An important key to use when studying God’s Word is to understand
WHY God has inspired certain stories: “Now all these things happened to
them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom
the ends of the ages have come” (1 Corinthians 10:11). Read the context
of this quote in verses 1 through 13, and you will understand that God
used their examples as a warning to others. He also revealed very
detailed information about Moses for the purpose of instruction: “And
Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a
testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward” (Hebrews
3:5).

In Biblical accounts, what is recorded represents the
actual circumstances and actions of people. The fact that God has
chosen to show examples that involved all kinds of human behavior does
not mean that He necessarily sanctions what was done! Rather, the Bible
tells the story of both faithful, obedient people and of those who
rebelled against God.

Concerning prophetesses, the Bible
reveals that certain women spoke in exactly the same fashion as any
number of prophets through whom God revealed both His will and future
events. The first prophetess mentioned in Scripture is Miriam, the
sister of Moses and Aaron (Exodus 15:20). Furthermore, we have this
testimony from God: “…And I SENT before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam”
(Micah 6:4). Another prophetess, written about in Judges, chapters 4
and 5, is Deborah:

“Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of
Lapidoth, was judging Israel at that time. And she would sit under the
palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the mountains of
Ephraim. And the children of Israel came up to her for judgment”
(Judges 4:4-5).

Reading further, we find that Deborah conveyed
God’s will to Barak, stating that he should lead some of the tribes of
Israel into battle against their Canaanite oppressors (Judges 4:6-14).
At that time, Deborah was esteemed as God’s representative. Note how
Barak viewed her counsel: “And Barak said to her, ‘If you will go with
me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go!'”
(Judges 4:8).

Here is Deborah’s response: “So she said, ‘I will
surely go with you; nevertheless there will be no glory for you in the
journey you are taking, for the LORD will sell Sisera into the hand of
a woman.’ Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh” (Judges
4:9).

This exchange between Barak and Deborah depicts the
prevailing attitude in Israel during the period of the judges:
“…everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6; 21:25).
The people of Israel underwent a cycle of oppression and deliverance,
because they would rebel against God and begin to fall into worshipping
false gods time and time again. When they cried out to God, He would
deliver them through the leadership of someone He specially chose. This
lasted until the time of Samuel and until Israel rejected God and
demanded to have a king like the nations around them (Compare 1 Samuel
8:19).

In a time when the nation of Judah began to turn to God
through King Josiah, inquiry of God was made through a faithful woman
on behalf of the king and the nation: “So Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam,
Achbor, Shaphan, and Asaiah went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of
Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe.
(She dwelt in Jerusalem in the Second Quarter.) And they spoke with
her” (2 Kings 22:14). As it is recorded in verses 15-20 of 2 Kings 22,
Huldah conveyed God’s response.

When some of Judah returned to
Jerusalem following national captivity, Nehemiah’s leadership to
rebuild the wall of Jerusalem faced constant resistance. Among those
who contended against Nehemiah was a prophetess who proclaimed false
messages. Here is what Nehemiah recorded: “My God, remember Tobiah and
Sanballat, according to these their works, and the prophetess Noadiah
and the rest of the prophets who would have made me afraid” (Nehemiah
6:14).

God differentiates between women who act and speak on His
behalf and those who falsely establish themselves by their own
inspiration: “‘Likewise, son of man, set your face against the
daughters of your people, who prophesy out of their own heart; prophesy
against them… Because with lies you have made the heart of the
righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and you have strengthened the
hands of the wicked, so that he does not turn from his wicked way to
save his life. Therefore you shall no longer envision futility nor
practice divination; for I will deliver My people out of your hand, and
you shall know that I am the LORD'” (Ezekiel 13:17, 22-23).

We
then see from Scripture that just as there are true and false prophets,
there are also prophetesses designated by God, and there are those who
appoint themselves through lies and evil practices!

In the time
shortly following the birth of Jesus, another faithful woman specially
chosen by God is identified: “Now there was one, Anna, a prophetess,
the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was of a great age,
and had lived with a husband seven years from her virginity; and this
woman was a widow of about eighty-four years, who did not depart from
the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And
coming in that instant she gave thanks to [God], and spoke of Him to
all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:36-38).

As
we have seen from the examples in God’s Word, some dedicated, faithful
women have been chosen by God for unique service to Him. In the case of
Deborah, it appears that no man at that time had the kind of
faith necessary to serve as judge to Israel. Huldah the prophetess was
faithful to God while the nation of Judah was steeped in false worship,
and she was able to provide God’s encouragement to Josiah and other
national leaders as they sought to repent and turn Judah back to
following God. Anna, as a very elderly woman, was blessed to see the
Messiah and to testify of His presence in that generation.

An
interesting prophecy in the Book of Joel further reveals God’s actions
regarding the men and women who will serve Him: “‘And it shall come to
pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons
and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams,
Your young men shall see visions. And also on My menservants and on My
maidservants I will pour out my Spirit in those days'” (Joel 2:28-29).
Peter adds this to his quoting of Joel 2, verse 29: “And they shall
prophesy” (Acts 2:18).

Because of God’s Spirit being poured out
on both men and women, some among them spoke through the inspiration of
God. Certain individuals spoke of God’s will and of future events
revealed by God. We see other examples of this when Hannah prayed (1
Samuel 2:1-10) and in the statements made by Elizabeth to Mary (Luke
1:41-45).

Although we don’t have a record of what they prophesied
about, we do know that the four daughters of Philip spoke under God’s
inspiration (Compare Acts 21:9). Consider the kind of family that they
were a part of–here is the record in Acts: “On the next day we who
were Paul’s companions departed and came to Caesarea, and entered the
house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed
with him” (Acts 21:8). Philip was one of the seven deacons ordained as
the Church of God began to multiply following the Day of Pentecost
(Compare Acts 6:1-7). He was later raised in rank to the office of
Evangelist (Acts 21:8; also, compare Ephesians 4:11-13).

