LordReed:
LMAO! It's so funny that you are using semantics to try and wriggle your way out of this.

LordReed:
This sentence:
"Think twice before you co-sign a loan, no matter who it is", is a prime example that it can refer to a person so just stop this line of argument, kole werk.

NNTR:
Its actually you that makes it funny, seeing you hiding from the glaring truth

Judges 11:30-31
30And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord:
“If you give the Ammonites into my hands,
31whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s,
and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”'

If Judges 11:31 had a human being in mind, and if it wanted to refer to a person, as you want to argue is the case, then, going by and even parroting your example, it would be written as:
whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the Lord’s,
and I will sacrifice who it is, as a burnt offering.”'

The absence of "who it is" in Judges 11:31, along with the grammatical structure and word construction indicates, an animal is what was in the mind of Jephthah, not a human being.

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

LordReed:
You are the one saying it can't refer to a human being therefore he didn't burn his daughter. The argument stands, he burnt his daughter just as he promised his god your semantic dance won't change the meaning of what we can see korokoro.

NNTR:


Smh, I give up. Blind as a bat.

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

In your quackness, dumbness and pointless self, you fail to grasp and understand that God is completely against humans, being offered up as a dead burning sacrifice. Get this fact and truth set in the bone framework enclosing your brain please

Look at you, making a fool of yourself playing very hard trying to explain a non-existent event by proof-texting one single verse of the bible and another single verse.

Duh, did king Josiah say he made the sacrifices to God? Answer nah. Smh.

If anyone wants to confirm they can check any concordance, to see that, it was desecrate (i.e. inverse of sacrifice) that king Josiah did

Its only an arrant nonsense, fake paistor like you, who wouldnt know that king Josiah's act of desecration (i.e. embarrassed the bad priests by killing them all and leaving them as sacrifices on their fake gods' altars) was prophesied well before he was born

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

DeepSight:


And this is a response to something so self-evidently fundamental to the Christian faith - the indisputable fact that Christ is said to have been offered up as a sacrifice for sins?

In response to that being pointed out, you shamefully attempt to pretend the poser is too stupid to countenance, and accuse the poster of being "blind as a bat," while therefore throwing up your hands in surrender.

Cringe-worthy, but nothing new.

jamesid29:

2 Chronicles 18:2

DeepSight:


Discussing with NNTR, you will find that when you assert that two plus two is four, you will be required to actually draw two apples on one side, then draw two apples on the other side, and count them and show that there are now four apples. Sadly, after doing this, you will find this poster repeatedly ask you just how two plus two is actually four. Poker faced, this poster will say you have shown no such thing, and at the last minute is likely to insult you for saying that you have shown that two plus two is four.

jamesid29:

Actually it is wayyizbaḥ. The root word for wayyizbaḥ is zabah hence the "strong number".
The form wayyizbaḥ only occurs about 15times, two of which are in 2kings and 2chronicles.

You can pick up any good interlinear Bible to confirm.
Even the link he(pastorAi) posted confirms it as well

PastorAIO:


Followers of yhwh seem to be the only people who will see inconsistencies in a story and not suspect mendacity.

Let me pause there abeg, although there is a lot more to say.

tctrills:
We learn of Jephthah in Judges 11 who sacrificed his daughter. Was it an act of righteousness or murder?

tctrills:
We learn of Jephthah in Judges 11 who sacrificed his daughter. Was it an act of righteousness or murder?

Acehart:
Greetings,

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.
-Judges 11:31(KJV)

It's a good question you asked. But you missed out on something- the meaning of the word "for". I see from your response to some personalities here that you have substituted or given the wrong meaning to the word "for": you have replaced it was the word "as". You say, "I will offer it up as a burnt offering".

The preposition "for" in the Hebrew language has at least 14 translations. The best fit for the verse is בִּמקוֹם, instead of or כְּנֶגֶד, as against. Let's see this example: I will seize your allowances instead of flogging you. Instead here means "taking the place of something else". Sometimes we use the word in the English language is indicate replacement or substitution.

When you understand the full implication of Jephthah's vow, you would conclude that he was rash, and running contrary to the will of God. He wanted to institute his will above God's will. Why do I say this?

