JOSHUA 22 COMME�TARYEDITED BY GLE�� PEASE

Eastern Tribes Return Home

1 Then Joshua summoned the Reubenites, the Gadites and the half-tribe of Manasseh

BAR�ES, "The events of this chap. are no doubt recorded in their proper historical order. The auxiliary forces of the trans-Jordanic tribes were not sent away immediately after the campaigns against the Canaanites were over. They set forth from Shiloh, Jos_22:9, to which place the sanctuary had been removed Jos_18:1 after the conquest and the settlement of the children of Judah and of Joseph in their possessions, and after the appointment of the Levitical cities.

CLARKE, "Then Joshua called the Reubenites, etc. -We have already seen that 40,000 men of the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, had passed over Jordan armed, with their brethren, according to their stipulation with Moses. The war being now concluded, Joshua assembles these warriors, and with commendations for their services and fidelity, he dismisses them, having first given them the most pious and suitable advices. They had now been about seven years absent from their respective families; and though there was only the river Jordan between the camp at Gilgal and their own inheritance, yet it does not appear that they had during that time ever revisited their own home, which they might have done any time in the year, the harvest excepted, as at all other times that river was easily fordable.

GILL, "Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh. The promise of God to Israel being fulfilled, the land of Canaan being for the most part subdued, the war at an end, and rest had on all sides from their enemies, and the land divided among the nine tribes and an half, and they settled in the quiet possession of their lots; Joshua sent for the two tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, who had, at their own request, their portion allotted them on the other side Jordan, and who came over that river with him to assist their brethren in their wars with the Canaanites, and addressed them in the following respectable

HE�RY, "The war being ended, and ended gloriously, Joshua, as a prudent general, disbands his army, who never designed to make war their trade, and sends them home,

to enjoy what they had conquered, and to beat their swords into plough-shares and their spears into pruning-hooks; and particularly the forces of these separate tribes, who had received their inheritance on the other side Jordan from Moses upon this condition, that their men of war should assist the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, which they promised to do (Num_32:32), and renewed the promise to Joshua at the opening of the campaign, Jos_1:16. And, now that they had performed their bargain, Joshua publicly and solemnly in Shiloh gives them their discharge. Whether this was done, as it was placed, not till after the land was divided, as some think, or whether after the war was ended, and before the division was made, as others think (because there was no need of their assistance in dividing the land, but only in conquering it, nor were there any of their tribes employed as commissioners in that affair, but only of the other ten, Num_34:18, etc.), this is certain, it was not done till after Shiloh was made the head-quarters (v. 2), and the land was begun to be divided before they removed from Gilgal, Jos_14:6.

It is probable that this army of Reubenites and Gadites, which had led the van in all the wars of Canaan, had sometimes, in the intervals of action, and when the rest of the army retired into winter-quarters, some of them at least, made a step over Jordan, for it was not far, to visit their families, and to look after their private affairs, and perhaps tarried at home, and sent others in their room more serviceable; but still these two tribes and a half had their quota of troops ready, 40,000 in all, which, whenever there was occasion, presented themselves at their respective posts, and now attended in a body to receive their discharge. Though their affection to their families, and concern for their affairs, could not but make them, after so long an absence, very desirous to return, yet, like good soldiers, they would not move till they had orders from their general. So, though our heavenly Father's house above be ever so desirable (it is bishop Hall's allusion), yet must we stay on earth till our warfare be accomplished, wait for a due discharge, and not anticipate the time of our removal.

JAMISO�, "Jos_22:1-9. Joshua dismisses the two tribes and a half, with a blessing.

Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh— The general war of invasion being ended and the enemy being in so dispirited and isolated a condition that each tribe, by its own resources or with the aid of its neighboring tribe, was able to repress any renewed hostilities, the auxiliary Israelites from the eastern side of the Jordan were now discharged from service. Joshua dismissed them with high commendations for their fidelity and earnest admonitions to cultivate perpetual piety in life. The redundancy of the language is remarkable [Jos_22:2-5]. It shows how important, in the judgment of the venerable leader, a steadfast observance of the divine law was to personal happiness, as well as national prosperity.

K&D, "After the conquest and division of the land, Joshua sent the auxiliaries of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh back to their homes, with a laudatory acknowledgment of the help they had given to their brethren, and a paternal admonition to adhere faithfully to the Lord and His law, and with a parting blessing (Jos_22:1-6). By the expression “then Joshua called,” etc., the occurrence described in this chapter is placed in a general manner after the conquest and subjugation of Canaan, though not of necessity at the close of the distribution of the land. As the summons to these tribes to go with their brethren into Canaan, to assist them in the war, formed the commencement of Joshua's plans for the conquest of Canaan (Jos_1:12.), their dismission to their home very properly forms the conclusion to the history of the conquest of this land by the Israelites. We might therefore assume, without in any way contradicting the words of the

text, that these auxiliaries had been dismissed immediately after the war was ended. Even in that case, the account of their dismission would stand in its proper place, “since it was only right that the history itself, which relates to the conquest and possession of the land, should be fully completed before any other narratives, or any casual occurrences which took place, were introduced to break the thread” (Lightfoot, App. i. p. 42). On the other hand, however, the circumstance that the two tribes and a half were dismissed from Shiloh, where the tribes assembled for the first time during the casting of the lots, favours the conclusion that the dismission did not take place till after the lots had been cast; that is to say, contemporaneously with the advance of the other tribes into their possessions.

CALVI�, "1.Then Joshua called the Reubenites, etc Here is related the discharge of the two tribes and half-tribe, who had followed the rest of the people, not that they might acquire anything for themselves, but that, as they had already obtained dwellings and lands without lot, they might carry on war in common with their brethren, until they also should have a quiet inheritance. �ow, as they had been faithful companions and helpers to their brethren, Joshua declares that they were entitled to their discharge, and thus sends them back to their homes released and free. It is asked, however, how he can consider them to have performed their due measure of military service, while the enemy were still in possession of part of the land, of which the sole possession was to be the proper termination of the war? (178) But if we bear in mind what I lately said, the knot will be loosed. Had the Israelites followed the invitation of God, and seconded his agency, nay, when he was stretching out his hand to them, had they not basely drawn back, (179) the remaining part of the war would have been finished with no danger and little trouble. From their own sloth, therefore, they refused what God was ready to bestow. And thus it happened that the agreement by which the two tribes and half-tribe had bound themselves, ceased to be binding. For the only obligation they had undertaken was to accompany the ten tribes, and contend for their inheritance as strenuously as if their condition had been exactly the same. �ow, when they have perseveringly performed their part as faithful allies, and the ten tribes contented with their present fortune, not only do not demand, but rather tacitly repudiate their assistance, a free return to their homes is justly allowed them. They, indeed, deserve praise for their patient endurance, in not allowing weariness of the service to make them request their discharge, but in waiting quietly till Joshua of his own accord sends for them. (180)

COFFMA�, "The third and final major division of the Book of Joshua begins here. The Trans-Jordanic tribes, having discharged their duty, are sent home, with the compliments and encouragement of their great commander, who also gave a solemn warning against apostasy (Joshua 22:1-9). On the way home, the tribes of Gad, Reuben, and the half-tribe of Manasseh constructed an impressive altar near the Jordan (Joshua 22:10-12); the remainder of Israel were greatly disturbed and demanded an explanation (Joshua 22:13-20); the eastern tribes responded with a full explanation (Joshua 22:21-29); western Israel was pleased and satisfied with the explanation, and perfect unity was restored (Joshua 22:30-34).

There is no reason whatever for excising this chapter from the Word of God and for labeling it a "late priestly addition." �o textual evidence whatever warrants such a scissors job on the Holy Bible. The only reason for the critical attacks against this chapter is that it destroys one of their darling THEORIES, namely, that, "God's command to worship at the central sanctuary was �OT VALID from the very beginning, but that such a law came into being only after the construction of Solomon's Temple."[1]

This theory is incorrect; it is founded upon two tremendous errors, namely: (1) that, "A plurality of sanctuaries does not seem to be frowned upon in the O.T. prior to Josiah's reforms (about 621 B.C.)."[2] Woudstra based that rather timid statement of the theory on Deuteronomy 12:1-5, but that passage forbids worship anywhere except, "The place which Jehovah your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither shalt thou come." The critical canard that the O�LY PLACE God ever selected was Jerusalem is a gross mistake. Right here in Joshua, God chose to place his name at Shiloh, where the tabernacle rested for three centuries, and, throughout the history of Israel from the beginning to the end of it, the idea of the one central sanctuary where God would dwell among his people and where their sacrifices should be offered is the dominating theme.

(The first half dozen pages of my commentary on Deuteronomy 12, are devoted to the refutation of this irresponsible and ridiculous theory. Also, see my further comments in Vol. 2, Exodus, of the Pentateuchal series of commentaries, pp. 299,300.)

(2) The other prime mistake underlying this critical theory is that "Solomon's Temple" was the one and only goal of Almighty God throughout Israel's history! Preposterous! (Read our elaborate discussions of that "Den of Thieves and Robbers" known as Solomon's Temple in the �.T. series.) It was "the Tabernacle" that God gave Israel, not the Temple. The Temple was David's idea (2 Samuel 7), and, although God accommodated to it, God Almighty twice destroyed it. Why? From its beginning it proved to be a hindrance and a roadblock to the true will of God. It was that Temple, really, that crucified the Son of God!

This chapter, of course, is the death of that pivotal theory of the critics, and, therefore, they must get rid of the chapter! If they don't, they lose the war on that theory! We are thankful indeed that Samuel Holmes has told us exactly how they try to get rid of it. Here it is:

"This narrative is Midrash ... Midrash conveys doctrine, not in the form of abstract discourse, but in a mode appealing to the imagination. The teaching is embodied in a story, whether parable, or allegory, or seeming historical narrative; and the last thing such teachers would have thought of was the question of whether the selected persons, events, and circumstances, which so vividly suggest the doctrine are in themselves real or fictitious. The doctrine is everything; the mode of expression has no independent value. This narrative (Joshua 22) is clearly unhistorical. It is

Midrash!"[3]Is there any truth or value in such an "analysis" of God's Word? The answer is �O! It is on a parity with what Satan told Eve, "Ye shall not surely die." Such statements are not based upon any evidence at all, but merely upon the prior necessity of destroying a portion of God's Word that is hostile and contradictory regarding their false theories.

The big thing in this chapter is, of course, the near-civil war that was threatened by the building of that altar near the Jordan. It is amazing that a translator of the ability of Boling would declare this chapter to be the record of, "The comic squabbling of the people over an internal (or was it external?) boundary."[4] There is no boundary dispute at all in this chapter.

"Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gaddites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and said unto them, Ye have kept all that Moses the servant of Jehovah commanded you, and have hearkened unto my voice in all that I commanded you: ye have not left your brethren these many days unto this day, but have kept the charge of the commandment of Jehovah your God. And now Jehovah your God hath given rest unto your brethren, as he spake unto them: therefore now turn ye, and get ye unto your tents, unto the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of Jehovah gave you beyond Jordan. Only take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law which Moses the servant of Jehovah commanded you, to love Jehovah your God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments, and to cleave unto him, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul. So Joshua blessed them, and sent them away; and they went unto their tents."

This first paragraph of the chapter is "essential to the story of the invasion, showing that God kept faith with those who kept faith with Him, answering, as it does to Joshua 1:12-18."[5] Far from being a late addition by unscrupulous priests desiring to change God's law, as the critics allege, "The events of this chapter, without doubt, are recorded in their proper historical order."[6]

"These many days ..." (Joshua 22:3). Plummer says that the Hebrew in this passage actually means "a great many days."[7] Surely, those Trans-Jordanic troops served long and diligently in the conquest; and it is a remarkable tribute to Joshua's leadership that there is never a hint of any murmuring or dissatisfaction on the part of those soldiers. In fact, Plummer pointed out that the whole record of Israel under Joshua's leadership was one of strict obedience and continuity in God's law, forming a dramatic contrast with the endless bickerings and murmurings that marked Israel's conduct in the wilderness, and also immediately following the death of Joshua. He cited this as a significant indication of the historicity of the narrative." Any writer who was inventing his details (as would have been done in Midrash) could hardly have thought of making his history such a contrast with the rest of the history of Israel."[8]

"Do ... Love ... Walk ... Keep ... Cleave ... Serve ... with all your heart, and with all your souls ..." (Joshua 22:5). Here we have six one-syllable words, dramatic

imperatives that can lead the soul into a state of being well pleasing to God. The message here is founded upon the "first and great commandment" (Mark 12:29-30). Throughout the Scriptures, the "love of God" is equated with keeping God's Word and doing His will. Christ said, "If ye love me, ye will keep my word; if ye love me, ye will keep my commandments" (John 14:15,23).

COKE, "Ver. 1-4. Then Joshua called the Reubenites, &c.— The war against the Canaanites being happily concluded, the conquered country divided, and the priests and people settled in the peaceable possession of the cities which had been assigned them; Joshua thought it was just to dismiss the 40,000 men of the three tribes beyond the Jordan, who, for seven or eight years before, had generously quitted their families, and run all the hazards of war, to assist their brethren in their conquest, as Moses had enjoined them. Accordingly, he sent for their chiefs, bore public testimony to their courage and fidelity, and in a solemn manner permitted them to return to their tents, i.e. to their dwellings or houses; for, as the Israelites dwelt at first in tents, this word is in Scripture put indifferently for dwellings or habitations.

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:1. Joshua called the Reubenites and the Gadites, &c. — The war being ended, and ended gloriously, Joshua, as a prudent general, disbands his army, and sends them home to enjoy what they had conquered; and particularly the forces of those separate tribes, which had received their inheritance on the other side Jordan, from Moses, upon this condition, that their men of war should assist the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan; which they promised to do, �umbers 32:32, and renewed the promise to Joshua at the opening of the campaign, Joshua 1:16. And now, as they had performed their agreement, Joshua publicly and solemnly, in Shiloh, gives them their discharge.

WHEDO�, "THE TRA�S-JORDA�IC TRIBES DISMISSED, Joshua 22:1-9.

We have seen (Joshua 1:12-15) that Joshua required these tribes to fulfil the condition on which they were permitted to receive their portions before the conquest of Canaan, namely, that they should assist in that conquest, (�umbers 32:20,) and we have noted the cheerfulness with which they left their families and possessions (Joshua 1:16) and became the vanguard of the invading host, forty thousand strong. Joshua 4:12-13. Through all the long war of subjugation they have served faithfully, till at last the land is substantially conquered and actually allotted, and henceforth each tribe is to clear its own inheritance without the aid of the federal army, which is now disbanded with the high encomiums of their chief.

PETT, "Chapter 22 The Transjordan Contingents Return Home - The Memorial Altar.

The initial war with the Canaanites being over, Joshua called to him the warriors from the two tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, who had came over Jordan with him to assist in the warfare, and commended them for their obedience to Moses, to himself, and to God. Then he bade them return home with

his blessing on them, giving them careful instructions about keeping to the right ways and to the rightful worship of God.

At this they returned to their country, and when they came to the border they set up a memorial altar by the River Jordan. When the rest of the children of Israel heard of this, it gave them great offence, for they feared that they were going to turn from the pure worship of God at the central sanctuary. So they sent a deputation of princes to them, along with Phinehas, the son of Eliezer, the high priest, to enquire into what was happening, and rebuke them about it. But when they received a satisfactory answer, they returned and reported back to the children of Israel to the satisfaction of all.

Verses 1-3Chapter 22 The Transjordan Contingents Return Home - The Memorial Altar.

The initial war with the Canaanites being over, Joshua called to him the warriors from the two tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, who had came over Jordan with him to assist in the warfare, and commended them for their obedience to Moses, to himself, and to God. Then he bade them return home with his blessing on them, giving them careful instructions about keeping to the right ways and to the rightful worship of God.

At this they returned to their country, and when they came to the border they set up a memorial altar by the River Jordan. When the rest of the children of Israel heard of this, it gave them great offence, for they feared that they were going to turn from the pure worship of God at the central sanctuary. So they sent a deputation of princes to them, along with Phinehas, the son of Eliezer, the high priest, to enquire into what was happening, and rebuke them about it. But when they received a satisfactory answer, they returned and reported back to the children of Israel to the satisfaction of all.

Joshua 22:1-3

‘Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and said to them, “You have kept all that Moses the servant of YHWH commanded you, and have obeyed my voice in all that I commanded you. You have not left your brothers these many days to this day but have kept the charge of the commandment of YHWH your God.” ’Joshua commended the Transjordan contingent. They had been faithful in their duty, fully obeyed their commander and had not sought to desert or to avoid battle. They had been true soldiers of God even though it had involved hardship and separation from their families and loved ones for well over five years. But now the groundwork had been done it was time for them to return home.

“All that Moses commanded you.” See Deuteronomy 3:18-20. It was the commandment of Moses, of Joshua (Joshua 1:12-18) and of God. ‘You have kept’ is strictly ‘you shall keep’. Joshua is thinking of the command he had given them. For

‘keep the charge of’ see Leviticus 8:35; Leviticus 18:30; Deuteronomy 11:1. ‘The commandment’ is a characteristic expression of Moses (Deuteronomy 17:20 compare Deuteronomy 5:29) which Joshua takes up here and Joshua 22:5.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 1-8Joshua commended these Israelites for their faithfulness to their promise to go to war with their brothers ( Joshua 22:2-3; cf. Joshua 1:16-18). He also charged them to remain faithful to the Mosaic Law ( Joshua 22:5). Obedience included complete devotion to Yahweh.

"This [ Joshua 22:5] is the key verse in this chapter. It is another statement of the theme of the book that the people must be faithful to the Lord and obey his laws if they wish to be blessed and live in the land." [�ote: Madvig, p355.]

Joshua then dismissed these Israelites with his blessing ( Joshua 22:6-8).

PULPIT, "The Reubenites and the Gadites. According to the Hebrew idiom, these are in the original in the singular, as in Genesis 12:6. Thus a tribe, as has been before remarked, or even a family (Joshua 6:25), is spoken of frequently as a single individual (cf. Joshua 17:14, Joshua 17:15, Joshua 17:17, Joshua 17:18). It seems probable that this chapter occurs in strict chronological order, and that the soldiers of the two tribes and a half remained under the national banner at Shiloh until the work of survey and appointment was completed. But this cannot be affirmed with certainty. The word אז with which the chapter commences, is not the usual word for chronological sequence, though it does not preclude it (see note on Joshua 8:30). And the time during which these soldiers must in this case have remained separated from their wives and families was a very long one. Some have even supposed that it lasted fourteen years (see Genesis 12:3). On the other hand, the words "gathered together to Shiloh," in Genesis 12:12, implies that the tribes west of Jordan had left Shiloh. �or did there seem to be the least need for their services after the battle of Merom. We must be content to leave the matter in uncertainty, with the remark that if the armed men of the two tribes and a half did remain during this long period away from their homes, our sense of their ready obedience must be greatly enhanced, as also of the personal influence of the leader at whose instance they did so. The half tribe of Manaseh. Some cities read שבט here for מטה, and as the tribe is spoken of in a political and not in a genealogical point of view, the reading, as far as internal considerations go, would seem preferable. The two words, however, are not always used with complete strictness, but are sometimes regarded as synonymous (see note on Joshua 13:29).

PI�K, "Pledges Honored

"Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh" (Josh. 22:1). The opening "Then" looks back to 21:43-45, where there is a brief but blessed summing up of all that is recorded in the foregoing chapters:

"And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which He sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the Lord gave them rest round about, according to all that He sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass." Therein thankful acknowledgment was made of the inviolable integrity of Jehovah, for there had been an exact performance of everything He had promised. Therein we behold His unchanging faithfulness: notwithstanding their wilderness provocations, He brought them into Canaan. Therein we have exhibited the perfect harmony which there is between God’s words and His works, which are wonderful not only in contrivance, but equally so in their execution. Therein we learn how sure is the fulfillment of Divine prophecy; every detail predicted was literally accomplished.

The Lord had promised to give the land of Canaan unto Abram’s seed for a possession (Gen. 12:7), and He had now done so. He promised to make Abram’s seed a prolific and numerous one (Gen. 13:16), and they "multiplied and grew" (Ex. 1:12), so that by the time they left Egypt a single family had become "about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, besides children" (Ex. 12:37). The Lord promised to preserve them in all places whither they went (Gen. 28:15), and He had done so—in Egypt, at the Red Sea, and throughout all their wilderness journeyings. He promised to bring into Canaan the fourth generation of Abram’s descendants after their sojourn in Egypt (Gen. 15:16), and a close examination of Exodus 6:16-28, proves that so it came to pass. The Lord promised to give them success in their fighting:

"I will send My fear before thee (cf. Joshua 2:9), and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee . . . for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand" (Ex. 23:27, 31), and so their sons acknowledged (Ps. 44:3). He promised to deliver "kings" into their hands (Deut. 8:24), and Joshua 10:24, 40, attests that He did so. He promised to give them "rest" in the land (Deut. 12:10), and we are told "the Lord gave them rest" (Josh. 21:44).

There were indeed some of the original inhabitants still left in the land to test and try God’s people; but at the close of the seven-year campaign all open conflict had ceased. The whole of Canaan had now been given by Divine lot unto Abram’s descendants: the greater part of it was then occupied by the different tribes, and they were peacefully settled in their heritage. If they continued to obey the Lord and count upon His enablement, they should still more completely possess their possessions. "There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel." Such will be the triumphant testimony of the whole Church collectively and of every Christian individually. In due season shall all that God has promised the spiritual Israel come to pass, with regard both to their present comfort and future felicity. All will be accomplished, exactly and perfectly, as God has declared, for all His promises are in Christ yea and amen (2 Cor. 1:20). At the last, when the whole company of the redeemed will have entered their eternal

rest and inheritance, they will bear joyous witness that "He hath done all things well."

"Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh" (Josh. 22:1). The passage which opens with those words contains the sequel to what is recorded at some length in �umbers 22. There we read, "�ow the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had a very great multitude of cattle: and when they saw the land of Jazer, and the land of Gilead that, behold, the place was a place for cattle . . . came and spake unto Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and unto the princes of the congregation, saying . . . the country which the Lord smote before the congregation of Israel, is a land for cattle, and thy servants have cattle; wherefore, said they, if we have found grace in thy sight, let this land be given unto thy servants for a possession, and bring us not over Jordan" (vv. 1-5). They referred to the land which had formerly been occupied by Sihon and Og, whose forces Israel had, under God, completely destroyed, and whose territory they then seized by right of victory (�um. 21:21-35). Lying in the Jordan valley, the ground was well watered, and ideal for pasturage.

For several months the camp of Israel had remained stationary on the plains of Moab: looking backward to the house of bondage from which they had been delivered; looking forward to the land of Canaan which had been promised them for their inheritance. Behind them lay the dreary desert, before them was the river of Jordan. In view of the mentioning of "the princes of the congregation" in addition to Eleazar, it would appear that an official conference of the Sanhedrin, or chief counsel of the nation, was being held—perhaps over the disposing of the territory which had been acquired by their recent victory. The language used by the spokesman of the two tribes also conveys the impression that their request was of the nature of a formal petition. It was to the effect that they should be given the title to settle in the luxurious valley of Jazer and Gilead. There was nothing underhand or stealthy in the appeal which they. made, but an honorable and open approach unto the heads of authority; and in a meek and modest spirit, as their "if we have found grace in thy sight" evinces. �otwithstanding, the commentators generally condemn their action.

It is concluded by some that their conduct was very blameworthy: that they showed contempt of Canaan, or, if not that, were following the line of least resistance in wanting to remain where they were, and thus escape the hardships and fighting which the crossing of the Jordan would involve. Others see in their proposal a display of covetousness, a greedy desire to make this fertile portion their own. Still others charge them with being lacking in public spirit, putting their own private interests before the common good of the nation. Personally, we see nothing definite in the narrative to support such views, but rather some things to the contrary. Had their request been as reprehensible as these critics make out, they had been promptly informed of its unlawfulness, and there the matter would have terminated. Most certainly the Lord had never confirmed it! God had already delivered this land into the hands of Israel, and someone must inherit and inhabit it. It was particularly suited for pasturage, and that was what these tribes, with their "very

great multitude of cattle," most needed. �or were they despising the Lord’s inheritance, for the boundary of Canaan was not the Jordan, but rather the mountain-range of Gilead, which separated it from the desert lying beyond. Thus, as Joshua 22:9, shows, the section desired by these tribes was as much within Canaan proper as was the land on the farther side of the Jordan.

Moses was thoroughly displeased with their suggestion, placing the worst construction upon it. He supposed that their request proceeded from a spirit of cowardice and sloth. He considered that they were giving way to unbelief, distrusting God’s power, seeking to shelve their responsibility (�um. 35:6). In any case, it would mean the weakening of Israel’s army by a reduction of at least one fifth of its manpower. Moreover, they were asking him to establish a dangerous precedent, which others might desire to follow (v. 7). He recalled the faint-heartedness of their fathers, and the disastrous sequel which had attended the same (vv. 8, 9). He feared that their attitude would bring down the Lord’s wrath upon the whole congregation (v. 14). But his suspicions were unwarranted, and his fears unnecessary.

"And they came near unto him, and said, We will build sheepfolds here for our cattle, and cities for our little ones: but we ourselves will go ready armed before the children of Israel, until we have brought them unto their place: and our little ones shall dwell in the fenced cities because of the inhabitants of the land. We will not return unto our houses, until the children of Israel have inherited every man his inheritance. For we will not inherit with them on yonder side Jordan, or forward; because our inheritance is fallen to us on this side Jordan eastward" (�um. 32:16-19). Thus did they show how grievously Moses had misjudged them, and how unfounded were his surmisings. They had no intention of sitting still while the other tribes went to war. Without murmuring or disputing, they expressed a willingness to share their brethren’s burden. So far from being afraid to enter the field against the enemy, they were prepared to take the lead and go "before the children of Israel." They would remain with their fellows until all of them were duly settled. �or would they require any compensation or expect to receive any share of the spoils.

Satisfied with their explanation and assurances, Moses conditionally granted their request. Holding them to their promises, he agreed to the proposal 6n their fulfillment of its terms. If they carried out their part of the contract, the land of Jazer and Gilead should be their "possession before the Lord" (�um. 32:22). But if they went back upon their word, then they would be offending against God Himself, and in such an event their sin was certain to find them out (v. 23), which signifies that bitter and inevitable would be the consequences, and not discovered or brought to light. "Thy servants will do as my lord commandeth" (v. 25) was their ready response and solemn vow. Thereupon the agreement was formally and publicly ratified before Israel’s supreme court, Joshua (who was to succeed him) being expressly informed of the compact (v. 28), according to the terms of which the coasts and cities of Sihon and Og became the possession of the two and a half tribes (v. 33). Thus did they strikingly prefigure the Old Testament saints, who entered into their

spiritual inheritance during the Mosaic economy.

When Joshua took over the leadership, he addressed himself to the two and a half tribes thus: "Remember the word which Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you, saying, The Lord your God hath given you rest, and hath given you this land," and then detailed the stipulated conditions of this provisional arrangement (Josh. 1:12-15). As we pointed out in the ninth article of this series, Joshua was acting here not on the ground of natural prudence, but in obedience to his Master’s will. The Lord had bidden him to "observe to do according to all the law, which Moses My servant commanded thee" (Josh. 1:7), and this was one of those things (�um. 32:28)! Thus, the new head of the nation did not take it for granted that they would carry out their agreement, but definitely reminded them of the same and held them to it. It is blessed, too, to observe the ground upon which he appealed to them: it was neither as a personal favor to himself for their co-operation nor as an encouragement unto their brethren, but as an act of obedience: "Remember the word which Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you."

Equally blessed is it to hear their response: "And they answered Joshua, saying, All that thou commandest us we will do, and whithersoever thou sendest us, we will go. According as we hearkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee: only the Lord thy God be with thee" (Josh. 1:16, 17). Thus did they solemnly and explicitly renew their agreement; and, as the sequel demonstrates, it was no idle boast that they made. It is ever God’s way to honor those who honor Him: Joshua had given Him His proper place by complying with his commission and magnifying God’s Word, and now the Lord graciously inclined these two and a half tribes willingly to serve under him. In his "until the Lord have given your brethren rest . . . and they also have possessed the land" (v. 15), he expressed his unwavering faith in the successful outcome of the campaign; and here the Lord moved these men to give him their full support. They averred their willingness to accept him as their commander and yield full obedience to his authority.

Faithfully did they fulfill their part of the agreement: "And the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh, passed over armed before the children of Israel, as Moses spake unto them: about forty thousand prepared for war passed over before the Lord unto battle, to the plains of Jericho" (Josh. 4:12, 13). How the Holy Spirit delights to record the obedience of saints! And now we come to the happy sequel to the whole of the above: "Then Joshua called the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and said unto them, Ye have kept all that Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you, and have obeyed my voice in all that I commanded you: ye have not left your brethren these many days unto this day, but have kept the charge of the commandment of the Lord your God" (Josh. 22:2, 3). A real tribute of praise was that, and a signal proof of the magnanimity of the one who paid it. Though they had only discharged a manifest obligation and fulfilled their part of the contract, it cost Joshua nothing to acknowledge their fidelity and commend their obedience, and such a word from their general would mean much to them.

They had given further proof of the sterling quality of their character by submitting to the authority of Joshua. They might have pleaded that their agreement had been made with Moses, and that, since death cancels all contracts, his decease relieved them of their engagement. But having put their hand to the plough, they refused to look back (Luke 4:62). Or, to change the figure, they conducted themselves in a manner that was in every respect the very opposite of that of the Ephraimites at a later date, of whom we read that they "turned back in the day of battle. They kept not the covenant of God, and refused to walk in His law" (Ps. 78:9, 10). Alas, how the courage of many who enlist under the banner of Christ fails them in the day of testing, so that they retreat before the foe: and in the hour of temptation prove false to their good resolutions and solemn promises and vows. Different far was it with these Reubenites and Gadites. �ot only did they begin well, but they also endured unto the end; yea, their wholehearted devotion to the cause of God and His people increased, for a comparison of Joshua 1:16, with �umbers 32:31, reveals that the promise which they made unto Joshua went beyond that which they had pledged unto Moses.

For seven years they had served obediently under Joshua, had disinterestedly put the welfare of the nation before their own private comforts, had made no attempt to rejoin their families, but had remained by the side of their brethren until Canaan was conquered. Most commendable was their meekness in waiting for their dismissal. They did not chafe at the delay, but were submissive to their leader’s will. Instead of seeking out Joshua and complaining that it was high time for them to return to their homes, they quietly tarried for Him to take the initiative in the matter. As another remarked, "Like good soldiers they would not move till they had orders from their general. They had not only done their duty to Joshua and Israel, but, which was best of all, they had made conscience of their duty to God: ‘Ye have kept the charge,’ or, as the word is, ‘Ye have kept the keeping,’ that is, Ye have carefully and circumspectly kept the commandments of the Lord your God: not only in this particular instance of continuing in the service of Israel to the end of the war, but in general, you have kept up religion in your part of the camp—a rare and excellent thing among soldiers, and which is worthy to be praised" (Matthew Henry).

"And now the Lord your God hath given rest unto your brethren, as He promised them: therefore now return ye, and get you unto your tents, and unto the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of the Lord gave you on the other side Jordan" (v. 4). How careful was Joshua to place the crown of honor where it rightly belonged, and ascribe the glory of their victory unto the Author of the same! At the same time, he considered it meet that thankful acknowledgment should be made to those who had assisted him therein. "God must be chiefly eyed in our praises, but instruments must not be altogether overlooked" (Matthew Henry). Equally definite was Joshua in here magnifying the fidelity of Jehovah, reminding Israel that the successful outcome of their military efforts, and the resultant rest for the whole nation, was the fulfillment of the sure word of the Lord. Having faithfully performed their part of the contract by sharing the hardships and dangers of their brethren, Joshua now made good the assurances which Moses had given to the two

and a half tribes, publicly and solemnly granting them an honorable discharge from the army and authorizing them to rejoin their families.

"But take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law, which Moses the servant of the Lord charged you, to love the Lord your God, and to walk in all His ways, and to keep His commandments, and to cleave unto Him, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul" (v. 5). Ere dismissing the two and a half tribes, Joshua gave them salutary counsel. �o instructions were furnished for the fortifying of their cities or for the cultivation of their land, the whole emphasis being placed upon the regulating of their spiritual lives. �or was there any lowering of the rule to meet their "moral inability," but a strict maintaining of God’s claims upon them. "Perfect obedience to the Divine Law was no more practicable in the days of Joshua than at present, yet his exhortation takes no notice of this, for the standard of obedience cannot be too high (Matthew 5:43-48), nor our aim too high, as we are sure to fall very far short of what we propose for ourselves. But the consciousness of our imperfections subserves the purposes of humiliation, and the feeling of our insufficiency dictates prayers for forgiveness and assistance" (Thomas Scott). It is not sufficient that we know God’s Law, we are required to do it: in order to obedience, we most "take diligent heed": we shall only walk in God’s ways to the extent that we serve Him wholeheartedly, for love to Him is the spring of all acceptable obedience and worship.

EXLPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMME�TARY

THE ALTAR ED.

Joshua 22:1-34.

THE two tribes and a half had behaved well. They had kept their word, remained with their brethren during all Joshua's campaign, and taken their part in all the perils and struggles through which the host had passed. And now they receive the merited reward of honourable conduct. They are complimented by their general; their services are rehearsed with approval; their threefold fidelity, to God, to Moses, and to Joshua, is commended; they are dismissed with honour, and they receive as their reward a substantial share of the spoil which had been taken from the enemy. "Return," said Joshua, "with much riches unto your tents, and with very much cattle, with silver and with gold, and with brass, and with iron, and with very much raiment; divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren." It thus appeared that honour, like honesty, is the best policy. Had these two tribes and a half chosen the alternative of selfishness, refused to cross the Jordan to help their brethren, and devoted their whole energies at once to their fields and flocks, they would have fared worse in the end. �o doubt as they recrossed the Jordan, bearing with them the treasure which had been acquired on the western side, their hearts would be full of that happy feeling which results from duty faithfully performed, and honourable conduct amply rewarded. They brought back "peace with honour" and prosperity

to the bargain. After all, it is high principle that pays. It demands a time of patient working and of patient waiting, but its bills are fully implemented in the end.

In sending away the two tribes and a half Joshua pressed two counsels on them. One was that they were to divide the spoil with those of their brethren that had remained at home. Here, again, selfishness might possibly have found a footing. Why should the men that had incurred none of the labour and the peril enjoy any of the spoil? Would it not have been fair that those who had borne the burden and heat of the day should alone enjoy its rewards? But, in point of fact, there had been good reason why a portion should remain at home. To leave the women and children wholly undefended would have been recklessness itself. Some arrangement, too, had to be made for looking after the flocks and herds. And as the supply of manna had ceased, the production of food had to be provided for. The men at home had been doing the duty assigned to them as well as the men abroad. If they could not establish a claim in justice to a share of the spoil, the spirit of brotherhood and generosity pleaded on their behalf. The soldier-section of the two and a half tribes had done their part honourably and generously to the nine and a half; let them act in the same spirit to their own brethren. Let them share in the good things which they had brought home, so that a spirit of joy and satisfaction might be diffused throughout the community, and the welcome given to those who had been absent might be cordial and complete, without one trace of discontent or envy.

Occasions may occur still on which this counsel of Joshua may come in very suitably. It does not always happen that brothers or near relatives who have prospered abroad are very mindful of those whom they have left at home. They like to enjoy their abundance, and if the case of their poor relations comes across their minds, they dismiss it with the thought that men's lots must differ, and that they are not going to lose all the benefit of their success by supporting other families besides their own. Yet, how much good might accrue from a little generosity, though it were but an occasional gift, towards those who are straitened? And how much better it would be to kindle by this means a thankful and kindly feeling, than to have envy and jealousy rankling in their hearts!

The other counsel of Joshua bore upon that which was ever uppermost in his heart -loyalty to God. ''Take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law, which Moses the servant of the Lord charged you, to love the Lord your God, and to walk in all His ways, and to keep all His commandments, and to cleave unto Him, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul." It is evident that Joshua poured his whole heart into this counsel. He was evidently anxious as to the effect which their separation from their brethren would have on their religious condition. It was west of the Jordan that the sanctuary had been placed, and that the great central influence in support of the national worship would mainly operate. Would not these eastern tribes be in great danger of drifting away from the recognised worship of God, and becoming idolaters? Joshua knew well that as yet the nation was far from being weaned from idolatry (see Joshua 24:14). He knew that among many there were strong propensities towards it. He had something of the feeling that an earnest Christian parent would have in sending off a son, not very decided

in religion, to some colony where the public sentiment was loose, and where the temptations to worldliness and religious indifference were strong. He was therefore all the more earnest in his exhortations to them, for he felt that all their prosperity, all their happiness, their very life itself, depended on their being faithful to their God.

We cannot tell how long time had elapsed when word was brought to the western side that the two and a half tribes had built a great altar on the edge of Jordan, apparently as a rival to the ecclesiastical establishment at Shiloh. That this was their intention seems to have been taken for granted, for we find the congregation or general assembly of Israel assembled at Shiloh to prepare for war with the schismatical tribes. War had evidently become a familiar idea with them, and at first no other course suggested itself for arresting the proposal. It was one of the many occasions of unreasoning impetuosity which the history of Israel presents.

�o mention is made of Joshua in the narrative of this transaction; he had retired from active life, and perhaps what is here recorded did not take place for a considerable time after the return of the two and a half tribes. It may be that we have here an instance of the method so often pursued in Hebrew annals, of recording together certain incidents pertaining to the same transaction, or to the same people, though these incidents were separated from each other by a considerable interval of time.

It was well that the congregation assembled at Shiloh. They would be reminded by the very place that great national movements were not to be undertaken rashly, since God was the supreme ruler of the nation. We are not told whether the usual method of asking counsel of God was resorted to, but certainly the course followed was more reasonable than rushing into war. It was resolved to begin by remonstrating with the two and a half tribes. The idea that their proposal was schismatical, nay, even idolatrous, was not given up, but it was thought that if a solemn remonstrance and warning were addressed to them, they might be induced to abandon their project.

A deputation was sent over, consisting of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar the priest, as representing the religious interest, and ten princes, representing the ten tribes, to have an interview with the heads of the two and a half tribes. When they met, the deputation opened very fiercely on their brethren. They charged them with unheard-of wickedness. What they had done was a daring act of rebellion. It was worthy to be classed with the iniquity of Peor - one of the vilest deeds that ever disgraced the nation. It was fitted to bring down God's judgments on the whole nation, and would certainly do so. If the secret act of Achan involved the congregation in wrath, what calamity to the whole people would not result from this daring and open deed of rebellion? They were not safe for a single day. The vials of the Divine wrath could not but be ready, and in twenty-four hours the whole congregation of Israel might be overwhelmed by the tokens of His displeasure.

One should have said that if anything was fitted to have a bad effect on the two and

a half tribes, it was this mode of dealing. It is not wise to assume that your brother is a villain. And scolding, as has been well said, does not make men sorry for their sins. But one thing was said by the deputation that was fitted to have a different effect. "�otwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us: but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God."

Here was a generous, a self-denying proposal; the ten tribes were some of them in straits themselves, finding the room available for them far too narrow; nevertheless they were prepared to divide what they had with their brethren, if their real feeling was that the east side of the Jordan was outside the hallowed and hallowing influence of the presence of the Lord.

Instead, therefore, of firing up at the fierce reproof of their brethren, the two and a half tribes were softened by this really kind proposal and returned a reassuring answer. They solemnly repudiated all idea of a rival establishment. They knew that there was but one place where the tabernacle and the ark of the covenant could be, and they had not the remotest intention of interfering with the spot that had been chosen for that purpose. They had never entertained the thought of offering burnt offerings, or meat offerings, or peace offerings on their altar. They solemnly abjured all intention to show disrespect to the Lord, or to His law. The altar which they had built had a very different purpose. It was occasioned by the physical structure of the country, and the effect which that might have on their children in years to come. "In time to come your children might speak unto our children, saying. What have ye to do with the Lord God of Israel? For the Lord hath made Jordan a border between us and you, ye children of Reuben and children of Gad; ye have no part in the Lord: so shall your children make our children cease from fearing the Lord. Therefore we said, Let us now prepare to build us an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice; but that it may be a witness between us, and you, and our generations after us." It was not a rival, but a witness, a pattern; a reminder to the two and a half tribes that the true altar, the Divine sanctuary, hallowed by the token of God's presence was elsewhere, and that there, and only there, were the public sacrifices to be offered.

The acquaintance with the physical structure of Palestine which we have obtained in recent years enables us to appreciate the feeling of the two and a half tribes better than could have been done before. The mere fact that a river separated the east from the west of Palestine would not have been enough to account for the sense of isolation and the fear thence arising which had taken hold of the heads of the two and a half tribes. It is the peculiar structure of the valley in which the river runs that explains the story. The Jordan valley, as has already been mentioned, is depressed below the level of the Mediterranean Sea, the depression increasing gradually as the river flows towards the Dead Sea, where it amounts to 1300 feet. In addition to this, the mountainous plateau on each side of the Jordan valley rises to the height of 2000 or 2500 feet above the sea, so that the entire depression, counting from the top of the plateau to the edge of the river, is between three and four

thousand feet. On each side the approach to the Jordan is difficult, while, during the warm season, the great heat increases the fatigue of travelling and discourages the attempt. All these things make the separation between the two parts of the country caused by the river and its valley much more complete than in ordinary cases of river boundaries. There can be no doubt now that the heads of the two and a half tribes had considerable ground for their apprehensions. There was some risk that they should cease to be regarded as part of the nation; and their explanation of the altar seems to have been an honest one. It was designed simply as a memorial, not for sacrifices. We see what a happy thing it was for the whole nation that the deputation was sent across before resorting to arms. A new light was thrown on what had seemed a daring sin; it was but an innocent arrangement; and the terrible forebodings which it awakened are at once scattered to the winds.

But who can estimate all the misery that has come in almost every age, in circles both public and private, from hasty suspicions of evil, which a little patience, a little inquiry, a little opportunity of explanation, might have at once averted? History, tradition, fiction, alike furnish us with instances. We recall the story of Llewellyn and his dog Gelert, stabbed by his master, who thought the stains upon his mouth were the blood of his beloved child; while, on raising the cradle which had been turned over, he found his child asleep and well, and a huge wolf dead, from whose fangs the dog had delivered him. We remember the tragedy of Othello and Desdemona; we see how the fondest love may be poisoned by hasty suspicion, and the dearest of wives murdered, when a little patience would have shown her innocent - shown her all too pure to come in contact with even a vestige of the evil thing. We think of the many stories of crusaders and others leaving their homes with their love pledged to another, detained in distant lands without means of communication, hearing a rumour that their beloved one had turned false, and doing some rash and irrevocable deed, while a little further waiting would have realized all their hopes. But perhaps it is in less tragic circumstances that the spirit of suspicion and unjust accusation is most commonly manifested. A rumour unfavourable to your character gets into circulation; you suspect some one of being the author, and deal fiercely with him accordingly; it turns out that he is wholly innocent. A friend has apparently written a letter against you which has made you furious; you pour a torrent of reproaches upon him; it turns out that the letter was written by some one else with a similar name. But indeed there is no end to the mischief that is bred by impatience, and by want of inquiry, or of waiting for explanations that would put a quite different complexion on our matters of complaint. True charity ''thinketh no evil," for it "rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in truth. It beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things." If its gentle voice were more regarded, what a multitude of offences would vanish, and how much wider would be the reign of peace!

