וַיַּעֲנ֨וּ אֶת־יְהֹושֻׁ֜עַ וַיֹּאמְר֗וּ כִּי֩ הֻגֵּ֨ד הֻגַּ֤ד לַעֲבָדֶ֨יךָ֙ אֵת֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֜ה יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֨יךָ֙ אֶת־מֹשֶׁ֣ה עַבְדֹּ֔ו לָתֵ֤ת לָכֶם֙ אֶת־כָּל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּלְהַשְׁמִ֛יד אֶת־כָּל־יֹשְׁבֵ֥י הָאָ֖רֶץ מִפְּנֵיכֶ֑ם וַנִּירָ֨א מְאֹ֤ד לְנַפְשֹׁתֵ֨ינוּ֙ מִפְּנֵיכֶ֔ם וַֽנַּעֲשֵׂ֖ה אֶת־הַדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה׃
(Joshua 9:24)
The Strategic Confession of the Giveʿonites
Joshua 9:24 contains the climax of the Giveʿonites’ confession—a syntactically complex and rhetorically calculated justification for their deception. What appears at first glance to be a simple explanation is, in reality, a multi-layered syntactic web, composed of coordinated verbs, nested subordinate clauses, and telic infinitives. This verse exemplifies how Biblical Hebrew syntax carries persuasive force, not just grammatical information.
Clause Complexity: From Confession to Motivation
The verse begins with a wayyiqtol + direct object construction:
– וַיַּעֲנ֨וּ אֶת־יְהֹושֻׁ֜עַ — “And they answered Yehoshua”
– וַיֹּאמְר֗וּ — “and they said”
This pairing reflects standard narrative sequence, with the conjunction וַ introducing consecutive past actions. But what follows is a highly subordinate causal chain, beginning with כִּי֩ הֻגֵּ֨ד הֻגַּ֤ד—an emphatic passive construction that launches a cascade of motivations.
Word Order and Repetition: The Echo of Emphasis
The double passive form הֻגֵּ֨ד הֻגַּ֤ד reflects a superlative emphatic construction. It mirrors the structure of biblical phrases like מוֹת תָּמוּת (“you shall surely die”), using repetition for intensity. Here, “it was told, indeed told” emphasizes the certainty and seriousness of the information received.
The clause הֻגַּד לַעֲבָדֶיךָ breaks typical VSO order by placing the indirect object (“to your servants”) immediately after the passive verb, maintaining focus on the recipients rather than the agent.
Nested Clauses: Syntactic Layering of Divine Command
Following the passive introduction is a clause introduced by אֵת אֲשֶׁר—the direct object marker + relative pronoun, forming a complex relative clause:
– אֵת אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֶת־מֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ
This clause functions as the content of the report, with a relative clause modifying אֵת. It in turn contains:
– A verbal clause: צִוָּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ (“YHWH your God commanded”)
– A double accusative: אֶת־מֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ — indicating both the person commanded and the content to be carried out.
The depth of nesting reflects the chain of authority, from YHWH to Moshe, then to Yisraʾel, now arriving before Yehoshua.
Infinitive Constructs: Purpose and Consequence
Two infinitive constructs follow:
– לָתֵת לָכֶם אֶת־כָּל־הָאָרֶץ — “to give you all the land”
– וּלְהַשְׁמִיד אֶת־כָּל־יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ — “and to destroy all the inhabitants of the land”
These are governed by the earlier relative clause, unpacking the content of the command. The infinitives are telic, expressing the divine purpose revealed through Moshe.
Note that both infinitives include direct object markers with full noun phrases: אֶת־כָּל־הָאָרֶץ and אֶת־כָּל־יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ. This parallelism reinforces the totality of YHWH’s promise and judgment.
Double Prepositional Motivation: מִפְּנֵיכֶם
The phrase מִפְּנֵיכֶם appears twice:
1. After וּלְהַשְׁמִיד… מִפְּנֵיכֶם — emphasizing divine agency working on behalf of Yisraʾel.
2. After וַנִּירָא מְאֹד לְנַפְשֹׁתֵינוּ מִפְּנֵיכֶם — emphasizing human fear in response.
The second occurrence marks a thematic and syntactic shift from theology to anthropology—from divine command to human response.
Coordinated Result: וַנִּירָא … וַנַּעֲשֵׂה
The final portion reflects the Giveʿonites’ twofold reaction:
– וַנִּירָא מְאֹד לְנַפְשֹׁתֵינוּ — “We feared greatly for our lives”
– וַנַּעֲשֵׂה אֶת־הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה — “and we did this thing”
Both are wayyiqtol clauses of sequential action, rooted in the theological claims made earlier. They anchor the entire verse in consequential syntax: knowledge → fear → action.
Table: Syntactic Functions in Joshua 9:24
| Component | Hebrew Phrase | Syntactic Role | Function |
|---|---|---|---|
| Introductory Verb Pair | וַיַּעֲנ֨וּ… וַיֹּאמְר֗וּ | Wayyiqtol coordination | Standard narrative sequence |
| Emphatic Passive | הֻגֵּ֨ד הֻגַּ֤ד | Verbal repetition | Strong emphasis on reported speech |
| Relative Clause | אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֜ה… | Subordinate clause | Defines the content of the report |
| Infinitive Constructs | לָתֵ֤ת … וּלְהַשְׁמִ֛יד | Telic infinitives | Explain divine intent and scope |
| Result Clauses | וַנִּירָא… וַנַּעֲשֵׂה | Coordinated wayyiqtol | Response to divine command and fear |
Surrendered by Syntax: The Rhetoric of Survival
This verse stands as a masterpiece of syntactic persuasion. By carefully structuring their explanation, the Giveʿonites present their actions not as rebellion but as rational self-preservation, grounded in divine inevitability. The grammar is their argument.
Nested clauses reinforce hierarchy: YHWH > Moshe > Yehoshua > Givʿon. The doubling of מִפְּנֵיכֶם — first for YHWH’s action, then their own fear — creates a rhetorical mirror. Syntax becomes theology, fear becomes grammar.
Ultimately, Joshua 9:24 showcases how Biblical Hebrew syntax isn’t just a tool for sentence construction—it’s a vessel for confession, politics, and survival strategy.