1. All burnt offerings from Genesis 2 to Jephthat's day involved the sacrifice of the male firstling of cattle, sheep, or goat- A shadow of the sacrifice of God's firstborn, Christ Jesus. Jephthah tried to be like many men, who substituted something instead of the instituted burnt offering laws; Cain was rejected because he offered the fruit of the ground instead of a firstling from the flock, Aaron's sons offered "strange fire" instead of the fire from the altar and paid with their lives, Elijah's altar was destroyed because he offered a burnt offering at Camel instead of Jerusalem, Saul was rejected because he offered an animal (as a sacrifice) from Amalek instead of Bethlehem, and Uzziah was struck with leprosy because he usurped the prerogatives of the priest. All levitical ordinances can never be replaced by the will of man.

2. The Bible shows us that God's people offered an animal sacrifice after warfare and according to God's prescription. We see this in the Book of Joshua after Joshua conquered Ai: He built it according to what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses - Joshua 8:31. When Jephthah said, "and I will offer it up for a burnt offering", one would think it referred to an animal. Only until his daughter was seen that one would see the true intention of Jephthah- revenge.

Since he intended to sacrifice a man, perhaps his half-brother, and that wasn't feasible. Then the best way to replace a burnt offering would be to give an equivalent- prevent his daughter from having offspring, as a sacrifice of a young calf is to offer it together with its offspring.

PastorAIO:


2 Chronicles 18:2
After some years he went down to Ahab in Samaria. And Ahab killed an abundance of sheep and oxen for him and for the people who were with him, and induced him to go up against Ramoth-gilead.

I can see where the confusion is. The case actually still remains the same. Why?

Because when Way yiz Bah is translated to mean Sacrifice it refers to a ritual killings that is done as an inducement to another person.

When I kill a goat on a deity's shrine it is not just any killing but a killing that is done in order to appease, influence, induce the deity to be well disposed towards me.

A murder, or a judicial killing cannot ever be a Way yiz bah. If I kill a goat because the goat was vexing me for some reason or the other then that is NOT wayyizbah. But if I kill the goat as an offering to someone or something then that is Way yiz bah.

Ahab way-yiz-bah many sheep and oxen for his father in law in order to 'finesse' him, appease him, induce him, to want to go to war with him. This is the same way that a devotee will way-yiz-bah a sheep on the altar of a deity as an inducement to the deity to get the deity to well disposed towards him.
In other words Wayyizbah is a killing that is done for the purpose of offering inducements to someone or something else.

Josiah Wayyizbah the priests. That means that it was done with regards to a deity or some other entity.

jamesid29:


Interesting viewpoint. Just so I'm accurately getting your point.

Are you saying wayyizbah should no longer be thought of as a word that exclusively denotes a ritual sacrifice but should be taken more generally as a term to denote a killing done in other to induce/ appease someone. That person could either be human or a deity.

I'm i correct in my understanding of your position?

jamesid29:


Interesting viewpoint. Just so I'm accurately getting your point.

Are you saying wayyizbah should no longer be thought of as a word that exclusively denotes a ritual sacrifice but should be taken more generally as a term to denote a killing done in other to induce/ appease someone. That person could either be human or a deity.

I'm i correct in my understanding of your position?

PastorAIO:


Yes. or to reduce it to one word, an Offering.

NNTR:
Greetings to you too highly regarded

Inasmuch that this is a most unusual take and approach to Jephthah you have above put forward, permit me, to ask you the following questions please:
1. Do you accept it as true, that Jephthah wasnt familiar with and wasnt aware of Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10, Leviticus 18:21 and 2 Kings 21:6?
2. Do you believe that, in spite of Jephthah, being familiar with and aware of Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10, Leviticus 18:21 and 2 Kings 21:6, he so was still ready, prepared and determined to goes against the grain of Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10, Leviticus 18:21 and 2 Kings 21:6?
3. What do you believe, specifically is the action(s), Jephthah took or did, that worked in his favour and what consequently made him get the recognition and qualification to be listed in the 'Faith Hall of Fame', found in Hebrews 11?

DeepSight:




But this is the essence of a ritual sacrifice. You are going round in circles.

PastorAIO:


Yes. or to reduce it to one word, an Offering.

DeepSight:




But this is the essence of a ritual sacrifice. You are going round in circles.

PastorAIO:
2 Chronicles 18:2
After some years he went down to Ahab in Samaria. And Ahab killed an abundance of sheep and oxen for him and for the people who were with him, and induced him to go up against Ramoth-gilead.

