Studies of the Rahab story in Joshua illustrate how, as interpreters, we can read our interests and convictions into a text, allow it no room to protest that it did not have these interests or convictions, and give it no opportunity conversely to question the interests and convictions that we bring to it as interpreters. This raises the question whether we actually want to discover things from texts or whether we simply want to provide illustrations of and support for what we think already.

The referent of Ἰησοῦς in Heb 4.8 is traditionally understood to refer to Joshua son of Nun and frequently as a type referring to Jesus the Christ. I will argue against this reading and, instead, maintain that the referent of Ἰησοῦς is Jesus. Two lines of evidence are provided. First, analysis of the context demonstrates that the ‘Joshua’ option disrupts the author's argument, and that understanding the referent to be Jesus clarifies the argument. Second, the use of the nomina sacra abbreviations to refer to Jesus in the earliest manuscripts demonstrates that they interpreted Ἰησοῦς as referring to Jesus.

This essay argues that Deut 29–32, especially Deut 31, plays a significant role in 2 Cor 3, especially vv. 7–18: Paul's elusive allegorical narrative draws on Deuteronomic motifs of ‘closure’ (the end of Moses, of the law and of the Israelites); the national observance of reading the law and encountering the Lord face to face; and the succession of Moses by one named Ἰησοῦς in the LXX. This analysis extends scholarly discussion of Paul's use of Deuteronomy and contributes to the wider debate about Paul's use of scripture and his understanding of Jesus' relationship to Moses and the Mosaic covenant.