Noah Feldman and the New York Times

I plan to write about this, but for now, I’d just like to provide some links about this issue. If you haven’t heard about it yet, here’s the summary. Dr. Noah Feldman, a law professor at Harvard University, wrote at length in the New York Times Magazine from this past Sunday, about his experiences at the Modern Orthodox Maimonides School in Brookline, which he attended for twelve years. Dr. Feldman has since married a non-Jewish woman and has two children. Entitled “Orthodox Paradox”, the article explores the contradictions and challenges of living at the crossroads of modernity and tradition, as written by someone who still seems himself at that crossroads.

NY Times Article

Shmuly Boteach, who had a close relationship with Dr. Feldman during the latter’s two years at Oxford University, responded thoughtfully.

A response from R. Ozer Glickman, a Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University affiliate the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, is available on request. Send email to rejewvenator[at]gmail.com

Gil Student added some resentful comments.

To see what other bloggers are saying, click here.

Update: Jewcy editor Joey Kurtzman interviews Noah Feldman about his article, “Orthodox Paradox.”

Brits Just Sound Better

I’ve never posted a video before, but here goes nothing! It’s about Islam and liberal democracy. Edit: I can’t seem to embed it… stupid wordpress. Here’s the URL

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=418_1176494781

His arguments are not new, but he sure does deliver. His name is Pat Condell, by the way, and here’s the tagline from his website:

Hi, I’m Pat Condell.

I don’t respect your beliefs

and I don’t care if you’re offended.

Cheers.

What’s Wikipedia For?

Recently, Wikipedia’s been getting some decent press, including an article in the New York Times magazine. I’ve never been much into Wikipedia. Like everyone else, I’ll take a look at it for an overview of a topic or to nail down a specific fact, but on religious or controversial topics, Wikipedia is a hopeless morass of bias. I guess it’s no surprise – who would willingly spend time, uncompensated, to produce and edit these kinds of articles. You’d have to have a strong ideological motivation on a given topic to do this kind of work for free.

It came to me though that perhaps Wikipedia does have a better use. I’ve been reading up on Iran recently, trying to understand a nation whose relevance to American and Israeli politics cannot be understated. Getting a Western perspective is easy enough, but to see the country through the eyes of its loyalists, I turned to Wikipedia.

As I read, my assumptions about what the Wikipedia article would look like were largely confirmed. The tone of the article conveys a great sense of pride in Iranian history and culture, even as it whitewashes or even ignores ignominious events. For example, though much is made of Iranian pride in Islam, the actual Islamic conquest of Iran, a 14-year period whose consequences are still felt today, is disposed of in two sentences.

As an American Jew born in Israel, I realized that I was bringing my own bias to the project, and I wondered if I was merely seeing my own biases reflected back, but then I realized a startling omission. The Wikipedia article about Iran has no mention of Hezbollah! The word appears only once, at the very of a very long article, linking to the main Wikipedia article about Hezbollah. See for yourself:

Iran – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What’s the lesson? Clearly, Wikipedia remains a poor source for unbiased information, but I did find it to be a great window into how Iranian sympathizers see the country. I should probably read the article about Israel next.

Joshua 6 – Really, I Promise

Joshua 6 / Hebrew – English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

Finally, some action! It occurs to me that as a kid, you’re told that the Book of Joshua is about the Israelites conquering the land of Israel, and then you’re forced to get through five chapters with no fighting! Chapter six makes up for all that in dramatic fashion.

The ritualized circling of the city of Jericho, the precursor to its walls being miraculously breached, istruly fascinating. I can’t help but think of the Shemitta and Yovel cycles. First, the armed host circled the city once each day for six days, just like the first six years of the Shemitta. On the seventh day, the priests and the Ark of the Covenant circled the city, representing the seventh year of Shemitta. The Yovel cycle, itself made up of seven seven-year cycles, culminates with blasts of the Shofar (or, the Yovel – a word that means horn) on the fiftieth year to announce the manumission of slaves, and the return of land to its original owners.

At the conquest of Jericho, seven priests, with seven horns, circled the city once each day for six days, and on the seventh, they circled it seven times. All the Israelites were silent until Joshua’s signal at the seventh circuit of the city, when they all cried out together. The slaves who had cried wordlessly to God from the depths of their enslavement finally found a voice, a voice like the sound of the Shofar, a kol teruah, and with it, they declared a Yovel in the land, when slaves were finally fully redeemed, when the land of their fathers, their inheritance, came back to them, and when they ate from a land that they had not sown. Though the crossing of the Jordan has strong ties to Passover, the conquest of Jericho seems to me to be more related to Shavuot, the holiday that anchors the latter part of redemption.

