Joshua's Long Day - was it really? #1
An in-depth look at this day
Presented by
Ralph Woodrow
FOREWORD by Keith Hunt
I grew up, like most of us do who are surrounded by "Christian
religion" with pre-conceived ideas, taught to us as children. I
was told that the sun stood still for Joshua and extended the day
for many hours. I accepted this as a child without much question,
after all is it possible for God to do anything, nothing is
impossible for Him. And I never studied the matter of Joshua's
Long Day. I never investigated the issue in any in-depth way. It
was not until I was in my late 40s that I read the small book by
Ralph Woodrow, which I now present to you here. For me it changed
my whole understanding and concept on the so-called Long Day of
Joshua.
Let me say, this is not a matter of salvation, it really makes no
difference if you want to believe the day was literally extended
by many hours, or if you want to believe Woodrow and many others
he quotes, and how they have come to view it. I personally will
side with Woodrow and the others, as to the true understanding of
this section of Scripture.
JOSHUA'S LONG DAY
How Long Was it?
We have all heard about the time Joshua commanded the sun to
stand still and - according to the common belief - the day was
extended many additional hours until the battle was won.
Early settlers in the California desert were familiar with
the story and are credited for naming the "Joshua tree" which
reminded them of Joshua, lifting his hands, and commanding the
sun to obey his words.
The story has even been the basis for some pulpit humor.
A man accused of bootlegging was brought before a judge.
"What is your name?" "Joshua." "Are you the Joshua that made the
sun stop?" "No Sir, I'm the Joshua that made the moonshine"!
At the time of Galileo, much attention was focused on the
Biblical account of Joshua. Galileo understood that day and night
result from the earth turning on its axis - not because the sun
travels around the earth. This brought him into conflict with the
Romish Inquisition which threatened him with torture and life in
prison. Religious leaders at the time, such as Pope Paul V,
believed the sun travelled around the earth, the proof being that
Joshua's command for the sun to stand still made the day longer!
As well-known as the basic story about Joshua is, however, a
serious study of the Biblical account reveals that what really
happened has been commonly misunderstood. The traditional view is
that Joshua and his men had fought all through the day until late
afternoon. Seeing the sun about to set, and realizing that
additional hours of daylight were required to complete the
battle, Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and lo! that day
was extended not just for a few extra moments, but for almost a
whole day.
Today, however, we all know, as Galileo did, that the length
of a day is not determined by the movement of the sun. It is the
earth turning on its axis that makes day and night. Consequently,
the passage about Joshua making the sun stand still has puzzled
and embarrassed Bible teachers who have tried to uphold the
traditional view. In an attempt to harmonize the story with
scientific facts, they say it was actually the earth that stopped
turning, that the only reason the Biblical writer spoke of the
sun standing still is because he used terms as they were
understood at the time. It is pointed out that even today we use
the terms "sunrise" and "sunset" even though, technically, it is
not the sun that is rising or setting.
But I believe there is a much better explanation.
Many are surprised when it is pointed out that a hailstorm
took place that day. This part of the story, though clearly
stated in the text (Joshua 10:11), is not as well-known as the
part about Joshua's command to the sun! Somehow the idea of
Joshua praying for more daylight does not seem to fit with the
sky being darkened by a massive storm!
With these thoughts as a preface, we turn to Joshua
10:12-14:
Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord
delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and
he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon
Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun
stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had
avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written
in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst
of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. And
there was no day like that before it or after it, that the
Lord harkened unto the voice of a man: for the Lord fought
for Israel.
The expressions used in this text about the sun or moon
standing still are translated from two Hebrew words "daman" and
"amad" in the following places: "Sun, stand still [daman] ... and
the sun stood still [daman], and the moon stayed [amad]... so the
sun stood still [amad]." The first word used, "daman," is given
in the margin as "be silent." It has the root meaning of "to be
dumb" and thus, by implication, "to stop" (Strong's Concordance,
1826).
The other Hebrew word, "amad," is defined as "to stand" and
is used in various relations literally and figuratively (Strong's
Concordance, 5975).
Within the book of Joshua it is the word used when the
waters of Jordan stood upon a heap and when the priests, crossing
this riverbed with the sacred ark, stood still. Though the word
is used in a variety of ways, the idea of to stop or quit is
evident: the waters of Jordan stopped flowing, the priests
stopped marching, etc. Admittedly, both words - "daman" and
"amad" - have the meaning of "TO STOP."
