Vow Times Two

And should you tell of this mission of ours, we will be clear of your vow that you made us vow.  Joshua 2:20  Robert Alter

Your vow/us vow – Alter’s translation helps us realize that the same Hebrew word is used in both occurrences.  If you read this verse in the NASB, you probably would assume otherwise:

“But if you tell this business of ours, then we shall be free from the oath which you have made us swear.”

It’s true that “oath” and “swear” are cognates, but “oath” is “common to Celtic and Germanic, possibly a loan-word from one to the other, but the history is obscure and it may ultimately be non-Indo-European,”[1] whereas “swear” follows the route of Old Saxon to Old High German and Gothic.  Of course, the translation gives us the right “picture,” but it obscures the deep Hebrew connection.  The spies use the same Hebrew root for the description of Rahab’s vow and their obligation.  “Your vow” is šĕbūʿâ.  “Made us vow” is from the root šābaʿ, the same root for “your vow.”  The Hebrew leaves no doubt at all about the connection.  This is vow times two.

There are two reasons why this matters.  The first is obvious.  We need to know that the two vows are of the same kind.  They are both sacred oaths, arising from the reciprocal obligation of ḥesed found in verse 12 (where the same root, šābaʿ, is translated in the NASB as “swear”).  In other words, the obligation incurred through an act of ḥesed governs this entire passage.  The translation should not disguise this.

Secondly, despite the ḥesed obligation, we find that the spies set conditions for their response.  By tying “swear,” “oath,” and “kindness” together, we see why later rabbis felt the need to provide explanations for their actions.  Typically, ḥesed spawns unconditional obligation.  The two parties establish something like an ancient treaty.  If either party breaks the obligation, severe consequences follow.  Since ḥesed is one of those Hebrew words that has no cognate in other Semitic languages, and its paradigm example is found in God’s self-description (Exodus 34:6-7), any occurrence must be carefully examined.  But in this case, the spies provide themselves with an escape clause, highly unusual in ḥesed formulations.  What they say is that if Rahab tells anyone other than her father’s household about the promised rescue, they will no longer be obligated.  The question is this: “What obligation is forfeited?”  Do they mean that if she talks they won’t honor their promise to rescue her and her father’s household, or do they mean they they won’t save anyone else who shows up?  Despite the apparent conditions placed on this vow, the spies still obligate themselves to rescue Rahab and her family even if others show up.  They simply say that they won’t be responsible for anyone other than the family.  ḥesed still applies.  It is still obligatory.  But it does not extend indefinitely.  The promise can’t be expanded.

This has some interesting implications.  God and Israel are involved in ḥesed obligations because God initiated the treaty.  If we apply the declaration of the spies concerning ḥesed to God’s relationship with Israel, we might conclude that God’s promise of rescue and redemption also can’t be indefinitely extended.  The promise includes those who are Israel, but not everyone else.  Perhaps we need this kind of background when we turn to Paul’s convoluted arguments about Jews and Gentiles.

Topical Index: ḥesed, šĕbūʿâ, oath, šābaʿ, to vow, Joshua 2:20

[1] https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=oath&ref=searchbar_searchhint