The explanation that had been offered by Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh proved satisfactory to Phinehas and the princes of the congregation, and likewise to the people of the west generally, when the deputation reported their proceedings. The remark of Phinehas before he left his eastern brethren was a striking one: "This day do we perceive that the Lord is among us, because ye have not committed this

trespass against the Lord; now ye have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the Lord." There was a great difference between the Lord being among them, and their being in the hand of the Lord. If the Lord were among them they were under all manner of gracious influence; if they were in the hand of the Lord they were exposed to the utmost visitations of His wrath. It was the joy of Phinehas to find not only that no provocation had been given to God's righteous jealousy but that proof had been afforded that He was graciously blessing them. If God often departs from us without our suspecting it, He is sometimes graciously present with us when we have been fearing that He was gone. So it was now. Phinehas in imagination had seen the gathering of a terrible storm, as if the very enemy of man had been stirring up his countrymen to rebellion and contempt of God; but in place of that, he sees that they have been consulting for God's honour, for the permanence of His institutions, and for the preservation of unity between the two sections of the nation; and in this he finds a proof that God has been graciously working among them. For God is the God of peace, not of strife, and the Spirit is the Spirit of order, and not of confusion. And when two sections of a community are led to desire the advancement of His service and the honour of His name, even by methods which are not in all respects alike, it is a proof that He is among them, drawing their hearts to Himself and to one another.

Perhaps the common adage might have been applied to the case - that there were faults on both sides. If the ten tribes were too hasty in preparing for war, the two and a half tribes had been too hasty in deciding on the erection of their altar, without communication with the priests and the civil heads of the nation. In a matter so sacred, no such step should have been taken without full consultation and a clear view of duty. The goodness of their motive did not excuse them for not taking all available methods to carry out their plan in a way wholly unexceptional. As it was, they ran a great risk of kindling a fire which might have at once destroyed themselves and weakened the rest of the nation through all time. In their effort to promote unity, they had almost occasioned a fatal schism. Thus both sections of the nation had been on the edge of a fearful catastrophe.

But now it appeared that the section that had seemed to be so highly offending were animated by a quite loyal sentiment. Phinehas gladly seized on the fact as a proof that God was among them. A less godly man would not have thought of this as of much importance. He would hardly have believed in it as anything that could exist except in a fanatical imagination. But the more one knows of God the more real does the privilege seem, and the more blessed. �ay, it comes to be felt as that which makes the greatest conceivable difference between one individual or one community and another. The great curse of sin is that it has severed us from God. The glory of the grace of God in Christ is that we are brought together. Man without God is like the earth without the sun, or the body without the soul. Man in fellowship with God is man replenished with all Divine blessings and holy influences. A church in which God does not dwell is a hold of unclean spirits and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. A church inhabited by God, like the bride in the Song of Solomon, "Looketh forth as the morning, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners."

BI 1-34, "Ye have not left your brethren.

Helping one another

I. These tribes helped their brethren to their own inconvenience and positive detriment. A narrow-minded, selfish race would have recognised no claim for any service which could not be repaid dollar for dollar. What fine excuses could have been made for the non-performance of this duty if they had been in the excuse-making mood! How prominently that threadbare proverb, “Charity begins at home”—a proverb often outrageously perverted—might have figured in their conversation! We have our own children and our own houses to look after; our crops must be planted and harvested; our homes must be established in this new land; the wandering tribes of our enemies may at any time swoop down upon our vineyards and gardens. Small and selfish souls always reason in this way, whether they live in Palestine or America, in the fifteenth century before Christ or the nineteenth after Christ. Such reasoning and such living inevitably lead to national and individual bankruptcy in all the generous and noble qualities which make a nation great. Let us remember also that it is not what we can spare as well as not which helps our brother. It is not the cast-off coat which we should never wear, the superfluous dollar whose gift we should never feel, that blesses the world; it is the gift that carries part of ourselves with it that helps to regenerate mankind. The Reubenites and Gadites gave themselves, their sturdiest men, their bravest warriors, not merely a quota of drafted hirelings. There is no other brotherly kindness worth the name; a dollar bill given without the personal interest of the one who sends it is but a piece of printed paper; a dollar bill sent with love and prayer, a bill that represents the yearning of some heart to do good, may be—yea, it always is—the winged messenger of God, carrying a blessing to him to whom it goes and leaving a larger one with him who sends it.

II. These heroic israelites helped their brethren persistently and patiently. Seven long years passed before all their battles were fought and they were at liberty to return to their wives and their children. In our deeds of benevolence and charity the tendency is to leave the work half-done because of discouragement at the slowness of results. “Ye did run well, who did hinder you?” might be the epitaph on the tombstone of many abandoned schemes of philanthropy. If the world could be converted in a year, there would be many enthusiastic missionaries among those who now chiefly find fault with the slowness of missionary operations, because the Lord chooses to make use of centuries in bringing about the triumph of His cause. The reason for this seeming slowness of God’s hosts is not far to seek. There is more virtue in the fight than in the victory. There are souls to be enlarged, there are sympathies to be quickened, there are lives to be inspired with zeal for God and truth and fellow-men. All this is accomplished by the struggle and not by the ease and the possession of the goodly land that follows the struggle.

III. Their home-coming after the seven years of conflict. There is another home-coming to which every true heart aspires, and the conditions of honourable discharge and of welcome to that home are typified in our lesson. What is heaven except the final gathering-place for those who have helped their brethren for Christ’s sake? (F. E. Clark.)

Helping others

The law for us is the same as for these warriors. In the family, the city, the nation, the

Church, and the world, union with others binds us to help them in their conflicts, and that especially if we are blessed with secure possessions, while they have to struggle for theirs. We are tempted to selfish lives of indulgence in our quiet peace, and sometimes think it hard that we should be expected to buckle on our armour and leave our leisurely repose because our brethren ask the help of our arms. If we did as Reuben and Gad did, would there be so many rich men who never stir a finger to relieve poverty, so many Christians whose religion is much more selfish than beneficent? Would so many souls be left to toil without help, to Struggle without allies, to weep without comforters, to wander in the dark without a guide? All God’s gifts in providence and in the gospel are given that we may have somewhat wherewith to bless our less happy brethren. “The service of man” is not the substitute for, but the expression of, Christianity. Are we not kept here, on this side Jordan, away for a time from our inheritance, for the very same reason that these men were separated from theirs—that we may strike some strokes for God and our fellows in the great war? Dives, who lolls on his soft cushions, and has less pity for Lazarus than the dogs have, is Cain come to life again; and every Christian is either his brother’s keeper or his murderer. Would that the Church of to-day, with infinitely deeper and sacreder ties knitting it to suffering, struggling humanity, had a tithe of the willing relinquishment of legitimate possessions and patient participation in the long campaign for God which kept these rude soldiers faithful to their flag and forgetful of home and ease till their general gave them their discharge. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Standing by our brethren

A ship arrived at San Francisco recently which had been two hundred and ninety-six days from New Castle, Australia. She had been in great peril in a storm at sea and had had long delays. One night when she was in great danger the captain asked the captain of another ship to stand by through the night, and he did so at great risk to his own vessel and his own life, but finally was the cause of the salvation of the imperilled vessel. As soon as he was safe in harbour the captain of the ship that had been threatened with wreck gave his first attention to showing appreciation of the other captain’s assistance, and sent him a gold watch, and went before the council of the city of Sydney and told the story of his heroism. On learning of it the Sydney authorities presented to the noble captain a medal bearing his name on one side, and on the other the simple inscription, “The man that did stand by.” In the midst of the campaign for righteousness that is going on in our modern life the noblest ambition for a Christian man is to share the fate of righteousness; to be no more popular than Jesus Christ would be, if He stood in his place, and sought as of old to make it easy for men to do right and hard for them to do wrong. Rather than anything else the Christian man should prize having Christ look down upon him and say: “The man that did stand by.” (Louis A. Banks, D. D.)

Take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law.

The commander’s parting charge

They were about to depart for a life of comparative separation from the mass of the nation. Their remoteness and their occupations drew them away from the current of the national life, and gave them a kind of quasi-independence. They would necessarily be less directly under Joshua’s control than the other tribes were. He sends them away with one commandment, the imperative stringency of which is expressed by the accumulation

of expressions in verse 5. They are to give diligent heed to the law of Moses. Their obedience is to be based on love to God, who is their God no less than the God of the other tribes. It is to be comprehensive—walking in all His ways; it is to be resolute—cleaving to Him; it is to be whole hearted and whole-souled service, that will be the true bond between the separated parts of the whole. Independence so limited will be harmless; and, however wide apart the paths may lie, Israel will be one. In like manner the bond that knits all divisions of God’s people together, however different their modes of life and thought, however unlike their homes and their work, is the similarity of relation to God. They are one in a common faith, a common love, a common obedience. Wider waters than Jordan part them. Graver differences of tasks and outlooks than separated these two sections of Israel part them. But all are one who love and obey the one Lord. The closer we cleave to Him, the nearer we shall be to all His tribes. (American Sunday School Times.)

Universal obligation

All the great duties of a Christian life are no more incumbent upon Christians than upon other men; for men are bound to be and to do right on the religious scale of rectitude not because they are Christians, but because they are men. Religious obligations took hold of us when we were born. They waited for us as the air did. They have their sources back of volition, back of consciousness, just as attraction has. Though a man declares himself an atheist it in no way alters his obligations. Right and wrong do not spring from the nature of the Church. Obligation lies deeper than that. It is as much the worldling’s duty to love God and obey His laws as the Christian’s. (H. W. Beecher.)

Obedience unmeasured

When the truth of our sincerity requires to be weighed out in drachmas and scruples, and runs so sparingly as from an exhausted vessel—when the state of the conscience must be ascertained by a theological barometer, the health of the soul must be in a very feeble and crazy condition. (H. G. Salter.)

Sincere obedience

If conscience be enlightened, and faithful in the trial, a man cannot deliberately deceive himself: he must know whether his resolutions and endeavours be to obey all the will of God; or, whether, like an intermitting pulse, that sometimes beats regularly, and then falters, he is zealous in some duties, and cold, or careless in others? Saul would offer sacrifice, but not obey the Divine command to destroy all the Amalekites: for his partiality and hypocrisy he was rejected of God. ‘Tis not the authority of the lawgiver, but other motives that sway those who observe some commands, and are regardless of others. A servant that readily goes to a fair or a feast, when sent by his master, and neglects other duties, does not his master’s command from obedience, but his own choice. Sincere obedience is to the royalty of the Divine taw, and is commensurate to its purity and extent. (H. G. Salter.)

What trespass is this that ye have committed?—

The memorial altar

1. Notice the proper jealousy of the elders. When the chiefs of the tribes of Israel heard of this altar they arose in great alarm and went down to their brethren, the two and a half tribes, to demand an explanation. Their jealousy was hasty, it was ignorant and uncharitable, but it was not unnatural. It arose, indeed, from a misunderstanding. They imagined that the eastern men were wishful to do the exact opposite of that which was in their hearts; they took the altar to be a sign and a means of division, whereas it was intended to be a symbol and an influence for unity. Such misunderstandings often and naturally arise. Men look at what others are doing; they do not stay to inquire, they assume they know all about it; they read in what they see their own notions, and hence they come to unwise and uncharitable opinions. It is surely necessary that Christian men, in judging each other’s work, should cultivate a spirit of candour, should be anxious to be clear in judgment, should assume the better motive until the worse is proved; and should remember that, within the limits of what is right, there is room for wide difference of taste, even where there is equal loyalty for the truth and equal anxiety for its maintenance.

2. Now notice the anxiety of the fathers. They were very anxious to have a symbol of unity. They themselves, who had borne a part in every conflict, could never forget the battle or the victory; but to their children those memories might become dim, and might even become to be thought mere myths, and so they desired a symbol, the existence of which could only be accounted for by the fact symbolised, and the sight of which, exciting curiosity and comment, should keep the glorious facts alive amongst them. And they were surely right. Symbols and monuments are useful, the human mind requires them, and men in all ages and lands have provided them erected on the sites of great battles, as Waterloo and Quebec; to commemorate great discoveries, such as chloroform; or great inventions, such as the steam engine; they have been executed to keep green the memory of great men. The busy world is only too apt to forget its benefactors and to lose trace of the events which have been mightiest in moulding its fortunes, so the instinct of men has led them to keep alive precious memories by monumental symbols. And the principle has been recognised by God Himself, and has been embodied in the institutions of the Church. The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is a symbol, a memorial observance in which we do show forth the Lord’s death till He comes. By its frequent observance the Church recalls to the mind of its members and the attention of the thoughtless world the supreme fact of human history. And surely never were becoming memorials of great and noble events more necessary than in our own time! These are days of rush and hurry unexampled. Events succeed each other so rapidly that one impression overlays, and perhaps effaces, its predecessors. Anything that will help us to keep in mind great deeds done for God and man, and their influence on subsequent events, will preserve the rich treasure of our spiritual heritage.

3. But, again, those fathers were anxious for a link with the past. They were unwilling that the continuity of their history should be broken. They, and their children after them, would be impoverished if the memories of the past should be lost. Some of them might be memories of shame, but even therein were precious lessons of warning; and many of them were memories of triumph invaluable for the inspirations to duty and to enterprise which they conveyed. Those old heroes were unwilling that the past with its lessons should fade away and disappear, and they were right. How much we owe to the past, though we are often unconscious of the

debt! Our position, our mental quality, the balance of our faculties, our peculiar character, have come to us through the mingling of many strains and the influence of a thousand varying circumstances. Our mental conceptions arise out of the heritage of ideas which we find before us when we come into the world, possessed by all minds as a common endowment and embodied in a multitude of forms, literary, mechanical, social, religious. What magnificent possessions the past hands on to us!

4. And, especially, these people were anxious for their children; they were anxious that their share in the toils and risks of the campaigns of Israel should not be forgotten. They were fearful lest their children should lose their part in the original heritage of the covenant. Many causes would favour this: distance, which made it impossible for them to attend the great national festivals; difference of habits occasioned by the different surroundings of their life; the influence of neighbouring idolatry; intermarriage with the tribes hard by—all these things would make it only too likely that, after one or two generations, their children would fall away from the faith of Israel. If by the sight of this great altar overlooking the Jordan they could be reminded of God’s claim upon them and God’s covenant with them and God’s dealing with their fathers, perhaps they might be preserved from the apostasy which would otherwise ruin them. Who does not sympathise with this anxiety of the fathers of the ancient days which has always been a marked characteristic of truly godly men, that they have been anxious for their children’s salvation? “Oh, that Ishmael might live before Thee!” is a prayer which has often found echo in the hearts of men. Love itself becomes more true and tender when, with all the other passions, it is sanctified by the indwelling Spirit. Then, too, the successes or failures of life become properly discriminated. Men who see the invisible estimate the more correctly the things temporal and the things eternal. And the chief solicitude for their children comes to be, not that they should be rich or fashionable, but that they should be good. (T. R. Stephenson, D. D.)

The altar of testimony

Suppose we call the Israelites who built the altar the Eastern Church, and those who found fault with them the Western Church. We shall hope to get instruction from both. From the builders of the altar of testimony we shall ask you to learn a lesson in Christian doctrine; from their brethren of the west, who found fault with them, a lesson in Christian practice.

I. Now the story of the altar on the banks of the Jordan appears to me remarkable as a perfect illustration of what may be called a great spiritual ambiguity, common (in fact, universal) throughout the church of the moderns. It certainly is something above and beyond a mere theological refinement when we discuss one with another the right province of duty and work in the system of Christianity. It enters into every judgment we form of other men’s Christianity or our own. The hard-toiling Christian, is he a Pharisee or not? The idle and the use less Christian, is he a humble believer in the sacrifice of Christ? Here, then, it is that the Reubenites will come in and render us a valuable service as teachers of sound doctrine. “We dwell,” said they, “in the near neighbourhood of idolatrous tribes. There is nothing now—there will be less when we are dead and gone—to mark us out from the heathen and to rank us with the chosen of the Lord.” And therefore up went the altar—a memorial, a lasting memorial, in the style of it, or the inscription it bore, that the builders were they who had come up out of Egypt, and belonged to the seed of Abraham according to the promise. And is it not for this very

same purpose that we Christians are commanded to “let your light so shine before men”? The offerings of the silver and the gold, the building of churches, the visiting of the widow and the fatherless, the carrying of the gospel to foreign climes, the reclaiming of untaught and neglected childhood from misery and guilt—there are lesser motives for doing these things, but the chief motive is that we may adorn the doctrines we profess, that men may take knowledge of us that we have been with Jesus, and that all the world may discover that ours is no barren or unprofitable faith. Or perhaps, like the Reubenites, our motives may stretch out into other generations. We may build, with our money, and our toils, and our example, and our lives, that our children and our children’s children may say of our memory, “Behold the pattern of the altar of the Lord, which our fathers made.” But now, mark you. It was an altar that the Church east of the Jordan built up for their memorial. Were the Reubenites wrong in rearing their memorial in the form of an altar? It came out, “Not at all.” It was not designed for a victim: no sacrifice, in the proper Shiloh sense of sacrifice, was ever to be offered up from it. “Behold the pattern of the altar of the Lord.” That was all they intended by the erection. They would tell the heathen, and their children would tell the children of the heathen, that the Jordan made no difference between them and the seed of Abraham on the other side. They must build something. What shall it be? Why, let it be a model, a copy, of the altar that is at Shiloh. What more fitting? What more pregnant with meaning? It reminds them whilst they live of the one solitary spot where the blood must be shed for the remission of sin; it will prove to friends and enemies, when they themselves are no more, that they too were blessed in faithful Abraham. The altar was a tribute, not a rival, to the tabernacle that dwelt in Shiloh. Oh, beautiful picture this of what a Christian’s good works are, and what a Christian’s good works are not. They are a memorial, a demonstration. They must take some form. What form shall they have? What? Why the form of patterns, copies, models of the sacrifice of Christ. To be trusted in? To be looked to for salvation? To supplant the offering on the Cross? Nay, indeed, not so. But to do homage to that Cross by imitation, to remind us of it while we live, and to point our descendants to it when we are gone.

II. Learn, then, from the warm-hearted Israelites on the east of the Jordan that a good man’s toils are not the good man’s atonement, but that they may be reared, and must be reared, in the shape and on the model of Christ’s atonement—an altar, but an altar of witness or testimony, reminding both yourselves and your neighbours of the one sacrifice for sin which, though none can ever repeat, all are commanded to copy. But now it seems hardly possible to make the Reubenites and the Gadites our only teachers in this story. They may render a lesson upon Christian doctrine, but certainly their brethren across the water match them with a lesson on Christian practice. Just think for a moment of the spirit and manner wherein, from the days of the apostles, the Church has carried on the innumerable controversies that split up the Catholic Church into parties. Grace and good works. What a happy thing it would have been for every one but the booksellers if the champions on both sides had only had the charity and good sense to do what the men of Western Israel did towards the men of Eastern Israel three thousand years ago. They condescended first to find out whether, in point of fact, there was any heresy to fight against. “Strike,” then, in your controversies, but “hear” first; and when you “strike,” let it be only with the strong argument, and never with the frenzy of the persecutor. Remember the words of Bishop Taylor: “Either the disagreeing person is in error, or he is not. In both cases to persecute is extremely imprudent. If he be right, then we do open violence to God and to God’s truth; if he be wrong, what stupidity it is to give to error the glory of martyrdom. Besides which, there is always a jealousy and a suspicion that persecutors have no arguments, and that the hangman is their best

reasoner.” No, no, we will not hastily “bear false witness against our neighbour,” but we will speak one to another, and judge other men’s servants no longer; and may the very God of peace and love give to all of us to build up everywhere humble models and copies of His great work for our salvation, and help us to do all that we do in the spirit of charity. (H. Christopherson.)

The purity and unity of the Church

I. The state of mind which the erection of this altar excited in the other tribes.

1. Zeal for the honour of God.

2. Fear lest they should incur the Divine displeasure.

II. THE real design for which the altar was erected.

1. It was a memorial that they were one people.

2. It was a memorial that they had one God and one religion.

Lessons:

1. These Israelites, by setting up this altar, show their love to the service and worship of God. Had they not valued their privileges, it would not have occurred to them to provide against the possibility of losing them: that which we value we endeavour to keep.

2. They show their love to their brethren. Had they not felt a regard for them, they would not have sought means to preserve the know ledge of their common relation to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. They who sincerely love God will love their brethren, and love will secure unity; but not at the expense of purity. (Essex Congregational Remembrancer.)

A supposed wrong explained

1. How little reliance can be placed upon hearsay! It is always so difficult to give a true report of what has happened, that to draw inferences from, and institute action upon mere rumour, is a dangerous course. A fact is not necessarily the truth, because it may be but part of the truth. Part of the truth is often the most dangerous, subtle, and wicked lie. A fact is after all but the expression of a motive; so that to grasp the bearing of a fact the motive must be first of all understood. Consequently, hearsay must always be an unsafe, and often a mischievous guide.

2. Notice how a religious symbol, employed with the most innocent design and for a praiseworthy end, was interpreted as a signal of idolatry and rebellion. At the present day, what excites the worst passions so powerfully, and that, too, in the name of religion, as some devout act or pious sign, of which the meaning is not quite clear to the uninitiated, or which prejudice associates with heresy or superstition.

3. If all would follow the example of the Israelites, and, before going to war, as it were, to right a supposed wrong, would first seek an explanation, how often the wrong would be found to have no existence, and how clear of discord the atmosphere of the world would become!

