Behind the Scenes of 1 Corinthians 10:4
One Point among Many in a Long Interpretive Tradition
Click here to view an approximate timeline of the texts discussed
Two notable narrative points of the Hebrews’ wilderness wanderings, found in Exodus 17 and Numbers 20-21, serve as literary bookends to one of the most complex and interconnected interpretive developments in early Hebrew literature. These passages describe details of the provisioning of water during Israel’s wilderness journey - from a rock struck by Moses and later from a well that appears with a song of celebration. While they are disconnected points in the context of the narrative in the Hebrew Bible, they eventually evolved into a strangely connected interpretive tradition that saw them first as opportunities for allegory but then continued to develop in a different direction, into a kind of hyper-literal midrashic reading where the rock and well became mobile, following the Israelites throughout their desert wanderings. These creative readings, absent from the biblical text itself, took root in multiple community traditions, including that of the Dead Sea scrolls, Hellenistic traditions of Philo and Pseudo-Philo, and eventually flourishing in many facets of Rabbinic literature.
One additional stop along this winding journey may be even more surprising, as these traditions make an appearance in what may seem at first glance like a throwaway comment from Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:4. This seemingly peripheral comment manages to demonstrate Paul’s continued engagement with the interpretive methods of his Jewish heritage even while penning some of the earliest texts of the New Testament. By referring to a ‘following rock,’ Paul draws upon these traditions in a way that incorporates the allegorical tradition and simultaneously some of the hyper-literal tradition.
The significance of Paul’s interpretive move extends beyond literary curiosity. By identifying the mobile rock tradition with Jesus, Paul accomplishes a rhetorical strategy that both honors his inherited tradition and transforms it. This approach exemplifies how early Christian tradition kept continuity with Jewish interpretive practices while finding new meaning through their interpretation of Jesus’s life. The tradition Paul employs - visualizing the rock, rolling alongside Israel’s camp, and providing water whenever needed - demonstrates the fluid nature of biblical interpretation in the ancient world, where allegorical and hyper-literal readings could coexist, creating meaning that transcended the boundaries of the original texts. It also provides evidence of “finding” Jesus in tradition, outside the strict written text of the Hebrew Bible.
The Lord said to Moses, “Go over before the people; take with you some of the elders of Israel and take in your hand your staff with which you struck the Nile and go. I will be standing before you there on the rock in Horeb, and you will strike the rock, and water will come out of it so that the people may drink.” And Moses did so in plain view of the elders of Israel. He called the name of the place Massah and Meribah, because of the contending of the Israelites and because of their testing the Lord, saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?” (Exodus 17:4-7)
Then the Lord spoke to Moses: “Take the staff and assemble the community, you and Aaron your brother, and then speak to the rock before their eyes. It will pour forth its water, and you will bring water out of the rock for them, and so you will give the community and their beasts water to drink.” (Numbers 20:7-8)
And from there they traveled to Beer; that is the well where the Lord spoke to Moses, “Gather the people and I will give them water.” Then Israel sang this song: “Spring up, O well, sing to it! The well which the princes dug, which the leaders of the people opened with their scepters and their staffs.” And from the wilderness they traveled to Mattanah; and from Mattanah to Nahaliel; and from Nahaliel to Bamoth; and from Bamoth to the valley that is in the country of Moab, near the top of Pisgah, which overlooks the wastelands. (Numbers 21:16-20)1
A careful examination of these biblical texts reveals the textual foundations from which this mobile rock-well tradition emerged. In Exodus 17, Moses strikes a rock at Horeb with his staff producing water for the contentious Israelites. Later, in Numbers 20, Moses assembles the community before a different rock, and though instructed merely to speak to it, strikes it twice with his staff, again producing abundant water. The narrative then shifts in Numbers 21 to Beer, where without conflict, the people celebrate as their leaders open a well with scepters and staffs. What appears in the Hebrew Bible as a straightforward geographical itinerary following the well song - “from the wilderness to Mattanah … to Nahaliel … to Bamoth” - became transformed in interpretive imagination into the well’s own journey alongside Israel. This creative reading, seeing continuity between these distinct episodes and transforming geographical markers into the well’s movements, exemplifies how ancient interpreters found narrative coherence by reading between the lines of the text.2 Before the literal midrashic reading is found in written tradition, though, we first find record of allegorized readings.