But the question is: When Joshua commanded the sun to stop,
did he mean for it to stop moving or stop shining? We believe he
meant for it to STOP SHINING!
The Jerome Biblical Commentary says the Hebrew meaning, as
used in this context, is "stop shining," and refers to the
darkening of the sun and moon. (The Jerome Biblical Commentary,
p.135).
"The Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Cyclopedia"
cites various viewpoints regarding this passage, including that
which would take these words "to signify merely cease to shine."
(M'Clintock and Strong, op.cit., Vol.4, pp.1026, 1027).
Many years ago an article in "Moody Monthly" presented a
comparison of the Hebrew words in our text with parallel usages
in ancient astronomical tablets. The conclusion presented in the
article is that "stand still" makes good sense if rendered
"become dark" - that the sun stopped shining, not that the whole
solar system stopped for a day (Robert Dick Wilson, "What Does
'The Sun Stood Still' Mean?" in "Moody Monthly" (October 1920).
What caused the sun to stop shining? This is where the
hailstorm comes in! The sun stopped shining on Gibeon because the
sky was darkened with stormy clouds. In various situations the
Biblical writers spoke of "a thick cloud" blotting out the light
of the sun (Isaiah 44:22), of turning a day into "darkness" (Job
3:4,5), of the heavens becoming "black with clouds" (I Kings
18:45). Ezekiel spoke of God covering "the sun with a cloud,"
resulting in "darkness upon thy land" (Ezekiel 32:7,8). Job said,
"With clouds he covereth the light; and commandeth it not to
shine by the cloud that cometh betwixt" (Job 36:32). During
Paul's voyage toward Rome, for many days the sun was not seen
because of storm clouds (Acts 27:20).
When Joshua commanded the sun to stop shining, the storm
that moved in was of such density that it cut off the sunlight
from Gibeon. The attacking Amorites may have considered this a
bad omen, providing at least one reason why they fled from Gibeon
in terror. As they fled "the Lord cast down great stones from
heaven upon them... and they died: they were more which died with
hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the
sword" (Joshua 10:11).
Why did Joshua want the sun to stop shining upon Gibeon? We
believe the Biblical evidence indicates this battle took place in
the middle of summer and that Joshua was asking for relief from
the extreme heat of the sun, certainly not for more sunlight or
an extended day!
HIGH NOON
Contrary to the idea that the sun was about to set - and
Joshua saw that he needed more hours of daylight to complete the
battle - the Bible speaks of the sun as being "in the midst of
heaven" (Joshua 10:13). "The Hebrew here is not the usual word
for midst," says the Pulpit Commentary. "It signifies literally,
the half." (Pulpit Commentary, vol.7, p.166).
The Hebrew word is "chatsi" which is translated over 100
times by the word "half." The meaning is that the sun was
overhead, it was high noon! The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia makes this comment:
The sun to Joshua was associated with Gibeon, and the sun
can naturally be associated with a locality in either of two
positions: it may be overhead to the observer and considered
as being above the place where he is standing or as a
locality on the skyline and the sun rising or setting just
behind it. But here, it was not the latter two, but at noon,
literally in the halving of the heaven; that is to say,
overhead. Thus Joshua was at Gibeon when he spoke (ISBE,
vol.1, p. 448).
It was at Gibeon that Joshua said: "Sun, stand thou still upon
Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon." With the sun
overhead - at noon - notice where the moon was. The description
is quite precise. The moon was "in the valley of Ajalon" - not
"over," but "in" the valley of Ajalon. Since Ajalon was a low
pass, the declining moon above the horizon appeared to be framed
in the valley.
Looking now at the map, the over-all picture begins to
come into better focus. Ajalon is west of Gibeon. Had the sun
been setting and the moon rising - as some have supposed - the
moon would have been east of Gibeon. This was clearly not the
case.
The moon was setting in the valley of Ajalon, west of
Gibeon. The sun was over Gibeon - in the half of the sky - at
noon. With the sun and the moon in these positions, it has been
determined that the moon was in its "third quarter," about half
full, had risen at about 11 PM the previous night and was now
within a half hour of setting. The sun had risen at almost
exactly 5 AM that morning. It was summertime, Tuesday, July 22!