I can see where the confusion is.

PastorAIO:
The case actually still remains the same. Why?

PastorAIO:
Because when Way yiz Bah is translated to mean Sacrifice it refers to a ritual killings that is done as an inducement to another person.

PastorAIO:
When I kill a goat on a deity's shrine it is not just any killing but a killing that is done in order to appease, influence, induce the deity to be well disposed towards me.

PastorAIO:
A murder, or a judicial killing cannot ever be a Way yiz bah

PastorAIO:
If I kill a goat because the goat was vexing me for some reason or the other then that is NOT wayyizbah. But if I kill the goat as an offering to someone or something then that is Way yiz bah.

PastorAIO:
Ahab way-yiz-bah many sheep and oxen for his father in law in order to 'finesse' him, appease him, induce him, to want to go to war with him. This is the same way that a devotee will way-yiz-bah a sheep on the altar of a deity as an inducement to the deity to get the deity to well disposed towards him.

PastorAIO:
In other words Wayyizbah is a killing that is done for the purpose of offering inducements to someone or something else.

PastorAIO:
Josiah Wayyizbah the priests. That means that it was done with regards to a deity or some other entity.

jamesid29:
Interesting viewpoint. Just so I'm accurately getting your point.

Are you saying wayyizbah should no longer be thought of as a word that exclusively denotes a ritual sacrifice but should be taken more generally as a term to denote a killing done in other to induce/ appease someone. That person could either be human or a deity.

I'm i correct in my understanding of your position?

PastorAIO:
Yes. or to reduce it to one word, an Offering.

jamesid29:
Please where did you get your translation from or did you come up with it on your knowledge?

Secondly, In view of 2 Chronicles 18:2, would you agree that the best way to translate the verb in that passage would be "to slaughter/kill"?
As to Sacrifice, might give a modern reader a different connotation of the text because of how we understand the word in our worldview. And to Offer could likewise mislead a modern reader into thinking he just gave him the animals.

Are we in agreement on this?
Please bear in mind biblical Hebrew does has words for offering & killing

DeepSight:
The final word on this matter is very simple. Propitiatory sacrifices were standard fare for Yahweh throughout the ages covered by the Old Testament. This in itself says quite enough: for the sensitive and enlightened soul must at once wonder at the spiritual and even rational basis for those practices. By what means was it ever suggested that animal sacrifices were appropriate to appease Yahweh in the first place. How is such not as pagan and barbaric as anything ever was.

Worse than all this, the fundamental rock on which the Christian faith is built is a further propitiatory sacrifice - this time of a human being - Jesus of Nazareth. How this is supposed to be something beautiful, graceful and sublime must eternally elude all people of conscience, good sense, genuine morality, integrity and humanity. The equivalent of an Aztec human sacrifice to appease a blood-thirsty deity and wash away the sins of humanity can never be something to be idealized. Not even the argument that Christ was not just human helps this any - for what sense can anyone derive from the spectre of a god entering the world in human form in order to enact a gory scene of blood propitiation to satisfy himself enough to pardon his creatures of the sinful nature he created them with.

The whole precept is at once nonsensical, devilish, pagan, barbaric and stinks of the worst kind of dark ritualism conceivable. That anyone would conceive of all of this as some sort of exalted purity is only explainable by the severe psychological delusion of humankind.

That is all there is to say.

PastorAIO:
No matter the calibre, whether ido-later or Ido-sooner, The point which seems to be flying over your head is that they were sacrificed!

Now it is possible that you are confused because of the bible translations that you are reading because the translators sanitised the text.

The Hebrew says that he Way yiz bah the priests. Way yiz bah means to sacrifice. Not to punish by death. To sacrifice.

If anyone wants to confirm they can see it in this concordance.

