had carefully studied what is contained in the law of Moses on the subject of vows, he need not have fallen into a mistake on so important a subject, a mistake which probably embittered the remainder of his life, and that of his daughter too. Perhaps this may be said in justification of Jephthah, if he made a mistake, as is here assumed: From the time of Joshua to the time of Jephthah, something more than two centuries, we find but little said about vows, compared with what we find in the time of Saul, David, and Solomon, and onward to the captivity. So Jephthah had not the opportunity and advantage of seeing on what occasions others had made vows, and how they kept them.

We find vows made in scripture by almost every sort of characters, from the humble and devout Hannah to the ambitious and corrupt Absalom. By having many instances of vows made by others before one, with their results, one might be guided when and how to make a vow for himself, and how to fulfil it. Jephthah had no such advantage, and therefore had to be guided by his own interpretation of the law concerning vows, and in view of the trouble he got himself into by making a vow, we may conclude he did not very thoroughly understand the subject. We think he made a mixture of the vow called singular, and the one called cherem, which devotes to utter destruction. Very likely he had in his eye Lev. xxvii., more especially verses 28, 29. Perhaps it should for another reason not seem strange to us that Jephthah should make a mistake in such an important matter, for we are told how he was banished from his paternal home, and what his manner of life was from that time to the time he was invited to become leader of his own people in delivering them from their oppressors. We may well ask, what opportunity he had to be instructed in things of a religious nature? Indeed we may ask : Did he have a manuscript copy of the law in his possession, which he might read at his leisure? We know that in his day copies of the law were scarce and not a little expensive. We are to bear in mind that there was nothing in the form of print in the

us.

days of Jephthah, nor any writing except the law of Moses; at least none that we know of, which would be reliable and safe for giving religious instruction. As Jephthah seems, however, to have been well acquainted with the book of Moses, as shown by the message he sent to the king of Ammon, we must conclude he had seen and read, or at least had heard, what is contained in the law concerning vows, and the fulfilment of them. But the commentators agree in saying that he seems better acquainted with the historical parts of Moses than with the preceptive. Let us, then, proceed to look at the record in the book of Judges (xi.), and see how this narrative of Jephthah and his vow is presented to When Jephthah had been duly chosen by his people to become their leader in the work of delivering them from their oppressors (vs. 4-11), when Jehovah had confirmed the choice by giving of his spirit to qualify and encourage him for the undertaking (vs. 29), and moreover when Jephthah had humbly and sincerely sought guidance and success from the Lord (vs. 11, 27), then he paused very unnecessarily to make this vow which cost him so much trouble, and has perplexed the world ever since to know what he really meant. He makes his vow and says: "If Jehovah will give success, then the comer-forth out of my house to meet me on my return in peace shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer a burnt-offering." Thus the vow stands while he is gone on his expedition, which probably did not occupy many days. He returns, having had great success. The daughter meets him with the liveliest expressions of joy. The father rends his clothes, and says: "Alas, my daughter!" Who shall account for the entirely opposite feelings expressed by them on such an occasion? Can we suppose the daughter knew anything of the vow of the father? Did not the father know what he had purposed in his heart from the first to do? Had he not had time to think of the possibility that his daughter might meet him first? Why, then, is he so agitated and sad? Why should he be shaken in his purpose if it was a good one? What can he mean when he says concerning the

daughter, thou hast brought me very low? He cannot mean that he was brought low by being overpowered and subdued by his enemies. Such a meaning the word has in some places, as in Deborah's song. Was he not thinking of being brought low by having his name cut off in the earth by leaving no posterity? Was not this considered a being brought low in his day by every one, and dreaded as a great misfortune? What can Jephthah mean by saying of his daughter thou art one of them that trouble me? She surely meant no such thing, but manifestly the opposite. Was Jephthah thinking of having the hope of happiness with his daughter dashed as in a moment when he thought of his vow? The Hebrew word here used to express trouble is not the one Job used when he said trouble came to him though he was trying to live religiously in the sight of his Maker, nor like that used when it is said: "man is of few days and full of trouble." It is a word expressive of trouble arising from sin on our part, as when Achan proved a trouble to Israel by what he did in bold transgression of what had been expressly forbidden; and as Saul troubled Israel and endangered the life of his son Jonathan by his rash words. Jephthah says he had opened his mouth to the Lord, and he could not go back. He had indeed opened his mouth, but was it done wisely? Moses opened his mouth at one time, and it went very ill with him. in consequence of what he said. Elihu charges Job with opening his mouth in folly, and uttering words without knowledge. The word here used by Jephthah is the same as used by Elihu in speaking of Job's opening his mouth in folly

