(Judges 11:39) 1ST CATEGORY OT QUESTION 43. SINCE GOD FORBADE ABRAHAM TO SACRIFICE HIS SON, WHY DID HE NOT ALSO DEFEND JEPHTHAH FROM SACRIFICING HIS DAUGHTER? — There is a big difference between Abraham and Jephthah. At first Abraham had a legitimate birth, while that of Jephthah was illegitimate, for he was the son of a courtesan. Then, Abraham's life was irreproachable; Jephthah was chief of lawbreakers. Abraham was a righteous man and that temptation had felt. Jephthah could not present any testimony of justice. Abraham was therefore commanded to sacrifice his son to God to show men the greatness of his faith in God, since at his command he did not hesitate to sacrifice his son to him. Indeed, he does not doubt for a moment that he who, against all human hope, could have given birth to this child of a sterile and advanced woman could not, against the laws of nature, resuscitate him from among the dead. This obedience was the height of Abraham's righteousness, for God saw then that he did not ask for the blood of this child, but that he only wanted by this commandment to put the last line to the virtue of his servant, he submits those who love him to certain trials to motivate the just rewards he has for them. Jephthah, on the other hand, a man without virtue and without foresight, by a sentiment of religion misunderstood, promises a sacrifice to God in these words: "I will offer a burnt offering to God the first to come out of the door of my house and come in front of me when I come back from the fight." (Judg. 11:31) Was he forced to do this? or did he understand how he was to perform it? What would he have done if he had introduced to him a dog, a donkey, which the law forbids offering to the Lord, or the son or wife of another? Would he have fulfilled his vow by rejoicing at the expense of others' pain? The judgment of God, therefore, allowed this vow, the improvidence of which might be so fatal to others, to fall back on itself; and Jephthah pushed blindness until he did not recognize that he had made a reckless wish and that he had to go back on the erroneous promise of which he was the author. He ought to have understood that God cannot accept a similar sacrifice, request for his reckless conduct, and offer to God a victim who was not contrary to the law; but he likes to become better parricide by remaining faithful to his vow, without recollecting that truth which a reckless and foolish promise, in order to be useful, can only be fatal. He sacrificed himself by immolating his daughter, so God concealed his disapproval of such a sacrifice. If he had positively forbidden it, he would have seemed to want another victim to be sacrificed to him, while he knew that Jephthah was unworthy and could not offer it to him. As for her daughter, death was a gain for her, because in dying as an innocent victim of her father's guilty wish, she avoided the pain of hell to which she might not have been able to escape by prolonging her life. If we see the triumph crowning the efforts of Jephthah, let us beware of attributing it to his own merit or that of his army, for we do not read that they prayed to God to give them a defender. Besides, had God given this mission to Jephthah? had he spoken to him? No, but as the foreign nations exalted the power of their gods, as if they had subjected them to the children of Rael and had only insults for the God of Abraham, God exercised his vengeance against these natives not for his people, who was unworthy of it, but for the honor of his name in view of the merits of Abraham and for his sanctuary. So when we see the spirit of God seize Samson, who gave himself up to a courtesan, shall we say that he was worthy? No, but this grace was given to him only for the destruction of enemy nations. (Judg. 14:6; 15:14) |