A farther enquiry into several remarkable texts of the Old and New Testament which contain some difficulty in them with a probable resolution of them / by John Edwards ...

The third Text enquired into, viz.Judges XI. 30, 31.

And Jephthah vowed a Vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt with∣out fail deliver the Children of Ammon into my hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my House to meet me, when I return in Peace from the Children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a Burnt-offering.

THis Remarkable Vow of Iephthah, and the Manner of the performing of it, have frequently employed the Thoughts and Pens of the Learned, who ac∣cording to their different Apprehensions of the Words, have decided this Controversie in a different manner. Some confidently assert, that Iephthah did not Sacrifice his Daughter, but others on the contrary main∣tain that he did. And besides this, there is

another Question on supposal that he did Sacrifice her, viz. Whether it was well done of him or no? These are the Particulars which will fall under our Enquiry at present, but especially I shall entertain the Reader with the latter of them, and there endeavour to shew what was the Rise of this Inhumane and Extravagant Action, and what Reason may be given why this Generous Comman∣der, this Noble Warrior was so eager of shedding the Blood even of his own Daughter, yea when it was so absolutely contrary to the Law which this Great Man could scarcely be ignorant of. Here I hope to give some light to this Controverted Cause, by assign∣ing the True Spring of that Strange Action, and by discovering what was the Over-ruling Design of Providence in it, which hath not been enquired into by others (that I have met with) on this Subject.

But first, Let us hear what those say who embrace the Negative, viz. That Iephthah did not Sacrifice his Daughter. To make this good, they hold that there are two di∣stinct parts of the Vow: 1. Whatsoever com∣eth forth of the doors of my House to meet me, shall surely be the Lords. 2. I will offer it up for a Burnt-offering. And they put them to∣gether thus, Whatsoever cometh, &c. shall sure∣ly be the Lords, or I will offer it up, &c. They read Or instead of And, for the Copulative Vau (they say) is sometimes Disjunctive in Scripture, and so it is here in this Vow, the Hebrew Particle which is here translated

and should be rendred or; for Iephtha's words are to be taken Disjunctively, and his Vow was no other than this, Whatever I first meet with coming out of my House, shall either be dedicated to the Lord, or I will Sacrifice it for a Burnt-offering. It was a Conditional Vow, i. e. If it were a thing fit to be Sacrificed he would Sacrifice it, other∣wise not, he would Dedicate and Consecrate it to God, or something in the lieu of it. If a Dog or an Ass had been first met by him, he was not ingaged to Sacrifice them. Neither if he met with a Man or a Woman, was he bound to offer them in Sacrifice; but only he was to act according as the Creature was which he met with. Now Iephthah, they say, performed the first part of his Vow, and that was sufficient. He offered and Consecrated his Daughter to the Lord, he devoted her to a Virgin-State all her Life, which appears from the Connection of those words, He did according to his Vow; and she knew not a Man, v. 39. One is Exegetical of the other; which sheweth that Iephthah kept his Vow in separating his Daughter to a single Life for ever. She was not Properly, but Metaphorically Offered and Slain, i. e. she was to keep her Virginity perpetually. This Civil Death passed upon her. Which is confirmed by what you read in v. 40. The Daughters of Israel went yearly to‖ lament (or, as others render it, to talk with) the Daughter of Jephthah.

Whence they gather that Iephthah did not Sacrifice his Daughter, but only made her a kind of a Nun; in some solitary place he secluded her from all Society, excepting that the Daughters of Israel were permitted to go and spend three or four days in a Year in Lamenting and Condoling her perpetual Virginity, and in Talking and Conferring with her, and in Comforting her concerning her Solitary Condition, and her being kept from Marriage. Thus her Life was spared, she fell not a Sacrifice, but was Consecrated to God and his Service, she was devoted to a single Life, and was to remain a Recluse all her days. This was the opinion of R. Kimchi and some other Jewish Expositors; and they are followed not only by some of the‖ Pontificians (who perhaps might think of Celibacy and a Nuns Life) but by several of the Reformed Churches.

Secondly, Others, and with more reason, are for the Affirmative, viz. That Iephthah really sacrificed his Daughter. For what is, or can be more plain, than that in v. 39. He did with her according to his Vow which he had vowed? What was this Vow? There is all the Difficulty. And yet, if you enquire narrowly into it, you will find that the Difficulty vanisheth; for the Vow is very plain and intelligible, Whatsoever com∣eth forth of the doors of my House to meet me, shall surely be the Lords, and I will offer it up for a Burnt-offering. He saith whatsoever, which shews that it was no Conditional Vow,