However,
Philip’s daughters were not ministers! Neither are they called
prophetesses. The Bible only says that they “prophesied.” There is no
Biblical record that women were called or ordained to an office of
prophetess in the New Testament Church. In fact, God does not permit a
woman to preach or to prophesy in Church services. Paul makes this
statement: “And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority
over a man, but to be in silence” (1 Timothy 2:12). Also, Paul
explains: “Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not
permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also
says” (1 Corinthians 14:34).

For more information about this important Biblical teaching, please read pages 13-15 of our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families!”

When
Apollos first preached about Jesus Christ, “…he knew only the baptism
of John” (Acts 18:25). Note the approach taken by a faithful husband
and wife who were members of God’s Church: “So he began to speak boldly
in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him
aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately” (Acts
18:26).

Aquila and his wife Priscilla had a PRIVATE discussion
with Apollos. They both explained to him things of Christianity that he
had not yet learned. In that sense, Priscilla was involved in teaching
something to Apollos; however, Priscilla did not do this acting as a
minister, nor did she do this publicly.

Based on a careful and
comparative reading of various translations in 1 Timothy 3 and 5, and
in consideration of the broad Biblical statements and examples, the
Church of the Eternal God and its corporate affiliates follow the long
established practice of the Church of God, under Herbert W. Armstrong,
and ordain women to the office of “deaconess.” In Romans 16:1-2, we
read in the NKJV: “I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a SERVANT
of the church in Cenchrea, that you may receive her in the Lord in a
manner worthy of the saints, and assist her in whatever business she
has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself
also.” The RSV translates the word servant as “deaconess.” “Diakonos”
is the masculine form and gives credence to the idea that Phoebe was a
deaconess. Otherwise, Paul would have used a feminine form for servant.

Men
have served as prophets and women as prophetesses, as the Word of God
clearly illustrates. In the Church of God, today, men may still be
called to be prophets (among other offices)–which is by ordination
(Compare Acts 11:28; 21:10-11; 1 Corinthians 12:27-28; Ephesians 4:11;
Hebrews 5:4). Women, such as the four daughters of Philip, may also be
chosen to speak prophetically through the outpouring of God’s Holy
Spirit, but not in Church services, and not as ordained ministers or as
ordained prophetesses. The ONLY ordained office within the Church of
God that is held by women is that of DEACONESS–an appointment based on
solid maturity and selfless service.

In considering how God
administers His government, remember: “There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for
you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). In the future, we
will all be born-again children of God through whom He will continue to
build His unending Kingdom!

Let us attentively serve God in whatever capacity He has called us in this present time!

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

The Gibeonites, who belonged to the Hivites (who were descendants from Canaan, the son of Ham, 1 Chronicles 1:8, 13-15), were one of the peoples which had occupied the Promised Land, prior to Israel’s arrival (Exodus 3:8). God had commanded the Israelites not to make a covenant with any of these people. Rather, He wanted them expelled from the land (Exodus 23:28, 32-33). However, under Joshua, the Gibeonites, pretending to be a people from far away, tricked the Israelites into acting hastily by making a covenant with them to let them live amongst them (Joshua 9). In fact, the capital of the Gibeonites or Hivites was “Gibeon,” a town situated on a rocky eminence, about six miles northwest from Jerusalem and four miles from Bethel, where the modern village of El-Jib now stands (Commentary on the Whole Bible, by Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, page 174; Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, under “Gibeon”).

Even though God had not desired of Israel to make a covenant with the Gibeonites, He held Israel responsible to be faithful to it. Under Joshua, the Gibeonites were made servants to the Levites, assisting them with work for the altar (Joshua 9:27). Four hundred years later, God was angry with King Saul and his sons for having killed Gibeonites, in violation of the promise that Israel had given to them at the time of Joshua (2 Samuel 21:1).

What happened subsequently to the descendants of the dark-skinned Gibeonites or Hivites? The Bible Story by Basil Wolverton, volume 4,1964, writes on page 62: “Today, the descendants of those ancient dark-skinned Hivites are called Falashas–meaning migrants–because they journeyed out of Palestine to Ethiopia to escape captivity when Israel was driven out of Palestine centuries later.”

It is interesting to learn more about this remarkable journey, and what is known today of the Gibeonites. We are told the Gibeonites or Falashas went to Ethiopia. There was also a small Jewish religious group known as Beta Israel or Falasha, in the northwest of Ethiopia.

The “Encyclopedia Britannica,” volume 9, 1959, adds, under “Falashas,” remarkable information, showing the mixture of error and truth of the traditions of the modern-day Gibeonites. It is obvious that many of their traditions, true or false, were adopted by their close contact with the Israelites:

“Falashas, or Jews of Abyssinia [Abyssinia is a former designation of Ethiopia], a tribe of Hamitic stock… who profess the Jewish religion and claim to be descended from the ten tribes banished from the Holy Land… the Falashas know nothing of… the Talmud, make no use of phylacteries… and observe neither the feast of Purim nor the dedication of the temple [the Jewish feast of Hanukkah]. They possess… books of the Old Testament [which are written in the Ethiopian language]; a volume of extracts from the Pentateuch, with comments given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai… [and] the laws of the Sabbath… A copy of the… Mosaic law is kept in the holy of holies in every synagogue… Priests are allowed to marry once only, and no one is admitted into the order who has eaten bread with a Christian… Fasts, obligatory on all above seven years of age, are held on every Monday and Thursday, on every new moon and at the passover… The annual festivals are the passover, the harvest feast, the… Feast of tabernacles… the day of covenant or assembly, and Abraham’s day… The Falashas live for the most part in villages of their own, or, if settled in a Christian or Mohammedan town, occupy a separate quarter. Their own kings, they [believe], were descended from David, but in 1800, the royal race became extinct… They do not mix with the Abyssinians, and never marry women from alien religions… Polygamy is not practiced; early marriages are rare and their morals are generally better than those of their Christian masters.”

