JOSHUA 24 IN THE LXX: SOME LITERARY AND THEOLOGICAL REMARKS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25159/1013-8471/2522Abstract
The differences between the MT and LXX texts of Joshua 24 are numerous and complex. In this essay, I will discuss these differences from a theological viewpoint. I will start with the assumption that the MT of Joshua 24 displays a distinctive pro-Samaritan attitude. The aim of this essay is to determine the theological viewpoint of the LXX of Joshua 24 regarding the attitude toward the Samaritan question. I will argue that the LXX of Joshua 24 displays an antiSamaritan attitude and that it embeds the covenant of Joshua 24 in the broader narrative of apostasy and fall, in sharp contrast to the MT of Joshua 24.Metrics
References
Achenbach, R 2005. Pentateuch, Hexateuch und Enneateuch. Eine Verhältnisbestimmung, ZAR 11:122–154.
Alt, A 1978.4 Das Heimat des Deuteronomiums, in Alt 19784:250–275.
Alt, A 19784. Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 2. Band. München: Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Anbar, M 1992. Josué et l’alliance de Sichem (Josué 24:1–28) Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese und Theologie 25. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Anderson, G W (ed.) 1968. Congress volume: Rome 1968. VTSup 17. Leiden: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275409
Auld, A G 1998. Joshua retold: synoptic perspectives. OTS. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Aurelius,E 2003. Zukunft jenseits des Gerichts: Eine redaktionsGeschichtliche Studie zum Enneateuch. BZAW 319. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110903201
Babota, V 2013. The institution of the Hasmonean high priesthood. Supplement to the Journal for the Study of Judaism vol. 165. Leiden/Boston: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004252042
Barrick, W B & Spencer, J R (eds) 1984. In the shelter of Elyon: essays on ancient Palestinian life in honour of GW Ahlström. JSOTSup 31. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Becker,U 2006. Endredaktionelle Kontextvernetzungen des Josua-Buches, in Witte, Schmid, Prechel and Gertz 2006:139–161.
Bieberstein,K 1995 Josua-Jordan-Jericho. Archäologie, Geschichte und Theologie der Landnahmeerzählungen Josua 1–6. OBO. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Blum, E 1990. Studien zur Komposition des Pentateuch. BZAW 189. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110879506
_______ 1997. Die Kompositionelle Knoten am Übergang von Josua zu Richter: Ein Entflechtungsvorschlag, in Lust and Vervenne 1997:181–212.
_______ 2006. The literary connection between the books of Genesis and Exodus and the end of the book of Joshua, in Dozeman and Schmid 2006:80–106.
_______ 2011. Pentateuch-Hexateuch-Enneateuch, in Dozeman, Römer and Schmid 2011:43–
Brooke, G J (ed.) 1994. New Qumran texts and studies. Proceedings of the First Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies. STDJ 15. Leiden: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350175
Butler,T C 1983. Joshua. WBC 7. Waco, Texas: Word Books Publisher.
Dahmen, U, Lange, A & Lichtenberger, H (eds) 2000. Die Textfunde vom Toten Meer und der Text der Hebraischen Bibel. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchen Verlag
Dillman, A 1886. Die Bücher Numeri, Deuteronomium und Josue. Leipzig: Hirzel.
Dines, J M 2004. The Septuagint. New York: T&T Clark.
Dozeman, T B 2011. The Book of Joshua as intertext in the MT and LXX canons, in Dozeman, Römer and Schmid 2011:185–211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780195393361-0133
Dozeman, T B & Schmid, K (eds) 2006. Farewell to the Yahwist? The composition of the Pentateuch in recent European discussion. SBL Symposium Series 34. Atlanta: SBL.
Dozeman, T B, Römer, T C & Schmid, K (eds) 2011. Pentateuch, Hexateuch, or Enneateuch. Identifying literary works in Genesis through Kings. SBL 8. Atlanta: SBL.
Fabry, H J 2000. Der Altarbau der Samaritaner-ein Produkt der Text-und literaturgeschichte?, in Dahmen, Lange & Lichtenberger 2000:35–52.
Flint, P W (ed.) 2001. Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls and related literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Frevel, C 2011. Die Wiederkehr der Hexateuchperspektive. Eine Herausforderung für die These vom Deuteronomistischen Geschictswerk, in Stipp 2011:13–53.
Frey J, Schattner-Rieser, U & Schmid K (eds) 2012. Die Sameritaner und die Bibel:
Historische und literarische Wechselwirkungen zwischen biblischen und Sameritanischen Traditionen. Studia Judaica/Studia Samaritana 7. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Garcia Martinez, F & Noort, E (eds) 1998. Perspective in the study of the Old Testament and early Judaism: a symposium in honour of Adam S. van der Woude on the occasion of his 70th Birthday. VTSup 73. Leiden: Brill.