(as those of the other side pretend) but an Absolute one. He unadvisedly made a Vow to Sacrifice whatsoever he met in his return from the Battle, if he proved a Vi∣ctor. When the Vow is thus Large and General, it is ridiculous to think or say the contrary, viz. That it was a Conditional Vow, and it is as irrational to distinguish between a Copulative and a Disjunctive Vau in this place; though 'tis granted that in some other Texts it is allowable, because the very Sense and Meaning of the words direct us, yea constrain us to it; but here is no occasion for it in the least. Wherefore this nice distinguishing between one Vau and the other, and between Offering to the Lord and Sacri∣ficing, is altogether groundless, and you may see it cashiered by what is expresly menti∣oned in the following Narrative in this Hi∣story, for 'tis positively said, that Iephthah upon his return home and meeting his Daughter Rent his Cloaths. What was the reason of this? If his Vow had been Conditional or Disjunctive, (as some would have it) there was no ground at all for this his Behaviour; there was no occasion of Sorrow and Distraction if the Sacrificing his Daughter were not included in his Vow, if it were in his choice to offer her to the Lord (i. e. to dedicate her to him) or to Sacrifice her on the A••••ar; yea if he were at liberty by vertue of his Vow to kill a Beast instead of his own Child. If the case was thus, he had no reason to la∣ment

and rend his Cloaths, to vex and mor∣tifie himself, which we find him doing here. But it is plain by this Action of his, that things were otherwise with him, and that he had some Dreadful and Fatal Tidings to impart to his Daughter which were real matrer of Lamentation, and that the Con∣tents of his Vow which so nearly concerned her Life, were the cause of his Trouble and Sorrow. This appears from what fol∣lows, Alas, my Daughter (saith he) thou hast brought me very low, and thou are one of them that trouble me: And then he commu∣nicates the direful News to her, I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back. It happeneth indeed to be a very Sad and Deplorable Vow which I made, but I am ingaged to keep it, and I am fully resolved that I will. Whereupon his Sub∣missive Child uttered these words, My Father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the Lord, do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth: Seeing thou are returned in Safety, and with Victory over thy Enemies, I am willing to be offered a Sacrifice of Thanksgiving to the God of Hea∣ven, who mercifully covered thy Head in the day of Battle, and delivered thy Ene∣mies into thy hand. But this Obedient Da∣mosel had one thing to request of her Father before she left the World. Let this be done for me (saith she) let me alone t••o months, that I may go up and down upon the Mountains, and bewail my Virginity, I and

my Fellows. As much as if she had said, Seeing thou, O my Father, hast determined that I shall be offered up unto the Lord for a Burnt-offering according to the Tenor of the Vow which thou madest in the day of the Distress, I beg but this one thing of thee, that thou wouldest vouchsafe to re∣spite me for a little time, I desire only that I may be permitted to retire with a few of my Female Acquaintance into some Solitary place, that I and they may joyn together in Mourning, and lament this unhappy Allot∣ment of mine, viz. That I must not live to be acquainted with the Joys of a Conjugal State, nor be a Joyful Mother of Children, (as I have sometimes wished, because Bar∣renness is accounted a Curse) but that I must Expire a Virgin, and die Ingloriously, and leave no Off-spring behind me. Iephthah, as soon as she made known this her request to him, most willingly granted it, and wished with all his heart he could have granted her more. He said, Go, and he sent her away for two Months: And she went with her Com∣panions, and bewailed her Virginity on the Mountains. And then the History imme∣diately after this tells us, That at the end of two Months she returned to her Father, who did with her according to his Vow which he had vowed: That is, he of••ered her up unto the Lord for a Burnt-offering, for that was his Vow.

One would think now that there should be no Dispute whether Iephthah Sacrificed

his Daughter; for what reason can Men have to oppose the express words of the Text? These are so plain that it cannot but create some wonder, why Expositors should vary in the Interpretation of th••m. Or, suppose there be some Ambiguous Words in the Relation, which seem to disagree with what is here said; yet for that very reason, because they are Doubtful and Am∣biguous, we are not to make use of them to confront a Plain Text. It is true, it is added in the last mentioned Verse, She knew no Man: And indeed how could she when she was taken out of the Land of the Living? Observe the Connection, He did with his Daughter according to his Vow, and she knew no Man: That is, She was so Unhappy as to leave the World in her Youth before she had the Knowledge of a Man. Hereupon it immediately follows, (which verifies and confirms this Interpretation) It was a custom in Israel, that the Daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the Daughter of Jephthah four days in a year. This doth not imply that she was Alive, and that they went duly to give her a Visit in the Mountains. No, These words plainly relate the Behaviour of her Surviving Companions; they brought it into a Custom and Constant Practice among the Daughters of Israel, to go yearly and lament her Memory in that very place where she chose to bewail her Condition before her Death. Or, if they went to talk and confer (as it may be rendred according to the