Perhaps Jephthah began to be conscious that he had not been wise and considerate in what he had said, and used one of the words commonly used to express hasty and forbidden speech. There are three such words in Hebrew, occurring a few times only. The daughter seems not to know what the father had said in opening his mouth to the Lord, until this point of time. It is probable the father now informed the daughter of the substance of his vow. How he explained

the vow and how she understood it, is not very clear to us. The fact that the daughter demanded two months for consideration before anything further was done, would seem to show that she was not absolutely at the father's disposal. Did the daughter expect that at the end of two months her life would be sacrificed, and did she spend those two months in composing her mind to peace in view of that great and most solemn event; or was her purpose to consider whether to submit to the vow or not? At the end of the specified time the daughter returns with her mind made up; but what was done next is the important thing to decide. It is said the father fulfilled the vow which he had made concerning the daughter; but the question is, what had he vowed to do with her? All the commentators agree in saying, she was an amiable, dutiful, and pious daughter. We accept the statement as true. Such being the fact, what lawful right had the father to take the life of such a character? We should bear in mind that the vow devoting to destruction, applied only to the wicked. Such a vow was designed only for the most wicked, who were thereby made an example to others not to transgress, and fall victims to such utter destruction. Is there an instance in all the Bible of an intelligent Israelite, a true and sincere worshipper of God, such as Jephthah in the chapter before us seems to have been, doing such a thing as to make a vow of this destructive sort? Long after this we read of king Manasseh doing something like this, but he is strongly reproved in the Bible for what he did. We read also of a king of Moab who offered his oldest son a sacrifice on the city wall; but this was not done to Jephthah's God, and it excites in us no other feeling than horror and disgust at the cruelty and the sin of the unnatural deed. Milman, speaking of Jephthah, calls him a barbarous and fierce freebooter. Professor Palfrey, speaking of Sampson, calls him a wild compound of the buffoon and the profligate. Perhaps it is not well to speak thus of scripture characters, after we have the decision of the Most High (see Heb. xi. 32) that he accepted them at last, notwith

standing all their faults and follies. In the scripture record, Jephthah stands between Gideon and Sampson; and their most prominent and public acts seem to be under divine direction and guidance. Why may we not conclude the same of Jephthah, and that he would not be left to do a thing often forbidden in scripture? Milman, John Scott, the Comprehensive Commentary, yea, the stream of interpreters say, that if Jephthah sacrificed his daughter, it is a solitary instance in the Bible. On the supposition that Jephthah made a sacrifice of his daughter, will the commentators tell us with some definiteness when it was done, and by whose hand it was done? Did he go to Shiloh, as Elkanah did, and make his offering at the tabernacle, as the law prescribed to all who would fulfil their vows acceptably? Did he engage a priest to make the offering for him, or did he do the thing himself? We know what was done to king Saul for assuming the office of priest, and also to king Uzziah; but Jephthah did not know of these unlawful acts, and so could not be warned by them. But if this transaction was done at the tabernacle, and Jephthah engaged a priest to make his offering, the priest would have known how an offering should be made in order to be acceptable to God. The question is: Would an intelligent and devout Hebrew priest make an offering to God of such a person as we suppose the daughter of Jephthah to have been? Can one show us anything approaching to it in all the Bible? If this was not done at the tabernacle as the law prescribed, but in some irregular and unprescribed way, then how can we suppose that it met with any favorable regard from God? Is it said, in reply, that the patriarchs erected altars on their own premises, and made offerings to God, and that he signified his acceptance of them? The answer is: Jephthah was not a patriarch, nor did he live in the patriarchal age, but under the Mosaic dispensation, according to which offerings to God were to be made at the tabernacle and temple, and by a priest, in order to be accepted. Milman lays stress on the fact that Jephthah would not be likely to go to the tabernacle then at