ESV Global Study Bible :: Footnotes for Judges 11

Judg 11:1–3 Jephthah was a mighty warrior, but his illegitimacy caused his half brothers to force him out of his father’s house. He attracted worthless fellows (v. 3; compare 2 Chron. 13:7), which indicates a weak personal character.

Judg 11:6 Come and be our leader. God did not “raise up” Jephthah, as he had previous judges (3:9; 15; 4:6; 6:14). The people appointed a leader without seeking God’s approval—another sign of their increasing rebellion.

Judg 11:8 that you may go with us and fight. Compare the language later used by the Israelites to ask Samuel for a king: “that our king may . . . go out before us and fight” (1 Sam. 8:20). In both cases, even though God granted it, the request was inappropriate. God, not any judge or any king, was to be Israel’s commander in war.

Judg 11:11 Jephthah spoke all his words before the Lord. Jephthah displayed a strange mixture of faith and foolishness. While he acknowledged God (see vv. 21; 23; 27; 30–31; 12:3), overall his foolishness seemed to outweigh his faith (see note on 11:31).

Judg 11:12–28 In an impressive speech, Jephthah answered the Ammonite charge (v. 13) that Israel had unlawfully seized the disputed territory. Jephthah asserted that “the Lord, the God of Israel” was himself the one who had displaced these peoples (vv. 21, 23, 24). Israel was not an aggressor (v. 15) but merely a recipient of the Lord’s generosity. Sihon, king of the Amorites, had taken some of the Ammonite territory, and then Israel had taken Sihon’s territory (see Num. 21:25–26). And the Ammonites never really had claim to the land to begin with; rather, it was the land of the Amorites (Judg. 11:19–22). Finally, it was a little late to be challenging Israel’s claim to the land in any case, since 300 years had passed since the events in question (v. 26). Jephthah ended by appealing to God to judge between the two sides.

Judg 11:17–22 The review of the past refers to events in the wilderness described in Num. 20:14–21. All the territory refers to the limits of the Amorites’ land, precisely what the Ammonites claimed was theirs in Judg. 11:13 (compare Num. 21:24).

Judg 11:24 Chemosh was the Moabites’ god (1 Kings 11:7, 33); elsewhere, the Ammonites’ god was Molech (1 Kings 11:7) or Milcom (1 Kings 11:5, 33). However, Ammon and Moab were closely associated, as both were descended from Lot (Gen. 19:37, 38). The two nations likely shared cultural and religious heritages, and Chemosh may have been considered stronger than Molech/Milcom.

Judg 11:29 the Spirit of the Lord was upon. See note on 14:6.

Judg 11:31 whatever comes out. The wording here would indicate that Jephthah intended to offer some animal as a burnt offering. However, the grammar also allows for “whoever” (see esv footnote), in which case Jephthah would have intended to offer a human sacrifice all along. If so, what surprised him was not that he had to sacrifice a person, but that it was his daughter. Human sacrifice was strictly forbidden in Israel (Lev. 18:21; 20:2; Deut. 12:31; Ezek. 20:30–31). Yet, Jephthah’s foolishness drove him to make such a vow (see note on Judg. 11:39).

Judg 11:35 I cannot take back my vow. Vows were solemn affairs, made only to God. People were not forced to take them, but, if they did, they had to be kept, under normal circumstances (Deut. 23:21–23; Eccles. 5:4–5). But any vow that would result in sin was not binding (Lev. 5:4–6). The law did not require Jephthah to follow through with killing his daughter.

Judg 11:39 who did with her according to his vow. Most likely this means Jephthah literally sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering. Another interpretation is that Jephthah dedicated his daughter to permanent virginity, as a figurative sacrifice (see references to her uniqueness [v. 34] and virginity [vv. 37–40]). This would be a tragedy for her, as she would bear no children, and also for Jephthah, whose family line would come to an end. Some support for this comes from Jephthah’s speech in vv. 12–28, which shows enough knowledge of Israel’s history to imply that he might have stopped short of literally sacrificing his own child.