Acception of the Hebrew word) the Sense is the same, for the meaning is not that they talked with Her, but with one another; they discoursed among themselves of that Deplorable Matter, of that Unfortunate Occurrence. I joyn both the Senses of the word together thus, At that Anniversary Meeting they talked of and lamented, they lamented and talked of the Sad Fate of that Royal Virgin, who was snatched away in her Prime, and denied the Blessing of Mar∣riage, and of bearing Children. This was the Compliment of Condoleance which was per∣formed upon her Death. This is the plain History without wresting it; and nothing is more clear from the whole than this, that Iephthah slew his Daughter, and offered her for a Burnt-offering, and that it was the True and Real Import of his Vow that he would do so. He vowed that he would Sacrifice to the Lord whatsoever he met coming out of his House: He met his Daughter, and accordingly he did with her according to his Vow, i. e. he Sacrificed her. The Famous‖ Jewish Historian gives his Suffrage to this, and all the Old Iews were of the same Opinion, expresly asserting that Iephthah vowed to Sacrifice his Daughter, and that he did so. This is the general Per∣swasion of the Antient Fathers both Greek and Latin, and their Agreement herein is

very considerable. A numerous Company of ‖ Moderns of great Learning and Judgment, both of the Roman and Protestant Perswa∣sion hold the same: And our Great Chri∣stian Rabbi, who had been once of another mind, was induced by a farther Enquiry into the Reasons of this Opinion, to change his thoughts, and to declare expresly that Ieph∣thah's performing of his Vow, is to be under∣stood in the plain and literal meaning of it, viz. The real and actual Sacrificing of his Daughter.

The next Question is, Whether Iephthah did well or ill in so doing: Or, which amounts to the same, Whether it was lawful to Sacrifice his Daughter? Some think (and what will not they think?) that it was a Good and Lawful Deed, and to this purpose they alledge Lev. 27. 28, 29. Notwithstanding, no devoted thing that a man shall devote unto the Lord, of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy to the Lord. None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed: but shall surely be put to death. Iephthah's Vow, say they, was of this sort, and he could not possibly Redeem his Daughter, but was ne∣cessitated to Sacrifice her. That known Critick Lewis Cappel runs altogether upon this, viz. That it was lawful by the Law of Cherem to Sacrifice this Innocent Maid: But this Learned Man was never so overseen and mistaken as in this Cause, for 'tis certain that

Cherem, which is the word here used, always signifies either Persons devoted to Slaughter, destined to Death for their Execrable Wick∣edness (as the Amalekites, and those other People and Nations which the Israelites were commanded to put to death) or it signifies Things destined to utter Destruction, as Iericho and Ai, &c. with all the Substance that was found in them, excepting some particular things which God ordered to be spared. And these Things were thus de∣stined for the sake of the Persons to whom they appertained, who were extreamly Wicked and Abominable in the Eyes of God. This is the true Notion of Cherem (of which I shall give you a farther account in a follow∣ing Discourse.) And as for the Law of Cherem, which is set down in that forecited place in Leviticus, it speaks only of that Irre∣vocable Vow of Destining Persons or Cities to utter Destruction (as in Numb. 21. 32. Deut. 13. 15. 25. 19. Iosh. 6. 17, 18. 1 Sam. 15. 3.) for their horrid Crimes, and because indeed there was the particular command of God for it. Now let any Man judge whether this hath any reference to Iephthah's Innocent and Harmless Daughter. The Law saith, no Person or thing devoted of Men (i. e. by Men) shall be redeemed, but shall surely be put to Death, or be destroyed. But then let it be remembred that no Men can devote any Persons to Death, unless they deserve it for their Excessive Impiety; nor can they devote any Thing to Destru∣ction,

unless it be on the account of such Persons. This therefore doth no ways con∣cern our present Business. Iephthah could not lawfully Vow the Death of any one who deserved not to be put to death. There∣fore his Daughter was no Cherem, no Exe∣cration, no Devoted Wretch. This Law of Cherem or Anathema gave the Jews no Li∣cense to turn Assassines and Cut-throats, and to take away the Lives of their own Children: Of which Mr. Selden and other Learned Men were so convinced, that upon this very account they assert (and think they prove) that Iephthah did not offer up his Devoted Daughter in Sacrifice. But, by their leave, all that they prove hence is this, that he should not have done it. Besides, this sort of Vows called Cherems, was to be made by particular Warrant from God, who is Lord and Disposer of Life and Death, and can Sentence and Devote to D••struction whom and what he pleaseth: But we read of no Warrant that Iephthah had to Vow the Death of his Daughter, much less to pro∣ceed to Execution; therefore it was direct Murder to put her to Death. And parti∣cularly as to Sacrificing her, that was a most Inhumane, Horrid and Barbarous Act, and expresly forbid of God, and hated by him. Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not burn thy Sons and thy Daughters in the fire, as the Heathens used to do to their Gods: For every abomination to the Lord which he hateth, have they done, Deut. 12. 31.

For Iephthah then to Vow the Sacrificing of his Daughter, was so far from being accor∣ding to the Law, and Acceptable to God, that it was an Abomination to him.