The “Compton Encyclopedia” adds further details about the modern-day Gibeonites, even calling them, “Jewish.” We read, under “Falasha”:

“Falasha (or Beta Israel), a Jewish Hamitic people of Ethiopia… use [a] Bible and a prayer book written in… the ancient Ethiopian language; follow Jewish traditions including circumcision, observing the Sabbath, attending synagogue and following certain dietary and purity laws; in 1975 [they were] recognized by the chief Rabbinate as Jews, and [with Israeli military assistance,] allowed to [migrate to] Israel; in 1984-85 [during the Ethiopian civil war] thousands of Falashas resettled to Israel from refugee camps in Sudan as part of the Israeli government’s ‘Operation Moses’ and the US government’s ‘Operation Sheba.'”

Bartleby.com, in its article, “Falashas,” says: “A second airlift of more than 14,000 occurred in May, 1991, bringing [the] total in Israel to more than 70,000.”

We are also advised by the San Diego Union Tribune, in an article of February 1, 2005, that by the end of 2007, Israel intends to bring to the Promised Land the last known 20,000 Ethiopians claiming to be Falashas with strong ties to Judaism, dating back more than 2000 years.

This means that by then, some of the modern tribes of the houses of Israel and Judah–the United States of America and the Jewish people–will have assisted approximately 90,000 modern-day Gibeonites or Falashas resettling to the state of Israel. (For more information on the identity of the modern houses of Israel and Judah, read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”)

It is truly remarkable how God saw to it that Israel’s covenant with the Gibeonites, which was made at the time of Joshua, would be kept and fulfilled in these last days.

Lead Writers: Norbert Link and Bill Grams

We are told, in Genesis 4:1-2, of two sons born to Adam and Eve, i.e., Cain and Abel; and of the respective relationships of these two sons with God. This is a very familiar story to all. But once the story of Abel’s death through the wicked hands of Cain is told in the first fifteen verses of Genesis, chapter 4, we read in Genesis 4:16-17 of Cain moving to the east of Eden and of the conception of his wife.

In this short historical account of events, it is not revealed to us how much time elapsed, nor are we told of the time sequence of the events recorded in the verses that follow. We only know that the human race continued to increase over the face of the earth.

Genesis 3:20 explains this question in part, quite succinctly: “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.” Although we don’t fully comprehend how God guided the increase of humans on the earth, it is apparent that His purpose was to establish the entire human population through Adam and Eve. Eve, herself, was created from the rib of Adam (Compare Genesis 2:22-23). In the recent emergence of science, we understand that cloning can actually be used to reproduce life forms. Of course, much more was involved when God first formed man of the dust of the ground and created mankind, both male and female.

It is clear from Scripture that Adam and Eve had children other than Cain and Abel. We read of Seth being begotten when Adam was 130 years old (Genesis 5:3); and we see in the very next verse that Adam lived another 800 years and begat sons and daughters. The total number of sons and daughters, who were begotten of Adam over his 930 years total, is not revealed to us.

Thus, Adam and Eve were the first man and woman on the earth and Scripture reveals they were created by God. Scripture does not reveal that any other human beings were so created. In Genesis 1:28 God commanded the man and woman to “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over… every living thing that moves on the earth.” Adam and Eve were the ones who were to multiply, and it was their offspring who were to fill the earth–God did not create any other human being in the way that He created Adam and Eve.

Beyond the genetic, social and moral problems arising from inbreeding in modern times, we know that God places tremendous importance on the family structure. In reviewing the New Testament record, we note that Paul admonished the Church of God at Corinth that: “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles–that a man has his father’s wife” (1 Corinthians 5:1). This Scripture does not expressly say that this relationship existed between a mother and her son, although this is possible; but it may also imply that the relationship was between the young man and his step-mother. The issue would then be one of morality–not genetics.

Returning to the Old Testament times of Adam and Eve, and based on all the revealed information we have, we must conclude that Cain married a female descendant of Adam–perhaps one of Adam’s daughters, or even one of Cain’s nieces. We understand that God had not declared such a union to be contrary to His will at that time. As newly created, physically perfect human beings, a danger of genetic problems did not really exist. Notice in Genesis 20:12 that Abraham explains to Abimelech that Sarah, in addition to being his wife, was his sister, the daughter of his father, but not the daughter of his mother (i.e., his half-sister). Even though Abram had married his half-sister, that of itself is not conclusive evidence that such a marriage was permitted. Abram could have sinned by marrying Sarai, but we don’t read that God condemned him for that.

In light of the fact that God commanded Adam and Eve to multiply, and that God expected Adam and Eve’s descendants to multiply; we must conclude that it was not wrong, at the time of Adam and Eve, nor during Noah’s time (compare Genesis 9:1), to marry someone closely related by blood–a practice which God would later expressly prohibit.

That God directly intervened in man’s populating the earth is clearly evident from the fact that God controlled the lifespan of mankind. However, Genesis 6, verses 1 and 2, indicates that the family structure was already in jeopardy–it appears that the people of this later time were marrying in ways that would be very harmful to mankind. The key issue here is that mankind was marrying whomever he wanted–implying rejection of God’s commands.

However, God did bless marriages with children. Note, for example, that God granted Abraham and Sarah the child Isaac. At this point marrying within families (a relative) under certain circumstances was still allowed. When the lineage of Abraham and Sarah through Isaac grew into the nation of Israel, God established laws to govern them, including laws that specifically set limits on whom one could marry and how the family was to be structured.

Apparently, certain laws governing incest did not become established until the time of Moses. Any such requirement of God is not revealed until Leviticus 18:6-17, where God described–from that time forward–those type actions as “wickedness.” Verses 9 and 11 specifically forbid marriage with one’s step-sister, or with one’s half-sister, and verse 6 forbids incest between father and daughter and between a brother and his full sister (compare The Nelson Study Bible, comments to verses 6, 9 and 11).

It does appear, therefore, that Cain did in fact marry a female descendant of Adam, perhaps one of his sisters or nieces. And it is evident from the Biblical facts that all of mankind is descended from Adam and Eve.

