[RW/bold; VAN@S6K/regular—At this point of this discourse, we are re-posting the answer to the whole article, written by Sinaite VAN. The article was originally sent to him by RW April 16, 2011 and VAN’s edited and reformatted reply dated April 21, 2011 is reposted here.]
RW: There is another case where this Leviticus 27 command was implemented. Judges 11:30 “And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” He might have been thinking of his dog, but certainly not his daughter! However, this is what happened, the result of an immature person and foolish vow.
Judges 11:34-35 “Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah. And behold, his daughter came out to meet him with tambourines and with dances. She was his only child; besides her he had neither son nor daughter. And as soon as he saw her, he tore his clothes and said, “Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low, and you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the LORD, and I cannot take back my vow.”
Judges 11:39 “And at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow that he had made.”
To me this is the clear meaning of the text regardless if some commentaries say she remained a virgin the rest of her life instead of being executed. This is also a clear warning that vows to YHVH must be paid, whether foolish or not!!
—————————————————————————
Shalom,
Just so that we are both looking at the same issue I would like to refer to item (3) of my reply so you see “my problem” with the “lamb of God” of John (Jn.1:29). I will not deal with Isaiah 48 verses 12 -13 and 16. I believe I have given you my understanding of the verses in my reply.
- In Exodus 12 Yahweh commanded Moses to tell the congregation to take a one-year-old male lamb, unblemished, from the sheep or goat. And, that this lamb is to be killed at twilight. It is also commanded that the blood of this lamb be put in the doorposts of the houses in which they eat it. It is also required that they eat the flesh the same night, roasted with fire. And,whatever is left they shall burn with fire. In other words, they shall not take anything with them when they leave Egypt.
- In the case of Joshua, Joshua 6:17; 7:24-25, the City of Jericho was under ban, meaning doomed for destruction or devoted for destruction or set apart for destruction, as some translation would put it. This means the city and everything in it is to be destroyed. However, Yahweh made an exception by sparing the lives of Rahab and her family.
- In the case of Achan, who was the leader of the Israelites, he disobeyed Yahweh by taking for himself (v. 20,21) some items in violation of His commandment ( 1:18 ). And, therefore, suffered the same fate by the ban imposed on the City. Is this a “human sacrifice” required by Yahweh? I do not believe so!
- In the case of Jephthah, Judges 11:30, 34-35, he made a vow “whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return…it shall be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering”. And, it just happened that when he came home it was his daughter that first came out of the house. Jephtah therefore, offered her “according to the vow which he has made (v.39). It was Jephtah’s commitment, under a vow, to make good what he promised. It was his choice not Yahweh’s. Did Yahweh require this human sacrifice? I do not believe so! (By the way, what has the daughter remaining a virgin got to do with it, now that you mention it?).
This is the reason why I asked what made John and the other apostolic writers point to Yeshua (Jesus), a man, as a sacrifice acceptable to Yahweh?
Now let me comment regarding the “binding of Isaac” (Gen.22).
A reading of the passage will show that “God tested Abraham…” (22:1). It is a passage that tells us Yahweh is testing Abraham how he would respond to His command. It is a test of obedience – whether Abraham will obey or not. Yahweh’s command was to take Isaac and “offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains” (v.2). When Abraham placed Isaac on the altar and took his knife to slay Isaac, an angel stopped him. At this point it has become clear that Abraham was willing to obey Yahweh, even to the extent of slaying his only son. The offering of Isaac as a sacrifice was not consummated because it has already accomplished Yahweh’s purpose for commanding Abraham – test of obedience. Please notice that the passage does not say “slay” or “kill” or “slaughter” – only to be offered up or be prepared for an offering. It is my understanding therefore, that Yahweh had no desire at anytime to require Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. It is just a simple test of obedience. In fact, what follows was that Abraham “took a ram and offered him up for a burn offering in the place of his son” (v.13).
Because there was no sacrifice, there was no blood shed, and no ashes burned. In fact, in the following verses, Abraham instructed Eliezer, Abraham’s faithful servant, to look for a wife for Isaac. He did not die and resurrect and no such account is mentioned in the Scriptures.
How can the apostolic writers claim that the “binding of Isaac” is a preview of the “Lamb of God who will take away the sins of the world”? By the way, was it not a ram that was provided as a substitute and not a lamb? As I recall, the requirement for the temple sacrifices is post-Abraham and none of them were humans.
You seem to use New Testament passages to validate the Tanach instead of the other way around – the Tanach validating what is in the New Testament. As anyone can see, what you claim to be in the New Testament is not in the Tanach (Hebrew Scriptures).
The case in point is your mention of Melchizedek. The only reference I found regarding Melchizedek is in Gen.14:18,19; and in Psalm 110:4 (NASB). In the Tanach (Hebrew Scriptures) the phrase “According to the order of Melchizedek” does not appear. Melchizedek is a gentile and he is called the priest of God, the Most High, because unlike the priests of other nations, he serves Hashem. This is according to the Jewish sages. So, why make a connection to the Melchizedek priesthood? It doesn’t make sense.
The more I study your article, the more I am beginning to see that you are reading your interpretation into the text. It would seem to be anyway. This is just a mere suspicion. Maybe it would be best if we agree on one basic document which is the Tanach and examine every issue raised by the New Testament writers and see if they are consistent and valid. We could start from there. And I would suggest getting a copy of The Tanach, English translation, Stone Edition, ArtScroll Series. Also, try getting a copy of Pentateuch & Haftorahs, Edited by Dr. J.H.Hertz. It has a good commentary on sacrifices. I got my copy from [the messianic library here].
I would like to end here on the above issues and wait for your reply. I will send you some articles on the other issues, such as, the Messiah and on Psalm 2.
VAN@S6K
Reader Comments