Yea, some of the very Pagans themselves thought such-an Act as this to be Unlawful: Thus Plutarch tells us that Agesilaus being commanded in a Dream to Sacrifice his Daughter, refused to do it; and that when Pelopidas in a Vision was bid to Sacrifice a Virgin, he look'd on it as a Severe and Impious Command. Agamemnon, it is true, Sacrificed his own Daughter, but even a Prophane and Atheistical Poet could blame him for it, crying out against his Supersti∣tious Religion, as the ill Motive which prompted him to so vile a Practice. Yea it is probable that This is the very Instance which I am now treating of: Iphigenia was Iephthah's Daughter, for the Greeks mistook Iphigenia for Iephthigenia, which plainly sig∣nifies the Daughter of Jephthah: And Aga∣memnon was mistaken for Iephthah, for he being a known Man in the Trojan Wars, which were in Iephthah's time (as the Ma∣sters of Chronology have agreed) it was easie for the Poets to take one Warlike∣man or Great Captain for another, and to represent the History of Iephthah under the Name of Agamemnon (as I shall shew at an∣other time, it was the common use of the Poets, to disguise Passages of Sacred Hi∣story with Fables and Prophane Names,) particularly as for this Sacrificing of his

Daughter, it being so Remarkable but yet so Infamous an Act, it is certain that it was spread abroad and known among the Na∣tions, and could not but be abhorred by all Persons of Sobriety and Reason: So far is it from being allowed by a Particular Law of God, as some pretend.

Again, There are Others, who that they may effectually prove the Lawfulness of this Fact, tell us, it was done by the particular Instinct of the Holy Spirit, that Iephthah was immediately stirred up by God to At∣chieve this singular Enterprize, which in others would have been unlawful. St. Ierom of old seem'd to be of this mind and Peter Martyr afterwards was enclined to think the same, but he presently corrected himself. And truly no less could be expected from him, for it is a very near approach to Blas∣phemy, to say that so Wicked a Perpetra∣tion was by favourable Instinct from God himself, especially when he hath so particu∣larly forbidden it, as you heard in the for∣mer particular. Indeed from what I deli∣vered there, this Bold Opinion is sufficiently confuted, for if Sacrificing his Daughter was downright Murther, and was a Breach of Moses's Law, and of the Law of Nature, then it is intolerable Folly and Presumption to plead for the Lawfulness of it. More∣over, if there had been here a Divine Im∣pulse, or a Particular Command from Hea∣ven (as in the Example of Abraham, who was bid to do what he did, and that for

Trial only) he would not have rent his Cloaths and been troubled, but he would have likewise check'd his Daughters Sorrow (as well as his own) by declaring that his Reso∣lution to Sacrifice her was from a particular Dictate which he received from Heaven: Thus we have reason to reject the Opinion of those Men who hold that Iephthah sinned not in Sacrificing his Daughter, for neither of the Arguments which they alledge have any Truth and Reality in them; there was no Express Law of God, nor any Divine Instinct in the case. Wherefore we may safely and confidently aver with the Great Iewish Antiquary before cited, That the Sacrifice which ••ephthah offered was not law∣ful, nor acceptable to God, but that on the contrary it was Unlawful and Sinful. And so most of the Antient Fathers of the Church, who have spoken of this, do assert.

But here we may be thought to be re∣duced to a great streight in maintaining this Post; for if all Humane Slaughter was forbid by God, and is against Nature, and is utterly Unlawful and Vicious, how came Iephthah to commit this Fact? What made him act so Strangely? What could be the Motive to so Horrid an Enterprize? If it was so Gross an Enormity, how can we think this Great Man, this Judge with his High Priest and Priests about him, yea and the whole Sanhedrim to advise him, could be guilty of such a Vile and Notorious Crime as this?

Here then I am to give an Account why and whence it was that Iephthah acted thus Extravagantly and (as it may seem) profli∣gately; and I hope it will not be offensive, if I take liberty to dissent from the gene∣rality of Writers in this matter: For though I agree with those who hold that Iephthah sacrificed his Daughter, and that he did very ill in it, yet I differ from them in the Ground and Occasion of it; which is the thing I will now insist upon, and for which I chiefly designed this Discourse.

They attribute it to the Corruption of that Age, telling us that very Strange and Exor∣bitant things were done in those days, as the Book of Iudges expresly relates. And moreover they add that Iephthah herein followed the Examples that had been be∣fore him, for Humane Sacrifices were com∣monly offered by the Heathens that dwelt in Palestine, Deut. 12. 31. Their Sons and their Daughters they burned in the fire to their Gods, and particularly we read that the Ammonites offered their Children to Moloch in the Flames. Nay it cannot be denied that this Horrid and Bloody Idolatry was practised by some of the Israelites a little before Iephthah's time, Iudges 1. 21. com∣pared with Psalm 106. 37. Much less can it be denied, that afterwards there were fre∣quent Examples of this Effusion of Humane Blood, and Sacrificing of Men and Women, of which I shall speak in another place. But though Example is strong, and hath a

very great Empire over our Minds, yet I cannot be induced to believe that this was the Ground of Iephthah's Sacrificing his Daughter. This Good and Vertuous Man (for he is signally represented to future Ages as such by St. Paul) would not be led to this Flagitious Action by the Example of some Wild Insidels, or a few Besotted Israelites, who were forsaken of God, and became professed Votaries to the Infernal Daemons, and having given Themselves, proceeded to offer their Children (who were parts of them) to these Hellish Ghosts. I cannot think therefore that this was the reason of Iephthah's committing this worst kind of Homicide: This was not, this could not be Motive strong enough to prevail upon this Worthy Man, this Noble Hero; he would easily have baffled such a Scandalous and Horrid Temptation as this. As bad as those times were, as degenerate as Israel was in those days, it is not credible that such a Person, and in such Circumstances (which could not but make him willing to be dis∣engaged from his Vow, if it were possible) would tamely follow the Example of the most Accursed Idolaters, of the worst and vilest Miscreants in the World, and inhu∣manely Massacre his only Child. This must not, this cannot enter into our thoughts, unless at the same time we banish thence all sober Reason.