They prophesied deceit in order to divert Israel from following God. But God remembered the covenant of the forefathers. And he raised from Aaron men of knowledge and from Israel wise men, and made them listen. And they dug the well: A well which the princes dug, which the nobles of the people delved with the staff. The well is the law. And those who dug it are the converts of Israel, who left the land of Judah and lived in the land of Damascus, all of whom God called princes, for they sought him, and their renown has not been repudiated in anyone’s mouth.(4Q266, Damascus Document)
The soul falls in with a scorpion, that is to say, with dispersion in the wilderness; and the thirst, which is that of the passions, seizes on it until God sends forth upon it the stream of his own accurate wisdom, and causes the changed soul to drink of unchangeable health; for the abrupt rock is the wisdom of God, which being both sublime and the first of things he quarried out of his own powers, and of it he gives drink to the souls that love God; and they, when they have drunk, are also filled with the most universal manna; for manna is called something which is the primary genus of everything. (Philo, Allegorical Interpretations)3
Before the traveling rock-well tradition gained prominence, several early Jewish communities had already found allegorical significance in these wilderness water narratives. The Damascus Document found among the Dead Sea Scrolls directly states that ‘the well is the Law,’ explicitly connecting the water source from Numbers 21:18 with Torah itself. This identification transforms the princes who ‘dug the well’ into devoted interpreters of divine instruction. Similarly, Philo of Alexandria in his Allegorical Interpretations identifies ‘the abrupt rock’ as ‘the wisdom of God,’ elevating the physical water source to a metaphysical fountain of divine knowledge, a common way to contemporize the Torah in Hellenistic Jewish culture that valued philosophy.4 These early interpretive traditions, found in communities as distant geographically as they were theologically, reveal how the rock and well narratives had, early in this point of reception history, acquired profound symbolic significance representing Torah and Wisdom and were already deeply integrated. The well had become, in these interpretations, not merely a physical source of water but a metaphorical wellspring of divine instruction and wisdom accessible through proper interpretation.5
The Lord commanded the sea and it returned unto his waves, and covered the Egyptians and their chariots and their horsemen unto this day. But as for his own people, he led them forth into the wilderness: forty years did he rain bread from heaven for them, and he brought them quails from the sea, and a well of water following them brought forth for them. And in a pillar of cloud he led them by day and in a pillar of fire by night did he give light unto them. (Pseudo Philo, Biblical Antiquities 10.7)
We then find in Pseudo-Philo’s Biblical Antiquities a brief but consequential mention of ‘a well of water following them’ alongside other divine provisions like manna and the pillars of cloud and fire. This may be the earliest, if not at least among the earliest, written attestation of the hyper-literal tradition that interpreted the same rock traveling through the wilderness, given equal importance to other well-known details from the wilderness wandering such as the manna and the pillar of fire.6
The well was due to the merit of Miriam. For what does Scripture say? And Miriam died there, and was buried there. And what is written after that? And there was no water for the congregation. How was the well constructed? It was rock-shaped like a kind of bee-hive, and wherever they journeyed it rolled along and came with them. When the standards under which the tribes journeyed halted and the tabernacle was set up, that same rock would come and settle down in the court of the Tent of Meeting and the princes would come and stand upon it and say, Rise up, O well. (Numbers Rabbah 1:2)7
The well that accompanied Israel in the wilderness was like a rock the size of a k’bara (a large vessel), and it flowed forth, rising like water from the mouth of a flask. It traveled with them, going up into the mountains and down into the valleys. Wherever Israel encamped, the well positioned itself before them, in front of the entrance to the Tabernacle. The princes of Israel, along with their servants, surrounded it and chanted over it this song: “Spring up, O well, sing to it.” Then the waters surged upward, rising like a pillar, and each person drew out the staff of his tribe and family, as it says: “The well that the princes dug, that the nobles of the people carved out, with the scepter and their staffs.” (Tosefta Sukkah)8
As rabbinic traditions continued to develop, interpretations of the rock and well took a much more concrete direction, implicitly de-emphasizing allegorical readings. Numbers Rabbah 1:2 provides one of the most detailed accounts, describing in usual haggadic language how the well was “rock-shaped like a kind of bee-hive” that “rolled along and came with them” wherever the Israelites journeyed. The text connects the well to Miriam also, giving credit “due to the merit of Miriam,” and noting it disappeared after her death. Tosefta Sukkah likewise elaborates with precise details about its appearance and function, describing it as “a rock the size of a k’bara” that positioned itself “in front of the entrance to the Tabernacle” at each encampment.