4. Never assume the guilt of those whom you suspect. It creates a prejudice in one’s

own mind, which it is hard to overcome. It makes one’s own manner severe and condemnatory, instead of being conciliatory and impartial. The effect upon the opposite party is to create an attitude of resentment, to excite irritation, to give a sense of injury, to predispose to a perpetuation of the quarrel, instead of seeking to remove it.

5. The eastern tribes behaved with exemplary self-control. They were the grossly injured party. Yet, smarting as they were under the sense of injustice, they did not resent the indignity. You hear no reproaches or recriminations. They simply state their innocence and disclose their real motives.

6. Phinehas and the people blessed God that war was averted. Are we not sometimes disappointed when we find there is no cause for quarrel? (T. W. M. Lund, M. A.)

Misunderstanding

1. Prepossessions and misunderstandings are too often the occasion of great divisions in the world, and of such as, if not prevented, draw after them very pernicious and fatal consequences.

2. There ought to be the speediest and most effectual care taken for preventing the ill-consequences of such misunderstandings, and to rake up the case before it comes to the utmost extremity.

3. The most proper method for preventing such misunderstandings, and for composing differences arising from such misunderstandings, is examination and inquiry into the cause with deliberation and meekness, that they may see where the difference lies, and take the best course for the composing of it.

4. It is a comfortable evidence of God’s presence with a people to bless, defend, and prosper them when mistakes are removed, differences happily composed, and they are at union and peace among themselves. (John Williams, D. D.)

Misconstruction

Thus quarrels among brethren oft arise from mere mistakes, as betwixt Cyril and Theodoret, who excommunicated one another for heresy, &c., yet afterwards coming to a better understanding of each other’s meaning, and finding they both held the same truth, they were cordially reconciled. We must justly wonder at the over-hasty jealousy of the ten tribes against their brethren, whose faithfulness and valour for God and His people they had so long experience of in the Seven Years’ War; yet now to find fault, when themselves were foully faulty of a rash censure, having only Allegata’s, or matters alleged, but no Probata’s, or things proved; but alas I how oft doth inconsiderate zeal transport even religious men to uncharitable censures. Would to God all such differences upon mistakes in our day may be as happily ended as this was here, then God is among us (Jos_22:31), perceivingly; but dissension drives God from us, and will let in dissolution among us if we avoid not all giving offence carelessly and all taking offence causelessly. Oh, that the Lord would take away that morosity and malignity of a censorious spirit from us, and give to us more meekness of wisdom (Jas_3:13). The Reubenites, &c., here were really to be commended not only for their care in building this altar for the spiritual good of their posterity (lest they should forsake the sincere service of the true God in their following generations), but also for their meekness when

thus foully calumniated. They did not bristle and set up the crest in a way of scornful defiance, but they calmly sought to give due satisfaction to their offended brethren; and the ten tribes were verily more blameworthy for misconstruing their religious meanings and doings upon such slender grounds as a bare report (without any solid proof), misrepresenting the matter to them. Yet herein were they truly praiseworthy, not only that they were so blessedly blown up with a zeal for God’s glory, in preparing war against idolatry, yea, even in one half of the tribe of Manasseh against the other half beyond Jordan, when the purity of their religion came in competition with brotherly affection, like Levi in that heroic act of Divine justice (Exo_32:26-29), would not spare their own brethren (Deu_33:9), but also, and more especially, that the ten tribes first sent Phinehas, so famous for his heroic act against Zimri and Cozbi, whereby God’s wrath was appeased (Num_25:8-11; Psa_106:30), to compromise the controversy, which he happily effected without any imbruing their hands in one another’s blood. Sure I am we want such a Phinehas in our day to put an happy end to our unhappy differences. (C. Ness.).

2 and said to them, “You have done all that Moses the servant of the Lord commanded, and you have obeyed me in everything I commanded.

GILL, "And said unto them, ye have kept all that Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you,.... Which was, that they should leave their wives and children, and flocks, and herds, behind them in the land of Gilead, and pass over Jordan, with their brethren the children of Israel armed, and fight with them, and for them, until the Canaanites were subdued, and not return until their brethren were peaceably settled in the possession of their inheritances; all which they had punctually observed, and inviolably kept, as they agreed to, Num_32:1,

and have obeyed my voice in all that I commanded you; as the generalissimo and commander in chief of the Israelitish forces; as what rank and position to be in, what part to take in an engagement, what attack to make, when and where, or on what expedition to go; wherever he ordered them to go, they went; and upon whatsoever and wheresoever he sent them, they readily and cheerfully obeyed, as they promised, Jos_1:16; and approved themselves as good soldiers under him; for all which he commends them, and gives them military honour.

K&D, "Jos_22:2-3

Joshua acknowledged that they had done all that they were under any obligation to do

towards Moses and himself (Num_32:20.; Jos_1:16-17). “Kept the charge of the commandment,” i.e., observed what had to be observed in relation to the commandment of the Lord (see at Lev_8:35 and Gen_26:5).

Jos_22:4

BE�SO�,"Verse 2-3Joshua 22:2-3. Ye have kept all that Moses commanded, &c. — Thus he dismisses them with a very honourable character. When Moses was gone, they remembered and observed the charge he had given them; and all the orders which Joshua, as general of the forces, had issued out, they had carefully obeyed. Ye have not left your brethren these many days — He does not say how many, nor can it be collected with certainty from any other place; but it was as long as the war lasted, and therefore must have been the space of seven or eight years, Joshua 11:18; Joshua 14:10. So long they had been absent from home, excepting such individuals as might have occasionally visited their families, the distance not being great, or have been exchanged for others of their brethren.

3 For a long time now—to this very day—you have not deserted your fellow Israelites but have carried out the mission the Lord your God gave you.

GILL, "Ye have not left your brethren these many days unto this day,.... For the space of fourteen years, which is the commonly received notion of the Jews (f); seven years according to them the land was subduing, and seven more spent in dividing it, and then these tribes were sent for and dismissed; all this time they stayed close by their brethren, and assisted them in their wars, and never offered to return to their wives and children, until they had an order from their general:

but have kept the charge of the commandment of the Lord your God; for what both Moses and Joshua commanded them was from the mouth of the Lord; so that, in obeying them, they obeyed him.

JAMISO�, "Ye have not left your brethren these many days unto this day— for the space of seven years.

WHEDO�, "3. Ye have not left your brethren — Ye have not permanently abandoned them during seven years of war. It is not to be supposed that in the long intervals between the military campaigns they had not been permitted to visit on furloughs their families only a few miles distant beyond the Jordan. Such frequent permissions to visit their homes had kept them from murmuring at the long delay in the division of Canaan. For the provision made for the protection of their homes, and the maintenance of their families during their absence, see Joshua 1:14, note.

PULPIT, "Many days (see note on Joshua 22:1). The expression in the original implies more, a great many days, the usual expression for a period of considerable length. Thus the military service of these tribes must under any circumstances have been a prolonged and arduous one, and they well deserved the encomiums which Joshua here lavishes upon them. It is a remarkable and almost inexplicable fact, that while the sojourn in the wilderness is represented as one long catalogue of murmurings, not one single complaint disturbs the peace of the tribes while Joshua led them. This remarkable consistency of the narrative throughout, so great a contrast to what precedes and what follows, and felt to be so by the writer (Joshua 24:31), is of itself no small pledge of the trustworthiness of the whole. A collector at random from various narratives, themselves to a considerable extent fictitious, could hardly have managed to cull portions which would form an harmonious whole. A writer who was inventing his details would hardly have thought of making his history so great a contrast to the rest of the history of Israel, save with the idea of exalting the character of his hero. But there is no attempt to set Joshua above Moses, or any other Jewish leader. In fact, it is an argument for the early composition of the hook that there is no reference, not even an allusion, to any later events in the history of Israel. Why there was this marked difference between Israel under Joshua, and Israel at any other time, is a question somewhat difficult to determine. Yet we may believe that it was the evidence of visible success. While the Israelites were wandering in the wilderness, they felt keenly, as men accustomed to a civilised and settled life, the inconveniences of a nomad existence. By their mingled impatience and cowardice they had forfeited their claim to God's protection. Even the observance of their feasts, and still further the rite of initiation into the covenant itself, were in abeyance (see notes on Joshua 5:2-8). So uncertain, humanly speaking, was their future, that it was as difficult a task, and one the successful accomplishment of which was above unassisted human powers, for Moses to keep them together in the wilderness, as it was for Joshua to lead them to victory in the promised land. And it is one of the commonest of Christian experiences, both in the history of individuals and of the Christian Church, that times of prosperity are times of content and outward satisfaction. It is the times of adversity that try men's faith and patience. As long as the Israelitish Church was subduing kingdoms, winning splendid victories, experiencing the encouragement derivable from God's sensible presence and intervention, there was no discontent, discouragement, or wavering. But the trials of the long wandering, as well as those incident to the quiet, unostentatious discharge of duty, were fatal to their faith and patience. Can theirs

be said to be a singular history? Kept the charge. The words in the original have reference to the punctual discharge of a duty entrusted to a person to fulfil. It may be rendered, "kept the observance of the commandment." This commandment, as we have before seen, was given in �umbers 32:1-42. (see also Joshua 1:12-18).

4 �ow that the Lord your God has given them rest as he promised, return to your homes in the land that Moses the servant of the Lord gave you on the other side of the Jordan.

GILL, "And now the Lord your God hath given rest unto your brethren,

as he promised them,.... As in Jos_21:44; see Deu_12:9,

therefore now return ye, and get ye unto your tents; not their military tents in the army, from which they now came to Joshua, but their houses, as the Greek version, and their cities, as the Targum; they having been so long used to tents in the wilderness, and during the wars in Canaan, this was a familiar word for their dwellings:

and unto the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of the Lord gave you, on the other side Jordan; before his death, on condition of doing what they now had done; even the land of Gilead and Bashan, beyond Jordan.

HE�RY, " Joshua dismisses them to the land of their possession, Jos_22:4. Those that were first in the assignment of their lot were last in the enjoyment of it; they got the start of their brethren in title, but their brethren were before them in full possession; so the last shall be first, and the first last, that there may be something of equality.

JAMISO�, "get you unto your tents— that is, home; for their families had been left in fortified towns (Num_32:17).

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:4. Return ye to your tents — That is, to your settled habitations. Though their affections to their families could not but make them very desirous to return, yet, like good soldiers, they would not move till they had orders

from their general. So, though we desire to be at home with Christ ever so much, yet we must stay here till our warfare is accomplished, wait for a due discharge, and not anticipate the time of our removal.

K&D, "Jos_22:4

Jos_22:4 points back to Jos_1:15. “Unto your tents,” for to your homes, - an antiquated form of expression, as in Deu_16:7; Jdg_7:8, etc.

PETT, "Verse 4“And now YHWH your God has given rest to your brothers, as he said to them. �ow therefore turn you, and get you to your tents, to the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of YHWH gave you, Beyond Jordan.”�ow YHWH with their help had given rest to their brothers. They were settling in the land and beginning to sow and to plant. ‘Turn you.’ See Deuteronomy 1:7; Deuteronomy 1:40; Deuteronomy 2:3; Deuteronomy 16:7. ‘Get you to your tents.’ A phrase from the past which meant ‘go home’, whether to tents or houses (compare Joshua 22:8; Deuteronomy 16:7; possibly Judges 7:8; 1 Kings 12:16). ‘The land of your possession.’ God had already given them their reward.

SIMEO�, "THE DISBA�DI�G OF THE TROOPS OF ISRAEL

Joshua 22:4-5. �ow return ye, and get you unto your tents, and unto the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of the Lord gave you on the other side Jordan. But take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law, which Moses the servant of the Lord charged you, to lore the Lord your God, and to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and to cleave unto him, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul.

THE duties of soldiers and of their commanders are well illustrated in this passage. The soldier’s chief excellence is a prompt, steady, persevering, uniform obedience to the commands of his superiors, without regarding any difficulties, any dangers, any sacrifices: and amongst the chief excellencies of a commander is an attention to the spiritual and eternal interests of those who are under his authority.

The Reubenites, Gadites, and Manassites, had received their portion on the other side of Jordan on the express condition, that a just proportion of their tribes should pass over Jordan to fight in concert with the other tribes, and not return unto their inheritance till the whole land should be subdued. This they had done; and now that they were about to be disbanded, Joshua acknowledges to their honour, that “they had kept all that Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded them, and had obeyed his voice also in all that he had commanded them.” But whilst he commends them for their fidelity to him, he endeavours to impress upon their minds a sense of duty and allegiance to God; and enjoins them to “take diligent heed to serve the Lord their God with all their heart, and with all their soul.”

From this parting exhortation we are led to remark,

I. That a progress in holiness is above all things to be desired—

[Had Joshua merely judged it proper to insert an admonition relative to their religious duties, one or two expressions would have sufficed: but from the multitude of expressions used in the text, we see of what unspeakable importance he considered religion to be to every child of man. He not only mentions the subject first in general terms, that “they should do the commandment and the law,” but enters particularly into it: they must have, as the principle of their obedience, the love of God: the extent of it must be to all God’s ways: and, as to the manner of it, they must cleave to him with an unalterable determination of their wills, and the most ardent exercise of their affections — — — This is holiness; but nothing short of it will suffice. We do not say that the Christian must be perfect: for where should we then find a Christian? but he must aim at perfection, and be continually pressing forwards for the attainment of it. This was the great object of Joshua’s solicitude both for himself and his soldiers: this was the great end for which our Lord Jesus Christ died upon the cross, even “to purify to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works:” and this must be the one object for which we should desire to live.]

II. That, whatever progress any person may have made, he still needs to hear words of counsel and exhortation—

[The soldiers whom Joshua was disbanding had continued with unshaken fidelity to fulfil their engagements: and though they had been detained from their families and possessions for seven years, they never once murmured or repined at the delay: yet Joshua did not on that account think that his religious counsels to them were superfluous. �or should the most established Christian imagine himself to be beyond the reach of danger, or to have attained such eminence as not to need every possible help for his furtherance in the divine life. St. Peter, writing to those to whom “the divine power had already given all things that pertained to life and godliness,” says, “I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.” And indeed the counsel in our text intimates, that, in order to do the commandments, we must “take heed,” yea, “take diligent heed” to them; so many are our temptations to violate them, and so averse are we by nature to observe them — — — In a general way, the truth of these observations will be thought so obvious, as that they scarcely deserved a mention: but experience proves, that they need to be insisted on with all possible earnestness: for, whilst the professors of religion depart from open iniquity, there is in every one of them some besetting sin, which they are prone to cherish and indulge. Moreover, their blindness with respect to that sin is most astonishing: for, not only are they unconscious of its domination, but they are even ignorant of its existence in them; and not unfrequently do they give themselves credit for that as a virtue, which others see to be their greatest defect. How blind are men to their pride, their vanity, their worldliness! How often does an angry and bitter spirit habitually prevail in men, who never mourn over their unchristian tempers, or appear even to

be aware of them! — — — We call upon all then to “be jealous over themselves with a godly jealousy;” and to hear the exhortations of the Gospel with an especial reference to themselves, searching out their own spirit, and striving to attain the full “mind that was in Christ Jesus.”]

III. That a state of peace and prosperity is a season of peculiar danger—

[�ow the disbanded soldiers were returning to the bosom of their families, and the peaceful prosecution of their worldly business: and, as Moses had long since warned them, they were in danger, whilst enjoying “houses which they built not, wells which they digged not, and vineyards which they planted not; they were in danger, I say, of forgetting the Lord their God.” And who does not feel how apt the mind is to yield to the pleasures of sense, and to relax its ardour in the pursuit of heavenly things, when it has no trials or troubles to stimulate its exertions? Visit the chambers of sickness, and of health; and see how different the same persons are under the two different states! View persons under painful bereavements, and see them afterwards in the full enjoyment of all earthly comforts! Truly, if we regarded heavenly things only, we might rather congratulate men on troubles than on the absence of them, and account prosperity their greatest snare. To all then who are looking forward to any worldly acquisitions or comforts, or who are now living in the possession of them, we would urge with peculiar earnestness the necessity of vigilance, lest having “begun in the Spirit, they end in the flesh.” Hear the exhortation of an inspired Apostle: “Follow holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord; looking diligently, lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled [�ote: Hebrews 12:14-15.]:” there you may see the hidden nature, the growing tendency, the baneful effects of sin; its effects in the heart, the Church, the World — — — O that we may be ever on our guard against its secret workings; and most of all on our guard, when ease and prosperity are administering opiates to our souls!]

“Suffer ye then, Brethren, a word of exhortation [�ote: Hebrews 13:22. If this were on the occasion of disbanding troops, the commendation given by Joshua, as well as his exhortation, should, as far as was applicable, be insisted on.]”—

[When ye are released from your present warfare, and are dismissed to your eternal inheritance, ye will be beyond the reach of sin: in the bosom of your God your holiness and felicity will be complete. But, as long as you are in this world, you will need to have every word of Joshua’s injunctions repeatedly enforced. See then to it that you “love the Lord your God,” who has redeemed you from sin and Satan, death and hell — — — See that, from a sense of love to him, and his love to you, your obedience be carried to its utmost possible extent; and strive to “be perfect even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” — — — And, since it is certain that you will find many things to draw you away from him, mind that you “cleave to him with full purpose of heart,” “abhorring that which is evil, and cleaving to that which is good” — — — Lastly, let all your affections centre in Him, and in his ways: let “your whole heart and your whole soul” be engaged in his service; and let the delight which you experience in fulfilling his will, be manifested, “not in word and

in tongue, but in deed and in truth;” so that your bitterest enemy, or most watchful observer, may have no room to doubt either the excellence of your principles, or the reality of your attainments.]

5 But be very careful to keep the commandment and the law that Moses the servant of the Lord gave you: to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, to keep his commands, to hold fast to him and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul.”

CLARKE, "But take diligent heed, etc. - Let us examine the force of this excellent advice; they must ever consider that their prosperity and continued possession of the land depended on their fidelity and obedience to God; to this they must take diligent heed.

Do the commandment - They must pay the strictest regard to every moral precept.

And the law - They must observe all the rites and ceremonies of their holy religion.

Love the Lord your God - Without an affectionate filial attachment to their Maker, duty would be irksome, grievous, and impossible.

Walk in all his ways - They must not only believe and love, but obey: walk not in your own ways, but walk in those which God has pointed out.

Keep his commandments - They must love him with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength, and their neighbor as themselves.

Cleave unto him - They must be cemented to him, in a union that should never be dissolved.

Serve him - They must consider him as their Master, having an absolute right to appoint them when, where, how, and in what measure they should do his work.

With all your heart - Having all their affections and passions sanctified and united to him.

And with all your soul - Giving up their whole life to him, and employing their understanding, judgment, and will, in the contemplation and adoration of his perfections; that their love and obedience might increase in proportion to the cultivation and improvement of their understanding.

GILL, "But take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law,.... The ten commandments, and all other laws, both ceremonial and civil:

which Moses the servant of the Lord charged you; in the name of the Lord, to keep and observe:

to love the Lord your God; of which keeping the commands of God is an evidence, and which is the true principle and motive of hearty, sincere, and cheerful obedience to them:

and to walk in all his ways; which he has prescribed, all his ways of worship, paths of duty, faith, truth, holiness, and righteousness:

and to keep his commandments; whether moral, ceremonial, or judicial: whether of natural and moral obligation, or of positive institution:

and to cleave unto him; and not depart from his ways, worship, word, and ordinances:

and to serve him with all your heart, and with all your soul: in the most strict and affectionate manner. This advice Joshua thought proper to give them, and inculcate into them, now they were about to leave their brethren, and go on the other side Jordan; where they would be at a distance from the tabernacle, altar, and service of God, and might be under temptation to relinquish it, and set up another form of worship elsewhere.

HE�RY, "He dismisses them with good counsel, not to cultivate their ground, fortify their cities, and, now that their hands were inured to war and victory, to invade their neighbours, and so enlarge their own territories, but to keep up serious godliness among them in the power of it. They were not political but pious instructions that he gave them, Jos_22:5. 1. In general, to take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law.Those that have the commandment have it in vain unless they do the commandment; and it will not be done aright (so apt are we to turn aside, and so industrious are our spiritual enemies to turn us aside) unless we take heed, diligent heed. 2. In particular, to love the Lord our God, as the best of beings, and the best of friends; and as far as this principle rules in the heart, and is the spring of its pulses, there will be a constant care and sincere endeavour to walk in his ways, in all his ways, even those that are narrow and up-hill, in every particular instance, in all manner of conversation to keep his commandments, at all times and in all conditions with purpose of heart to cleave unto him, and to serve him and his honour, and the interest of his kingdom among men, with all our heart and with all our soul. What good counsel was here given to them is given to us all. God give us grace to take it!

K&D , "Jos_22:5

Remembering, however, the changeableness of the human heart, Joshua appends to the acknowledgment of their fidelity in the performance of their duty the pressing admonition, to continue still to observe the law of Moses faithfully, to walk in the ways of the Lord and serve Him with the whole heart, which was simply a repetition of what Moses had impressed in a fatherly way upon the hearts of the people (see Deu_4:4,

Deu_4:29; Deu_6:5; Deu_10:12; Deu_11:13, etc.).

CALVI�, "5.But take diligent heed, etc He thus releases and frees them from temporary service, that he may bind them for ever to the authority of the one true God. He therefore permits them to return home, but on the condition that wherever they may be they are to be the soldiers of God; and he at the same time prescribes the mode, namely, the observance of his Law. But since such is the vanity and inconstancy of the human mind, that religion easily fades away from the heart, while carelessness and contempt creep in, he requires of them zeal and diligence in executing the Law. He calls it the Law of Moses, that they may not be carried to and fro by airy speculations, but remain fixed in the doctrine which they had learned from the faithful servant of God. He touches also on the end and sum of the Law, love to God, and adherence to him, because outward worship would otherwise be of little value. He confirms the same thing by other words, by which sincerity is denoted, namely, serving the Lord with their whole heart and soul.

