Josh 24:33 in the MT reads:
וְאֶלְעָזָר
בֶּן־אַהֲרֹן מֵת וַיִּקְבְּרוּ אֹתוֹ בְּגִבְעַת פִּינְחָס בְּנוֹ אֲשֶׁר נִתַּן־לוֹ
בְּהַר אֶפְרָיִם
The 1985
JPS Tanakh renders this verse as:
Eleazar son of Aaron also died, and they buried
him on the hill of his son Phinehas, which had been assigned to him in the hill
country of Ephraim.
The LXX
reads:
καὶ ἐγένετο μετὰ ταῦτα καὶ Ελεαζαρ υἱὸς Ααρων ὁ
ἀρχιερεὺς ἐτελεύτησεν καὶ ἐτάφη ἐν Γαβααθ Φινεες τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ ἣν ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ ἐν
τῷ ὄρει τῷ Εφραιμ [1] ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ λαβόντες οἱ υἱοὶ Ισραηλ τὴν κιβωτὸν τοῦ
θεοῦ περιεφέροσαν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς καὶ Φινεες ἱεράτευσεν ἀντὶ Ελεαζαρ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ
ἕως ἀπέθανεν καὶ κατωρύγη ἐν Γαβααθ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ [2] οἱ δὲ υἱοὶ Ισραηλ ἀπήλθοσαν ἕκαστος
εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῶν καὶ εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν πόλιν καὶ ἐσέβοντο οἱ υἱοὶ Ισραηλ τὴν Ἀστάρτην
καὶ Ασταρωθ καὶ τοὺς θεοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν τῶν κύκλῳ αὐτῶν καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς κύριος
εἰς χεῖρας Εγλωμ τῷ βασιλεῖ Μωαβ καὶ ἐκυρίευσεν αὐτῶν ἔτη δέκα ὀκτώ.
The Lexham
English Septuagint (2d ed.) renders this verse thusly:
33 And it
happened with these events that Eleazar, son of Aaron the high priest, passed
away and was buried in Gibeah of Phinehas his son, which he gave him on Mount
Ephraim. 33a On that day, when the sons of Israel took the ark
of God, they carried it around among themselves, and Phinehas served as the
priest in place of Eleazar his father until he died and was buried in Gibeah,
in his own place. 33b But the sons of Israel departed, each to
his home and to their own city. And the sons of Israel worshipped Astarte and
Ashtaroth and the gods of the nations surrounding them. And so the Lord put
them into the hands of Eglon the king of Moab, and he ruled over them eighteen
years.
Aware of both the covenant of Num
25:10–13 and Phinehas’ minimal priestly literary wake in the MT, the scribes
responsible for LXX Joshua sought to correct the apparent failure of the
covenant’s fulfillment through a significant and late expansion to the end of
Joshua. As it exists in the LXX, Josh 24:33 presents the only reference that
describes Phinehas’ ascension to and performance of the high priesthood.
Therefore, this brief insertion is of significant value for understanding the
meaning of the covenant and its period of emergence. Though Josh 24:33 is
widely regarded as a late insertion into the LXX and the burden to establish
the version seen in the LXX as anything other than a late redactional expansion
lies with those who seek to argue for 24:33, this is not, contrary to the
claims of Funke, a uniform position. Regardless of the position one takes on
the debates surrounding the relationship between MT and LXX Joshua, what cannot
be denied is that the position of Phinehas seen in 24:33 represents a marked
change from Phinehas’ heretofore normative literary wake as genealogical entry
and warrior priest—though it has been frequently overlooked due to the debates
regarding the proposed literary strata evident between the textual traditions.
The identification of this insertion as a significant expansion to Phinehas’
inner-biblical discourse is also noteworthy for consideration of the
involvement of P materials within the book of Joshua more broadly, presenting
clear evidence that counters the traditional position of scholars like Cross
that Joshua did not pass through priestly hands, and furthering the work of
those, like Carr, who advocate for the identification of P-like elements within
the texts of the Pentateuch. However, given the identification of v. 33 as the
text of significance for understanding the post-covenant literary wake of
Phinehas, we will put aside these debates and focus solely on Phinehas’
appearance in v. 33.
. . .
In this expansion, placed
following the death of Eleazar in line with the model established in Num
20:23–29, the LXX seeks to fill the gap that is the period of Phinehas’
priesthood within the MT. However, the insertion does more than address a
deficiency in Phinehas’ literary wake as this expansion confirms the
understanding of the covenant priesthood bestowed on Phinehas in Num 25:10–13
within the inner-biblical discourse. In its description of Phinehas’ ascension
to the position held by Eleazar, LXX Josh 24:33 definitively confirms the
inner-biblical interpretation of Phinehas’ unspecific “perpetual priesthood” as
the high priesthood, reflecting the understood meaning while also revealing the
apparent scribal need to refine and develop Phinehas’ tradition in the LXX in
light of this understood meaning. The insertion of LXX Josh 24:33 makes clear
that despite its ambiguity, the covenant intended in Num 25 was indeed the high
priesthood. (Jordan Scott Jones, “The
Forgotten Promise to Phinehas: A Reception History of Numbers 25:10-13”
[PhD Dissertation; The University of Iowa, August 2025], 132-34, 137-38)