Lead Writer: Edwin Pope

The account referred to can be found in Judges 11:30-31, 34-40. We read:

“And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD, and said, ‘If You will indeed deliver the people of Ammon into my hands, then it will be that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the people of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up as a burnt offering.’… When Jephthah came to his house at Mizpah [after having defeated the Ammonites], there was his daughter, coming out to meet him with timbrels and dancing; and she was his only child. Besides her he had neither son nor daughter. And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he tore his clothes, and said, ‘Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low! You are among those who trouble me! For I have given my word to the LORD, and I cannot go back on it.’ So she said to him, ‘My father, if you have given your word to the LORD, do to me according to what has gone out of your mouth… let me alone for two months, that I… bewail my virginity…’ And it was so at the end of two months that she returned to her father, and he carried out his vow with her which he had vowed. She knew no man. And it became a custom in Israel that the daughters of Israel went four days each year to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.”

Before addressing whether Jephthah actually sacrificed his own daughter, let us point out that Jephthah will be resurrected, as an immortal spirit being, at the time of Christ’s return, to enter the Kingdom of God, as Hebrews 11:32, 39-40 clearly implies. This fact alone does not answer the question, however, whether or not Jephthah committed the abominable act of killing his own daughter — we understand that EVERY sin can and will be forgiven by God upon true repentance.

Commentaries are divided as to the question whether Jephthah sacrificed his daughter. The Ryrie Study Bible explains:

“Some understand that Jephthah’s daughter was only dedicated to the service of God in a life of celibacy and not actually slain. Others hold that she was killed according to Canaanite practices which Jephthah had embraced.”

Rienecker, Lexicon of the Bible, points out:

“The question of Jephthah’s vow is not clearly resolved. He had vowed to offer to the LORD as burnt offering what (or possibly, according to the Hebrew, who) would meet him upon his victorious return (Judges 11: 30, 31). That was his only daughter. After granting her two months to bemoan her virginity, he did what he had vowed (verse 39). This seems to indicate, in combination with his grief (verse 35), that the burnt offering was actually completed. On the other hand, the law of the Israelites did not allow human sacrifices, but it permitted to redeem a person who had been dedicated to the LORD (Leviticus 27:1-8). Some have concluded that Jephthah, who is mentioned with approval in 1 Samuel 12:11 and Hebrews 11:32, was able to circumvent the literal fulfillment of his vow. Some have speculated that a celibate, withdrawn life (Judges 11:39) could also show complete dedication to the LORD, as a burnt offering would have shown. The right conclusion is difficult, as the Holy Scriptures only report, without expressly judging either the vow itself or its fulfillment.”

The Nelson Study Bible seems to prefer the understanding that Jephthah did not actually kill his daughter. The following is stated in support of that view:

“Some have interpreted Jephthah’s vow ‘whatever comes out of the doors’ as a clear intention to offer a human sacrifice. His surprise then is not that he had to sacrifice a human being, but that the unfortunate person was his daughter. The phrase ‘to meet me’ seems to refer more appropriately to a human than to an animal… Undoubtedly, Jephthah knew that human sacrifice was strictly forbidden in Israel (Lev. 18:21; 20:2; Deut. 12:31; 18:10; Jer. 19:5; Ezek. 20:30, 31; 23:37, 39), but his foolishness and lack of faith impelled him to make a reckless vow in order to try to manipulate God (11:39).

“… But did Jephthah have to follow through on his vow? Ordinarily the answer would be yes. Vows were made only to God, and they were solemn pledges that had to be kept. People were not forced to take them, but if they did, they had to be honored (Deut. 23:21-23; Ps. 15:4; Eccl. 5:4, 5). But Jephthah had vowed something sinful in itself if his intent was to make a human sacrifice in the literal sense.

“… The text does not explicitly say that he killed his daughter, only that ‘he carried out his vow.’ When the verse goes on to say that ‘she knew no man,’ some take this to mean that she was ‘sacrificed’ by being dedicated to a life of perpetual virginity. Several arguments can be made for this interpretation. First, human sacrifice was contrary to the Law of Moses… Second, the great respect that Jephthah had for God surely would have prevented him from making such a perverse offering. Third, the fact that Jephthah permitted his daughter to bewail her virginity… for two months fits an explanation of perpetual virginity better than human sacrifice. Fourth, the indication that his daughter ‘knew no man’ also seems to be a detail that would support the idea of celibacy. Fifth, the Bible provides evidence that such devoted service for women did exist at the central sanctuary (Ex. 38:8; I Sam. 2:22; Luke 2:36, 37). In ancient Israelite society, the father had the power to prohibit a daughter to marry. Sixth, the conjunction in Jephthah’s pivotal statement in v. 31, that whatever or whoever came out of the door ‘shall be the LORD’s, AND I will offer it up as a burnt offering’ could be translated OR. Thus, if a person came out first, he would dedicate that person to the LORD, OR if an animal came out first, he would offer the animal as a burnt offering.”

However, several problems exist with that interpretation. To begin with, it is possible that Jephthah had strictly an animal in mind, when he made his vow, as Jephthah’s words (in Judges 11:31) can be translated from the Hebrew, as follows: “Whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me…, I will offer IT up for a burnt offering” (compare Authorized Version). It was common at that time for houses to have enclosed courtyards where animals were kept.

In any event, whatever Jephthah’s original intent, the earliest Christian and Jewish commentators all seem to have accepted the story at face value; that is, that Jephthah killed his daughter. It appears that the medieval Jewish commentator David Kimchi was the first to suggest that rather than having sacrificed his daughter, Jephthah merely kept her a perpetual virgin. The New Bible Commentary: Revised explains:

“It has sometimes been inferred… that Jephthah commuted his daughter’s fate from burnt-offering to perpetual virginity, but this is hardly warranted by the narrative. The plain and restrained statement that he ‘did with her according to his vow’ (v. 39) is best taken as implying her actual sacrifice. Although human sacrifice was strictly forbidden to Israelites, we need not be surprised at a man of Jephthah’s half-Canaanite antecedents following Canaanite usage in this matter. The author of Judges does not approve of his action; he may well have regarded it as a symptom of the state of affairs at a time when ‘every man did what was right in his own eyes’ (cf. 17:6; 21:25). The closest biblical parallel is Mesha’s sacrifice of his eldest son (2 Ki 3:27).”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, agrees with this conclusion. So do Matthew Henry’s Commentary; The Broadman’s Bible Commentary; Unger’s Bible Handbook; Eerdman’s Handbook to the Bible; and, apparently, Halley’s Bible Handbook.