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:5. Take diligent heed — Watch over yourselves and all your actions. Commandment and law — Two words expressing the same thing, the law of commandments delivered by Moses. All your heart and soul — With the whole strength of your minds, and wills, and affections.

WHEDO�,"5. And the law — The Torah. In note on chap. Joshua 1:8, we have shown that the Torah was already called a book. We have in this verse grounds for inferring that there was more than one copy. The Eastern tribes could not have been commanded to take diligent heed to obey the Torah if they were now to be excluded from its constant perusal.

With all your heart and with all your soul — The words heart and soul indicate the affectional and emotional nature, and are used to intensify the exhortation to sincere and heartfelt obedience unto Jehovah. As if foreseeing the decay of national feeling which the separation of the deep trench of the Jordan would tend to create, Joshua tenderly and earnestly presses upon the departing tribes the duty of a faithful study of the law and a scrupulous obedience to its requirements. He well knew that the Hebrew could be a patriot only as he was an Israelite indeed; a lover of his nation only as a lover of his nation’s God. With a clear vision did Joshua see that both individual and national prosperity must arise from obedience to the moral law. The redundancy of the language evinces the intense earnestness of the great leader.

PETT, "Verse 5‘Only take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law, which Moses the servant of YHWH commanded you, to love YHWH your God, and to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and to cleave to him, and to serve him with all your heart, and with all your soul.’Here Joshua was charging them with the necessity for diligent obedience to the covenant of YHWH (Deuteronomy 4:9). They had ‘to love -- to walk -- to keep -- to

cleave -- to serve’. A right response of heart, obedient steps, meditation on His word, holding tightly to Him and doing His will. Compare Deuteronomy 10:12 ‘to fear --to walk -- to love -- to serve.’ Deuteronomy 11:22 ‘to love -- to walk -- to cleave’. Deuteronomy 13:4 ‘walk -- fear -- keep -- obey -- serve -- cleave’. Deuteronomy 19:9 ‘keep all his commandment to do it, -- to love YHWH your God -- to walk ever in His ways’. Thus Joshua was repeating and enlarging on the words he had heard from Moses.

Covenant love for God was central to the faith of Israel (Deuteronomy 6:5). Their thought and worship must be focused on Him. But their especially distinctive idea was that of walking in His ways, in morality and obedience to His Law. They knew that God cared how they lived towards their fellow man because it was a part of the essential covenant. And it was one way by which they revealed their covenant love for Him, by keeping in their hearts and in their minds His commandments. To ‘cleave to Him’ was a warning against being led astray by the gods of the nations. To ‘serve Him’ summed up the whole covenant, especially in worship. Thus Joshua was urging them to be faithful to the tribal covenant that bound the tribes together and to their responsibilities with regard to worship at the central sanctuary at present at Shiloh. This was especially important in view of their distance from it.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:5

But take diligent heed. This passage is a quotation from the Book of Deuteronomy (Joshua 6:5; Joshua 10:12; Joshua 11:13, Joshua 11:22; 30:6, 16, 20, etc) The expressions, as Keil well remarks, are "crowded together, so that obedience to God's commands may be the more deeply impressed on their hearts." It is worthy of remark, that while beginning with the love of God, Joshua does not end there. The best proof of love is our conduct towards the person loved. If love be genuine, it is the practical principle which produces diligent service, punctual obedience, faithful attachment, the devotion of the heart and soul. Commandment and law. The first of these words, derived from a root signifying to set up, has rather the force of what we call a positive precept, referring to single acts. The word translated law, derived from the root to cast, hence to stretch out the hand, to point out, refers rather to moral precepts. The Greek νόµος and our law are used in the same sense. Cleave unto Him. The Hebrew is stronger, cleave into Him, as though regarding not so much isolated actions as principles of life. Our life was to be "rooted and grounded," to use an apostolic phrase, in His. But the full significance of these words could not be understood till One had come who enabled us by faith to "eat His flesh and drink His blood," and so be united to Him as the branch to its root.

6 Then Joshua blessed them and sent them away, and they went to their homes.

GILL, "So Joshua blessed them, and sent them away,.... Dismissed them from his presence with a blessing, in order to go to their own country; this he did by wishing them well, praying to God for a blessing on them, their persons, and families, who had been so useful in assisting their brethren to get possession of the land of Canaan. Some think this blessing includes gifts and presents he bestowed on them:

and they went unto their tents; here the word means their military tents in the camp of Israel, to which they returned, in order to take with them their goods, their substance and riches, their part of the spoil of the enemy, which of right belonged to them.

HE�RY, "He dismisses them with a blessing (Jos_22:6), particularly the half tribe of Manasseh, to which Joshua, as an Ephraimite, was somewhat nearer akin than to the other two, and who perhaps were the more loth to depart because they left one half of their own tribe behind them, and therefore, bidding often farewell, and lingering behind, had a second dismission and blessing, Jos_22:7. Joshua not only prayed for them as a friend, but blessed them as a father in the name of the Lord, recommending them, their families, and affairs, to the grace of God. Some by the blessing Joshua gave them understand the presents he made them, in recompence of their services; but Joshua being a prophet, and having given them one part of a prophet's reward in the instructions he gave them (Jos_22:5), no doubt we must understand this of the other, even the prayers he made for them, as one having authority, and as God's viceregent.

K&D 6-8, "Jos_22:6-8

Thus Joshua dismissed them with blessings. - In Jos_22:7, the writer, for the sake of clearness, refers again to the fact that only half of Manasseh had received its inheritance from Moses in Bashan, whereas the other had received its inheritance through Joshua on the west of the Jordan (cf. Jos_14:3, and Jos_18:7). To us such repetitions appear superfluous; but they are closely connected with the copious breadth of the early

historical style of the Hebrews, which abounded in repetitions. The verb נתן (gave) wants

its object, אח�תו or נחלתו, which may easily be supplied from the context. This

interpolation involved a further repetition of the fact, that Joshua also dismissed them (the Manassites of the other side) with a blessing, in order that the words might be appended with which Joshua dismissed the two tribes and a half to their homes, namely, the admonition to share the rich booty which they had accumulated with their brethren at home, in accordance with the instructions which Moses had given them with reference to the war with the Midianites (Num_31:25.).

PETT, "Verse 6‘So Joshua blessed them, and sent them away, and they went to their tents.’

To bless was to wish God’s power and favour on them. But the idea here would also seem to include the spoils that they shared as a result of the conquests. Then they retired to their tents to prepare for their journey (compare Judges 7:8 and contrast Joshua 22:4 above). Alternately this is a typical summary statement before more detail is given meaning ‘returned to their dwellings’. Such summary statements helped the listener to prepare for what as coming. Repetition was a recognised factor in ancient literature.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:6

To their tents. It would seem that, during the whole of these "many days," the conquered cities had remained tenantless, waiting for the return of the warriors from their long expedition. "Those that were first in the assignment of the land were last in the enjoyment of it; so 'the last shall be first and the first last,' that there may be something of equality" (Matthew Henry). The first part of the quotation is due to Bishop Hall, who also says, "If heaven be never so sweet to us, yet may wee not runne from this earthen warfare till our great Captaine shall please to discharge us."

7 (To the half-tribe of Manasseh Moses had given land in Bashan, and to the other half of the tribe Joshua gave land on the west side of the Jordan along with their fellow Israelites.) When Joshua sent them home, he blessed them,

BAR�ES 7-8, "The insertion of this explanation about the half tribe, and the repetition of Joshua’s farewell, are examples of a marked characteristic of very ancient writers and of Hebrew writers as much as any - that of giving a completeness and finish to each section of their story. The Jewish historian scarcely ever quotes or reminds, but repeats so much as may be necessary to make his account of the transaction in hand fully intelligible by itself. (Compare also Jos_13:14, Jos_13:33; Jos_14:3; Jos_18:7.) It is quite possible, however, that the particulars special to Jos_22:8, may be due to some other narrative of the whole event than that to which Jos_22:5 belongs, and may have been interwoven by a later reviser.

CLARKE, "Then he blessed them - Spoke respectfully of their fidelity and exertions, wished them every spiritual and temporal good, prayed to God to protect and save them, and probably gave some gifts to those leaders among them that had most distinguished themselves in this seven years’ war. In all the above senses the word bless is frequently taken in Scripture.

GILL, "Now to the one half of the tribe of Manasseh Moses had given possession in Bashan,.... The kingdom of Og, see Deu_3:13,

but unto the other half thereof gave Joshua among their brethren on this side Jordan westward: of which an account is given, and the border of their lot described, Jos_17:1,

and when Joshua sent them also unto their tents, then he blessed them; it seems as if this half tribe was separately dismissed and blessed, they being more nearly related to Joshua, who was of the tribe of Ephraim, and so had a more particular dismission and blessing; and he took his leave of them in a different and affectionate manner. Kimchi makes mention of a Derash, or Exposition of theirs, which says, that after they had taken leave they stayed two days, and returned and took leave a second time, and which he understands of them all, and not of the half tribe only; but it is plainly the half tribe that is only spoken of.

COFFMA�,"Verse 7"�ow, to the one-half tribe of Manasseh Moses had given inheritance in Bashan; but unto the other half gave Joshua among their brethren beyond the Jordan westward. Moreover when Joshua sent them away unto their tents, he blessed them, and spake unto them, saying, Return with much wealth unto your tents, and with very much cattle, with silver, and with gold, and with brass, and with iron, and with very much raiment: divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren. And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the children of the half-tribe of Manasseh returned, and departed from the children of Israel out of Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan, to go unto the land of Gilead, to the land of their possession, whereof they were possessed, according to the commandment of Jehovah by Moses."

Here we have another instance of the constant repetition that characterizes so much of the O.T. Here in Joshua 22:7 is the fourth time since Joshua 13 that we have been told that the half-tribe of Manasseh had been settled east of Jordan through the commandment of God by Moses, and that the other half received their portion west of Jordan! See Joshua 13:8; Joshua 14:3, and Joshua 18:7. That this salient feature of the O.T. is found here in this chapter is an important evidence that the chapter is not spurious, that it belongs, that it lies here in the usual style of Joshua, and that we can count on it as true history.

Despite the fact that the eastern tribes already held vast possessions beyond Jordan, they were not denied their portion of the spoils of conquest. Consequently, they were

loaded down with great wealth at the time Joshua sent them away.

�ow, the next portion of this chapter deals with what those returnees decided on the way home to do. This whole story is synchronized together and dove-tailed with all of the known facts pertinent to those times, giving us the kind of narrative of which even the critics have said, "The story is skillfully composed, and the time skillfully chosen for the purpose."[9] It is simply impossible that some imaginative creator of Midrash could have produced a narrative like this.

COKE, "Ver. 7. �ow to the one half of the tribe of Manasseh Moses had given, &c.— These words seem to be here inserted, 1. Merely by way of parenthesis, and as it were to bring back to the reader's view the present state of the tribe of Manasseh settled as well as the other on this side of the Jordan. 2. It may be a kind of introduction to what follows; namely, Joshua's blessing the children of Manasseh; for, from the manner in which the whole is worded, one would think that he blessed them separately.

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:7. Then he blessed them — �ot only prayed for them as a friend, but blessed them as a father, in the name of the Lord, recommending them, their families, and affairs to the grace of God. It seems probable, from the manner in which this is stated, that this his blessing was peculiarly and separately given to the half-tribe of Manasseh. He was somewhat more nearly related to them than to the other two, as being an Ephraimite, and perhaps they might be more reluctant to depart than the others, as they were leaving one half of their own tribe behind them, and therefore might have more need than the others of the comfort and encouragement of his blessing.

PETT, "Verse 7-8‘�ow to the one half tribe of Manasseh Moses had given inheritance in Bashan, but to the other half gave Joshua an inheritance among their brothers in Beyond Jordan westward. And when Joshua sent them away to their tents, he blessed them, and spoke to them, saying, “Return with much wealth to your tents and with a great deal of cattle, with silver, and with gold, and with bronze, and with iron, and with a great deal of clothing. Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brothers.’Joshua 22:7 a is really a parenthesis reminding the listeners of the twofold nature of Manasseh, in view of the strange nature of the split tribe, a reminder required when the account would be read in instalments. Then Joshua 22:6 continues in Joshua 22:7 b, for all the Transjordan tribes would share the spoil. The spoils were defined first in terms of cattle, the most important of all to such people, then in terms of valuable metals, and finally in terms of clothing.

“Return -- to your tents.” Here the phrase unquestionably means ‘return home’.

“Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brothers.” This means that the men returning home should share the spoils with the fellow tribespeople who had remained to settle into the land, the older men and the families. It is unlikely that we are to see it as telling the half tribe of Manasseh to share their spoil with Reuben

and Gad, or with the other half of the tribe, for no reason is given as to why the half tribe should be treated as distributors, while we do expect all the Transjordan tribes to receive spoil, and the comment about Manasseh reads like a parenthesis.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 7-8(7, 8) Joshua blesses the half tribe of Manasseh that dwelt on the west of Jordan.

(7) When Joshua sent them away also unto their tents, then he blessed them.—It is noteworthy that of all the tribes of Israel who followed Joshua, and remained with him, this half tribe alone is mentioned as receiving a special blessing. We cannot fail to observe that both in ancient times, and also among ourselves, the conduct of the two and a half tribes in choosing their inheritance on the east of Jordan has been regarded as laying them open to some blame. Historically, this is incorrect. God delivered the land of Sihon and Og to Israel; some one must inherit it. Again, the true eastern boundary of Palestine is not the Jordan, but the mountain range of Gilead, which parts it from the desert that lies beyond. Really the two and a half tribes were as much in Palestine as the rest, only their position does not take advantage of that wonderful miracle by which Jordan was driven back, and the Israelites were enabled to strike at the heart of their Canaanitish foes. They themselves, however, were compelled to cross the Jordan before they could obtain the nest which they seemed to have won before they crossed it—“that they without us should not be made perfect.” In the spiritual world these two and a half tribes answer to the people who received their inheritance from Moses (i.e., from the law); the others are those who received nothing until they followed Joshua, i.e., the Captain of salvation, Jesus Christ, who gives rest to all. When He came, His own people were divided, like the tribe of Manasseh. Some could not forsake Moses, a sacrifice which they thought He required of them; some gave up all, and followed Him. “Forgetting (Heb., M’nâsheh—i.e., Manasseh) the things that were behind, and reaching forth unto the things before,” they would take nothing but what He gave. These are they who receive special blessing from Him. (See �ames on the Gates of Pearl—Manasseh, p. 165, &c.)

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:7

�ow to the one half of the tribe of Manasseh. We have here, as Keil remarks, a specimen of our author's habit of repetition. Four times do we read (Joshua 13:14, Joshua 13:33; Joshua 14:3; Joshua 18:7) that the Levites were to have no share in the division of the land. Four times (in Joshua 13:8; Joshua 14:3; Joshua 18:7, and here) does he repeat that the tribe of Manasseh was divided into two, and had its inheritance on either side Jordan. The same kind of repetition occurs in the narrative of the passing of the Jordan. It has been before remarked to be a characteristic of the style of the Old Testament generally, but nowhere is it found to a greater degree than in the Book of Joshua. Yet this, to which critics of the analytical school have objected as a sign of spuriousness, is in fact one of those peculiarities of style which mark the individuality of the writer. It is to inspired history what the Gospel and Epistles of St. John are to inspired theology. The form belongs to the author; the matter, at least as regards its general purport, belongs to

God. A Hebrew writer, we are reminded in the 'Speaker's Commentary,' does not quote or refer to what has been already stated. If it is necessary to make his narrative clear, he repeats it.

8 saying, “Return to your homes with your great wealth—with large herds of livestock, with silver, gold, bronze and iron, and a great quantity of clothing—and divide the plunder from your enemies with your fellow Israelites.”

CLARKE, "Return with much riches - It appears they had their full proportion of the spoils that were taken from the Canaanites, and that these spoils consisted in cattle, silver, gold, brass, iron, and raiment.

Divide the spoil -with your brethren - It was right that those who stayed at home to defend the families of those who had been in the wars, and to cultivate the ground, should have a proper proportion of the spoils taken from the enemy, for had they not acted as they did the others could not have safely left their families.

GILL, "And he spake unto them,.... To the half tribe of Manasseh only, though some think also to the other ten tribes:

saying, return with much riches unto your tents; that is, return to their own land, and habitations there, with whatsoever riches they had got from the spoil of the enemy:

and with very much cattle; they had taken from them, and fell to their share, and for which they had good pasturage in Gilead and Bashan, and therefore very proper to take with them:

with silver and with gold, and with brass, and with iron; whether in massive pieces, or wrought up into vessels, which they found in the houses of the Canaanites when they plundered them:

and with very much raiment; some no doubt very rich and costly, such as their

kings, princes, nobles, and great personages among them wore:

divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren; according to Jarchi and Kimchi, this is spoken to the half tribe of Manasseh, to divide their spoil with the tribes of Reuben and Gad; but it rather means the dividing the above spoil, when they came to their own country with their brethren they left behind; who as they were employed in guarding and defending their cities, their wives and children, herds and flocks, in their absence, they had a right to part of the spoil; and as in other instances it appears to be a common case for those that stayed at home to share in the spoil with them that went to war, see Num_31:27; though the notion of Abarbinel pleases me best, that by "their brethren" are meant the other half tribe of Manasseh that remained in Canaan, and were settled there: when the spoil of the Canaanites was divided among all the tribes, the whole tribe of Manasseh had its share; and whereas now half of it were going to their own country on the other side Jordan, it was but reasonable they should have their part of the spoil to carry with them; and this seems to be the true reason of their being separately addressed, and dismissed and blessed.

HE�RY, " He dismisses them with their pay; for who goes a warfare at his own charge? Return with much riches unto your tents, Jos_22:8. Though all the land they had helped to conquer was to go to the other tribes, yet they should have their share of the plunder, and had so, and this was all the pay that any of the soldiers expected; for the wars of Canaan bore their own charges. “Go,” says Joshua, “go home to your tents,” that is, “your houses,” which he calls tents, because they had been so much used to tents in the wilderness; and indeed the strongest and stateliest houses in this world are to be looked upon but as tents, mean and movable in comparison with our house above. “Go home with much riches, not only cattle, the spoil of the country, but silver and gold, the plunder of the cities, and,” 1. “Let your brethren whom you leave behind have your good word, who have allowed you your share in full, though the land is entirely theirs, and have not offered to make any drawback. Do not say that you are losers by us.” 2. “Let your brethren whom you go to, who abode by the stuff, have some share of the spoil: Divide the spoil with your brethren, as that was divided which was taken in the war with Midian, Num_31:27. Let your brethren that have wanted you all this while be the better for you when you come home.”

III. He dismisses them with a very honourable character. Though their service was a due debt, and the performance of a promise, and they had done no more than was their duty to do, yet he highly commends them; not only gives them up their bonds, as it were, now that they had fulfilled the condition, but applauds their good services. Though it was by the favour of God and his power that Israel got possession of this land, and he must have all the glory, yet Joshua thought there was a thankful acknowledgment due to their brethren who assisted them, and whose sword and bow were employed for them. God must be chiefly eyed in our praises, yet instruments must not be altogether overlooked. He here commends them, 1. For the readiness of their obedience to their commanders, Jos_22:2. When Moses was gone, they remembered and observed the charge he had given them; and all the orders which Joshua, as general of the forces, had issued out, they had carefully obeyed, went, and came, and did, as he appointed, Mat_8:9. It is as much as any thing the soldier's praise to observe the word of command. 2. For the constancy of their affection and adherence to their brethren: You have not left them these many days. How many days he does not say, nor can we gather it with certainty from any other place. Calvisius and others of the best chronologers compute that the conquering and dividing of the land was the work of about six or seven years, and so long these separate tribes attended their camp, and did them the best service they

could. Note, It will be the honour of those that have espoused the cause of God's Israel, and twisted interests with them, to adhere to them, and never to leave them till God has given them rest, and then they shall rest with them. 3. For the faithfulness of their obedience to the divine law. They had not only done their duty to Joshua and Israel, but, which was best of all, they had made conscience of their duty to God: You have kept the charge, or, as the word is, You have kept the keeping, that is, “You have carefully and circumspectly kept the commandment of the Lord your God, not only in this particular instance of continuing in the service of Israel to the end of the war, but, in general, you have kept up religion in your part of the camp, a rare and excellent thing among soldiers, and where it is worthy to be praised.”

JAMISO�, "he spake unto them, saying, Return with much riches— in cattle, clothes, and precious metals.

divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren— (See on Num_31:25-39).

CALVI�, "8.Return with much riches, etc As it was formerly seen that the greater part of the two tribes were left in their territories beyond the Jordan, when the others passed over to carry on the war, it was fair that, as they had lived in case with their families, or been only occupied with domestic concerns, they should be contented with their own livelihood and the produce of their own labor. And they certainly could not, without dishonesty, have demanded that any part of the booty and spoil should be distributed among them, when they had taken no share in all the toil and the danger. Joshua, however, does not insist on the strictly legal view, but exhorts the soldiers to deal liberally with their countrymen, by sharing the prey with them. Here some one may unseasonably raise the question, Whether or not the booty was common? For Joshua does not decide absolutely that it is their duty to do as he enjoins; he admonishes them that, after they have been enriched by the divine blessing, it would betray a want of proper feeling not to be liberal and kind towards their brethren, especially as it was not their fault that they did not take part in the same expedition. Moreover, when he bids them divide, he does not demand an equal partition, such as that which is usual among partners and equals, but only to bestow something that may suffice to remove all cause of envy and hatred. (181)

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:8. Divide the spoil with your brethren — That is, with them who stayed beyond Jordan for the defence of their land, and wives, and children, who therefore were to have a share, though not an equal share with these. “�othing could be more just,” says Dr. Dodd, “than this command; for, notwithstanding those who remained beyond Jordan had not shared in the dangers of the war, like those who had gone through it; yet they had, during that period, watched over the families of the latter, and defended their possessions against the inroads of their surrounding enemies. This seems to have been constantly the custom among the Israelites: those who were detached upon any military expedition, gave the rest of the army a share of the booty they had taken from the enemy; the pagans acted in like manner; God himself enjoined this practice after the war against the Midianites. Those who fought kept half the spoil of the enemy, and gave the other

half to the rest of the people. Probably the same proportion was observed on this occasion. David, on his return from pursuing the Amalekites, changed this custom into a law, 1 Samuel 30:24-25.”

