We now turn to what has unnecessarily been made one of the most difficult features in

the book of Judges, viz., the vow of Jephthah. Various suggestions have been put

forward as solutions of the moral difficulties created by the vow. First there is the

acceptance, as a fact, of the idea that Jephthah did actually offer up a human sacrifice--

his own daughter. We are reminded of the wild state of the times, and of the prevailing

ignorance of God's law and character. That Jephthah was an outlaw, and had been

leading the life of a Rob Roy or Robin Hood, and that we must, therefore, not expect to

find that he possessed too nice a sense of what is righteous or holy in the sight of God.

The fact that the spirit of God came upon him for the work of delivering Israel, no more

sanctified his every action, or rendered him infallible, than did the coming of the spirit

upon Samson mean that all his actions were acceptable unto the Lord.

Against this acceptance of the record as it appears on the surface, is the objection that

Jephthah is included in the examples of faith in Heb. 11:, a fact indicative of something

more personal and sanctified than the equipment of a leader of an expedition.

Even if it be admitted that so rash a vow had been made, there is weighty objection to

the idea that God would allow it to be carried out. Indeed Scripture, in such passages as

Lev. 18: 21 or 20: 2-5, forbids such an act.

Some commentators have supposed that the words of Judges 11: 31, "and I will offer

it up for a burnt offering", might be rendered, "or I will offer", etc., thereby indicating

that the vow was of an alternative character. Either he would dedicate the first person

who came out of his home to meet him on his return, or, if he were met by an animal, he

would offer it up as a burnt offering. But most Hebrew scholars are against the idea that

vav (the word translated "and") can be translated "or" here, though it is sometimes found

with the meaning "or" where there is no opposition, as for example.

but the usage is not comparable.

Having considered these opinions let us come to the touchstone of Scripture and

examine the original Hebrew of Judges 11: 31, "And I will offer it up for a burnt

offering". The Hebrew equivalent of "for a burnt offering" is l'olah, l meaning "for"

and olah "burnt offering". Any enquirer can see this usage for himself by looking at the

original of such a passage as Lev. 5: 7, "for a burnt offering". But to our amazement,

we discover that in Judges 11: 30, there is no l before olah. "For a burnt offering"

therefore is an error of translation. What Scripture says is: "And I will offer it up a burnt

In Gen. 22: 2 where we read "offer him up for a burnt offering" the Hebrew

explicitly reads l'olah. There, the Lord, having accomplished His object of proving

Abraham's faith, intervened to prevent the actual slaying of Isaac.