Hjelm , I 2002. Shiloh and Shechem: competing traditions? Paper for SBL Berlin 2002. Available: www.theSamaritanUpdate.com. [Accessed 2015/03/01.]
Hölscher, G 1922. Ursprung des Deuteroniomiums, ZAW 40:161–255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/zatw.1922.40.1.161
Holmes, S 1914. Joshua: the Hebrew and Greek texts. Cambridge: CUP.
Knauf, EA 2007. Buchschlüsse im Josuabuch, in Römer and Schmid 2007:217–224.
_______ 2008. Josua. ZBKAT 6. Zurich: Theologisher Verlag.
Knoppers, G N & McConville,J G (eds) 2000. Reconsidering Israel and Judah: recent studies on the Deuteronomistic History. SBTS 8. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781575065182
Konkel, M 2008. Sünde und Vergebung: Eine Rekontruktion der Redaktionsgeschichte der hinterein Sinaiperikope (Ex 32–34). Vor dem Hintergrund aktueller Pentateuchmodelle. FAT 88. Tübingen: Mohr.
Koopmans, W T 1990. Joshua 24 as poetic narrative. JSOTSup 93. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Kratz, R G 2005. The composition of the narrative books of the Old Testament (trans. J. Bowden). New York: T&T Clark.
Krüger, T 2007. Anmerkungen zur Frage nach den Redaktionen der Grossen Erzählwerke im Alten Testament, in Römer and Schmid 2007:47–66.
Levin, C 2011. On the cohesion and separation of books within the Enneateuch, in Dozeman, Römer and Schmid 2011:127–154.
Levinson, B M & Knoppers, G N (eds) 2007. The Pentateuch as Torah: new models for understanding its promulgence and its acceptance. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781575065854
Lust, J &Vervenne, M (eds) 1997. Deuteronomy and Deuteronomistic literature. BETL 133. Leuven: Peeters.
Margolis, A 1931–36. The book of Joshua in Greek. Paris: Geuthner.
Mazor, L 1988. The origin and evolution of the curse on the rebuilder of Jericho – a contribution of textual criticism to biblical historiography, Textus 14:1–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/2589255X-01401003
_______ 1994. The Septuagint translation of the book of Joshua. Abstract of thesis submitted for the degree Doctor of Philosophy to the Senate of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. BIOSCS 27.
Mckenzie, S L & Römer, T C 2000. Rethinking the foundation: historiography in the ancient world and in the Bible. Essays in honour of John van Seters. BZAW 294. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110805802
Merklein H, Müller, K & Stemberger, G (eds) 1993. Bibel in jüdischer und christlicher Tradition: Festschrift für Johann Maier zum 60. Geburtstag. BBB 88. Bonn: Hahn.
Mor, M & Reiterer, F V (eds) 2010. Samaritans: past and present. Current studies. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110212839
Na’aman, N 2000. The law of the altar in Deuteronomy, in Mckenzie and Römer 2000:141– 161.
Nelson, R D 1997. Joshua: a commentary. OTL. Louisville: Westminster John Knox.
Nielsen, E 1955. Shechem: a traditio-historical investigation. Copenhagen: Gad.
Nihan, C 2007. The Torah between Samaria and Judah: Shechem and Gerizim in Deuteronomy DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/j.ctv1bxh2k1.12
and Joshua, in Levinson and Knoppers 2007:187–223.
_______ 2012. The literary relationship between Deuteronomy and Joshua: a reassessment, in Schmid and Person 2012: 79–114.
Noll, K L & Schramm, B (eds) 2010. Raising a faithful exegete: essays in honour of Richard Nelson. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781575066264
Noort, E 1998a. Zu Stand und Perspektiven: Der Glaube Israels zwischen Religionsgeschichte und Theologie, der Fall Josua 24, in Garciá-Martinez 1998:82–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275980_005
_______ 1998b. 4Qjosha and the history of tradition in the book of Joshua, JNSL 24/2:127–
Noth, M 1953.2 Das Buch Josua. HAT 7. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
O’ Brien, M A 1989. The Deuteronomistic History hypothesis: a reassessment. OBO 92. Fribourg: Éditions. Universitaires/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht.
