon into my hand, then it shall be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon, it shall be the LORD’S, or I will offer it up as a burnt offering.” (NASB) Judges 11:30-31
The correct meaning is "or." This should be accepted as the proper translation for several reasons. First, if we assume "and" is correct then Jephthah knowingly committed himself to making a human sacrifice, since he said, "whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me . . . ." We must also realize that the Mosaic Law prohibited human sacrifice (Lev. 18:21; Deut. 12:31). Since Jephthah was filled with the Holy Spirit according to Judges 11:29, the Spirit would not have prompted him to make a vow to sin. Second, Judges never says that his daughter was killed or sacrificed. In fact, we are told that she goes into the mountains to weep for her virginity for two months.
Queen Titania
Senator
When and where are you talking about EatTheRich?
EatTheRich
President
That rabbis centuries later were able to force a gentler construction on it does not graft their 2nd-century-BCE consciousness onto the days that gave rise to the legends of the Biblical judges. Look, I'm not saying most of the Bible is about human sacrifice (unless you do like most Christians and read just the New Testament, which is primarily about the human sacrifice of Jesus on the cross). It's pretty clear that the Israelites and their god tended to be against human sacrifice, while the Canaanites, Phoenicians, etc., and their god tended to be for it. But the Israelites came from the same cultural milieu, they swapped gods and cultic practices back and forth, and they wrote stories encompassing various mixes of social and cultural values into their Bible.
Absolutely. Hebrews 11:32. Also, the oath is immediately rewarded with God's favor in the battle.
It's consistent with other parts of the Bible:
2 Kings 23:20 20 Josiah slaughtered all the priests of those high places on the altars and burned human bones on them.
A few verses later:
25 Neither before nor after Josiah was there a king like him who turned to the Lord as he did—with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his strength, in accordance with all the Law of Moses.
There's also something in that chapter about the human bones being burned on the alter fulfilling a prophecy of The LORD, which goes all the way back to 1 Kings 13 and the reign of King Jeroboam.
You're the Hebrew scholar, not I. (You wrote that yourself, right? There's no attribution.) Consider, though:Translation. Unfortunately, our understanding of what he really promised hinges mainly on one letter in the Hebrew alphabet,, which can mean "or" as well as "and." This should be accepted as the proper translation for several reasons.
"And" is the translation used by most of the several versions listed at biblehub.com (http://biblehub.com/judges/11-31.htm), including the King James Version, New International Version, and English Standard Version. "And" is the sense suggested by literally every translation listed there. "Kai" is used by the Greek Septuagint. The NET Bible, which was produced by leading scholars of Biblical languages and has extensive footnotes about translation, says:
3 tn Some translate “or,” suggesting that Jephthah makes a distinction between humans and animals. According to this view, if a human comes through the door, then Jephthah will commit him/her to the Lord’s service, but if an animal comes through the doors, he will offer it up as a sacrifice. However, it is far more likely that the Hebrew construction (vav [ו] + perfect) specifies how the subject will become the Lord’s, that is, by being offered up as a sacrifice. For similar constructions, where the apodosis of a conditional sentence has at least two perfects (each with vav) in sequence, see Gen 34:15-16; Exod 18:16.
God makes many people do evil things in the Bible. For example, there is the "evil spirit of God" that attacks Saul, and God telling David to take a census which David later recognizes as evil. Not to mention someone like Phinehas, who was given a "covenant of a lasting priesthood" for murdering an interracial couple out of zeal for God's honor. And of course leaving out the commands by God to exterminate entire tribes, which also contradicts the Mosaic Law (Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill.) Certainly people continue to be inspired by their "Holy Spirit" to do horrible things to this day:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-impregnates-20-members-of-his-congregation-and-claims-the-holy-spirit-told-him-to-do-it-123038/
The days of the judges (12th century BCE) preceded the Holiness Code in Leviticus (7th century BCE) or the Deuteronomic Code (7th century BCE).
Leviticus 18:21, which you quote, reads:
"'Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molek, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD."
One natural reading: don't sacrifice your children to "Molek" ... sacrifice them to ME. I am "the LORD," not Moloch/Molek.
Yes, to weep that she will die a virgin. If she wasn't going to be sacrificed, what was the 2 months a respite from? Then the Bible does say she was sacrificed: "After the two months, she returned to her father, and he did to her as he had vowed."
EatTheRich
President
The Almohad dynasty conquered Marrakesh from the Almoravids in 1147 and became the leading power in North Africa. The empire peaked in 1171 with the conquest of Seville, at which point it controlled most of present-day Morocco and parts of Mauritania, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Spain, and Portugal. The Amir who conquered Seville, Abu Ya'qub Yusuf, is the same one who instituted the "convert or die" policy toward the Christians and Jews, and who banned religious books not from his own Zahiri school of Islamic jurisprudence.
resident_evil
Senator
This is what I can do for you which you didn't seem willing to do for yourself (Don't let others manipulate you or stop trying to manipulate others. Whichever is the case)
https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=12&article=2775
http://www.openbible.info/topics/human_sacrifice
Queen Titania
Senator
He favored the Zahirite school of thought, his was a political rule in the time of that extraordinary change in the civilized world when sadly for us all the 'religious/political' became the worlds dictatorships.
Within both the Christian and Islamic World especially in the early days, as with your Communism - again sadly for us, the past was often eradicated.
EatTheRich
President
The first link is to a Christian apologist asserting arbitrarily that there is "much evidence" that the Bible doesn't really mean what it plainly says about famous cases of human sacrifice. It contains the same arguments you copy-and-pasted on earlier posts on this thread, and which I've already attempted to refute in detail.
The second link merely provides several quotes for and against human sacrifice from the Bible, and includes John 3:16 as a prominent verse relating to human sacrifice.
resident_evil
Senator
I can't make you read. And your "refutations" are those of an illiterate atheist.
resident_evil
Senator
Not only that your critiques are themselves drawn from anti-Christian websites. Why are you a hypocrite?
EatTheRich
President
Not really. For the most part they're original critiques based on my personal knowledge of the Bible, and the citations I make are to Biblical scholars and to the Bible itself. Certainly I have read many works by both Christian apologists and critics of Christianity, including websites; but I haven't been cutting and pasting the way you have (and your cut-and-paste answers fall apart on examination and are designed to give pat answers to fool people who don't know the Bible as well as I do).
resident_evil
Senator
I cut and pasted one website without attribution (because I forgot). Color me bad that you think I was trying to pass it off as my own. lol I just decline to rehash what is resolved by far better informed people than you or I.
You are stuck on your own understanding of the matter.
EatTheRich
President
Perhaps. I just find it inherently implausible that the common religious practices of the Canaanites, Phoenicians, Moabites, and Ammonites ... which according to the Bible itself were sometimes practiced by the Israelites ... were reflected nowhere in the Bible, which in so many other ways reflects the common cultural milieu in which it was composed.
That said, I will reiterate that it is apparent that the general thrust of the Old Testament is against human sacrifice, and that the leading Israelite priests and prophets (excepting, perhaps, Elijah, Elisha, and Jeremiah) opposed the practice, often vehemently, from a relatively early age.
freyasman
Senator
I [Unwelcome language removed] hate Wahhabis.
Queen Titania
Senator
Who doesn't? Have you seen footage of the way they brainwash/radicalize young boys? Evil fu'cks.
But they turned on the Sauds once, they may again. Not who we would wish too chuck em off the Throne but it would serve them right.