But they likewise impute it to the Igno∣norance of that Age. The Priests, say they,

were Strangers to their own Law, and knew it not. Hence it was that they thought that by the Law in Lev. 27. 28. Iephthah's Daughter was a devoted Person, and so could not be redeemed, but must be put to Death. I do not wholly exclude the Ignorance of that Age, which was an attendant (if not a Cause in part) of their General Corruption: But it is highly improbable that none of the Sacred Function should understand this Case that was before them, as Dr. Lightfoot re∣presents it, The Sanhedrim was now sitting, and there was the Priesthood attending on the Ark at Shiloh, and yet is Israel now so little acquainted with the Law, that neither the Sanhedrim nor the Priests can resolve Jeph∣thah that his Vow might have been redeemed. I cannot perswade my self that they could All of them err so grosly, and that in so plain a Matter, wherein they were directed not only by the Positive Law of God, but by that of Nature and Reason. But I rather think that there was more of Neglience than Ignorance in the present Miscarriage: The Priests of that degenerate Age were grown Careless and Unconcerned: They were not Solicitous to instruct this Prince aright, and to conduct his Conscience by right and steady Measures in this present Case of the Vow which he had made. They could not (as I conceive) be ignorant of the Unlawfulness of this Vow, and of the Greater Unlawf••lness of putting his Daughter to Death: But herein they were

most shamefully defective, that they neg∣lected to inform this Doubting and Mis∣guided Man, and to convince him of the Unreasonableness of his too forward Zeal.

Which brings me to that which I intend more largely to insist upon, viz. The True Source and Original of this Extravagant and Bloody Act of our Renowned Ieph∣thah. It was, as I apprehend, his too For∣ward Zeal that pushed him on to this un∣happy Undertaking. To make good this Assertion, I must tell you that I have this Idea of-him, That he was a Man of a very Religious and Pious Disposition; which mani∣fested it self at his first publick appearing for his Country-men; for I observe that he then applied himself to ask Council of God, Iudges 10. 17. 11. 11. When he undertook to fight their Battles, this was the first thing he did. He opened the Campagne well, for he began with God. Likewise I take no∣tice that he shewed himself very Conscien∣tious in his Treaty with and offers of Peace to the Ammonites before he proceeded to any Acts of Hostility, Chap. 11. 12, &c. He was pleased to give them some account of his marching against them, though he needed not have done it: He laboured to convince them that it was a Just and Lawful War which he was undertaking, and ac∣cordingly he sacredly appeals to the Lord as Iudge in this Quarrel, v. 27. When he had thus quitted himself like a Religious and Iust Man, it is expresly said, The Spirit of

the Lord came upon him, v. 29. That is, he was extraordinarily stir'd up by God, and animated to engage the Enemy, and to re∣duce them to Obedience and Submission. A Person of so Holy and Pious Inclinations was assisted and blessed by God in a signal and eminent manner. But behold yet an∣other Argument and Demonstration of his Godly Mind, viz. His Solemn Vow that he made; for this proceeded purely from a Good and Religious Heart, from an ardent Desire and Intention of giving Honour to God upon his obtaining a Victory. All these Instances are Proofs of what I asserted, That this Mighty Man of War (as he is called) was a Man of as great Religion and Goodness. Which is farther confirmed by the Testimony of the Infallible‖ Apo∣stle, who reckons this Iephthah among the Holy Patriarchs, Prophets and Eminent Ser∣vants of God, whose Faith had made them known and Famous in the World.

Having thus laid my Foundation (which is grounded on the History of Iephthah both in the Old and New Testament) I am to raise my Superstructure, which is this, This Conscientious and Good Man having with a Pious Intention made a Vow, but having been Rash and Indiscreet in the Wording and Framing of it, was unhappily drawn into a Snare, and his own Religious Temper and Active Zeal hastned him into it: And this I take to be the true Spring and Motive of his strange Acting, i. e. Of

his bereaving his Daughter of her Life. He being a Person of a very Sensible Con∣science, of a Soft and Tender Spirit, thought verily that he ought to perform his Vow, and accordingly did so. In this he shewed a very Singular Zeal, but not according to knowledge: So that we have reason to con∣clude, that he sinned out of Blind Zeal to perform his Promise and Vow which he had solemnly made to God. This was a great Fault, an heinous Error, but it was one on the right hand, and therefore the more ex∣cusable. This invites me to mention his Name and Memory with Honour, and to remember that he was one of those who are righteous overmuch (as the Wise Man speaks:) He was too Zealous in pursuit of his Vow, although it was a Rash and unad∣vised one as to the manner of it, and here∣upon his Innocent Daughter became a Victim, viz. for the sake of his Vow. In∣deed his case was to be pitied and lamented, for his Fault was the product of his Well∣meaning, and of his Great Care to keep a Good Conscience. He saw it was usual with Good Men to make Vows, and in a mistaken Imitation of them he turned a Solemn Votary, and in the sight and hear∣ing of all Persons that were about him, as well as before the All seeing God, promised the Sacrificing of his Daughter, for it was so in effect, she being included in whatso∣ever cometh forth of the doors of his House to meet him. The Sense of this most Solemn

