Okay, I guess it would help if I elaborated a bit on what I found out:
From the 'Insight on the Scriptures' book, under 'Jephthah'.
*** it-2 p. 28 Jephthah ***
Persons could be devoted to Jehovah’s exclusive service in connection with the sanctuary. It was a right that parents could exercise. Samuel was one such person, promised to tabernacle service by a vow of his mother Hannah before his birth. This vow was approved by her husband Elkanah. As soon as Samuel was weaned, Hannah offered him at the sanctuary. Along with him, Hannah brought an animal sacrifice.
Okay, so Samuel was devoted to Jehovah.
However according to 1 Samuel 8:1-3 Samuel had children:
8 And it came about that as soon as Samuel had grown old he made appointments of his sons as judges for Israel. 2 Now the name of his firstborn son happened to be Joel, and the name of his second A·bi´jah; they were judging in Be´er-she´ba. 3 And his sons did not walk in his ways, but they were inclined to follow unjust profit and would accept a bribe and pervert judgment.
So as a man dedicated to Jehovah from birth, he wasn't required to be a virgin.
Same book, same paragraph:
*** it-2 p. 28 Jephthah ***
Samson was another child specially devoted to God’s service as a Nazirite.—Jg 13:2-5, 11-14;
And Samson was married: (Judges 14:2) 2 So he went up and told his father and his mother and said: "There is a woman that I have seen in Tim´nah of the daughters of the Phi·lis´tines, and now get her for me as a wife."
But they were both male of course.
Was virginity a requirement for women?
I do know that the prophetess Deborah was married: (Judges 4:4) 4 Now Deb´o·rah, a prophetess, the wife of Lap´pi·doth, was judging Israel at that particular time.
Here is a typical example of how the society deals with it:
*** it-2 p. 28 Jephthah ***
It was a real sacrifice on the part of both Jephthah and his daughter, for he had no other child. (Jg 11:34) Therefore no descendant of his would carry on his name and his inheritance in Israel. Jephthah’s daughter was his only hope for this. She wept, not over her death, but over her "virginity," for it was the desire of every Israelite man and woman to have children and to keep the family name and inheritance alive. (Jg 11:37, 38) Barrenness was a calamity. But Jephthah’s daughter "never had relations with a man." Had these words applied only to the time prior to the carrying out of the vow, they would have been superfluous, for she is specifically said to have been a virgin. That the statement has reference to the fulfilling of the vow is shown in that it follows the expression, "He carried out his vow that he had made toward her." Actually, the record is pointing out that also after the vow was carried out she maintained her virginity.—Jg 11:39; compare renderings in KJ; Dy; Yg; NW.
Notice how they imply that barrenness is a natural consequence of temple service, without actually SAYING so. And without offering a single bit of proof. You'd think they'd go into a little more detail right?
Lore - W.W.S.D?