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:8

Riches. The word here used is an uncommon one, and occurs only here and in the later Hebrew. Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren. This was the just reward for their toils. And here, as elsewhere, we may observe the strict and scrupulous integrity of Joshua. The division of the spoil by other leaders has often been the cause of heart burnings and even of mutiny. Here each man has his due, and no room is left for reproach or dissatisfaction.

PI�K, "Attention has been called to the conflicting opinions relative to the actions of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh in seeking their inheritance on the wilderness side of Jordan. The opinion of some is that they did wrong; while, of course, the opposite opinion is shared by others. In these studies this second opinion has been sustained. Where in Scripture there is no direct statement to clarify a matter, it is well not to dogmatize but to love as brethren and to be courteous (1 Pet. 3:8). One thing is sure, they returned to their possessions on the east side of Jordan with the commendation and blessing of Joshua.

Frequently the Apostle Paul opens his epistles to the churches, as did Joshua his address to the two and a half tribes, with a word of praise. To the saints with the bishops and deacons at Philippi, he wrote, "I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, Always in every prayer of mine for you all making request with joy, For your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now" (Phil. 1:3-5). Christians should seek to maintain the attitude of "honor to whom honor is due, and all the glory to God."

While Joshua released the two and a half tribes from present military obligations, he imposed upon them other obligations of both a spiritual and a material character; they were to be mindful of the Lord and of their brethren.

Joshua reduced the content of the divine commandment to five important statements: to love the Lord, to walk in His ways, to observe His commandments, to cleave to Him and to serve Him. These would engage the entire personality and demand an unreserved response of the whole being to the divine claims. Their meaning to those for whom they were intended would be very similar to that of the Apostle’s words to the saints at Corinth and, of course, to us: "Ye are not your own. For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s" (1 Cor. 6:19-20).

It would be difficult for these faithful war veterans not to feel a sense of pride in their accomplishment, especially after the eulogy of Joshua; and to feel that the much riches, much cattle, silver, gold, brass, iron, and very much raiment, with which they returned were their own, the remunerative spoils of the battles they had

fought and won, their possessions purchased with blood. �otwithstanding, Joshua instructed them, saying, "Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brethren" (v. 8), those that had remained at home to guard their belongings.

Moses had set a precedent years before when he had avenged the children of Israel of the Midianites. The Lord spoke to him, and said,

"Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar the priest, and the chief of the fathers of the congregation: And divide the prey into two parts; between them that took the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the congregation" (�um. 31:26-27). Centuries later this was the principle upon which David commanded his men, "As his part is that goeth down to the battle, so shall his part be that tarrieth by the stuff: they shall part alike" (1 Sam. 30:24).

While this is not the only principle underlying David’s song of triumph, Psalm 68, it is one of them. The victor who had led the former captor into captivity gave gifts unto men, apparently from the spoils of the battle (v. 18), sharing his victory with others. The Spirit of God applies this conception to our Lord Jesus in Ephesians 4:8, 11: "When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. . . . And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers." As the men who remained on the east side of Jordan were enriched by the spoils of the war fought by their brethren, even so the Church has been enriched by the spoils of Calvary where Christ, "having spoiled [stripped] principalities and powers, . . . made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it" (Col. 2:15). Our blessed Lord shares with His Church His glorious victory.

COKE, "Verse 8Ver. 8. Return with much riches, &c. and—divide the spoil—with your brethren—�othing could be more just than this command; for, notwithstanding those who remained beyond Jordan had not shared in the dangers of the war, like those who had gone through it; yet they had during that period watched over the families of the latter, and defended their possessions against the inroads of their surrounding enemies. This seems to have been constantly the custom among the Israelites: those who were detached upon any military expedition gave the rest of the army a share of the booty they had taken from the enemy: the pagans acted in like manner. God himself enjoined this practice after the war against the Midianites. Those who fought kept half the spoil of the enemy, and gave the other half to the rest of the people. Probably the same proportion was observed upon this occasion: I mean, that the 40,000 fighting men of the Israelites who came from beyond Jordan, retained a moiety of the booty they had taken, and remitted the other moiety to be divided among those other fighting men of the two tribes and a half, who remained behind to guard the country; and who were 70,000 in number. David, on his return from pursuing the Amalekites, changed this custom into a law. 1 Samuel 30:24-25.

REFLECTIO�S.—The auxiliary forces, supplied by the tribe of Reuben, Gad, and

Manasseh, having fulfilled their engagement, are now dismissed by Joshua. And this,

1. With an honourable testimony to their obedience, patience, and piety. They had served him with as much fidelity as they obeyed Moses; they had waited, without offering or desiring to return, till the whole land was subdued, and the tribes divided to possess their inheritance; and they had kept the charge of the commandment of the Lord, not only in this instance of patient service, but also in their pious conduct in the camp. �ote; (1.) The soldiers of Jesus Christ must object to no service that he enjoins them, but cheerfully and readily run at his bidding. (2.) Though our warfare be long, the faithful shall obtain an honourable dismission at death, to return to their eternal inheritance. (3.) Jesus, at the day of his appearing, will remember and own, to their eternal honour, the faithful services of his people.

2. He gives them a solemn charge (equally applicable to every spiritual Israelite) to keep up their religion at home, when they were separated by Jordan from the tabernacle in Shiloh. Take diligent heed (for our spiritual enemies are ever lying in wait to deceive) to do the commandment and the law of God; this is our constant rule of duty, and must be conscientiously obeyed; to love the Lord your God, without which no obedience can be acceptable, or indeed practicable; to walk in his ways, strait, holy, and self-denying as they are, and to cleave to him, amid all the temptations which surround us, and would turn us aside; and this with all your heart and soul. God's service requires a willing heart, and his work will never be done, unless it be our delight.

3. He adds his blessing to his advice; prays for their prosperity, and wishes them a safe and comfortable journey, and a happy meeting with their families. Where there is a good will, there will be a good wish; those whom we love, we shall pray for.

4. They return with all diligence; it was a long absence, and, no doubt, a happy meeting. Here below, business, war, voyages, separate the dearest relatives; but they are glad to get home in peace. How much hap-pier for the pilgrim soul, when his warfare of life is accomplished, to cross Jordan, and meet his brethren in glory, the family of God!

WHEDO�, "8. Much riches — Since the Canaanites were quite advanced in arts, manufactures, and agriculture, it is natural that they should have a large amount of the precious metals and costly articles embodying wealth.

Much raiment — Fashions in dress never change in the East. Hence the people make permanent investments of their wealth in dresses. Hence the Saviour’s exhortation, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where the moth doth corrupt,” evidently refers to accumulations of garments. Says a traveller in Palestine, “�ot unfrequently one sees among the inhabitants of a wretched little hamlet, consisting of the merest hovels, a number of persons dressed in handsome silks.”

Divide the spoil — On a previous occasion (�umbers 31:27) Moses commanded that

those who did service at home should share equally with those who had perilled their lives in battle, for the obvious reason that guarding the household and raising supplies for the army are just as necessary and as patriotic as hurling javelins and storming hostile cities.

9 So the Reubenites, the Gadites and the half-tribe of Manasseh left the Israelites at Shiloh in Canaan to return to Gilead, their own land, which they had acquired in accordance with the command of the Lord through Moses.

BAR�ES, "Gilead - Here used in the widest sense for the whole trans-Jordanic district.

GILL, "And the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, returned,.... First to the camp to take their substance, and then set forward to their own land:

and departed from the children of Israel; from the rest of them, for otherwise they were children of Israel also:

out of Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan; for here the camp of Israel was, as well as the tabernacle:

to go unto the country of Gilead, to the land of their possession,

whereof they were possessed; Gilead is put for the whole country on the other side Jordan, as the land of Jazer, and the kingdom of Bashan, which the two tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, were possessed of:

according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Moses; for when they moved to have that country, Moses, it seems, consulted the Lord about it, who declared it to be his will they should have it, on performing what they promised, see Num_32:1.

HE�RY, " Being thus dismissed, they returned to the land of their possession in a body (Jos_22:9), ferry-boats being, it is likely, provided for their repassing Jordan. Though masters of families may sometimes have occasion to be absent, long absent, from their families, yet, when their business abroad is finished, they must remember home is their place, from which they ought not to wander as a bird from her nest.

K&D 8-10, "On the way home, when the two tribes and a half had reached the border of Canaan, they built a large conspicuous altar in the district of the Jordan, in the land of Canaan, i.e., on this side of the Jordan: “a great altar to see to,” i.e., one which caught the eye on account of its size, since it was to serve for a memorial (Jos_22:24.). The definition appended to Shiloh, “in the land of Canaan” (Jos_22:9), serves to bring out the antithesis “into the land of Gilead,” by which we are to understand the whole of the

country to the east of the Jordan, as in Num_32:29; Deu_34:1; Jdg_5:17, etc. נאחז, both in the form and meaning the same as in Num_32:30, made possessors, i.e., settled

down. ה�ר�ן ה�ר�ן the circles of the Jordan, is synonymous with ,�לילות ,in Gen_13:10 ��רand signifies that portion of the Ghor which was upon the western side of the Jordan.

PETT, "erse 9‘And the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, returned, and departed from the children of Israel out of Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan, to go to the land of Gilead, to the land of their possession, of which they were possessed according to the commandment of YHWH by the hand of Moses.’So no doubt with great joy and expectation the three Transjordan contingents returned to their homes in Transjordan. Here ‘the land of Gilead’ indicated loosely the whole area controlled by the three tribes. Gilead was split into two parts by the great trench of the Jabbok, one half had been ruled by Sihon the other by Og. The name Gilead is used in various ways. Sometimes it refers to the section possessed by Reuben known as ‘half Gilead’ (Joshua 12:2; Joshua 12:5; �umbers 32:1; �umbers 32:29), at other times to the northern section (Joshua 17:1; Joshua 17:5; Deuteronomy 2:36; Deuteronomy 3:15-16), and often to the whole area between the Yarmuk, south east of the Sea of Chinneroth (Galilee), and the Arnon (1 Kings 4:19; 2 Kings 10:33), The whole area is often described as ‘all Gilead’ (Deuteronomy 3:10; 2 Kings 10:33).

We do not know exactly when this was, but must presume it was not long after Joshua 11:23. These three tribes would have little need to be directly involved in the activities of the individual tribes, nor in the distribution of the land. Their allotments had been given to them by Moses (Joshua 13:8-31). But their presence would be required while the initial bridgehead was being established.

This ties in with the fact that it was seemingly while the tribes were gathered at Shiloh, which must therefore come after Joshua 14:6 when they were still at their base camp at Gilgal. Thus they witnessed the initial movement of Judah to take the

hill country under Joshua’s overall command, and the movement of Ephraim and Manasseh to establish themselves in the hill country of Ephraim. Until that was done there was no bridgehead. So it was probably around the time of Joshua 18:1 when the official establishment of the camp at Shiloh took place, and it was made the central sanctuary. Such a movement from Gilgal to Shiloh would anyway make Transjordan more vulnerable to outside attack. While they were encamped at Gilgal it was a reminder to enemies across the Jordan that any indication of hostile intent could be met by force.

“Of which they were possessed according to the commandment of YHWH by the hand of Moses.” It is again stressed that their settlement Beyond Jordan eastward was at the behest of YHWH (�umbers 32:1), for there was a strong feeling among many that it was ‘outside the land of the possession of YHWH’ (Joshua 22:19).

CO�STABLE, "Verses 9-12The writer used the terms "the land of Canaan" and "the land of Gilead" to refer to the land west and east of the Jordan River respectively in this section, Cisjordan and Transjordan. The altar, then, stood on the west side of the Jordan.

These tribes evidently intended the altar they built to be a replica of the brazen altar in the tabernacle courtyard at Shiloh (cf. Joshua 22:28). If they did, it is easy to understand why the other tribes reacted to its construction so violently. God had prohibited the building of altars in the land apart from the ones He ordained ( Deuteronomy 12:1-14). [�ote: Woudstra, p320.] The Canaanites built many altars, but this was not to be Israel"s practice.

When the other Israelites learned what the two and one-half tribes had done, they prepared to go to war against them ( Joshua 22:12). This is what God had commanded the Israelites to do if any of their brethren sought to lead others in Israel away from God and His law ( Deuteronomy 13:12-18).

10 When they came to Geliloth near the Jordan in the land of Canaan, the Reubenites, the Gadites and the half-tribe of Manasseh built an imposing altar there by the Jordan.

BAR�ES, "The two tribes and a half erected this altar in order to keep alive their claim to have the same interest as the other tribes had in the sanctuary of God, which was established on the west side of Jordan: and in order to forestall any assertion that the Jordan itself was a natural barrier of exclusion between them and the sanctuary, they built it on the west or Canaanite bank of the Jordan and not on the east.

The word rendered “borders” is noteworthy; it means circuits, arrondissements.

CLARKE, "The borders of Jordan, that are in - Canaan - This verse can never mean that they built the altar on the west side of Jordan, for this was not in their territories; nor could it be a place for the purpose of public worship to their own people, if built on the opposite side of Jordan; besides, the next verse says it was built over against the land of Canaan. It appears that when they came to the river they formed the purpose of building the altar; and when they had crossed it they executed their purpose.

A great altar to see to - A vast mass of earth, stones, etc., elevated to a great height, to serve as a memorial of the transactions that had already taken place. Probably it was intended also to serve as a kind of watchtower, being of a stupendous height, altare infinitae magnitudinis, an altar of an immense size, as the Vulgate terms it.

GILL, "And when they came unto the borders of Jordan, that are in the land of Canaan,.... To the banks of it, or the sand heaps, some take the word to signify, which were thrown up to restrain the waters from overflowing; some by Geliloth understand a place so called; and Jerom (g) says it was near Jordan in the tribe of Benjamin: but rather the word signifies the meanders, windings, and turnings, of the river (h); and such circuits and compasses it fetched near Jericho, as the same writer (i)observes, where we may suppose these tribes went over, and at a place where the river jetted out into the land of Canaan:

the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, built there an altar by Jordan; or "then"; that is, when they had passed over the river into their own country, for which Josephus is express (k); and certain it is, that the altar was built not on the Canaan side of Jordan, but on the opposite side, as is clear from Jos_22:11, and indeed they had no right to build on any other ground than their own; and they pitched upon a spot where the river jetted out into the land of Canaan, as most proper to erect it on, to be a witness, that though separated from the rest of the Israelites by the river Jordan, yet were a part of them, and had a right to join them in the service of God, and bring their sacrifices to the altar of God in the tabernacle, as more fully appears in some after verses:

a great altar to see to; built up very high, so that it might be seen at a great distance.

HE�RY, "Here is, I. The pious care of the separated tribes to keep their hold of Canaan's religion, even when they were leaving Canaan's land, that they might not be as the sons of the stranger, utterly separated from God's people, Isa_56:3. In order to this, they built a great altar on the borders of Jordan, to be a witness for them that they were Israelites, and as such partakers of the altar of the Lord, 1Co_10:18. When they came to

Jordan (Jos_22:10) they did not consult how to preserve the remembrance of their own exploits in the wars of Canaan, and the services they had done their brethren, by erecting a monument to the immortal honour of the two tribes and a half; but their relation to the church of God, together with their interest in the communion of saints, is that which they are solicitous to preserve and perpetuate the proofs and evidences of; and therefore without delay, when the thing was first proposed by some among them, who, though glad to think that they were going towards home, were sorry to think that they were going from the altar of God, immediately they erected this altar, which served as a bridge to keep up their fellowship with the other tribes in the things of God. Some think they built this altar on the Canaan-side of Jordan, in the lot of Benjamin, that, looking over the river, they might see the figure of the altar at Shiloh, when they could not conveniently go to it; but it is more likely that they built it on their own side of the water, for what had they to do to build on another man's land without his consent? And it is said to be over-against the land of Canaan; nor would there have been any cause of suspecting it designed for sacrifice if they had not built it among themselves. This altar was very innocently and honestly designed, but it would have been well if, since it had in it an appearance of evil, and might be an occasion of offence to their brethren, they had consulted the oracle of God about it before they did it, or at least acquainted their brethren with their purpose, and given them the same explication of their altar before, to prevent their jealousy, which they did afterwards, to remove it. Their zeal was commendable, but it ought to have been guided with discretion. There was no need to hasten the building of an altar for the purpose for which they intended this, but they might have taken time to consider and take advice; yet, when their sincerity was made to appear, we do not find that they were blamed for their rashness. God does, and men should, overlook the weakness of an honest zeal.

JAMISO�, "Jos_22:10. They build the Altar of Testimony on their journey.

when they came unto the borders of Jordan, that are in the land of Canaan, the children of Reuben ... built there an altar by Jordan— This altar was probably an immense pile of stones and earth. The generality of our translators supposes that it was reared on the banks of the Jordan, within the limits of Canaan proper. But a little closer examination seems to make the conclusion irresistible that its position was on the eastern side of the river, for these two reasons; first, because it is said (Jos_22:11) to have been built “over against,” or in the sight of the land of Canaan -not within it; and secondly, because the declared motive of the trans-jordanic Israelites in erecting it was to prevent their brethren in Canaan ever saying, “in time to come, What have ye to do with the Lord God of Israel? For the Lord hath made Jordan a border between us and you,” etc. [Jos_22:24, Jos_22:25]. Such a taunt would be obviously prevented or confuted by the two tribes and a half having on the eastern side of Jordan, within their own land, a facsimile of the altar at Shiloh, as a witness that they acknowledged the same God and practiced the same rites of worship as the brethren in Canaan.

CALVI�, "10.And when they came unto the borders, etc The history here is particularly deserving of notice, when the two tribes and half-tribe, intending to erect a memorial of common faith and fraternal concord, allowed themselves from inconsiderate zeal to adopt a method which was justly suspected by their brethren. The ten tribes, thinking that the worship of God was violated with impious audacity

and temerity, were inflamed with holy wrath, and took up arms to use them against their own blood; nor were they appeased till they had received full satisfaction. The motive for erecting the altar was right in itself. For the object of the children of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, was to testify that though they were separated from their brethren by the intervening stream, they were, however, united with them in religion, and cherished a mutual agreement in the doctrine of the Law. �othing was farther from their intention than to innovate in any respect in the worship of God. But they sinned not lightly in attempting a novelty, without paying any regard to the high priest, or consulting their brethren, and in a form which was very liable to be misconstrued.

We know how strictly the Law prohibited two altars, (Exodus 20:24) for the Lord wished to be worshipped in one place only. Therefore, when on the very first blush of the case, all were at once led to think that they were building a second altar, who would not have judged them guilty of sacrilege in framing a ritual of a degenerate description, at variance with the Law of God? Seeing, then, that the work might be deemed vicious, they ought, at least, in so great and so serious a matter, to have made their brethren sharers in their counsel; more especially were they in the wrong in neglecting to consult the high priest, from whose lips the divine will was to be ascertained. They were, therefore, deserving of blame, because, as if they had been alone in the world, they considered not what offence might arise from the novelty of the example. Wherefore, let us learn to attempt nothing rashly, even should it be free from blame, and let us always give due heed to the admonition of St. Paul, (1 Corinthians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 10:23) that it is necessary to attend not only to what is lawful, but to what is expedient; more especially let us sedulously beware of disturbing pious minds (182) by the introduction of any kind of novelty.

COFFMA�,"Verse 10"And when they came unto the region about the Jordan, that is in the land of Canaan, the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh built there an altar by the Jordan, a great altar to look upon. And the children of Israel heard say, Behold the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh have built an altar in the forefront of the land of Canaan, in the region about the Jordan, on the side that pertaineth to the children of Israel. And when the children of Israel heard of it, the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh, to go up against them to war."

�ow, what was so wrong about those eastern tribes building an altar near the Jordan that it precipitated a reaction in the rest of Israel that brought the threat of a war of extermination against them? There can be but one answer to that question, namely, that from the very beginning of the Mosaic religion, the principle of "only one sanctuary" for the entire nation had been understood and enforced among the Israelites. That "one sanctuary," of course, had been moved no less than forty-two times during the wilderness wanderings, and the removal of it to Shiloh from Gilgal here in the Book of Joshua does not mean that it had not, at one time or another, been located elsewhere. The "one sanctuary," therefore, was not tied to any place;

but it was moveable. God had made that plain enough in the words, "Unto the place (any place) that Jehovah shall choose to put his name there" (Deuteronomy 12:1). (See the discussion of this under that reference.) The ridiculous notion that this means Jerusalem is frustrated and denied by the fact that the word "Jerusalem" is not even found in Deuteronomy. It was God's presence that identified the sanctuary, not some physical landmark.

As for the motivation of those eastern tribes that led to this near-disaster, "There was a sense of separation on the East Bank, and fear that the westerners might reject and disown them; also there was awareness that holy religion was not a characteristic of that eastern land."[10] "They erected this altar to keep alive their claim of having the same interest as the other tribes in the sanctuary of God, located at that time, in Shiloh."[11]

Regardless of all their good intentions, however, "This was a needless and presumptuous deed."[12] It almost plunged Israel into war; and, under slightly different circumstances, that war might have been impossible to avoid.

We should be aware of the part that public gossip, or rumor, had in this episode. It would have been quite easy for the leaders to have declared war on the basis of the gossip, rather than launching an investigation.