Joshua 6

As promised, I’d like to start at the end of chapter five, which I will quote here for your convenience.

יג וַיְהִי, בִּהְיוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּירִיחוֹ, וַיִּשָּׂא עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא, וְהִנֵּה-אִישׁ עֹמֵד לְנֶגְדּוֹ וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלוּפָה בְּיָדוֹ; וַיֵּלֶךְ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֵלָיו וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ, הֲלָנוּ אַתָּה אִם-לְצָרֵינוּ.	13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand; and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him: ‘Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?’
יד וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא, כִּי אֲנִי שַׂר-צְבָא-יְהוָה–עַתָּה בָאתִי; וַיִּפֹּל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶל-פָּנָיו אַרְצָה, וַיִּשְׁתָּחוּ, וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ, מָה אֲדֹנִי מְדַבֵּר אֶל-עַבְדּוֹ.	14 And he said: ‘Nay, but I am captain of the host of the LORD; I am now come.’ And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down, and said unto him: ‘What saith my lord unto his servant?’
טו וַיֹּאמֶר שַׂר-צְבָא יְהוָה אֶל-יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שַׁל-נַעַלְךָ מֵעַל רַגְלֶךָ, כִּי הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עֹמֵד עָלָיו, קֹדֶשׁ הוּא; וַיַּעַשׂ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כֵּן.	15 And the captain of the LORD’S host said unto Joshua: ‘Put off thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.’ And Joshua did so.

I’m immediately reminded of quite a few similar stories, including Jacob wrestling the mysterious figure whom the Midrash identifies as Esav’s protecting angel, Moshe’s encounter at the burning bush, and even the Haggadah, which mentions an angel with a drawn sword.

The episode in the Haggadah is actually rather illuminating. In Maggid, we interpret the verse:

ח וַיּוֹצִאֵנוּ יְהוָה, מִמִּצְרַיִם, בְּיָד חֲזָקָה וּבִזְרֹעַ נְטוּיָה, וּבְמֹרָא גָּדֹל–וּבְאֹתוֹת, וּבְמֹפְתִים.	8 And the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with great terribleness, and with signs, and with wonders.

(Deut. 26:8)

The Haggadah goes phrase by phrase, and when it reaches the part about an outstretched arm, it explains:

וּבִזְרֹעַ נְטוּיָה – זוֹ הַחֶרֶב, כְּמָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלוּפָה בְּיָדוֹ, נְטוּיָה עַל יְרוּשָלַיִם.

With an outstretched hand – This is the sword, as it is written: “having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem” (1Chron. 21:16)

What’s the Haggadah talking about? Though on the simplest level, the Haggadah is interpreting the word “outstretched” in Deuteronomy by finding a word elsewhere that interprets it, there’s more to it – the verse is trying to give us the identity of the destructive force here unleashed. The verse in Divrei Hayamim (Chronicles) is from a story about David taking a census of the people improperly, leading to a plague sent by God. As the story goes, David is presented with a choice of three penalties for his sin: either there would be a famine for three years, or his enemies would have dominion over him for three months, or God would strike the land with His sword and pestilence for three days. David famously replies to the prophet bringing this dire message something which we recite in the Tachanun prayer:

יג וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִיד אֶל-גָּד, צַר-לִי מְאֹד; אֶפְּלָה-נָּא בְיַד-יְהוָה, כִּי-רַבִּים רַחֲמָיו מְאֹד, וּבְיַד-אָדָם, אַל-אֶפֹּל.	13 And David said unto Gad: ‘I am in a great strait; let me fall now into the hand of the LORD, for very great are His mercies; and let me not fall into the hand of man.’

David thus selects plague, and it is his vision of the angel with the sword that we quote in the Haggadah:

ז וַיִּשָּׂא דָוִיד אֶת-עֵינָיו, וַיַּרְא אֶת-מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה עֹמֵד בֵּין הָאָרֶץ וּבֵין הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלוּפָה בְּיָדוֹ, נְטוּיָה עַל-יְרוּשָׁלִָם; וַיִּפֹּל דָּוִיד וְהַזְּקֵנִים מְכֻסִּים בַּשַּׂקִּים, עַל-פְּנֵיהֶם.	16 And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the LORD standing between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem. Then David and the elders, clothed in sackcloth, fell upon their faces.