Act of Religion (for such a Vow is, which is a Promissory Oath made unto God) was so vigorous on his mind, that he could not possibly divert the thoughts of it, nor per∣swade himself that he could any ways be excused from acting according to what he had vowed. This is to be imputed to the Reverence of an Oath, which hath ever been very Great and Awful.

We see in that Noted Instance of the Gibeonites what was thought concerning this kind of Obligation, though it was by Craft and Imposture: We have sworn unto them by the Lord God of Israel: Now therefore we may not touch them, Joshua 9. 19. It is not improbable that Iephthah bore this very In∣stance in his mind, and indiscreetly made use of it on this occasion which I am now speaking of: He thence confirmed himself in the Apprehensions he had of that Invio∣lable Tye he was under by reason of his Vow. He thought it was so far from being a Sin to keep his Promise made to God, that he reckoned it his indispensable Duty: And this false Perswasion hurried him on to this vile Act. So in other Examples in the Sacred History, we see what a Regard and Reverence Men had of an Oath or Vow, yea though it was in it self unlawful: Thus Saul having rashly but solemnly vowed in the day of Battle, that the Person should die who tasted any Food before the Pursuit was quite over; his own Son Ionathan, who had so signalized his Valour at that

time, by vanquishing Threescore thousand Philistines, had like to have been a Sacrifice (as Iephthah's Daughter here) after the Vi∣ctory, because Saul was so Religious and Austere (for so he would be thought to be) in observing his Oath, notwithstanding he was so plainly excused from the Obligation of it, as to his Son Ionathan, by reason of his known Circumstances, which were his Ignorance of his Fathers Oath, and the Ne∣cessity which he then lay under of taking some small Portion of Food to support him when he was so Faint and Hungry. The like Erroneous and Superstitious Conceit of an Oath, the Iews, but especially the Pharisees, had in our Saviour's time, who therefore sharply reproves them, Mark 7. 11. They imagined that their Vow of Corban ex∣tinguished their Obligation to other Com∣mands, as Honouring their Parents, and the like. So we read that Herod, by a lavish Oath, promised Herodias to grant her what∣ever she would ask, and therefore forsooth for his Oaths sake he must needs kill St. Iohn. This, though it was a mere Pretence in Herod, shews that a Vow or Oath hath always been held Sacred; else he could not have made use of this Pretence, viz. That he was bound by his Oath, and there∣fore could not be loosed from it. This hath in all Ages been held a most Sacred Tye; especially Vows, which are Oaths more immediately made to God, have been esteemed such. Whence we find that the

Best and Holiest Men have always been very observant of the Religious Obligation of a Vow, and have been exceeding careful to pay God their Vows which their Lips have uttered. It is no wonder then that Ieph∣thah, a Person so Religiously disposed was very careful, yea even to an Excess, to do the same. He had read in the Law, When thou shalt vow a Vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: And he was sensible that the willful Neglect of this is a Crime of a very heinous Nature, and that God is a severe Exactor of Vows, and is wont to avenge the Breach of them, by inflicting the greatest Judgments and Plagues imaginable. He knew that the Violation of Vows was no other than a Mocking of God, a Dissembling with Heaven, and an Act of Injustice and Un∣faithfulness towards our Maker.

Wherefore it is likely he thus argued with himself, though I know that the per∣forming of my Vow will be accompanied with Murther: Yet I consider likewise, that the not performing it will be attended with down-right Perjury. Seeing then there is a Necessity of Sinning one way or other, I resolve to choose the former, for though that be an Injury to my Daugh∣ter, yet the latter is a plain Affront to God. My Child is dear to me, but my God, my Father, is much more dear: Therefore 'tis be••••er to be Cruel than Im∣pious, to be Guilty of blood••••ed, than to

be Perjured and False to the Lord of Heaven and Earth. I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and I cannot go back, I must not reverse, I dare not revoke the Sacred Promise which I have made to the Al∣mighty, but my firm and unshaken purpose is to perform it. Thus the mistaken Sense of the Indissoluble Obligation which his Vow had laid upon him, ran him upon this fatal Rock. Iephthah could not but know, if he had seriously considered, that no Vow is Obligatory where the matter of it is unlawful; that what we Vow must be Honest, and in our Power, whereas this of killing his Daughter was neither; That the Force of that Obligation which goes along with a Vow or Oath, is from the Lawfulness of that thing which is vowed or Sworn; and therefore that he could not oblige himself to lay violent Hands on his Dear Relative, but that he having vowed it, and it being Unlawful in it self, he was obliged not to perform the Vow; besides that the Law of Natural Reason and Equity was a prior Obligation upon him. He should have considered that an Unlawful thing cannot possibly be made Lawful by the Interposition of a Vow; yea That it is a Double Sin to act unlawfully by vertue of a Vow, for there is not only the Sinful Vow, but the Sinful Act that follows it. But so blind and partial is good Mens Zeal sometimes, that they are not in a Capacity to attend to, at least not to