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/vaiyizbach_2076.htm

Genesis 31:54
HEB: וַיִּזְבַּ֨ח יַעֲקֹ֥ב זֶ֙בַח֙
NAS: Then Jacob offered a sacrifice
KJV: Then Jacob offered sacrifice
INT: offered Jacob A sacrifice

Genesis 46:1
HEB: בְּאֵ֣רָה שָּׁ֑בַע וַיִּזְבַּ֣ח זְבָחִ֔ים לֵאלֹהֵ֖י
NAS: to Beersheba, and offered sacrifices
KJV: to Beersheba, and offered sacrifices
INT: came to Beersheba and offered sacrifices to the God

Numbers 22:40
HEB: וַיִּזְבַּ֥ח בָּלָ֖ק בָּקָ֣ר
NAS: Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep,
KJV: And Balak offered oxen and sheep,
INT: sacrificed Balak oxen

everywhere in the Hebrew bible where you see wayyizbah they translate it as sacrifice. Only in 2Kings when Josiah sacrifices the priests that's when your translators deceive you and say 'slaughtered'. But Mendacity is what is to be expected. It shows that they know their evil but they want to hide it. Like you avoid points made and ramble nonsensically in the hope of derailing the point.
The point to be clear:
Josiah, Yhwh's favoured King, Sacrificed Priests on the altars.

NNTR:


The final word and point to be clear here, is that:
Josiah, YHWH's favoured King, slaughtered, the Priests gone bad, on their idolatrous altars, he burned the bones of these [pagan] priests on their altars.

He made a right divine judgment public spectacle of them, by desecrating their worthless bodies, on worthless altars, in their worthless gods' shrines

That is all, there is to say, to you and your alter-ego. loll.

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

Steep:
Why are you avoiding from vs 1 to19? quote them first

Do provide the evidence where yahweh commanded the children of Israel to offer human sacrifice.

@ bolded the word sacrifice was added by you.

2 Kings 23:10 And he defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech.

23:19 And all the houses also of the high places that were in the cities of Samaria, which the kings of Israel had made to provoke the Lord to anger, Josiah took away, and did to them according to all the acts that he had done in Bethel.
23:20 And he slew all the priests of the high places that were there upon the altars, and burned men's bones upon them, and returned to Jerusalem.

These priest were all involved in human and the king killed them upon their own altar.
sacrifice vv10, secondly the high places are not places were yahweh is worshiped, the high places were places that sacrifice to pagan gods were offered.

You mean this

Exodus 13:14 And it shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him, By strength of hand the LORD brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage:
13:15 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem.

This was a ceremonial practice in Israel to teach their descended how the Lord God killed all the firstborn of Israel but saved Israel.
Israel is God's firstborn. To redeem is to save or to deliver.
What happens when an Israelite is not able to redeem his son, then his son will continue to be in the service of the Lord

PastorAIO:
The word sacrifice was not added by me but rather was removed by you and by those ye ye bible versions that you picked. This is a further example of how the bible is distorted when redaction and translations are made.

The word in contention is WAY - YIZ- BAH. This word in Hebrew means ritual sacrifice. There is no other context in which it is used in the Hebrew language other than as religious ritual sacrifice.

If you don't believe me, look it up in a concordance:

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/vaiyizbach_2076.htm

If you can show me one other passage where way yiz bah did not mean a ritual sacrifice then I will send you 20 pounds.

DeepSight:
The argument about Jephtah, Josiah, et al - has nothing to do with my perspective, kindly note - if you are capable of noting.

DeepSight:
For me, the very fact of animal sacrifices to Yahweh in the OT and the alleged propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus in the NT are more than sufficient to conclude Yahweh as one of the most pagan, demonic, barbaric and darkly ritualistic deities of all time.

NNTR:

You see my dear friend, I give as good, even with added bonus, as much as I get, but when I do, you wince and class it as insults, loll.

Kk, here's the deal. Few questions to start with. I'll like to see your responses done in the same numbered up style, this allows be to see when, where, how and what question, you've answered, loll.
1. Please tell what does the name Jesus mean. Please pretty please tell
2. Who really is Jesus on Calvary that sacrificed?
3. The animal sacrifices to Yahweh served what purpose and why at all?
4. Explain and describe how you mean that Yahweh is one of the most pagan, demonic, barbaric and darkly ritualistic deities of all time?
5. What to your knowledge is the propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus in the NT neccesary?