This terrifying moment is actually a bit of dramatic irony. Though David is unaware of it, in the previous verse, God chose to spare the city of Jerusalem:

טו וַיִּשְׁלַח הָאֱלֹהִים מַלְאָךְ לִירוּשָׁלִַם, לְהַשְׁחִיתָהּ, וּכְהַשְׁחִית רָאָה יְהוָה וַיִּנָּחֶם עַל-הָרָעָה, וַיֹּאמֶר לַמַּלְאָךְ הַמַּשְׁחִית רַב עַתָּה הֶרֶף יָדֶךָ; וּמַלְאַךְ יְהוָה עֹמֵד, עִם-גֹּרֶן אָרְנָן הַיְבוּסִי. {ס}	15 And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it; and as he was about to destroy, the LORD beheld, and He repented Him of the evil, and said to the destroying angel: ‘It is enough; now stay thy hand.’ And the angel of the LORD was standing by the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. {S}

David remains so afraid of this destructive angel, this angel of the LORD that at the end of the chapter in 1 Chronicles, we learn that even though David had done all in his power to repent of his sin, including consecrating a new altar at lavish expense, he would not bring himself to the Tabernacle in Gibeon:

ל וְלֹא-יָכֹל דָּוִיד לָלֶכֶת לְפָנָיו, לִדְרֹשׁ אֱלֹהִים: כִּי נִבְעַת–מִפְּנֵי, חֶרֶב מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה. {ס}	30 But David could not go before it to inquire of God; for he was terrified because of the sword of the angel of the LORD. {S}

Joshua’s angel is not this same destructive angel, the angel of the LORD. Rather, he is the captain of the LORD’s hosts. When Joshua first sees this angel with a drawn sword, he is afraid, because he has seen an angel with a drawn sword destroy the Egyptians. However, as soon as he learns the identity of the angel, he realizes that this angel has been sent to help him. The episode ends with a Hollywood style fadeout – the angel tells Joshua to remove his shoues, just as Moshe did, and presumably, as the screen fades to black, Joshua and the angel begin to discuss how to begin the conquest of the land.

Of course, since chapter divisions were not the work of the Jews, we can read smoothly on and realize that the first five verses of the next chapter are the contents of this communication.

I’m not sure I intended to write this much about each chapter, as I’ve far out-read where I’m holding in this blog, but so be it. Maybe I’ll put up a broader post on the early section of Joshua, chapters 1-5, next.

Joshua 5

Joshua 5 / Hebrew – English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

Joshua and the nation have crossed the Jordan, but they’re not quite ready for battle yet. Last post I raised the question of why Joshua and the Conquest don’t merit a specific holiday. I believe that the answer is that Pesach is that holiday. The redemptive process that began with leaving Egypt is not yet finished. It appears to be a three-stage process: the first, nationhood, occurs at the Exodus from Egypt. The next stage, God, happens at Har Sinai, where the people accept the Torah. The final stage, land, opens now, with the conquest of Israel. Am, Eretz, Elohim – People, Land, God.

The oddest part of the story then is the mass circumcision of the people. Why exactly were the Israelites uncircumcised? The text explains that they did not practice circumcision in the desert, and I recall commentators explaining that they were halachically exempt from circumcision since they were traveling the desert, and newborns would be at risk for circumcision. This is only apologetics though. For one, children could have been circumcised at a later age, when they were hardier. Second, Moses’ wife circumcises their children while he is crossing the very same desert that the Jews wandered. Third, the Jews spent thirty-eight years camping in one spot, not traveling. Fourth, the Jews lived under the protection of the Clouds of Glory and ate miraculous bread. Surely God would have protected the children who had undergone circumcision!

This lack of circumcision also leaves you wondering about how Pesach was celebrated in the desert. Actually, the Torah only tell us about the first post-Exodus Pesach (Numbers 1-9) and the establishing of Pesach Sheini, but there is no further record in the Torah of Pesach being celebrated. By the later years of the desert sojourn, there must not have been many circumcised males left, and the sacrifice may only be eaten by the circumcised. Is it possible that the people of the desert simply did not celebrate Pesach? That they did no circumcise seems beyond a doubt.