regulate themselves by the most Rational Principles that are offered ••••em. This was the Lot of our Unhappy Prince and Warrior, he had conquered the Ammonites, but could not vanquish his own Erroneous Conceptions, his Mistaken Zeal, his Mis∣guided Conscience. He knew that the Law forbad Humane Sacrifices, but he was so deluded as to believe that the Re∣ligion of a Vow superseded that Prohibition. Wherefore he goes on perversely in the Prosecution of his Rash Oath, and com∣mands the Poor Reprieved Virgin to be brought to the Altar, and there be offered up a Burnt-offering to the Lord.

Yea, I am enclined to believe he Sa∣crificed her with his own Hand; for it is not probable that the Priests would comply with him in so Extravagant and Inhumane a Demand as this, of Sacrificing his Daugh∣ter: And besides, he that was so Precise to keep his Vow according to the very Exact Wording of it, would not think himself excused from acting this part himself, see∣ing he had expresly vowed the doing of it in his own Person, if you rigorously inter∣pret the Words: I will offer it up, saith he, for a Burnt-Sacrifice. By which Words this Curious Man might really think he was obliged to be the Sacrificer himself. Which could not but be a great Aggra∣vation of his Fault, because he was a Fa∣ther, and so acted Unnaturally; becau••e she was his Daughter, nay, because he had

no other Child but her, which made it yet more Unnatural and Cruel, because he was a Layman, and so plainly usurped on the Office of the Priest. But mention none of these things to me, saith he, say not I am her Father, and she my Child, say not I am no Priest, and that I invade the Sacred Function: I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, I have Sacredly en∣gaged to offer up for a Burnt-offering what∣soever cometh forth of the doors of my House to meet me, and lo! this my Daughter met me, and therefore must be offered up by my hand. Who knows not that the Regal and Priestly Power have resided in the same Person? As I am a Ruler and Ma∣gistrate, I have Authority to use the Sword: And why may I not make use of it to slay a Sacrifice as well as to cut off Offenders, especially when I have sacredly promised to do the former? My Vow makes me a Priest: I need no other Ordination than this: This alone Capacitates me, nay Necessitates me to discharge this part of the Sacerdotal Office. Thus our well∣meaning Bigot is Punctual in pursuing his Solemn Vow, this he urgeth and insisteth upon, and the thoughts of it are so Ram∣pant in his Breast, that he will not be beaten off from it. Though he had‖ two months time to consider of this Case, yet he remained inflexible, and would by no means be prevailed with to call back his Rash Vow, but he broke through all to

keep it. The Cause of it was no other than what I have often suggested, namely, too Nice and Curious a Conscience: This thrust him on to act against the undeni∣able Laws of his Religion. Lest he should violate his Sacred Promise to God, he puts off the Nature and Pity of a Man. To make good his single Vow, he disre∣garded all the other Obligations of Reason and Religion. Such, such is the impetuous Force of a Misguided Mind, of a Disordered Zeal.

Having thus discovered the True Spring and Motive of Iephthah's Sacrificing his Daughter, I will offer something con∣cerning the Design of Providence, which ruled in this, as in all other Events and Actions, seem they never so Strange; and I will suggest what I think is the Proper Use that is to be made of this Extraordinary and Surprizing Occurrence. Though this Great Judge and Prince of Israel behaved himself thus unworthily, and no ways suitably to his Character, yet God was pleased to suffer this for Ends not unworthy of his Divine Wis∣dom and Holiness. For by this Remark∣able Example he thought fit to admonish us concerning our making of Vows, that if at any time we enter upon this Solemn Act of Religion, we be careful to do it with great Circumspection and Considera∣tion. God permitted Iephthah's Daughter to be Sacrificed, saith an Antient Pious

Father, To teach Men for the future, not to make Vows to God indefinitely, as you re∣member Iephthah's Vow ran. These Large, Unlimited and General Vows are dangerous, and prove a Snare unto us: Wherefore in this respect we ought to use great Caution and Prudence. With this agrees that of Theodoret, God (saith he) to remind others to be careful of their Vows, and to teach them to make them Discreetly, hindred not Jephthah from putting his Daugh∣ter to death. By this Notable Instance in Sacred Story, he would condemn all Pre∣cipitancy and Temerity in Vowing and Swearing, and in making Solemn Promises before him: And he would warn the future Ages of the World to perform these Acts of Religion with previous Con∣sultation and serious Premeditation. For here he sheweth us what is the Punishment of Rash Oaths, and Undue and Unlawful Vows, that we may learn to avoid them. Here we see that the Fault of Iephthah's Rash Vowing was punished in the Untimely Death of his Daughter.