DeepSight:
[s]It is your way, even when no one has insulted you. Its merely interesting to note, please dont kid yourself into thinking any amount of ranting and raving from one such as yourself could cause me the slightest discomfort. Once upon a time I had the energy for your ilk, but as my grey hair begins to hit luxuriant stride, I have far less strength for piffle.[/s]

DeepSight:
[s]These are silly questions and I will not dignify them. [/s]

NNTR:
Joshua 14:10-11
10“Look how the LORD has let me survive, as you can see, these 45 years since the time when the LORD said this through Moses, while Israel was wandering through the wilderness. And look! I’m here today—my eighty-fifth birthday!
11I’m still as strong today as I was the day Moses commissioned me.
I’m as strong today as I was then, and I can go out to battle and come back successful.

Black kite, that thinks, its an eagle. Give Red Bull a trial, loll. You see now, that youse and your alter-ego are not made from cloth and materials Caleb and I, are cut from. I've always taken you and your alter-ego on and will forever push youse heads under water.

The fear of silly questions is the beginning of wisdom.
Why not tag team your alter-ego, to step in

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

Mom007:
Christ is the only true and acceptable sacrifice to God.

Mom007:
He didn't ' sacrifice' her per se but dedicated her to God. Big difference. Christ is the only true and acceptable sacrifice to God.

DeepSight:
How is that any less barbaric than Aztec human sacrifice?

jamesid29:

Please where did you get your translation from or did you come up with it on your knowledge?

Secondly, In view of 2chronicles 18:2, would you agree that the best way to translate the verb in that passage would be "to slaughter/kill"?
As to Sacrifice, might give a modern reader a different connotation of the text because of how we understand the word in our worldview. And to Offer could likewise mislead a modern reader into thinking he just gave him the animals.

Are we in agreement on this?
Please bear in mind biblical Hebrew does has words for offering & killing

The word CULT.

There are some points of interest to be gleaned from studying the etymology of the word cult. The word entered the English language in the 17th century from 2 sources. French culte, and Latin cultus. The French is itself derived from the Latin.

The meaning of Cult in Latin encompasses To Inhabit, To Cultivate, To Protect, To Grow, To Worship, To Train or To Educate,.....

It is from the Latin Cultus that we get the English words Cultivation, and Culture.

Exploring the connection of these uses for the word Cultus we come to a deeper understanding of Religious activity.

A religious Cult should be a place where a certain spirit in a person can be nurtured and developed.

In studying African traditional religion, many concepts can be misconstrued. For instance in Yoruba religious thought (and other tribes too) practitioners talk of going to offer ẹ́bọ́ to a shrine. Too many scholars loosely translate ẹ́bọ́ to mean sacrifice, and go on to explain that something must be given in order to get something as if the offering of ẹ́bọ́ is a business transaction.

But actually the word ẹ́bọ́ in Yoruba just means nourishment. To offer ẹ́bọ́ is to feed. In other words to 'cultivate', to culture, To cult. (In Yoruba it is said that the Wife bọ́s the Husband and the Husband bọ́s the Wife). Furthermore this misconstruing of the meaning of ẹ́bọ́ ignores a very important key part of the ẹ́bọ́ ceremony. And that is that the ẹ́bọ́ is mostly eaten by the person doing the offering and shared with everyone else present. So how can it be an offering or a transaction if you are just going to eat it yourself?

This fact is true of every traditional religion that I am aware of and that is that the Offering is eaten by the Offerer. This is true even of traditional Hebrew religion from which Christianity is derived. You can tell from certain passage that most offering were eaten:

1 Samuel 2
29 Why then do you scorn[b] my sacrifices and my offerings that I commanded for my dwelling, and honor your sons above me by fattening yourselves on the choicest parts of every offering of my people Israel?’

The sons of Eli fell into disfavour because they would purposely select the best part of the sacrifice for their own bellies.

And the other famous Offering was the Tithe which was again eaten by those who made the offering and shared with others.

Deuteronomy 14
23 Eat the tithe of your grain, new wine and olive oil, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks in the presence of the LORD your God at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God always.



So what exactly is going on when ẹ́bọ́ is offered? When a meal is dedicated to a deity at a shrine the meal is then consumed by the practitioners in the belief that when the eat the meal they are nourishing the spirit of the deity in them. An Ogun devotee when he eats of the sacrifice is nurturing the spirit of industry, invention, pioneering within himself. He is cultivating the Ogun aspects of his being.

When a christian eats the Eucharist he is nourishing and nurturing the spirit of Christ within himself. The hope is that the Christ nature within will grow and come to fruition.

Please bear in mind biblical Hebrew does has words for offering & killing