Perhaps the people did not practice circumcision because Egyptians practiced circumcision, especially among the priestly classes. Maybe the Jews stopped practicing circumcision after the Exodus as a rejection of the Egyptian culture that they had been exposed to.

Last time we spoke about the name Gilgal as being a circle of stones, perhaps already standing, perhaps newly-erected by Joshua. In this chapter, we learn a new reason for the name. After Joshua circumcises the people, God comes to him and says:

ט וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, אֶל-יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, הַיּוֹם גַּלּוֹתִי אֶת-חֶרְפַּת מִצְרַיִם, מֵעֲלֵיכֶם; וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא, גִּלְגָּל, עַד, הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה.	9 And the LORD said unto Joshua: ‘This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you.’ Wherefore the name of that place was called Gilgal, unto this day.

Gilgal is thus named three times – once by the land, once by Joshua and the nation, and once by God. The name given by the land is for its physical characteristics, the name given by Joshua and the nation is to memorialize the miracle of the parting of the Jordan, and the name given by God is to commemorate the day of the circumcision, which finally removed the shame of Egypt from the people. My contention is that the Jewish people had practiced circumcision in Egypt as part of their enslavement – that circumcision may have marked them as Israelites, but it also marked them as property of the Egyptian priesthood. When leaving Egypt they refused to circumcise their children to avoid that association. Upon entering their own land, the act of circumcision was no longer a mark of shame for them.

After a few days to heal from the circumcision the Israelites celebrate Pesach in the land of Israel for the first time, and immediately following that, the Man ceases to fall, and the Israelites sustain themselves from the land from then on.

The last part of the chapter deals with Joshua’s encounter with the angel of God, and I will deal with it next time, since that meeting begins the planning for the battle against Jericho, which is dealt with in the next chapter.

Joshua 3-4

Joshua 3 / Hebrew – English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

Joshua 4 / Hebrew – English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

These chapters tell of the Israelites crossing of the Jordan river. We mentioned earlier that Joshua had no moment of consecration, and God, perhaps recognizing the need for one, declares that the miracles of the crossing will serve to elevate Joshua in the eyes of the people and prove to them that God is with Joshua as He was with Moses. Certainly, by parting a body of water for Joshua, as He parted the Sea of Reeds for Moses, God is establishing Joshua as leader in the eyes of the people.

Joshua also takes upon himself to prepare various stone memorials. The name Gilgal, the place where Joshua and the nation camped is a common place-name, thought to refer to circles of standing stones, some of which are likely to be Neolithic in origin. It is unclear whether a stone circle already existed in Joshua’s Gilgal, or whether it was named Gilgal after Joshua erected his stone monument, perhaps in a circle. Also unclear is the exact location of Gilgal. While most place it a few miles northeast of Jericho, Vendyl Jones, the controversial antiquarian (I’ll call him an archaeologist just as soon as he gets his degree in the field) claims to have found Gilgal south of the city of Jericho. His claims are based upon the finding a rectangular wall only twenty inches high that dates to somewhere between 1550 and 3150 BCE. Dr. Jones claims that this wall was the boundary wall separating the Tabernacle’s grounds from the rest of the camp. Perhaps, but with 1,500 years of wiggle room, I’m not yet convinced.

In any case, Joshua certainly has a penchant for these monuments. I’m reminded first of the Patriarchs and their various stone monuments and altars, but with a key difference. Joshua’s monuments are built to be everlasting, unlike those of the Patriarchs. In general, Joshua acts as one taking permanent possession of a land, whereas the Patriarchs were wanderers in the land. I also wonder exactly when Joshua was written – a number of times the phrase “and they are there until this day” appears, and I’m not sure when that time is. Bib-Crit types will claim that it was written in about the 8th or 7th century BCE, Christians will claim Solomon wrote it, or perhaps Ezra, while traditional Jewish sources ascribe the text to Joshua, with a postscript by Phineas ben Elazar. Admittedly, by the latter claim, the claim that the monument stands “until this day” is not so impressive, since Joshua only lives about thirty years after crossing into the land, but of course, that issue is problematic throughout the first five books of the Torah as well.