It has also been the long-held understanding of the Church of God that Jephthah did in fact sacrifice his only daughter. It is stated in “The Bible Story”: “Though some commentators have thought Jephthah kept his daughter a perpetual virgin, the Jews and most commentators have understood this tragic story as explained in the Authorized Version of the Bible. Jephthah learned a mighty lesson. He discovered, through this tragedy, the real lesson of faith — that one does not have to vow to God in order to have Him perform what He has promised. What God expects is that we learn to trust Him in everything. When Jephthah finally learned that lesson, he became an outstanding example of faith. Paul even referred to him in Hebrews 11:32 as one of the outstanding examples of faith in the Old Testament.”

An older letter from the Letter Answering Department of the Worldwide Church of God added: “Jephthah made a very rash and foolish vow. He further compounded his error by keeping his vow (Judg. 11:39). That, no doubt, was greatly displeasing to God. Nevertheless, Jephthah is mentioned among the faithful listed in Hebrew 11 (see verse 32). This leads us to conclude that — like other servants of God — he ultimately realized the error of his own ways, repented, and received God’s forgiveness.”

In conclusion, it appears that Jephthah, following faulty human reasoning, sacrificed his own daughter. Upon his repentance, God forgave him, and Jephthah will be resurrected to immortal life, when Jesus Christ returns. This fact should give us great comfort and hope. Whatever sins we might have committed in our lives, God will forgive, when we genuinely and sincerely repent of them.

The Holy Scriptures do not record Paul’s death, and although historians agree that Paul was murdered, they are somewhat divided regarding the precise events leading to Paul’s death.

For instance, the 27th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, copyright 1959, writes on page 394, under “Paul”:

“Paul’s fate is hardly obscure. He himself saw that the charge against him, unrebutted by independent evidence, must bring him to the executioner’s sword, the last penalty for a Roman citizen. With this late and century tradition agrees (Tertullian, ‘De praescr. haer.’ 36), namely the very spot on the Ostian Way, marked by a martyr-memorial (‘tropaion,’ Caius ‘ap.’ Euseb. ii 25), probably at the modern Tre Fontane, some three miles from Rome. But the traditional date (June 29) reaches us only on far later authority. Acts simply suggests summer A.D. 62; and we may perhaps imagine Timothy reaching Rome in time to share Paul’s last days.”

Historians are by no means in agreement regarding the actual year of Paul’s death.

“The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,” by James Hastings, copyright 1917, states on page 694:

“The close of Paul’s life, therefore, like its beginning, is enveloped in obscurity. That he suffered martyrdom at Rome there can be no doubt. That it was by beheading, and that the place of execution was three miles outside the city on the Ostian Way, is the consistent tradition of the Roman Church. The date will lie between A.D. 64 and 67, most probably nearer the former date than the latter limit.”

Historians are divided, whether Paul’s death took place immediately after the end of the events described in Acts 28:30-31, that is, around A.D. 62, or whether a few years after those events, that is, between A.D. 64 and 67. The Broadman Bible Commentary, vol. 10, states on pages 151-152:

“Luke brings his book to a close with a summary account of Paul’s stay in Rome and tells us that he had full freedom in his preaching and teaching… The abruptness of the author’s conclusion has led to much speculation among New Testament scholars. Some believe that the work was unfinished due to the author’s death. Others maintain that the ending of Acts was lost. A few contend that Luke intended to write a third volume…”

We might interject here that some feel that Luke ended the account in the book of Acts in such a drastic way, as he was not inspired to reveal, at that time, the location of the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel. The book of Acts does not report the later activities of the original apostles, such as Peter, because, as some contend, they preached the gospel to the lost ten tribes (compare Matthew 10:6).

The Broadman Bible Commentary continues: “Cadbury (The Beginnings of Christianity, V, 333) cites an imperial edict attributed to the reign of Nero which specifies the time limit when cases were dropped. For capital cases in Roman provinces across the sea which were brought to Rome, the accuser and the accused had to appear in court before the maximum limit of 18 months. If the time limit should be exceeded, the case went by default. Perhaps Luke implied that Paul’s case was dropped by telling us that the apostle lived in Rome for two whole years at his own expense. If this was the situation, the author did end his book in a highly dramatic manner. The default was equivalent to an acquittal before Caesar’s court and gave tacit legal approval to the Christian movement…

“Clement of Rome about A.D. 95 says that Paul ‘preached the gospel to the uttermost bounds of the west.’ It is quite possible that Cement’s information is based on Paul’s express hope to go to Spain (Rom. 15:24,28). Tradition also tells us that the apostle, after his release, was arrested again by Roman officials and put in prison at Rome. Further, during the persecution of Christians by Nero in A.D. 64, Paul was put to death by the executioner’s ax. He was spared from crucifixion because he was a Roman citizen.”

Eusebius explains in “The History of the Church,” edited 1965, pp. 98-99, that Paul was spared in his first trial, as he was “rescued out of the lion’s mouth, the reference being apparently to Nero [or Satan, compare 1 Peter 5:8, using Nero as one of his instruments], because of his bestial cruelty.” Eusebius also explains that “Nero’s tyranny did not begin till A.D. 62, when Paul’s first imprisonment was over.”