(Ibid., p. 449).
It is not necessary to complicate this paper with the
technicalities of how these details are figured (based on the
positions of sun and moon, the amount of degrees north of west
the valley of Ajalon is from Gibeon, the contour of the land,
etc.); nor is it necessary to insist that it was exactly Tuesday,
July 22. For our present purpose it is sufficient to say it was
summertime, it was the month we call July and, consequently, it
was hot! We believe the reason Joshua wanted the sun to stop
shining was to provide relief from its burning heat.
Protection from the sun's heat in that land was very
important, so much so, that prophets commonly used wording about
shade as a type of God's blessings: "A shadow from the heat... in
a dry place... with the shadow of a cloud" (Isaiah 25:4,5); "The
Lord is thy shade... the sun shall not smite thee by day" (Psalms
121:5,6); "... under the shadow of the Almighty" (Ps. 91:1); "A
shadow in the daytime from the heat" (Isaiah 4:6); "The shadow of
a great rock in a weary land" (Isaiah 32:2).
Jesus spoke of the scorching heat of the sun (Matt. 13:6);
"the heat of the day" being the most difficult time to work in
the fields (Matt.20:12); a time when workers "earnestly desired
the shadow" from the heat (Job 7:2). "The sun beat upon the head
of Jonah, that he fainted, and wished in himself to die," so
intense was the heat of the sun (Jonah 4:5,8).
Relief from the sun's heat would help Joshua's men, but a
longer day would have put them at a disadvantage, as the
following details show:
When the Gibeonites sent to Joshua for help it was an
emergency message: "Slack not thy hand from thy servants; come up
to us quickly, and save us" (Joshua 10:5,6). The message was
urgent and there was no time for delay. "So Joshua ascended from
Gilgal, he, and all the people of war with him, and... came unto
them suddenly, and went up from Gilgal all night" (verses 7-9).
This was an uphill march of about 20 miles. Since there had
been no advance warning, Joshua's men had no time to rest in
preparation for this march. Instead, they had been up all day,
marched all that night carrying weapons and supplies with them,
and had engaged in a fierce battle until noon. Being summertime,
and now the heat of the day - with the temperature possibly as
high as 120 degrees - is it likely that Joshua would be asking
for more hours of daylight? Would another 12 hours of daylight be
to their advantage? Hardly. When Joshua commanded the sun to
stop, there is every reason to believe he wanted it to stop
shining! He didn't want more sunshine, if anything, he wanted
less!
Professor E. W. Maunder, who was for forty years
superintendent of the Solar Department of the Royal Observatory
at Greenwich, summed up the situation in these very fine
comments:
From what was it then that Joshua wished the sun to cease:
from its moving or from its shining? It is not possible to
suppose that, engaged as he was in a desperate battle, he
was even so much as thinking of the sun's motion at all. But
its shining, its scorching heat, must have been most
seriously felt by him. At noon, in high summer, southern
Palestine is one of the hottest countries of the world. It
is impossible to suppose that Joshua wished the sun to be
fixed overhead, where it must have been distressing his men
who had already been seventeen hours on foot. A very arduous
pursuit lay before them and the enemy must have been
fresher than the Israelites. The sun's heat therefore must
have been a serious hindrance, and Joshua must have desired
it to be tempered. And the Lord harkened to his voice and
gave him this and much more. A great hailstorm swept up from
the west, bringing with it a sudden lowering of temperature,
and no doubt hiding the sun (The World Almanac and Book of
Facts - 1982 - New York: Newspaper Enterprise Ass. Inc.,
1981, p. 161).
"The Wycliffe Bible Commentary," in similar vein, points out
that what Joshua deemed necessary for his troops who were already
tired from the all-night march, "was relief from the merciless
sun... God answered above all that Joshua could ask or think by
sending not only the desired shade to refresh His army but also a
devastating hailstorm to crush and delay His enemies... The true
explanation of this miracle, told in ancient, oriental, poetic
style, tends to confirm the idea that Joshua was looking for
relief from the sun (Wycliffe Bible Commentary - Moody Press,
1962, p. 218).