And from there was given to them the well, which is the well that the Lord spoke to Moses about, Gather the people together, and I will give them water. Therefore sang Israel this song: Spring up, well; sing all of you to it. The well which the princes dug, the chiefs of the people cut it, the scribes with their staves; it was given to them in the wilderness. And from the time that it was given to them it descended with them to the rivers, and from the rivers it went up with them to the height, and from the height to the vale which is in the fields of Moab, at the head of Ramatha … (Targum Onkelos, Numbers 21:16-20)9
Targum Onkelos to Numbers 21:16-20 likewise traces the well’s journey with geographical precision, stating it “descended with them to the rivers, and from the rivers it went up with them to the height.” These traditions share what scholars note as a common emphasis on mobility - transforming geographic place names into waypoints of the well’s journey. Targum Onkelos, also noted as one of the more literal of the Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible with less midrashic expansion, considered this tradition important enough to include in its final text.
For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ. But God was not pleased with most of them, for they were cut down in the wilderness. (1 Corinthians 10:1-5)10
We then come to Paul, whose brief statement in 1 Corinthians 10:4 now reveals his unique position at the crossroads of these evolving interpretive traditions and his complex interpretive approach reveals him to be functioning at a point of literary and historical intersection. His reference to “the spiritual rock that followed them” demonstrates familiarity with both an early form of the already-established tradition of a mobile water source and with an allegorical reading.11 By qualifying the rock as “spiritual” and connecting it directly to Jesus, who elsewhere in the New Testament is often spoken of in terms of a “personified” Torah, Paul simultaneously acknowledges a similar, hyper-literal midrashic reading while reframing it through an allegorical lens reminiscent of Philo and other earlier interpreters.12
What distinguishes Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:4 is his harmonization of these approaches, accepting the concrete image of a “following rock” while simultaneously drawing upon a reading that connected the water source to divine wisdom and the Torah. His innovation lies in identifying Christ as the fulfillment of both - the literal rock-well that physically sustained Israel and the spiritual source of divine wisdom. This interpretive technique exemplifies Paul’s theological method: maintaining continuity with Jewish tradition while reconfiguring them through his understanding of Jesus. In this single verse, we glimpse Paul not merely as a reader of scripture but as one navigating between the literal and allegorical, between Palestinian and Hellenistic Jewish traditions, and “finding” Jesus outside the boundaries of the written text and within a distinct tradition.
Kister, Meahem “Allegorical Interpretations of Biblical Narratives in Rabbinic Literature, Philo, and Origen: Some Case Studies” in Anderson, Gary A. Ruth A. Clements, David Satran (ed.) New Approaches to the Study of Biblical Interpretation in Judaism of the Second Temple Period and in Early Christianity (pp. 133-183) Brill, 2013
Aageson, James W. Paul’s Use of Scripture: A Comparative Study of Biblical Interpretation in Early Palestinian Judaism and the New Testament With Special Reference to Romans 9-11 (p. 266) Mansfield College, the University of Oxford, 1983
Aageson, James W. Paul’s Use of Scripture: A Comparative Study of Biblical Interpretation in Early Palestinian Judaism and the New Testament With Special Reference to Romans 9-11 (pp. 266-267) Mansfield College, the University of Oxford, 1983
van Henten, Jan Willem and Silvia Castelliv “Massah and Meribah Re-interpreted: Biblical Accounts, Judith, and Josephus” in De Troyer, Kristin, et al. (eds.) The Early Reception of the Torah (pp. 19-45) De Gruyter, 2020
Neusner, Jacob & Chilton, Bruce Classical Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism: Comparing Theologies (pp. 149-151) Baker Academic, 2004
Enns, Peter Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament (p. 188) Baker Academic, 2005