Frank J. Goodwin writes in “A Harmony of the Life of St.Paul,” edited 1951, on pages 194-196:

“Paul was acquitted after his first trial, and was remanded to prison… After the first trial nothing is certain. ‘That he underwent execution by the sword,’ says Alford, ‘is the constant tradition of antiquity, and would agree with the fact of his Roman citizenship, which would exempt him from death by torture.’ (Proleg., p. 97). Of his last trial and death there is tradition only, but no history (see Conybeare and Howson, II., pp. 488-490).”

Nevertheless, Conybeare and Howson state, in “The Life and Epistles of St. Paul,” reprinted 1976, on pages 782 and 783, that Paul was released from prison after his first trial, but subsequently again arrested and killed by the Romans. They point out: “The death of St. Paul is recorded by his contemporary Clement…; also by the Roman presbyter Caius (about 200 A.D.) (who alludes to the Ostian road as the site of St. Paul’s martyrdom), by Tertullian, Eusebius…, Jerome, and many subsequent writers… The statement that Paul was beheaded on the Ostian road agrees with the usage of the period, and with the tradition that his decapitation was by the sword not the axe.”

A handout on the Epistles of Paul, by the Ambassador College of the Worldwide Church of God, in the fall of 1982, stated the following under “Rome”:

“Rome, an ancient city dating back some 700 years prior to Christ’s birth, was in the time of Paul the powerful capital of a world-ruling empire. The city sat upon seven hills along the Tiber River in what is today modern Italy. The city itself rests nearly fifteen miles inland from Italy’s western coast.

“Paul’s first visit was in chains from Caesarea. He arrived in Rome after a long troublesome voyage and immediately held conference with Jewish leaders there (Acts 28:16-17). His first imprisonment was in his ‘own hired house’ (Acts 28:30). He received Onesimus here (Philemon10) as well as Epaphroditus (Philippians 4:18). He wrote the ‘Prison Epistles’ of Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians and Philemon probably in 60-61 A.D. He expected acquittal as recorded in Philemon 22.

“Activities between his two Roman imprisonments are rather sketchy. We may wonder if he was able to visit Philippi (Philippians 1:26; 2:24), Colossae (Philemon 22) and Spain (Romans 15:24, 28). We may be rather sure he did visit Ephesus and Macedonia (1 Timothy 1:3; 3:14, 15) as well as Crete (Titus 1:5), Miletus (2 Timothy 4:20), Troas (2 Timothy 4:13), Corinth (2 Timothy 4:20) and Nicopolis (Titus 3:12). It was during this time Paul probably wrote Timothy (first epistle) and Titus from Macedonia.

“Finally we come to Paul’s second arrest, his imprisonment and martyrdom. He is imprisoned as an evil-doer (2 Timothy 1:8; 2:8, 9), and writes his final epistle to Timothy in anticipation of death between 65-67 A.D. The epistle gives detail to Paul’s situation during his second imprisonment. It was here in Rome that tradition stated Paul was beheaded.”

In his remarkable book, “The Drama of the Lost Disciples,” edited 1993, George F. Jowett writes on page 127: “In the year A.D. 66 we are told that Claudia, with her husband and children, rescued the murdered body of St. Paul, interring it in the private burial grounds on the Pudens estate [at Rome], where they were all to rest together.” He continues, on pages 179-180:

“But what of Peter and Paul? Did they remain buried at Rome, in the grave where the loving hands of Claudia, Pudens and their children had placed them?… The positive answer is found in a document written by Pope Vitalian to the British King Oswy, A.D. 656. The letter is still in existence. Probably to the astonishment of many, the letter states that Pope Vitalian permitted the remains of the bodies of St. Paul and St. Peter, with the remains of the martyrs St. Lawrence, St. John, St. Gregory and St. Pancras, to be removed from Rome to England and re-interred in the great church at Canterbury. This historic record is beyond refutation… The full facts concenring this amazing incident are related by the Venerable Bede, A.D. 673-735, in his ‘Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation.'”

Excerpts from the Pope’s letter to King Oswy read [quoted from Opera Historica, Volume I, p. 501]: “But to your messengers, the bearers of this our letter, we have caused to be given the benefits of the saints, that is to say, the relics of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of the holy martyrs, Laurence [or Lawrence], John and Paul and of Gregory and Pancras, all to be delivered truly to your excellency.”

It is therefore reasonably certain that Paul was murdered under Nero through beheading. He was buried in Rome, but his body was later transferred to England, where it is today. Paul is still dead, lying in his grave, and waiting for his resurrection at the time of Christ’s return to this earth, in a few years from now.

Several have asked this question, especially in light of inconsistent teachings of the Church of God in the past on this matter. First of all, let us try to determine who the Pharaoh of the Exodus was. Some believe that the Exodus took place around 1290 B.C. and have concluded that Ramses the Great was the Pharaoh who resisted Moses. However, Ramses ruled a full century and a half later than the Exodus occurred.

Quoting from a Good News article of the March-April 1988 edition:

“A careful consideration of all biblical and extra-biblical evidence reveals that the Exodus occurred in the middle of the 15th century B.C. — specifically, in the year 1443, during the reign of Amenhotep II, whose tomb Loret excavated. He was the pharaoh who ruled… when the Egyptians would not let Israel go. This year — 1443 — was 430 years after the covenant with Abraham, made in the spring of 1873 B.C. (Genesis 17:1, Exodus 12:40-41, Galatians 3:17). And it was in the 480th year before the laying of the foundation of the Temple in Solomon’s fourth year (964 B.C.), as required by I Kings 6:1… Moses (born in 1523) was brought up as a prince of this ruling family [of Dynasty XVIII, inaugurated by Pharaoh Ahmose about 1570 B.C. Amenhotep II — a descendant of Ahmose — was the sixth pharaoh of this dynasty.] The ‘daughter of Pharaoh’ (Exodus 2:5) [was] Hatshepsut. She was the daughter of Pharaoh Thutmose I, a son-in-law of Ahmose… Thutmose — perhaps the greatest of the pharaohs of ancient Egypt — would therefore be the biblical ‘pharaoh of the oppression.’ In 1483 B.C., Moses was exiled from Egypt by this Thutmose upon the death of Hatshepsut, Moses’ foster mother and protector… Upon the death of Thutmose in 1450, Amenhotep II assumed the sole leadership of the country.”