NO DAY LIKE THAT
Once a person has been taught the other view - that the day
was extended for many additional hours - a verse like Joshua
10:14 tends to support that idea: "There was no day like that
before it or after it." But expressions like this were
proverbial; simply a way of stating that what happened was out of
the ordinary, unusual. Similar expressions may be found in verses
such as Exodus 9:18; 10:14; 1 Kings 3:12; 2 Kings 18:5; 23:22,
25; 2 Chron.1:12; Ezekiel 5:8,9; Joel 2:2; etc. What made this
day unusual is explained as we continue reading:
"There was no day like that before it or after it, that the
Lord harkened unto the voice of a man"!
We should not read into this verse the idea that the day was
unusual because the sun stopped moving and the hours of that day
extended. Even if this had been the case, this was clearly not
the point here. The point being made, as Maunder says, is that
"Joshua had spoken, not in prayer or supplication, but in
command, as if all nature was at his disposal; and the Lord had
harkened and had, as it were, obeyed a human voice: an
anticipation of the time when a greater Joshua would command even
the winds and the sea, and they would obey him" (ISBE, p. 448).
After reading that there was no day like this before, and
that the Lord harkened to the voice of a man, we read: "FOR the
Lord fought for Israel." What did the Lord do? Comparing
scripture with scripture, what the Lord did in fighting for
Israel was this: "The Lord cast down great stones from heaven
upon them... more died with hailstones than they whom the
children of Israel slew with the sword" (Joshua 10:11).
.................
Entered on my Website July 2004
JOSHUA'S LONG DAY? continued
Once a person has been taught the other view - that the day
was extended for many additional hours - a verse like Joshua
10:14 tends to support that idea: "There was no day like that
before it or after it." But expressions like this were
proverbial; simply a way of stating that what happened was out of
the ordinary, unusual. Similar expressions may be found in verses
such as Exodus 9:18; 10:14; 1 Kings 3:12; 2 Kings 18:5; 23:22,
25; 2 Chron.1:12; Ezekiel 5:8,9; Joel 2:2; etc. What made this
day unusual is explained as we continue reading: "There was no
day like that before it or after it, THAT the Lord HARKENED unto
the voice of a MAN"!
We should not read into this verse the idea that the day was
unusual because the sun stopped moving and the hours of that day
extended. Even if this had been the case, this was clearly not
the point here. The point being made, as Maunder says, is that:
"Joshua had spoken, not in prayer or supplication, but in
command, as if all NATURE was at his DISPOSAL; and the Lord
had HARKENED and had, as it were, OBEYED a HUMAN voice: an
anticipation of the time when a greater Joshua would command
even the winds and the sea, and they would obey him"
(ISBE,P.448).
After reading that there was no day like this before, and
that the Lord harkened to the voice of a man, we read:
"FOR the Lord fought for Israel."
What did the Lord do? Comparing scripture with scripture,
what the Lord did in fighting for Israel was this:
"The Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them...
more died with hailstones than they whom the children of
Israel slew with the sword" (Joshua 10:11).
This explains why that day was unusual and unique. But had
the whole solar system stopped moving - this being so much more
dynamic - surely the verse would have read: "And there was no day
like that before it or after it, for the Lord stopped the whole
solar system!" But instead, the POINT of the passage is that the
Lord obeyed the voice of a MAN and fought for Israel. And the way
he fought for Israel, specifically, is that he sent a storm which
dropped huge hailstones upon the enemy.
A. Lincoln Shute has described the defeat of the Amorites in
these words:
For nearly two miles they ran and stumbled from Upper to
Lower Beth-horon. Just before passing Lower Beth-horon, they
turned to the south and swept through the wider valley just
below Lower Beth-horon to the east, now filled with many
olive trees. Just after passing Lower Beth-horon, this
valley turns westward along the south side of the hill on
which the city stands, and a little farther on it turns
southward again towards the valley of Ajalon. Here, out of
the mountain passes, they poured into this broad valley, and
continued their disorderly retreat southward under the
pelting hail till they reached the vicinity of Azekah...
Here, apparently, the hail-storm ceased (Joshua 10:11), the
clouds broke, and, later in the afternoon, past the heat of
that July day, the sun appeared once more.
(A.Lincoln Shute, "The Battle of Beth-Horon," in
"Bibliotheca Sacra," 1927, p. 422).
MIRACLES WORLD-WIDE?