And as we are by this Example taught to avoid all Rash and Unlawful Oaths and Vows, so, when we have made them, not to keep them. There is a great deal of Iephthah's Blind Zeal in the World, too Nice a Conscience in some things, and too Rash and Bold in others. Nothing is

more Sacred than an Oath, and yet there may be a Superstitious and Undue Re∣verence of it. This appears plainly in Mens fondly pretending the indispensible Obli∣gation of some Oaths, whilst at the same time they have no regard to others which are certainly Obligatory to them. They speak the same Language that Iephthah did, telling us that they have opened their mouths unto the Lord, and they cannot go back, i. e. They plead the Force of their Solemn Engagements and Tyes, and refuse to unbind themselves (though it be in their Power) and thereby plunge them∣selves into Mischief, and endanger not only their own, but (with our Resolute, yet Nice Iephthah) other Persons Lives and Fortunes. This Rash Iuror speaks to us all to take warning by his Fatal Cir∣cumstances, and to be at great Pains to enlighten our Minds, but especially to in∣voke the Divine Light and Aid: He calls to us not to Debauch our Consciences by entertaining False Notions and Conceptions of a Vow. He remains an Example on Record of an Imprudent and Unlawful Votary, and likewise of the Dismal Effects of his being so. He not only reminds us that we ought to be extreamly careful not to make any Rash Vows or Unlawful Oaths, but that we ought not to think our selves tyed by them when we have made them. He is a constant Monitor to teach Men that their Unlawful Oaths and Promises

oblige them only to break them, and that this is acceptable to God, and just and equita∣ble in it self.

Lastly, This Notable Instance informs us that Real Vertue and Goodness do not always exempt Men from doing some very ill things. Sometimes we shall see Ver∣tuous Persons undertake and pursue with great Warmness what their Misinformed Consciences have put them upon, though it contradicts the Laws of God and Men. What Iephthah did was out of Simplicity and an Honest Mind, and therefore it was not inconsistent with Faith, which we find him praised for in the Catalogue of the Antient and Famous Worthies by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews: And truly there are other Great Offenders besides our Iephthah mentioned in that Panegyrick. So it is, the Sacred History acquaints us by enumerating sundry Instances that Persons beloved of God, and of the greatest Integrity, have been guilty of the most heinous Miscarriages. Especially it may be observed of those that are very Active and Warm in their Religion, that they sometimes are subject to some Un∣warrantable Bigotry, which unhappily leads or rather drives them to something worse. Particularly we see this in the Example before us, and let us mind the Design of Heaven in it. This Renowned Warrior and Judge was suffered by the most Wise Disposer of all Events to c••mmit this great

Folly, that we may be convinced of the In∣sufficiency of Humane Strength, that we may see that the Best Men egregiously offend in some things, that they are a Compound of Spirit and Flesh, half Angel and half Brute, and that it may appear to the World that there is no Perfect and Consummate Vertue in this Life. This is the Conception I have of Iephthah's Case; but every one is left to his Liberty to frame what other Notions of it he pleaseth.

Notes

• ‖

  Letannoth, ad lament an∣dum, à tanan lamentari, R. Iarchi & Chald. Paraphr.
• Ad confabulandum, à tanah narrare, confab••l••ri. R. ••im∣chi, Iun. & Trem. Buxto••s.
• ‖

  Arias Mon∣tanus, Pag∣nin, Vata∣bl••s, Estius.
• Iunius, Lud. de Di∣eu, Brough∣ton, Perkins Drusius, Grotius, Heinsius, Selden.
• V. 35.
• V. 35.
• V. 36.
• V. 37.
• V. 38.
• V. 39.
• ‖

  Ioseph. Ant. Iud. l. 5. c. 9.
• Iustin Mart. Quaest. 99. Tertull. cont. Marc. 3. 4. Hieronym. Epist. 34. ad Iulian. chrysost. hom. de Iephthâ. Ambros. de Offic. Nazian••. Orat. 6. de Maccab. Augustin. de civ. Dei. l. 1. c. 21.
• ‖

  Luther, Peter Mar∣••r, Salia∣nus, Serari∣us, Menochi∣us, à Lapide, Lud. Cap∣pellus, &c.
• Dr. Light∣••oot in his Chronicle of the T••nes of the Old Testament.
• Diatrib. de Voto Iepht.
• De Iure Nat. & Gent. l. 4. c. 11.
• In vit. Pelopidae.
• Tantum religio po∣tuit suade∣re malorum Lucret. l. 1.
• Epist. ad Iulian.
• Antiq. Iud. l. 5. c. 9.
• Ch. 11. 1.
• ‖

  Heb. 11. 32
• Gen. 28. 20. Num. ••••. 2.
• Mat. 14. 9.
• Deut. 23. 21.
• V. 34.
• ‖

  V. 38. 39.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Just. Mart. Quaest. & Resp. ad Or∣thod.