According to the Good News article, it was Amenhotep II who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. It was stated that Egyptian history reveals that he himself was not a firstborn. Likewise, his son and successor, Thutmose IV, was not Amenhotep’s firstborn son, either.

The Good News article continued: “Contrary to the common notion about the Pharaoh of the Exodus, Amenhotep II did not drown in the Red Sea with his army. Read carefully Exodus 14:23-32. Ancient records reveal that Amenhotep II’s reign lasted no less than into his 26th year… Sixteen of those 26 years followed the Exodus. Upon Amenhotep’s death in 1425, he was interred like his ancestors in the Valley of the Kings. There he lay undisturbed until Loret’s discovery in 1898.”

The concept that the Pharaoh of the Exodus did not drown is in conflict with the Church of God’s earlier teaching. In the original “The Bible Story,” published in 1962 by the Radio Church of God, it is stated in Volume 2, on page 86, that Pharaoh perished in the Red Sea. It was stated that he shouted a command to his soldiers “from the floor of the Red Sea,” which “was one of the last sentences Pharaoh uttered.” On page 87, it is stated that “This was the abrupt end of the man who had planned to wipe out the people God had chosen for a special task in His plan for things to come.” We note that in the revised version of “The Bible Story,” published in 1982 by the Worldwide Church of God, all these statements were omitted, and the statement of the “abrupt end of the man” had been altered, as follows: “Thus was the sudden end of the army of the man who had schemed to wipe out a people God had chosen for a special task in His plan for the future” (Vol. 1, p. 171).

Upon a careful examination of the Good News article, which had been published in 1988, we must conclude that it does not stand up to Biblical scrutiny. If we just look at Exodus 14, it is true that it is not stated expressly that Pharaoh drowned. We read that God “will gain honor over Pharaoh and over all his army, his chariots, and his horsemen” (verse 18); that God looked down on “the army of the Egyptians,” and that He “troubled the army of the Egyptians” (verse 24); that the LORD “overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea (verse 27); and that “the waters returned and covered the chariots, the horsemen, and all the army of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them. Not so much as one of them remained” (verse 28).

Although the implication is certainly conveyed in Exodus 14, that Pharaoh drowned with his army, the passage does not say so expressly. However, there are additional Scriptures to consider. We read, for example, in Psalm 136:13-15: “To Him who divided the Red Sea in two, For His mercy endures forever; And made Israel pass through the midst of it, For His mercy endures forever; But overthrew PHARAOH AND HIS ARMY [not just Pharaoh’s army] in the Red Sea, For His mercy endures forever.”

Some claim that the Hebrew word for “overthrew” (“naar”) means “shook off” and that, therefore, it does not prove that Pharaoh actually drowned. This observation is without merit. The same word is used in Exodus 14:27, where we read, “So the Lord overthrew (in Hebrew, “naar”) the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.” As the Egyptians in the midst of the sea clearly drowned, when God overthrew them, and “none of them remained” (verse 28), it is illogical to say that somehow Pharaoh did not drown when God overthrew him. Please note, too, that Psalm 136:15 states that God overthrew Pharaoh AND HIS ARMY in the Red Sea — so, to make a distinction here between Pharaoh and his army is just a human attempt to reinterpret Scripture. The word “naar” is an unusual word and conveys the analogy of “a contemptuous rejection of a reptile” (Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, “Commentary on the Whole Bible,” comment on Psalm 136:15).

The clear intent of Psalm 136:15 has also been understood by many other translators. For instance, the New International Version says: “…but swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea.” (Similar the Revised English Bible and the New American Bible). The New Jerusalem Bible states: “And drowned Pharaoh and all his army.” Moffat puts it this way: “and drowned the Pharaoh and his host.” Virtually all German translations clearly convey the meaning that God killed or drowned Pharaoh and his army, by throwing them into the Red Sea (Luther; Elberfelder; Menge; Zuecher; Pattloch). Any honest reading of this passage will have to agree with this. The Broadman Bible commentary says: “He is the one who cleaved the Red Sea in two, brought Israel through it, then pushed Pharaoh and his army into it.”

Psalm 136:15 does not give any room for the assumption that the Pharaoh of the Exodus did not drown.

IF, therefore, the conclusion is correct that Amenhotep II WAS the Pharaoh of the Exodus, we are faced with the question why his tomb could be discovered in the Valley of the Kings. The answer to that question is rather easy. We read in Exodus 14:30: “Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the seashores.” Based on this observation, we could conclude that Pharaoh’s dead body was washed to the seashore and that Egyptians buried him in the Valley of the Kings.

Another question is raised by the statement that Amenhotep II ruled for another 16 years after the Exodus, before he died. However, the Scriptures cannot be broken, that is, we cannot use “historical records,” that are in apparent contradiction with God’s Word, to reinterpret or change God’s Word, to make it fit with those records. The Bible is clear that the Pharaoh of the Exodus drowned. This means that, either, Amenhotep II was NOT the Pharaoh of the Exodus, OR, that he did NOT continue to rule for 16 years AFTER the Exodus. The Good News article, quoted above, only states, without giving any source material, that “ancient records reveal that Amenhotep II’s reign lasted no less than into his 26th year (This has been corroborated by a wine jar docket dated in his 26th year that was discovered in Egypt near the beginning of this century.).”

We are not told what those ancient records are, and whether they are precise in their dating, and whether this dating corresponds with the years, as we would count them today. Further, the accuracy of a precise dating of a jar docket must also be questioned. Recent discoveries have established, for example, that the methods used for dating, are many times rather imprecise, and cannot possibly be considered as absolutely accurate, when talking about a 20 year time span of more than 3,400 years ago.

In conclusion, the Biblical record establishes that the Pharaoh of the Exodus drowned in the Red Sea.