The earth completes one rotation on its axis in 23 hours, 56
minutes, and 4 seconds. This means that the surface of the earth
at the equator is travelling over 1,000 miles an hour. If the
earth suddenly stopped - causing the sun to appear to stand
still, as some explain it - the chain reaction of events
world-wide would have been tremendous. In 1960 an earthquake in
Chile triggered seismic sea waves that caused damage from Alaska
to New Zealand and wrecked coastal villages in Japan - a third of
the way around the world. If an earthquake could have such
far-reaching effects, imagine what would happen if the whole
earth suddenly stopped! All human beings, animals, and loose
objects would be thrown forward. Oceans would be flung onto land,
coastal towns would be devastated, ships at sea would be
swallowed by vast waves, and buildings would crumble. There would
be literally millions of disasters world-wide! Why would
thousands of people living in Italy need to be killed with waves,
or the population of Japan terrified with a night twice as long,
just so Joshua could defeat a comparatively few Amorites at
Gibeon?
Make no mistake about it, God is all-mighty and could
provide invisible "seat belts" for all people, hold back the
ocean from the coastlines, protect the ships at sea, keep
buildings from toppling over and millions of other miracles as he
stopped this planet from turning! But why such complex and
overwhelming measures in order to accomplish one simple purpose?
To complicate the whole thing to this extent reminds us of a
Rube Goldberg drawing about a machine for washing dishes. When
spoiled tomcat (A) discovers he is alone, he lets out a yell
which scares mouse (B) into jumping into basket (C), causing
lever end (D) to rise and pull string (E) which snaps automatic
cigar-lighter (F). Flame (G) starts fire sprinkler (H). Water
runs on dishes (I) and drips into sink (J). Turtle (K), thinking
he hears babbling brook babbling, and having no sense of
direction, starts wrong way and pulls string (L), which turns on
switch (M) that starts electric glow heater (N). Heat ray (O)
dries the dishes!
If God suddenly stopped the earth from turning - and
performed multiplied millions of protection miracles worldwide -
because of Joshua's words, the events that took place at Gibeon
would fade into insignificance in comparison! The Bible account
of what really happened would be pitifully incomplete. We do not
believe this is the case.
The New Testament mentions many phenomenal events in Old
Testament history -a leper dipping in Jordan for healing, Gideon
defeating an army, Lot escaping Sodom, manna falling from heaven,
Aaron's staff budding, the Exodus from Egypt, crossing the Red
Sea on dry ground, the fall of Jericho, etc. But the New
Testament never says anything about what would have been a
miracle of much greater magnitude: the sun (or earth) standing
still. It does not mention the world-wide disasters this would
have caused or the miracles that would have been required to
prevent such disasters. Does this not seem like a strange
omission if indeed Joshua's words set off a chain of complicated
and complex events world-wide? How much more feasible logically
and scripturally - to simply recognize that the sun stopped
shining and not that it stopped moving!
ORDER OF EVENTS
Taking the information given in Joshua 10, we are able to
reconstruct the order of events for this day. Again, the map on
page 84 will clarify the locations (I do not reproduce the map -
Keith Hunt).
1. Joshua and his men march all night from their camp at Gilgal
(verse 9).
2. Arriving at Gibeon, their attack on the Amorites meets with
great success (verse 10).
3. The Amorites flee for Azeka and Makkedah (verse 10).
4. Along the road huge hailstones fall on them, killing more than
are killed by the sword of Israel (verse 11).
5. "That day" Makkedah is taken, smitten with the sword, and camp
is set up there (verses 28,21).
6. The five kings who escaped and hid in a cave at Makkedah are
captured, killed, and hung on trees (verses 16, 26).
7. "And it came to pass at the time of the going down of the sun,
that Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the trees, and
cast them into the cave" (verse 27).
There is not the slightest hint from verse 27 that the sun
went down almost 12 (or 24) hours later than usual. There is
every reason to believe from this wording that "the time of the
going down of the sun" was the normal time.
If indeed the sun went down 12 hours later than usual (not
to mention 24 hours later, as some suppose!), this would mean
that Joshua and his men would have been up the day before their
march to Gibeon, marched all night, fought all day until evening,
and then continued fighting for another 12 hours during an
extended day; that is, a day of 12 hours, a night of 12 hours,
fighting all day for 12 hours, and then 12 hours more ! This
would be a total of 48 hours without sleep. The Amorites, on the
other hand, being the ones who planned the attack, had time to
rest before and would have been many hours fresher than the
Israelites. An extended day would have given them an advantage -
not the Israelites!