Orlinsky, H M 1969. The Hebrew Vorlage of the Septuagint of the Book of Joshua, in Anderson 1969:187–195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275409_013
Otto, E 2000. Das Deuteronomium im Pentateuch und Hexateuch. Studien zur Literaturgeschichte von Pentateuch und Hexateuch im Lichte des Deuteronomiumrahmens. FAT 30. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Pakkala, J 2013. God’s word omitted: omissions in the transmission of the Hebrew Bible. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666536113
Parry, D W & Ricks, S D (eds) 1996. Current research and technological developments on the Dead Sea Scrolls: conference on the texts from the Judean Desert, Jerusalem, 30 April 1995. STD 20. Leiden: Brill.
Perlitt, L 1968. Bundestheologie im Altes Testament. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
Rofé, A 1985. Joshua 20 – historico-literary criticism illustrated, in Tigay 1985:131–147.
_______ 1993. The piety of the Torah-disciples at the winding-up of the Hebrew Bible: Josh 1:8; Ps 1:2; Isa 59:21, in Merklein, Müller & Stemberger 1993:78–85.
_______ 1994. The editing of the book of Joshua in the light of 4QJosha, in Brooke1994:73–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350175_010
_______ 2000. Ephraimite versus Deuteronomistic history, in Knoppers and McConville 2000:462–474 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781575065182-027
Römer,T C& Brettler, M Z 2000. Deuteronomy 34 and the case for a Persian Hexateuch, JBL 119/3:401–419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3268406
Römer T C 2007. The so-called Deuteronomistic History: a sociological, historical and literary introduction. London: T&T Clark.
_______ 2010. Book-endings in Joshua and the question of the so-called Deuteronomistic History, in Noll and Schramm 2010:85–99.
Römer, T C & Schmid, K (eds) 2007. Les dernières rédactions du Pentatueque, de l’ Hexateuge, et de l’ Henneatuege. BETL 203.Leuven: Peeters.
Rösel, M 2002. The Septuagint version of the book of Joshua, SJOT 16:5–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09018320210000329
Rudolph, W 1938. Der “Elohist†von Exodus bis Josua. BZAW 68. Berlin: de Gruyer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112325421
Schenker , A 2010. Textgeschichtliches zum Samaritaniscsher Pentateuch und Samareitikon: Zur Textgeschichte zum Pentateuchs im 2. Jh.v.Chr, in Mor and Reiterer 2010:105–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110212839.3.105
Schmid, K 1999. Erzväter und Exodus: Untersuchungen zur doppelten Begründing der Ursprünge Israels innerhalb der Geschichtsbücher des Alten Testaments. WMANT 81. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
_______ 2012. Die Sameritaner und die Judaër. Die biblische Diskussion um ihr Verhältnis in Josua 24, in Frey, Schattner-Rieser & Schmid 2012:21–49.
Schmid, K & Person, R (eds) 2012. Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch, Hexateuch, and the Deuteronimistic History. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-152423-3
Schorch, S 2011. The Samaritan version of Deuteronomy and the origin of Deuteronomy, in Zsengellér 2011:23–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110268201.23
Soggin, J A 1972. Joshua: a commentary. OTL. London: SCM.
Stipp, H J (ed.) 2011. Das deuteronomistische Geschichtswerk. ÖBS 39. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00800-5
Tate, M E 1990. Psalms 51–100. WBC 20. Waco, Texas: Word Books.
Tigay, J H (ed.) 1985. Empirical models for biblical criticism. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Tov, E 1999. The Greek and Hebrew Bible: collected essays on the Septuagint. VTSup 72. Leiden: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275973
Ulrich, E 1996. Multiple literary editions: reflections toward a theory of the history of the biblical text, in Parry and Ricks 1996:78–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004350229_007
Van der Kooij, A 1998. Perspectives on the study of the Septuagint: who are the translators?, in Garcia Martinez and Noort 1998a:214–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275980_012
Van der Meer, M N 2004. Formation and reformulation: the redaction of the book of Joshua in the light of the oldest textual witnesses. VTSup 102. Leiden: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412922
Van Seters, J 1984. Joshua 24 and the problem of tradition in the Old Testament, in Barrick and Spencer 1984:139–158.
Waltke, B K 2001. How we got the Hebrew Bible: the text and canon of the Old Testament, in Flint 2001:27–50.
Wildenboer, J 2015. Joshua 24: some literary and theological remarks, JSem 24/2:484–502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25159/1013-8471/3465
Witte, M, Schmid, K, Prechel, D & Gertz, J C (eds) 2006. Die Deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerke: Redaktions- und religionsgeschichtliche Perspektiven zur “Deuteronomismusâ€- Diskussion in Tora und vorderen Propheten. BZAW 365. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Woudstra, M H 1981. The book of Joshua. NICOT. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.
Zsengellér, J (ed.) 2011. Samaria, Samar