That such an altar was actually built has been long ago verified by the discovery of the site.[13] And, couldn't you have guessed it? "Lieutenant Conder denied it!"[14]

COKE, "Verse 10Ver. 10. And when they came unto the borders of Jordan, that are in the land of Canaan— From the first reading of these words, one would conceive that the sacred writer means to say, that the Israelites built the altar, of which he proceeds to speak, on this side Jordan, before they had repassed the river; but, from what follows, we shall soon be convinced that this cannot be the sense of the historian. Had the Israelites of the two tribes and a half built an altar on the west side of the river, they would not have executed their own design, which was, to shew by this monument that, though separated from their brethren, and from the altar of the Lord, by Jordan, they still made but one and the same people with them. Besides, is it likely that they would have ventured to erect this pile upon the territory of the other tribes? And even were this the case, how, in the verse following, could the altar in question be said to have been built over-against the land of Canaan? we must, therefore, necessarily suppose the author to have expressed himself here in such brief terms as leave something to be made out by the reader. It was evidently his intention to say, that the Israelites, on their coming up to the bank of the Jordan on the side of the land of Canaan, crossed that river, and built the altar beyond it in their own country. See Josephus. Hist. Jud. lib. v. cap. 1. and Rabb. in Seder.—Olam. c. xii. p. 32. We may add, that the Hebrew Geliloth, rendered in our version borders, may very probably be in this verse the proper name of a place situate on the side of the Jordan. The Vulgate translates, on the heights of Jordan; but the Vatican manuscript of the LXX has it Gilead or Geliloth; understanding it of a place

near that where the Israelites crossed over the Jordan. The question then is, where Geliloth stood: if we understand by it the country of Gilead, the whole is clear; and then the Israelites, without any doubt, reared the altar after having passed the river. Le Clerc understands the matter very naturally, namely, that the Israelites came to Jordan, which bounds the land of Canaan, and, having crossed it, built there (i.e. on the other side,) the altar in question. This altar, we read, was of a remarkable size; such as might be perceived from afar. It was the work, not of an individual, but of a whole body of people, who thought they could not build it too magnificently. It was a heap of earth or stones. Bacchus, Hercules, Semiramis, Cyrus, and Alexander the Great, in after times, made others like it upon various occasions, to eternize the memory of their victories and travels. See Pliny, lib. 6: cap. 16, 17. Philostrat. Vit. Apollon. lib. 2: ad fin. See also Calmet and Le Clerc. By the stateliness and magnificence of this altar, it was rendered so different from that which Moses had dedicated to divine worship, that it is probable these Israelites thought it would therefore administer less occasion to their brethren to suspect that it was intended for sacrifice, or to rival the other.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 10(10) The borders of Jordan, that are in the land of Canaan.—As far as these words go, the site of the altar might be either east or west of Jordan; but it seems to be more probable that it was on the east bank. And thus the phrase above would be a reminder of the very thing the altar was intended to enforce, viz., the fact that both borders of Jordan are part of the promised land. But Kurn Surtabeth, twenty miles north of Jericho, on the west side of Jordan, has been thought to be the place.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:10. When they came — Or, They came (for the word when is not in the Hebrew) to the borders of Jordan — It is thought by many that גלילות, Geliloth, here rendered borders, was the name of a place. The children of Reuben built there an altar — This seems, at first sight, to import, that they built this altar before they went over Jordan, in the land of Canaan; but the Hebrew particle שם, sham, relates to time as well as place, and may be translated then as well as there. Examples of which may be found in Proverbs 8:27, compared with Joshua 22:30 ; Ecclesiastes 3:17; and Isaiah 48:16. And thus it is here to be interpreted, that before they went any farther, while they were yet on the bank of Jordan, they erected this altar on the borders of their own country; for so the next verse teaches us to expound the passage, and will admit of no other sense, where it is said they had built this altar, not in, but over against the land of Canaan. Indeed it is not likely that they would have ventured to erect it in the territory of the other tribes. �or would it have answered their intention to have built it there, which was to show, by this monument, that Jordan made no such separation between them and their brethren, but that they were one people with those in Canaan, where the altar of God was in Shiloh. See Joshua 22:28. �or would there have been cause to suspect, as it appears there was from the following verses, that it was designed for sacrifice, if they had not built it among themselves. A great altar to see to — Which made a very conspicuous appearance, being very high, and consequently visible afar off.

PETT, "Verse 10‘And when they came to the region about Jordan, that is in the land of Canaan, the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh built there an altar by Jordan, a great altar to look to.’This building of a memorial altar, in the land of Canaan west of Jordan, was imitated by Gideon later (Judges 6:24). The intention of it was in order that it might be a reminder that the Transjordan tribes were one with those in the land of Canaan and shared in the tribal covenant. It was a gesture of praise to God and of unity with their brother tribes. In a sense this was their possession in Canaan. As they looked at it across the Jordan it would be a reminder that they were one people in the covenant, sharing God’s land.

“The region about Jordan.” Or more literally ‘the circles (geliloth) of Jordan’, thus a specifically recognised district, possibly based on the circular twisting of the river like a serpent at this point. Possibly by building the altar in a place where the Jordan wound round it on three sides they saw it as on joint territory. Compare Genesis 13:10 where the southern part of the Jordan Rift valley is called ‘the circuit (kikkar) of Jordan’.

“A great altar to see to.” The altar was large so that it could be seen at some distance, and is purpose was so that it could be looked at from Transjordan. It was built on the pattern of the altar in the Tabernacle (Joshua 22:28).

WHEDO�, "THE ALTAR OF WIT�ESS AT THE JORDA�, Joshua 22:10-34.

10. By Jordan — Most commentators believe that the altar was on the western bank of the Jordan, because the language of the narrative is, when they came unto the borders of Jordan, that are in the land of Canaan. But in the next verse we read that the altar was built “over against the land of Canaan.” The purpose of the altar was to answer the taunting insinuation that they were aliens, by exhibiting within their own borders a facsimile of the altar at Shiloh as a proof of their Hebrew nationality and of their conformity to their brethren in religious worship. Josephus says, that the two and a half tribes “crossed the river and built an altar on the bank of the Jordan as a token of their affinity with those on the other side.” This altar, constructed by so large a body of men, was probably a vast heap of earth and stones.

A great altar to see to — Conspicuously located, and huge in its dimensions. That this mound has not been found by any traveller is not strange, when we consider the almost total neglect of Eastern Palestine by all modern explorers; and, besides, this great altar may long ago have been destroyed.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:10

The borders of Jordan. Literally, the circles (cf. notes on Joshua 13:2; Joshua 18:17;

Joshua 20:7; Joshua 21:32). Conder suggests downs, and it is most probable that the word refers to curved outlines, such as we frequently see in the hollows of our own chalk downs, or in any place where the strata do not yield easily to the action of water, and yet have been moulded by such action. That are in the land of Canaan. Again the intention is to lay stress upon the fact that the historian is still speaking of the country west of Canaan. A great altar to see to. Literally, an altar great to sight, i.e; large and visible from a great distance. Bishop Horsley, however, would render a great altar in appearance, supposing that what is meant is that it only looked like an altar, and was not intended to be used as one. One of the most valuable results of the Palestine exploration movement has been the discovery of the site of this altar, which seems probable, in spite of Lieutenant Conder's abandonment of the theory in his 'Tent Work in Palestine,' 2:53. The reasons for the identification are as follows. The altar must be near one of the fords of Jordan. It must be on this side of Jordan (see note on Joshua 22:24, Joshua 22:25). It must be in a conspicuous position, as we have just seen. �ow Kurn Sartabeh or Surtubeh (see note on Joshua 3:16), visible from a great distance on all sides, from Ebal, from near Gennesaret, thirty miles off, from the Dead Sea, from the eastern high lands, and from the Judaean watershed, fulfils all these conditions. Dr. Hutchinson replies that the altar is stated by Josephus to have been on the east side of Jordan, and that it was improbable that the two and a half tribes would have erected the altar on the cis-Jordanic territory, or so near to Shiloh, because Ephraim would have resented this. Moreover, the words, "a great altar to be seen," would imply that it was to be visible from a long distance, so that the two tribes and a half might see it from their side of Jordan. It must be confessed that the evidence for the identification is but slight, but so also are the arguments against it. For

Lieutenant Conder now admits that it is possible that the words stating that the tribes crossed "by the passage of the children of Israel "(Joshua 22:11, but see note there) leads to the idea that the ford by Jericho is meant, and not the Damieh ford by Kurn Sartabeh. See, however, the translation given below. The fact that the Arabs call the place the ascent of the father of Ayd, which has a close resemblance to the Hebrew word Ed, "witness," does not appear conclusive, though it lends some degree of probability to the theory. On the other hand, it might be contended that if the Reubenites and Gadites had not erected the altar on their own territory, it would not have excited the wrath of the remaining tribes. But as the best authorities are content to leave the matter uncertain, it must be left uncertain here.

11 And when the Israelites heard that they had built the altar on the border of Canaan at Geliloth

near the Jordan on the Israelite side,

GILL, "And the children of Israel heard say,.... Those that dwelt in the land of Canaan, for otherwise, as before observed, the two tribes and a half on the other side Jordan were Israelites also; and this is a further proof that the altar was built on their side, or those in the land of Canaan would have known of the building of it, and have seen them at it, and not come at the knowledge of it by hearsay only, as it seems they did, it being reported to them by some who had been in those parts, and had seen the structure:

behold, the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, have built an altar over against the land of Canaan; which clearly shows it was on the other side Jordan, though Noldius, who places it in the land of Canaan, renders the words, "in the neighbourhood of" it (l); which will not much help him, since it might be in the neighbourhood of it, and yet not in it:

in the borders of Jordan; on the banks of it, or in one of the meanders and windings of it, at a place where it ran out and fetched a compass in the land of Canaan:

at the passage of the children of Israel; where they passed over when they first came into Canaan, and where those tribes also passed over at their return; supposed to be the Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing, Joh_1:28.

HE�RY, ". The holy jealousy of the other tribes for the honour of God and his altar at Shiloh. Notice was immediately brought to the princes of Israel of the setting up of this altar, Jos_22:11. And they, knowing how strict and severe that law was which required them to offer all their sacrifices in the place which God should choose, and not elsewhere (Deu_12:5-7), were soon apprehensive that the setting up of another altar was an affront to the choice which God had lately made of a place to put his name in, and had a direct tendency to the worship of some other God. Now,

1. Their suspicion was very excusable, for it must be confessed the thing, prima facie -at first sight, looked ill, and seemed to imply a design to set up and maintain a competitor with the altar at Shiloh. It was no strained innuendo from the building of an altar to infer an intention to offer sacrifice upon it, and that might introduce idolatry and end in a total apostasy from the faith and worship of the God of Israel. So great a matter might this fire kindle. God is jealous for his own institutions, and therefore we should be so too, and afraid of every thing that looks like, or leads to, idolatry.

JAMISO�, "Jos_22:11-29. Contention thereupon.

and the children of Israel heard say— Fame speedily spread intelligence of what the trans-jordanic tribes had done. The act being suspected of some idolatrous design, the tribes rose in a mass, and repairing to the tabernacle at Shiloh, resolved to declare war against the two tribes and a half as apostates from God. On calmer and more mature consideration, however, they determined, in the first instance, to send a deputation

consisting of the son of the high priest, and ten eminent persons from each tribe, to make inquiry into this rumored rebellion against God (Deu_13:13-15). The quality of the deputies evinced the deep solicitude that was felt on the occasion to maintain the purity of the divine worship throughout Israel. In the presumptive belief that the two tribes and a half had really built an altar, the deputies expressed astonishment at their so soon falling into such a heinous crime as that of violating the unity of divine worship (Exo_20:24; Lev_17:8, Lev_17:9; Deu_12:5-13). They reminded their eastern brethren of the disastrous consequences that were entailed on the nation at large by the apostasy at Peor and by the sin of Achan, and finally exhorted them, if they felt the want of the tabernacle and altar and repented of their rash choice in preferring worldly advantages to religious privileges, to remove to the western side of the Jordan, where all the tribes would form a united and obedient community of worshippers.

K&D 11-12, "The Israelites (on this side) heard that the tribes in question had built the altar “opposite to the land of Canaan” (lit. in the face or in front of the land of Canaan),

at the opposite region of the children of Israel” (two descriptions which may be“ ,אל־אבר

explained on the supposition that the name of Canaan is used in a restricted sense, the valley of the Jordan being expressly excepted, and Canaan considered as only extending to the valley of the Jordan). When they heard this, the whole congregation (in its heads and representatives) assembled at Shiloh, to go up, i.e., with the intention of going, to make war against them. The congregation supposed that the altar had been built as a place for sacrifice, and therefore regarded it as a wicked violation of the commandment of God with regard to the unity of the sacrificial altar (Lev_17:8-9; Deu_12:4.), which they ought to punish according to the law in Deu_13:13. This zeal was perfectly justifiable, and even praiseworthy, as the altar, even if not erected as a place for sacrifice, might easily be abused to that purpose, and thus become an occasion of sin to the whole nation. In any case, the two tribes and a half ought not to have erected such a building without the consent of Joshua or of the high priest.

(Note: “We know how sternly the law prohibited the use of two altars: because it was the will of God that His worship should be restricted to one place. When, therefore, from the very appearance it could not fail to occur to the mind of any one that they were establishing a second altar, who would not have condemned them as guilty of sacrilege, for introducing rites and ceremonies at variance with the law of God? And since it might so naturally be regarded as a wicked deed, they ought certainly to have consulted their brethren in so grave and important a matter; and it was especially wrong to pass by the high priest, when the will of God might have been learned from his lips. They were deserving of blame, therefore, because they acted as if they had been alone in the world, and did not consider what offence might easily arise from the novelty of their proceedings.” - Calvin.)

CALVI�, "11.And the children of Israel heard say, etc There is no doubt that they were inflamed with holy zeal, nor ought their vehemence to seem excessive in taking up arms to destroy their countrymen on account of a pile of stones. For they truly and wisely judged that the lawful sanctuary of God was polluted and his worship profaned, that sacred things were violated, pious concord destroyed, and a door opened for the license of superstitious practices, if in two places victims were offered to God, who had for these reasons so solemnly bound the whole people to a single

altar. �ot rashly, therefore, do the ten tribes, on hearing of a profane altar, detest its sacrilegious audacity.

Here, then, we have an illustrious display of piety, teaching us that if we see the pure worship of God corrupted, we must be strenuous, to the utmost of our ability, in vindicating it. The sword, indeed, has not been committed to the hands of all; but every one must, according to his call and office, study manfully and firmly to maintain the purity of religion against all corruption’s. More especially deserving of the highest praise was the zeal of the half-tribe of Manasseh, who, setting aside all regard to the flesh, did not spare their own family. I admit, however, that this zeal, though pious, was not free from turbulent impetuosity, inasmuch as they hasten to declare war before they inquired concerning the mind of their brethren, and properly ascertained the state of the case. War, I admit, was declared only under conditions; for they send ambassadors to bring back word after they had carefully investigated the matter, and they move not a finger in the way of inflicting punishment till they are certified of the existence of the crime. Excuse, therefore, may be made for the fervor of their passion, while they prepare for battle in the event of any defection being discovered. (183)

ELLICOTT, "Verse 11(11) Have built an altar.—Rather, have built the altar. As appears by Joshua 22:28, it was a representation of the altar of Jehovah: a copy of the one altar which He had given to Israel for sacrifice. The design was to set up on the east of Jordan a likeness of that altar which was established on the west, that the tribes on the other side of Jordan might appeal to it as a proof that they also were the people of Jehovah.

COKE, "Verse 11Ver. 11. And the children of Israel, &c.— That is, those who were in the land of Canaan to the west of Jordan. This is a proof of the observation we just now made, that there are many things to be supplied in this narration; for the Reubenites, Gadites, and half-tribe of Manasseh, were no less children of Israel than the former. They were informed of the building of this altar, when finished; a certain proof that it had not been reared within their territories, in which case they would have seen and opposed them. The passage of the children of Israel is so called, either as being the part at which they entered into the land of Canaan, or by which they returned from thence: perhaps it was the place where the river was commonly crossed.

PETT, "Verse 11‘And the children of Israel heard it said, “See, the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, have built an altar before (at the frontier of) the land of Canaan in the circles of Jordan on the side that belongs to the children of Israel.’Word about the building of the great altar quickly spread and reached the authorities. The resulting anger would not be because of where it was built but because of its presumed purpose, although in fact where it was built tended to indicate that it was not for ritual use, otherwise it would have been built on the

eastern side.

PULPIT, "Half tribe of Manasseh. Throughout this part of the narrative, when the body politic, rather than the descent of the tribe, is to be indicated, we have, not מטה, but שבט . See above, Joshua 13:29. An altar. The original has the altar. Over against seems to have meant מול .It is difficult to fix the meaning of this expression . אל־מולthe front of anything, and therefore אל־מול would naturally mean towards the front of, or in front of. Thus we have had the expression in Joshua 8:33 (where see note), where it seems to mean, in the direction of, and in Joshua 9:1, where it seems to have the same meaning. With verbs of motion it signifies towards, as in Exodus 34:3, and 1 Samuel 17:30. Here it clearly cannot be pressed to mean across Jordan. See note below. The borders of Jordan. As above, 1 Samuel 17:10, the circles of Jordan. At the passage of the children of Israel. The word translated "the passage of," literally," unto over," has originally the sense of "across." Here, however, it means "towards the region opposite to the sons of Israel," i.e; in the direction of the country on the other side Jordan. The country across Jordan was usually designated as בעבר or מעבר Jordan. אל־עבר, the phrase used here, we find in Exodus 28:26, apparently in the sense of across (so Exodus 39:19). In Deuteronomy 30:13 it is used of moving in the direction of a place, "across" or "over the sea." In Ezekiel 1:9, Ezekiel 1:12, with the addition of פניו, the phrase means "straight forward." In 1 Samuel 14:40 לעבר אהד means "on one side." In 1 Kings 7:1-51. לעבר means "over." Thus the altar was not necessarily on the other side Jordan.

PI�K, "The Memorial Altar

"Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor. 10:12). God’s people must learn to act in the spirit of Hezekiah, who said, "I shall go softly all my years" (Isa. 38:15). There is always need of caution lest, having earned a commendation, we imprudently and inadvertently bring upon ourselves and others unnecessary troubles. God would have His own abstain from every appearance of evil (1 Thess. 5:22). The plans we formulate and execute may veil the true intention of the heart, and result in misunderstandings.

Shiloh had become the headquarters of Joshua (Josh. 18:8-9). Gilgal was the place associated with the conquest of the land (Josh. 5); it was from his military position there that Joshua directed the invasion of Canaan. When the conquest was assured, obviously he moved to Shiloh, a good choice because of its central location, and from there supervised the distribution of the territory. It was from here that these heroic soldiers were demobilized and sent back to their families.

A memorial marked that earlier extraordinary episode in the history of the nation, the crossing of the Jordan. Moses had built it when first they entered the land. Representatives of these very tribes had carried the stones out of the river and piled them as a cairn on its bank (Josh. 4), stones which were to be a sign to future generations. They had carried out the instructions of the Lord, "This may be a sign among you, that when your children ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean ye by these stones? Then ye shall answer them, That the waters of the Jordan

were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever" (vv. 6-7).

The Reubenites, the Gadites, and those from Manasseh apparently felt that as a memorial witnessed before their posterity to the miraculous entering into Canaan, so a memorial should also witness to their children why they recrossed the Jordan, and why they had their inheritance on the east side. �o matter how plausible the argument for the altar seemed, there was a great difference between the cairn of stones and the altar as they stood on the bank of Jordan; the one was there in obedience to the Word of God, the other because of human reasoning and planning. Any departure from the divine will as it has been revealed, whether by an addition to it or a subtraction from it, must ultimately involve us in difficulties.

The intention of the two and a half tribes may have been sincere enough, but the appearance of the altar certainly seemed to violate the Word of God given by Moses, "And it shall be on the day when ye shall pass over Jordan unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, . . . there shalt thou build an altar unto the LORD thy God" (Deut. 27:1-10). Their brethren viewed it in that light. The motive may not have been wrong, but the method was not right.

From the reading of Joshua 22:11 in the King James Version, it would appear as if the two altars were very close together; but since the phrase, "at the passage of the children of Israel," might also be rendered "at the side of them" the actual position of this second altar is not given.

This memorial of sacred appearance might easily have been a trap for future generations instead of a witness. The brazen serpent which brought life to many dying in Israel (�um. 21), eventually became a snare and the people worshiped it. Good King Hezekiah destroyed it along with other idolatrous objects when he instituted his reforms in the nation (2 Kings 18:4).

We read that it was "a great altar to see to"; that is, to look upon. It was large so as to attract attention. How very human! An accomplishment by man generally results in a large celebration and display, an ostentatious reminder of successful performance. The classic example of this is �ebuchadnezzar and his massive image through which he sought worship. With pride he exclaimed, "Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honor of my majesty?" Even as he thus spoke, divine judgment was decreed against him (Dan. 4:30-31). Surely, "a man’s pride shall bring him low" (Prov. 29:23). "Whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted" (Matthew 23:12).

SIMEO�,"THE ALTAR OF WIT�ESS

Joshua 22:11-12. And the children of Israel heard say, Behold, the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh have built an altar

over against the land of Canaan, in the borders of Jordan, at the passage of the children of Israel. And when the children of Israel heard of it, the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh, to go up to war against them.