The Biblical text does not indicate here whether this was a marriage which had taken place some time previously or whether this was a recent event. The Hebrew commentary, Soncino, offers one possible explanation that the Cushite woman was “a woman of Ethiopian origin.” It continues:”Legend tells that Moses married the queen of Ethiopia…”

The Hebrew writer Josephus gives the following narrative in his work, “Antiquities of the Jews”, p. 58, addressing one of Moses’ campaigns as an officer in Pharaoh’s army, prior to his flight from Egypt (compare Acts 7:22-29; Hebrews 11:24-27):

“Tharbis was the daughter of the king of the Ethiopians: she happened to see Moses as he led the army near the walls, and fought with great courage; and admiring the subtlety of his undertakings, and believing him to be the author of the Egyptians’ success, when they had before despaired of recovering their liberty, and to be the occasion of the great danger of the Ethiopians were in, whence they had before boasted of their great achievements, she fell deeply in love with him; and upon the prevalency of that passion, sent to him the most beautiful of all her servants to discourse with him about their marriage. He thereupon accepted the offer, on condition she would produce the delivering up of the city; and gave her the assurance of an oath to take her to his wife; and that when he had once taken possession of the city, he would not break his oath to her. No sooner was the agreement made, but it took effect immediately; and when Moses had cut off the Ethiopians, he gave thanks to God, and consummated his marriage, and led the Egyptians back to their own land.”

If this narrative is based on truth, and if Miriam and Aaron brought up Mose’s alleged marriage with Tharbis in Numbers 12:1, then it would be very clear why the “anger of the LORD was kindled against them” (verse 9) — after all, Moses would have married the princess before his flight to Midian, that is, long before his conversion.

There is, however, another possibility as to who the “Ethiopian woman” might have been. Soncino continues to explain: “[A commentary] identifies the Cushite woman with Zipporah [whom Moses married while in Midian, after he had escaped from Egypt, compare Exodus 2:21] who was a native of Midian. The Midianites, who were tent-dwellers and dark-skinned, were also known as ‘Kushim.'”

The Midianites were descendants of Abraham and Keturah (Genesis 25:1). Abraham took Keturah as his wife (same reference) or concubine (1 Chronicles 1:32) after the death of Sarah.

The Broadman Bible Commentary has this to say about the “Cushite woman”:

“The identify of the Cushite woman has been widely debated. The only known name of a wife of Moses was Zipporah (Ex. 2:16-22; 4:25; 18:2). However, there are times here and elsewhere at which Moses’ wife is referred to without specific name. It may be that the writer is referring to Zipporah here… For a long time, Zipporah had been left with her father (along with Moses’ two sons) but Jethro brought them to Moses. While Zipporah and the sons were absent, Miriam and Aaron had no challenger for second place; but when they were present there was a constant reminder of the several suggestions which had come through the Midianites upsetting the status quo arrangement. Zipporah was a Midianite (Ex. 2:16) or Kenite (Judg. 1:16; 4:11). In Habakkuk 3:7 the term ‘Cusham’ and ‘Midian’ are used in synonymous parallels. So she may have been referred to accurately as a Cushite woman. The story of Zipporah records the fact that Moses sent her away (Ex. 18:2). This is the same term as is used elsewhere for divorce. In the same chapter (Ex. 18:1,6) we are told that Jethro, still called the father-in-law of Moses, brought Zipporah to Moses ‘in the wilderness where he was encamped at the mountain of God’ (Ex. 18:5) along with her two sons. This account indicates (Ex. 18:27) that later ‘Moses let his father-in-law depart’ to his own country. No mention is made of Zipporah and the two sons, Gershom and Eliezer. Thus it may be that the Cushite woman was Zipporah. The reference in this case would explain a repeated reference to Cushite to emphasize with some disdain that Miriam and Aaron considered her a ‘foreigner.'”

This explanation would also shed light on the fact that God’s anger was kindled against them, and mainly Miriam, the apparent “spokesperson” in the incident. Verse 2 reports that they murmured against Moses, saying, “Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses [“and” — following the comments of the Broadman Bible Commentary — “Zipporah, that Cushite woman, who is influencing Moses”]? Has He not spoken through US ALSO?”

God, however, was not pleased with this criticism. He told Miriam and Aaron: “I speak with him [Moses] face to face, Even plainly, and not in dark sayings; And he sees the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid To speak against My servant Moses?” (verse 8).

Although we don’t hear anything further about Zipporah (if she was indeed the Cushite woman in Numbers 12:1), the Bible may contain a later possible reference to Moses’ first-born son, Gershom, in the book of Judges. We read that the Danites engaged in idolatry, setting up for themselves a carved image, and “Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh [in the margin, an alternate rendering is given as “Moses”], and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan” (Judges 18:30). The Hebrew Tanakh points out that “an earlier reading [i.e.,] ‘Moses'” instead of Manasseh, is “indicated.” The Ryrie Study Bible comments that the better rendering is “son of Moses. The Danite priests traced their lineage to Moses.” Most German translations, including Luther, Zuercher, Menge and Elberfelder, consistently render this phrase as, “son of Moses.” If the reference in Judges 18:30 to Gershom is indeed a reference to the son of Moses, then Moses’ and Zipporah’s grandson Jonathan had begun to be deeply involved in idolatry.

We find an additional reference to Gershom, the son of Moses, in 1 Chronicles 23:14-16; 26:24. These passages mention Shebuel, a son of Gershom, the son of Moses, who had become overseer of the treasuries. This grandson of Moses seemed to have stayed loyal to God’s way of life. We also learn, in 1 Chronicles 23:15, 17, that Moses’ second son, Eliezer, had a son, named Rehabiah, and that “the sons of Rehabiah were very many.”

In any event, whether the “Cushite woman” in Numbers 12:1 was a princess of Ethiopia or Zipporah, Miriam and Aaron should have never used Moses’ marriage as a justification to develop feelings of self importance and envy, resulting in their murmuring against Moses. They later acknowledged and repented of their sin, so that God could continue to use them in His great plan (verse 11).