When the sun went down at Makkedah - "at the time of the
going down of the sun," the normal time - this was a long enough
day without extending it longer!
UNINTERRUPTED TIME
Another point that weighs heavily is the fact that the Bible
implies the cycle of day and night has never been interrupted.
Clear back in Genesis we read: "While the earth remaineth..
day and night shall not cease (Genesis 8:22). Significantly, the
word translated "cease" is "sabbath," the word from which Sabbath
is derived, expressing the idea of intermission, to rest, to
cease (Strong's Concordance, 7673, 7676). In other words, as long
as the earth remained, day and night were not to cease, were not
to take a sabbath. But if - at the time of Joshua - night did not
come at its normal time, then the cycle of day and night did
indeed take a rest!
Day and night have never ceased to function right on time.
"Thus saith the Lord; If ye can break my covenant of the
day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not
be day and night IN THEIR SEASON" - right on time! - "then
may also my covenant be broken..." (Jeremiah 33:20).
The very integrity of God is linked to an uninterrupted
cycle of day and night.
Jeremiah, who spoke these words, lived after the time of
Joshua. If he had believed the cycle of day and night was
interrupted at the time of Joshua, his analogy would not be
valid. There is the strong implication that he did not believe
the sequence of day and night "in their season" had ever been
interrupted.
Those who believe the sun stopped and the day was lengthened
12 or 24 hours, face serious problems of interpretation. Suppose
Joshua's command was given on a Tuesday (the third day of the
week) - and this day was extended to include what normally would
have been Wednesday then Thursday (the next day, figuring by the
sun marking off day and night) would be the fourth day of the
week, Friday the fifth, Saturday the sixth, and Sunday the
seventh day of the week. The whole sequence of days would be off
a day from what it had been before! No such thing occurred, in
our opinion. The Bible uses the term "DAY" in describing this
period - not days.
If the time marked by the sun and moon was delayed for 24
hours, then holy days such as the Passover would from then on
fall on a different day than at the time of Moses. This is
unthinkable, for the Israelites were to keep the passover "in the
fourteenth day of this month, at even, ye shall keep it in its
appointed season" (Numbers 9:2, 3). If the moon had been delayed
for about a complete day, those who kept the Passover on the
fourteenth day after the new moon, would not be keeping the same
24 hour segment of time as that commanded by Moses! All Sabbaths,
feast days, and new moon festivals would have fallen within a
different 24 hour period than before - each being one day off!
This hardly seems to have been the case and so, again, a
reason to believe the sun stopped shining - not stopped moving! -
at the command of Joshua.
(Those who expound and believe this day of Joshua was extended by
12 to 24 hours just tell you that it did not effect the days of
the week per se. only that one of those days was an extra long
day. But as Woodrow has pointed out God said, long before Joshua
that day and night would not be interrupted. Miracles have taken
place on certain days, but none of the writers of the Bible give
any evidence that the earth stopped rotating for 12 to 24 hours,
and so interrupting the normal day and night function of the
earth - such an event as Woodrow points out, would have been so
huge a miracle, it could have hardly escaped being mentioned by
more than one writer of the books of the Bible - Keith Hunt).
AN EXTENDED DAY?
We have stated that Joshua wanted relief from the heat of
the sun - not more hours of sunlight. There is the direct
scriptural statement about a storm that moved in which would have
caused the sun to stop shining on Gibeon. And there is, of
course, the basic fact that stopping the sun would not make an
extended day. For these reasons, we have taken the position
presented here.
But, coming to verse 13, we read that the sun "hasted
not to go down about a whole day" which, in our English version,
does indeed seem to teach that the day was extended. Our
translators lived at a time when it was assumed that if the sun
stopped it would make the day longer. It is evident they
translated the Hebrew words here to fit within that concept. But
these words "cannot be proved to have this meaning," says the
highly esteemed "Pulpit Commentary." "In fact, it is difficult to
fix any precise meaning on them" (Pulpit Commentary, Vol.7,
p.166).
