Not Quite Finished
It came about when the priests who carried the ark of the covenant of the Lord had come up from the middle of the Jordan, and the soles of the priests’ feet were lifted up to the dry ground, that the waters of the Jordan returned to their place, and went over all its banks as before. Joshua 4:18 NASB
Come up – We’ve looked at this verse on a few occasions. You’ll remember the investigation of the idea that the ark and the priests flew over the Jordan (April 10, 2022 and April 11, 2022). A few days ago (June 9, 2022), we spent some time looking at the unusual and interesting problem of qere ketiv in this text (what’s read vs. what’s written). In that investigation we noted a comment from Stefan Schorch: “ . . . the Hebrew script is not able to record vowels, with the exception of the so-called vowel letters (matres lectionis), although the distinctiveness of a certain vocalization may carry important semantic information. As a result, the Hebrew Bible contains in fact a large number of words with different meaning, which had been homographs before the invention of the masoretic pointing.”[1] This verse in Joshua gives us an example. Consider once more the verb “to go up, climb, ascend” [עָלָה (ʿālâ)]. Notice the description in TWOT:
There are nearly 900 occurrences of the verb ʿālâ in the ot. The most common meanings in the simple tenses are “go up” (over 300 times), “come up” (over 160 times) and “ascend” (17 times). In the causative stems the two predominant meanings are “to bring up” (over 100 times) and “to offer” (77 times). The other 230 uses of the word are translated about 85 different ways in the av.[2]
Did you catch the caveat “85 different ways”? This single Hebrew word has almost 100 different English translations. Here is a list of some of the derivatives:
1624a עָלֶה (ʿāleh) leaf, leafage.
1624b עֱלִי (ʿĕlî) pestle (Prov 27:22).
1624c עֹלָה (ʿōlâ) I, whole burnt offering.
1624d עֹלָה (ʿōlâ) II, ascent, stairway.
1624e עִלִּי (ʿillî) upper (Jud 1:15; Josh 15:14).
1624f עֲלִייָה (ʿălîyâ) roof chamber.
1624g עֶלְיוֹן (ʿelyôn) I, high.
1624h עֶלְיוֹן (ʿelyôn) II, most high.
1624i מֹעַל (mōʿal) lifting.
1624j מַעֲלֶה (maʿăleh) ascent.
1624k מַעַל (maʿal) above, upward.
1624l מַעֲלָה (maʿălâ) I, what comes up, i.e. thoughts (Ezk 11:5).
1624m מַעֲלָה (maʿălâ) II, step, stair.
1624n תְּעָלָה (tĕʿālâ) I, conduit, water course.
1624o תְּעָלָה (tĕʿālâ) II, healing.
1624p עַל (ʿal) above.[3]
It’s hard to imagine how some of these derivatives are related. Now imagine reading the text without the vowel pointing. How could you tell which of the multiple possibilities is the correct one? Or is there even a correct one? Context alone is not the answer. The oral tradition must come into play. But even this is problematic. The Masoretes decided what the oral tradition would be when they added the vowel points. They fixed the text. We trust that they did so with full regard for the tradition, but in the cases of qere ketiv it seems clear that they recognized some issues. In other words, even if you realize that your English translation isn’t quite what the Hebrew text says, now you can add another layer. What the Hebrew text says depends on another set of translators, namely, the Masoretes. Emanuel Tov’s comments describe our true situation:
In sum, the text of the Bible is represented by the totality of its textual witnesses, and not primarily by one of them. Each Hebrew manuscript and ancient version represents a segment of the abstract entity that we call “the text of the Bible.” One finds the “text of the Bible” everywhere and nowhere. I say “everywhere,” because all manuscripts, from the ancient Qumran scrolls to the medieval Masoretic manuscripts, attest to it. I say “nowhere,” because we cannot call a single source, extant or reconstructed, “the text of the Bible.” For scholarly purposes we should go back, 2200 years or more, beyond the incongruities created by the domination of MT; only in this way can we understand “the Hebrew Bible.” . . . According to Sanders, the search for an original text is unrealistic since this stage (the “First Phase”) cannot be obtained any more.[4]
Topical Index: climb up, ʿālâ, homographs, meaning, Masoretes, Joshua 4:18
[1] Stefan Schorch, “Dissimilatory reading and the making of Biblical texts: the Jewish Pentateuch and the Samaritan Pentateuch”, in Raymond F. Person, Jr. and Robert Rezetko (eds.), Empirical Models Challenging Biblical Criticism (SBL Press, 2016), p. 113.
[2] Carr, G. L. (1999). 1624 עָלָה. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 666). Chicago: Moody Press.
[3] Carr, G. L. (1999). 1624 עָלָה. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 666). Chicago: Moody Press.
[4] Emanuel Tov, “The Place of the Masoretic Text in Modern Text Editions of the Hebrew Bible: The Relevance of Canon,” in The Canon Debate(eds. Lee McDonald & James A. Sanders; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002), 234–51