Getting back to the Exodus elements of the story, the crossing itself occurs on the tenth day of Nisan, just prior to Passover. I wonder why there is no holiday or commemoration of any kind for this crossing, or for the conquest of the land in general. Anyone have any thoughts on that?

And finally, after the crossing and construction of the monument, we get a very Passover-like set of verses:

א וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, לֵאמֹר: אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁאָלוּן בְּנֵיכֶם מָחָר אֶת-אֲבוֹתָם לֵאמֹר, מָה הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה.	21 And he spoke unto the children of Israel, saying: ‘When your children shall ask their fathers in time to come, saying: What mean these stones?
כב וְהוֹדַעְתֶּם, אֶת-בְּנֵיכֶם לֵאמֹר: בַּיַּבָּשָׁה עָבַר יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֶת-הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה.	22 then ye shall let your children know, saying: Israel came over this Jordan on dry land.
כג אֲשֶׁר-הוֹבִישׁ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֶת-מֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן, מִפְּנֵיכֶם–עַד-עָבְרְכֶם: כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם לְיַם-סוּף אֲשֶׁר-הוֹבִישׁ מִפָּנֵינוּ, עַד-עָבְרֵנוּ.	23 For the LORD your God dried up the waters of Jordan from before you, until ye were passed over, as the LORD your God did to the Red Sea, which He dried up from before us, until we were passed over,
כד לְמַעַן דַּעַת כָּל-עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ, אֶת-יַד יְהוָה, כִּי חֲזָקָה, הִיא–לְמַעַן יְרָאתֶם אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם, כָּל-הַיָּמִים. {פ}	24 that all the peoples of the earth may know the hand of the LORD, that it is mighty; that ye may fear the LORD your God for ever.’ {P}

Joshua 2

Joshua 2 / Hebrew – English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

This chapter tells the story of the spies who visit Jericho and stay with Rahab, perhaps the most famous prostitute in the Bible. The story is clearly meant as a foil for the disastrous mission of the spies under Moses, in Parshat Shlach, and in fact, this is the Haftorah for that parsha. Two differences stick out to me. First, the spies chosen are anonymous, and they do not appear to hold any political office – unlike their predecessors, who were tribal chiefs. Second, these spies reported privately to Joshua, not publicly. Both of these seem to be highly pragmatic adaptations that I believe are the hallmark of the difference between Moses’ Joshua’s leadership styles. Joshua believes that God is with him, but he is much more sensitive to the practicalities of leading a nation of imperfect humans.

In addition to this overt allusion, the story also goes back to the parting of the Yam Suf. Let’s compare the texts briefly. First, from the Az Yashir, the song sung after the Israelites had crossed the sea, and immediately after they acknowledged Moses’ leadership over them:

ד  שָׁמְעוּ עַמִּים, יִרְגָּזוּן;  {ס}  חִיל  {ר}  אָחַז, יֹשְׁבֵי פְּלָשֶׁת.  {ס}	14 The peoples have heard, they tremble; pangs have taken hold on the inhabitants of Philistia.
טו  אָז נִבְהֲלוּ, אַלּוּפֵי  {ר}  אֱדוֹם–  {ס}  אֵילֵי מוֹאָב, יֹאחֲזֵמוֹ רָעַד;  {ס}  נָמֹגוּ,  {ר}  כֹּל יֹשְׁבֵי כְנָעַן.  {ס}	15 Then were the chiefs of Edom affrighted; the mighty men of Moab, trembling taketh hold upon them; all the inhabitants of Canaan are melted away.

Now let’s look at what Rahab had to say to the spies:

וַתֹּאמֶר, אֶל-הָאֲנָשִׁים–יָדַעְתִּי, כִּי-נָתַן יְהוָה לָכֶם אֶת-הָאָרֶץ; וְכִי-נָפְלָה אֵימַתְכֶם עָלֵינוּ, וְכִי נָמֹגוּ כָּל-יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ מִפְּנֵיכֶם.	9 and she said unto the men: ‘I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land melt away before you.
י  כִּי שָׁמַעְנוּ, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-הוֹבִישׁ יְהוָה אֶת-מֵי יַם-סוּף מִפְּנֵיכֶם, בְּצֵאתְכֶם, מִמִּצְרָיִם; וַאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם לִשְׁנֵי מַלְכֵי הָאֱמֹרִי אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן, לְסִיחֹן וּלְעוֹג–אֲשֶׁר הֶחֱרַמְתֶּם, אוֹתָם.	10 For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea before you, when ye came out of Egypt; and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were beyond the Jordan, unto Sihon and to Og, whom ye utterly destroyed.
יא  וַנִּשְׁמַע וַיִּמַּס לְבָבֵנוּ, וְלֹא-קָמָה עוֹד רוּחַ בְּאִישׁ מִפְּנֵיכֶם:  כִּי, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם–הוּא אֱלֹהִים בַּשָּׁמַיִם מִמַּעַל, וְעַל-הָאָרֶץ מִתָּחַת.	11 And as soon as we had heard it, our hearts did melt, neither did there remain any more spirit in any man, because of you; for the LORD your God, He is God in heaven above, and on earth beneath.

It appears as if she’s already heard the song! In any case, the word Mog (as in NaMogU) is pretty rare, and appears in the Torah only once, in Joshua twice (both in this chapter), once in Samuel, once in Job, and a few times in the later prophets, including Isaiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Psalms, and Nahum. Usually, when it appears it is specifically referencing the parting of the Sea of Reeds.

There’s also interesting business regarding the sign of the deal that the spies make. They agree to save Rahab and her family, so long as they remain within her home. They also have her tie a scarlet thread to to her window (referred to as Tikvat Hashani – lit. the scarlet hope). It’s reminiscent of the scarlet line that would be tied on Yom Kippur in the Temple, and which would miraculously turn white upon the conclusion of the Yom Kippur service by the High Priest. This is also the first interaction that the Israelites have with the people of Canaan – a people whom they are bound to destroy, not to treat with. This tension will rise up again, shortly.

Tanach Reading Project

I’m trying to read through Tanach again, starting from Joshua. I am reading Hebrew with English translation, and while I may sometimes consult commentary, I am largely seeking to simply read through the Tanach and see how I respond to it ten years after the last time I finished reading through the Tanach.

Joshua Chapter 1

The first part of the first chapter of Joshua is a communication from God to Joshua in which God summarizes His covenant with the Jewish people, and indicates that Joshua will serve in Moses’ stead as the leader of the Jewish people and the messenger of God. God also emphasizes to Joshua that in order to succeed, he will have to remain faithful to the Torah, and to continue to study it and perform the commandments it contains. God tells Joshua to “be strong and resolute” and to have no fear, because God will not abandon him.

Joshua then begins to command the people. Notable is the gap in the narrative – after God speaks to Joshua, no response is recorded – unlike other prophets, including Moses, there is no act of consecration or any kind of episode in which Joshua responds to his election, either positively or negatively.

Instead, it appears that Joshua is confirmed through his continuation of Moses’ leadership. His first act of leadership is to gather the people and inform them that they will cross the Jordan in three days, and then to give specific instructions to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and (half of) Manasseh, reminding them of their pact with Moses, in which they agreed to send their send their armies across the Jordan with the rest of the Israelites, in exchange for receiving the lands east of the Jordan as their inheritance. They respond as follows:

טז  וַיַּעֲנוּ, אֶת-יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לֵאמֹר:  כֹּל אֲשֶׁר-צִוִּיתָנוּ נַעֲשֶׂה, וְאֶל-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁלָחֵנוּ נֵלֵךְ.	16 And they answered Joshua, saying: ‘All that thou hast commanded us we will do, and whithersoever thou sendest us we will go.
יז  כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר-שָׁמַעְנוּ אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, כֵּן נִשְׁמַע אֵלֶיךָ:  רַק יִהְיֶה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, עִמָּךְ, כַּאֲשֶׁר הָיָה, עִם-מֹשֶׁה.	17 According as we hearkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee; only the LORD thy God be with thee, as He was with Moses.
יח  כָּל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-יַמְרֶה אֶת-פִּיךָ, וְלֹא-יִשְׁמַע אֶת-דְּבָרֶיךָ לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר-תְּצַוֶּנּוּ–יוּמָת:  רַק, חֲזַק וֶאֱמָץ.  {פ}	18 Whosoever he be that shall rebel against thy commandment, and shall not hearken unto thy words in all that thou commandest him, he shall be put to death; only be strong and of good courage.’ {P}

Thus, the people echo God, accepting Joshua as Moses’ replacement, and urging him to be strong and resolute.