Many years ago, A. Lincoln Shute actually visited the area
of Gibeon at the specific season when the sun and moon were in
the same positions as recorded in Joshua 10, the sun overhead at
noon and the moon in the valley of Ajalon to the west. He wrote
an article for "Bibliotheca Sacra" in which he stated his belief
that the storm caused the sun to stop shining (not moving) and
that all the reasonable evidence for this viewpoint "goes far to
indicate that [verse 13] probably has some sense that harmonizes
with all the rest, if we only knew all the facts and all of the
various shades of meaning in that far away time" (Shute, op.cit.,
p. 430). We agree with this statement and will give several
possibilities concerning verse 13.
The Wycliffe Bible Commentary gives the following
translation:
"For the sun ceased [shining] in the midst of the sky, and
[i.e., although] it did not hasten to set about a whole day"
(The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 218).
Another possibility is this: We are told that the sun
"hasted not to go down." If we are correct that the way the sun
stopped was that it stopped shining, then the word "go" would be
a reversal of that action; that is, the sun stopped shining and
did not hasten to "go" (shine) again until the day was about
completed (whole). The word translated "whole" is also translated
"full" or "complete" in the Bible. In other words, then, what was
said poetically would mean, literally, that Joshua commanded the
sun to stop shining at noon, the clouds intervened, and when the
day was almost completed, the sun shined again. In the meantime,
it "hasted not" - it was not in any hurry, was not pressed - to
shine down upon them.
M'Clintock and Strong suggest that verse 13 - the sun
"halted not to go down a whole day" - is equivalent to withheld
its full light (M'Clintock and Strong, op. cit., Vol.4. pp. 1026,
1027).
Again, bear in mind that the word translated "whole" can be
correctly translated "full." The word "day" can be Biblically
linked with light, as when "God called the light Day" (Genesis
1:5). By omitting "about" (which is not translated from any
Hebrew word anyway), the wording "withheld its full light" does
present a meaning in harmony with the evidence we have seen.
Another thought: Often when the Bible uses the word "sun,"
it means more precisely the light of the sun, as when we read
that the fruits of the earth are "brought forth by the sun"
(Deut.33:14). If it is the light of the sun that is primarily
meant in verse 13 - and not the sun itself - it could be said
that the light of the sun did not go down - did not shine - until
the day was almost completed.
This raises the question, however, as to why the expression,
"the sun did not GO down" (which sounds more like the setting of
the sun itself) would be used. Why would it not be said, if
speaking of the light or rays of the sun, "the sun did not COME
down"? Realizing that the Hebrew word translated "go" has a wide
variety of applications, I wondered if it could just as correctly
be translated "come" down. My hunch was easily and quickly
confirmed as I checked Strong's Concordance (Number 935).
Interestingly enough, this word can be translated either way
- "go" or "come"! And, in fact, it is translated more times
"come" (670 times) than "go" (150 times)!
With this possibility, verse 13 would be saying that the
light of the sun (and its excessive heat being implied) did not
come down on them until the day was almost complete.
Another shade of meaning may be possible in the word
translated "day." The word is common enough, but its specific
definition is: "to be hot; a day (as the warm hours)" (Strong's
Concordance, 3117). By applying this precise meaning to verse 13,
and realizing that Joshua wanted relief from the heat of the sun,
it is possible that "day" could be understood as the heat of the
day. If so, then "about a whole day" would mean that the sun
stopped shining for "about" the whole period when the sun's heat
would be oppressive - the hot hours of the day.
Taking this information, then, and including it in brackets,
the following gives an over-all view of our text:
"Sun, stop [shining] upon Gibeon... and the sun stopped
[shining] ... until the people had avenged themselves upon
their enemies... So the sun in the midst of the sky stopped
[shining], and [the light of the sun] hasted not to go [come
or shine] down for about a whole [an entire] day
[specifically the hot hours of the day]."
POETIC PASSAGE
Finally, it should be pointed out that the wording about the
sun stopping is in a portion of Joshua 10 that is unmistakably
poetic in nature. As the "Pulpit Commentary" says:
"The poetic form of this passage is clear to everyone who
has the smallest acquaintance with the laws of Hebrew
poetry" and that these words "belong rather to the domain of
poetry than history, and their language is that of hyperbole
rather than of exact narration of facts."" Poetic passages
such as this do not require a literal meaning for each word
or expression used.
....................
TO BE CONTINUED
No comments:
Post a Comment