Joshua 7:8
Context7:8 If only we had been satisfied to live on the other side of the Jordan! O Lord, what can I say now that Israel has retreated 1 before its enemies?
Joshua 17:3
Context17:3 Now Zelophehad son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Makir, son of Manasseh, had no sons, only daughters. These are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.
Joshua 17:14
Context17:14 The descendants of Joseph said to Joshua, “Why have you assigned us only one tribal allotment? After all, we have many people, for until now the Lord has enabled us to increase in number.” 2
Joshua 22:20
Context22:20 When Achan son of Zerah disobeyed the command about the city’s riches, the entire Israelite community was judged, 3 though only one man had sinned. He most certainly died for his sin!’” 4
1 tn Heb “turned [the] back.”
2 tn Heb “Why have you given me as an inheritance one lot and one portion, though I am a great people until [the time] which, until now the
3 tn Heb “Is it not [true that] Achan son of Zerah was unfaithful with unfaithfulness concerning what was set apart [to the
4 tn The second half of the verse reads literally, “and he [was] one man, he did not die for his sin.” There are at least two possible ways to explain this statement: (1) One might interpret the statement to mean that Achan was not the only person who died for his sin. In this case it could be translated, “and he was not the only one to die because of his sin.” (2) Another option, the one reflected in the translation, is to take the words וְהוּא אִישׁ אֶחָד (vÿhu’ ’ish ’ekhad, “and he [was] one man”) as a concessive clause and join it with what precedes. The remaining words (לֹא גָוַע בַּעֲוֹנוֹ, lo’ gava’ ba’avono) must then be taken as a rhetorical question (“Did he not die for his sin?”). Taking the last sentence as interrogative is consistent with the first part of the verse, a rhetorical question introduced with the interrogative particle. The present translation has converted these rhetorical questions into affirmative statements to bring out more clearly the points they are emphasizing. For further discussion, see T. C. Butler, Joshua (WBC), 240.