RELIGIO� has often been made a plea for ambitious and bloody projects: but it never was on any occasion so truly and properly the ground of war, as in the event that is here recorded. The tribes who had their portion on the east of Jordan, after having been disbanded, came to the land of their possession: and, apprehending that at some future period they might be disowned by their brethren on account of their not having their inheritance in the land of Canaan, they built a large altar on the borders of their own land near Jordan, to serve as a memorial to all future ages, that they belonged to the tribes of Israel, and were the worshippers of Israel’s God. The other tribes having no conception of an altar being erected but for sacrifice, regarded this as an act of rebellion against God, and determined instantly to go and punish the supposed apostates. But first they agreed to send an embassy, to see whether they could not prevail by milder methods to reclaim them from their wickedness. The ambassadors went; a convention met; an explanation took place; the misapprehensions were removed; and all was speedily and amicably settled.

�ow this history will suggest many useful hints for the regulating of,

I. �ational interests—

[The question was, in fact, of infinite importance to the whole nation. Repeated occasions had arisen wherein the sin of individuals had been visited upon the whole nation. The iniquity of Achan had not long since caused the defeat of Israel’s hosts, and the loss of six and thirty men: and, not very long before, the connexion of many with the Midianitish women in whoredom and idolatry, brought destruction on twenty-four thousand Israelites in one day. What then could he expected, but that, if these who had erected the altar should pass unpunished, God would punish all the other tribes as partners in their guilt? To avert so terrible an evil was their bounden duty; and therefore they acted right in determining to avenge the quarrel of their God. But, as it was possible they might prevail by gentler means, they sent delegates from every tribe, with Phinehas at their head, to expostulate with them on their conduct. These were met by other delegates from the supposed offenders, and every thing was cleared up to their satisfaction: and thus the controversy was terminated to the unspeakable joy of all parties.

�ow in this we see how nations ought to act, whenever grounds of disagreement arise, and their mutual interests interfere. Their ambassadors should confer with each other in a conciliatory manner, anxious to prevent extremities, and, by mutual explanations and concessions, to adjust their differences. One thing in particular was worthy of applause in those who seemed disposed for war: they were intent only on the prevention of iniquity; and, imagining that the altar had been raised with a view to put the land of Gilead on a footing of equality with the land of Canaan, they offered to give up a proportionate share of their own land to those who had erected

it, and thus to sacrifice their own interests for the preservation of peace. Alas! how different is this from what is usually found amongst contending nations! Modern embassies are most frequently characterized by duplicity and concealment, by chicanery and finesse, and by a wanton pertinacity about matters of inferior moment. Were all actuated by the spirit of Israel on this occasion, were frankness on the one side met by patience and conciliation on the other, the earth would be no more deluged with blood, but the “swords would be beaten into ploughshares,” and happiness would reign, where nothing but desolation and misery is seen.]

But this history will be further useful for the regulation of,

II. Judicial policy—

[This act was in reality an enforcing of the existing laws under the direction of the civil magistrate: for, though Joshua is not mentioned, we can have no doubt but that Phinehas and the ten princes had received his sanction at least, if they did not proceed by his express command. The law of God had plainly enjoined, that there should be only one place for God’s altar, and that all the tribes should offer their sacrifices there [�ote: Deuteronomy 12:5; Deuteronomy 12:7.]. It also commanded, that, if any attempt should be made by any part of Israel to establish idolatry among them, the remainder, after due inquiry, should cut them off with the sword [�ote: Deuteronomy 13:12-15.]. This then was an interference of magistrates in support of the laws: and it was indispensably necessary that they should interfere, to prevent so fatal a schism as was likely to arise.

We would not be understood to say, that civil magistrates would be justified in using the sword for the prevention or punishment of schism now. The true Church is not so accurately defined now, as that any one body has a right to assume to itself the exclusive privilege of being called The Church of Christ: nor is there any commission given to magistrates to use carnal weapons in the support of any particular system, either of doctrines or of discipline, in the Church: but where, as in the instance before us, there appears to be a public renunciation of all religion, and a profane contempt of all laws, the magistrate is bound to interfere; and every Christian in the land is bound to give him his support. Opinions are not within the cognizance of the civil magistrate, except when they are manifested in actions, or are so promulged as to endanger the peace and welfare of society: but, when carried to that extent, they justly come under his control. This vigilance however, though sufficiently exercised in relation to the things which concern the State, is but little seen in the suppression of profaneness and iniquity. We have laws against every species of iniquity; but they are not carried into effect. The fear of divine judgments on the land scarcely ever enters into the bosoms either of magistrates or people: hence, if only there be no flagrant violation of the peace, iniquity may prevail almost to any extent, without any one to vindicate the honour of God, or to avert his displeasure from a guilty land. In this respect there is an awful difference between the Israelites and us: insomuch that we, with all our superior advantages, are not worthy to be compared with them. Yet we must remember, that whenever we put forth the arm of power for the suppression of vice, our first object must be, by

expostulation, to reclaim; nor must we ever inflict punishment, till milder measures have failed of success.]

This history will be yet further useful to us in the regulation of,

III. Religious zeal—

“It is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing:” but our zeal should particularly exert itself,

1. To prevent apostasy from God—

[This was the real object of the persons who raised the altar: they, in a most reverential and solemn manner, called God to witness that they had been actuated only by a desire to transmit to their posterity an indelible assurance, that they were as truly the Lord’s people, as those who dwelt in Canaan; and that though their land was separated from that of their brethren, their interests and privileges were the same.

Here was a noble example of regard for posterity. It might have been better indeed to have consulted Joshua, or rather to have taken counsel of the Lord, respecting this measure, before they had carried it into execution: but holy zeal does not always pause to consider all possible effects and consequences; (though doubtless, the more tempered it is with wisdom, the more excellent it appears:) but God does not blame their conduct: and in this at least we shall do well to follow it, namely, by exerting ourselves in every possible way to transmit, and to perpetuate even to the remotest ages, the knowledge of God, as our God, our Father, and Redeemer.

The other tribes also manifested a noble zeal, in the same cause, though by different means. They were fearful that this altar would be the means of turning many of their brethren from the worship of the true God; and they went forth at the peril of their lives to prevent it. It may be said, that these two were less temperate than they should have been: but, convinced as they were in their own judgment, their zeal was not at all more ardent than the occasion required. Though they spoke roughly, they spoke with candour, and with a perfect openness to conviction, if any thing could be said to justify the act. And their offer to surrender a part of their own possessions, in order to remove the temptation to which, in their own minds, they had ascribed the act, shewed, that they were actuated solely by a regard for God’s honour and for Israel’s good.

Here then is proper scope for all our zeal. We should remove, as far as possible, both from ourselves and from our children, every temptation to apostasy from God. We should rebuke sin in others also, and set ourselves against it to the uttermost, We should shew ourselves on all occasions on the Lord’s side; and be willing to sacrifice, not only our property, but even life itself, in vindicating his honour, and maintaining his interest in the world.]

2. To preserve love and unity with man—

[If we find somewhat to blame in each of these opposite parties; in the one, an undue precipitation in building the altar; and, in the other, an undue hastiness in ascribing it to wrong intentions; we behold much, very much, to admire in both. When the accusers found themselves mistaken, they did not shift their ground, and condemn their brethren for imprudence: nor, when the accused had evinced their innocence, did they condemn their accusers on the ground of uncharitableness and injustice: the one were as glad to acquit as the others were to be acquitted; and both united in unfeigned thankfulness to God, that all ground of dissension was removed.

�ow it will almost of necessity sometimes happen, that the well-meant actions of our brethren shall be misconstrued, through an ignorance of their precise views and intentions: it may also happen, that the well-meant reproofs of our brethren may be founded in misconception. Here then is ample room for the exercise of well-tempered zeal. To avoid, on the one hand, unnecessary accusations, and gladly to retract them if they have been unwittingly adduced; and, on the other side, to avoid vindictive recriminations, and with pious meekness to satisfy the minds of any whom we may have unintentionally grieved: this is the spirit which we should continually cultivate: it should be the labour of our lives to “keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”]

3. To avert the divine judgments from our guilty land—

[It is a memorable expression which is recorded on this occasion: “�ow ye have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the Lord [�ote: ver. 31.].” Sin delivers us into his hand for punishment. Of this, the history of Israel in all ages is a decisive proof [�ote: If this be the subject of a Fast Sermon, the judgments inflicted on us may be adduced as an additional proof.]. On the other hand, repentance delivers us out if his hand; as was remarkably exemplified in the case of �ineveh: which, but for the intervention of their penitence, would have been overthrown in forty days. But we need not go further than to the history before us, where this very effect is ascribed to the pious zeal of the Reubenites and Gadites. Happy would it be for us, if we all considered the effect of our conduct on the public welfare! God has no pleasure in punishing his creatures: and he is ever ready to remove his judgments, when they have produced in us the desired humiliation. Let us then approve ourselves to him: and then, though our zeal be misinterpreted, and even our own brethren be for a time incensed against us, our righteousness shall be made to appear, and our labours be crowned with the approbation of our God.]

12 the whole assembly of Israel gathered at Shiloh to go to war against them.

BAR�ES, "Gathered themselves together - The various tribes had already dispersed to their homes, and were now summoned together again.

CLARKE, "To go up to war against them - Supposing that they had built this altar in opposition to that which Moses, by the command of God, had erected, and were consequently become rebels against God and the Israelitish constitution, and should be treated as such. Their great concern for the glory of God led them to take this step, which at first view might appear precipitate; but, that they might do nothing rashly, they first sent Phinehas and ten princes, one out of each tribe, to require an explanation of their motives in erecting this altar.

GILL, "And when the children of Israel heard of it,.... Of the building the altar in the above place, namely, the nine tribes and a half settled in the land of Canaan:

the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh; where the tabernacle and altar of the Lord were, whose cause they undertook to avenge, being injured as they imagined by the altar the other tribes had built, and where they could consult the Lord by Urim and Thummim, if needful; hither they repaired from the several places around, where their tribes were settled; not the whole body of the people, but their heads and representatives:

to go up to war against them; to consult about it, and to prepare for it, which they were obliged to do by the law of God, as in the case of a city, so of a tribe drawn aside to idolatry; and which they imagined was the case of these tribes, or at least what they had done had a tendency to apostasy from the true worship of God, which they were zealous to defend at the hazard of their lives, and though it should issue in an extirpation of one or more

HE�RY, "Their zeal, upon this suspicion, was very commendable, Jos_22:12. When they apprehended that these tribes, which by the river Jordan were separated from them, were separating themselves from God, they took it as the greatest injury that could be done to themselves, and showed a readiness, if it were necessary, to put their lives in their hands in defence of the altar of God, and to take up arms for the chastising and reducing of these rebels, and to prevent the spreading of the infection, if no gentler methods would serve, by cutting off from their body the gangrened member. They all gathered together, and Shiloh was the place of their rendezvous, because it was in defence of the divine charter lately granted to that place that they now appeared; their resolution was as became a kingdom of priests, who, being devoted to God and his service, did not acknowledge their brethren nor know their own children, Deu_33:9. They would immediately go up to war against them if it appeared they had revolted from God, and were in rebellion against him. Though they were bone of their bone, had been companions with them in tribulation in the wilderness, and serviceable to them in

the wars of Canaan, yet, if they turn to serve other gods, they will treat them as enemies, not as sons of Israel, but as children of whoredoms, for so God had appointed, Deu_13:12, etc. They had but lately sheathed their swords, and retired from the perils and fatigues of war to the rest God had given them, and yet they are willing to begin a new war rather than be any way wanting in their duty to restrain, repress, and revenge, idolatry, and every step towards it - a brave resolution, and which shows them hearty for their religion, and, we hope, careful and diligent in the practice of it themselves. Corruptions in religion are best dealt with at first, before they get head and plead prescription.

COKE, "Verse 12Ver. 12. And—the whole congregation—gathered themselves together at Shiloh—That is, the elders and princes of the tribes came from their several cities thither to consult what, in consequence of this step of the two tribes and a half, was necessary to be done. On the first advice of the erection of so elevated an altar, the Israelites in general conceived that their brethren had abandoned the true religion. For, not to mention that the law forbad a plurality of altars, the prodigious height of the present denoted a monument dedicated to the pagan deities, for whose worship they were fond of the highest places, rather than one appropriated to the true God, who can as easily assist the most lowly, as those who are nearest the skies, and who had commanded that His altar should not exceed three cubits in height, and be without steps. See Deuteronomy 12:13 : Exodus 27:1; Exodus 20:26. The congregation at Shiloh, therefore, in the first emotions of its zeal, thought that the Israelites beyond Jordan were fallen into idolatry, either by devoting themselves to the worship of false gods, or by presuming to worship the Lord in another place and manner than he had appointed. Hereupon they consulted how it was necessary to act towards the supposed offenders; and the conclusion was, that they should proceed in strict conformity to the law of Moses; and that in case the 40,000 men had done as was presumed, it was necessary to go up to war against them, to avenge their insulted religion, and destroy them, as God had commanded, Deuteronomy 13:12; Deuteronomy 13:18. Many reflections might be drawn from this determination: we may boldly conclude, that it is not sufficient to have right intentions in what we undertake; but that in the execution of it, piety requires us to avoid, as much as possible, all appearance of evil. The 40,000 ought to have apprised the Israelites of Canaan of what they were about to do, and of their motive for so doing; their manner of proceeding could not but create disagreeable suspicions. But what noble sentiments did these suspicions produce in the hearts they animated! It is very pleasing to see the Israelites, scarcely delivered from the fatigues and dangers of so long a war, and but just beginning to taste the fruits of their conquests, determining immediately to resume arms, in obedience to the laws of their religion and commonwealth. An example of courage and zeal like this well deserves to be remarked.

ELLICOTT, "(12) To go up to war against them.—There is no more striking proof of Israel’s obedience to the law and veneration for it in the days of Joshua than this. A single altar to Jehovah, besides the one in Shiloh. is sufficient cause for war against the builders of it. But see what is the language of the prophet. “According to

the number of thy cities were thy gods, O Judah; and according to the number of the streets of Jerusalem have ye set up altars to Bosheth (disgrace), even altars to burn incense to Baal” (Jeremiah 11:13). What stronger proof could we require of the veracity of the narrative in this place, and that it is genuine contemporary history? What writer of the days of Jeremiah, to which date some have referred the Book of Deuteronomy and its requirements, could have conceived such a scene as this, when altars to Jehovah on the high places were hardly regarded as illegal, and altars to Baal were as numerous as the very streets?

Another passage in a different part of the Old Testament corroborates indirectly, but in a striking manner, the tone of this (�ehemiah 8:17): “The congregation. . . . made booths, and sat under the booths” (as required by the law of Moses in the Feast of Tabernacles); “for since the days of Joshua the son of �un unto that day had not the children of Israel done so.”

PI�K, "Alarm spread quickly among the other tribes. "When the children of Israel heard of it [the building of the altar], the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh, to go up to war against them" (v. 12).

Shiloh, as we have noticed, was the center of government. Israel met there in a general and solemn assembly. This was not a movement resulting from mass psychology, nor was it a rash act that might burst into mob violence. The Lord through Moses had legislated already how apostasy was to be punished. Israel, therefore, in formal assembly gathered for consultation and investigation. This wise and firm action stands in vivid contrast to that of the men of Gilead who indiscriminately slew forty-two thousand of the tribe of Ephraim (Judg. 12). The rash words of the Ephraimites on that occasion indubitably were provocative, but the harsh and cruel deeds of Jephthah and his followers were not justifiable.

The Spirit of God differentiates between righteous indignation and cruel anger and malice. Of the first He says, "Be ye angry and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath"; but of the second He says, "Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice" (Eph. 4:26, 31).

The thoroughness with which the governing body of Israel, probably the Sanhedrin, studied the matter is admirable. They conducted their investigation according to the will of the Lord which stipulated, should certain men arise and attempt to lead the people of their city into idolatry: "Then shalt thou enquire and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city" (Deut. 13:12-18).

The procedure they were to follow required both caution and patience. They were to enquire; that is, seek the answer to the difficulty. They were to search; that is, more intensely examine the evidence for proof. They were to ask diligently; make direct interrogations. They were to adopt a process of justice which would lead them to a

righteous decision. Spiritual discretion and discernment will "prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21). The church at Ephesus was commended by the Lord because she "tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and found them liars" (Rev. 2:2). It was the failure in the Corinthian church to practice a judicial caution, a failure to investigate certain discrepancies, that brought upon them the severe reproof: "Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? . . . I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" (1 Cor. 6:2-5).

This enquiry in Israel revealed certain fundamental principles which should be observed in dealing with rumors of a detrimental nature: consultation, representation, declaration, and recommendation. When these are strictly adhered to, they will result either in exoneration or condemnation.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:12. The whole congregation of the children of Israel — �ot in their own persons, but by their elders, who were used to transact all affairs of this kind in the name of all the people. Gathered themselves together against them — As apostates from God, and the true religion, according to God’s command in such a case. For they too hastily inferred, from the erection of this altar, that their brethren were either going to serve other gods, or to worship the God of Israel in a manner different from that which he had prescribed. For they were expressly commanded that, as there was but one God, so they should offer only upon one altar, and in that one place which the Lord should choose, Deuteronomy 12:5-18.

WHEDO�, "12. The children of Israel gathered themselves together — The news produced the greatest consternation, and caused an uprising of all the tribes. A separate altar implied the setting up of a new religion, and fore-shadowed a secession from the theocratic state. Such a movement, therefore, demanded the most careful investigation, according to the express provision of the law. Deuteronomy 13:13-14. So at a later time all Israel assembled at Mizpeh to investigate the offence of Benjamin. Judges 20.

To go up to war against them — For the law ordained that if any city went over to idolatry it should be smitten with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed. Deuteronomy 13:15-16.

PETT, "Verse 12‘And when the children of Israel heard of it, the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh to be ready to go up to war against them.’The gathering at Shiloh indicated a summons by the authorities from the central sanctuary for Israel to gather with their arms so that they were ready to act swiftly if it was necessary. The provisions of Deuteronomy 13:12-18, which dealt with the action to be taken when there were suspicions of idolatry, were then correctly carried into force, a thorough investigation to determine the truth of the matter.

PULPIT, "Gathered themselves together at Shiloh. The commentators refer here to Le Joshua 17:8, Joshua 17:9, and Deuteronomy 12:4-14. See also Le Deuteronomy 17:4. The punishment for the sin is to be found in Deuteronomy 13:12-16. We have before remarked (note on Deuteronomy 13:3) upon the singular obedience of the Israelites during the life of Joshua. The present incident is another exemplification of the fact. It is not Joshua who summons the children of Israel, it is they who voluntarily gather themselves together. The solemn provisions of the law have been infringed, they hasten at once, if necessary, to put the law in execution. The vivid sense of the triumphs they had enjoyed under Joshua, and the safety in which they now were enabled to dwell, filled their hearts with a strong, if short-lived, feeling of gratitude to Him who had done so great things for them, and of indignation against his foes. We may here observe two points which demonstrate the consistency of the narrative, and are evidences for its genuineness.

13 So the Israelites sent Phinehas son of Eleazar, the priest, to the land of Gilead—to Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh.

GILL, "And the children of Israel,.... In the land of Canaan:

sent unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead; they were possessed of, and had now returned unto and dwelt in; hither they sent an embassy to them, to inquire into the truth of what they had heard, and the reason of it, before they went to war with them, or proclaimed it, or took any further steps towards it; and which they were obliged to do by the above law, when there was any suspicion of idolatry, and any good ground and reason for it, Deu_13:14; and at the head of this deputation was

Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest; a man zealous for the Lord of hosts, and his glory, of which there is an instance in Num_25:7; and so a fit person to be employed in this affair, who would be faithful, bold, and zealous, as well as capable of giving advice and counsel to both parties, if needful.

HE�RY, " Their prudence in the prosecution of this zealous resolution is no less commendable. God had appointed them, in cases of this nature, to enquire and make search (Deu_13:14), that they might not wrong their brethren under pretence of righting

their religion; accordingly they resolve here not to send forth their armies, to wage war, till they had first sent their ambassadors to enquire into the merits of the cause, and these men of the first rank, one out of each tribe, and Phinehas at the head of them to be their spokesman, Jos_22:13, Jos_22:14. Thus was their zeal for God tempered, guided, and governed by the meekness of wisdom. He that knows all things, and hates all evil things, would not punish the worst of criminals but he would first go down and see,Gen_18:21. Many an unhappy strife would be prevented, or soon healed by an impartial and favourable enquiry into that which is the matter of the offence. The rectifying of mistakes and misunderstandings, and the setting of misconstrued words and actions in a true light, would be the most effectual way to accommodate both private and public quarrels, and bring them to a happy period.

K&D 13-15, "The congregation therefore sent Phinehas, the son of the high priest and his presumptive successor in this office, with ten princes, one from each tribe (not the tribe-princes, but a head of the fathers' houses of the families of Israel), to Gilead, to the two tribes and a half, to call them to account for building the altar.

COFFMA�, "Verse 13"And the children of Israel sent unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half-tribe of Manasseh, into the land of Gilead, Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and with him ten princes, one prince of a fathers' house for each of the tribes of Israel; and they were every one of them heads of their fathers' houses among the thousands of Israel. And they came unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half-tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead, and they spake with them saying, Thus saith the whole congregation of Jehovah, What trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from following after Jehovah, in that ye have builded you an altar, to rebel this day against Jehovah?"

From this it is clear that all Israel accepted the principle of "only one sanctuary"; and as we have pointed out, that was the true meaning of God's instructions from Mount Sinai and ever afterward. That the breach of this was indeed serious is apparent in the dignity and importance of the delegation Israel sent to inquire into the matter.

�ote that Phinehas was "sent" by the children of Israel. Who sent him? The central government, of which Joshua, of course, was the chief executive. Why did not Joshua go himself? For the same reason that the High Priest Eleazar did not go. Eleazar and Joshua were the ones doing the sending. In this light the error of Longacre's assumption here is apparent. He spoke of the, "Suppression of Joshua the leader in the interest of the religious leader Phinehas,"[15] offering this as evidence of the "late date of this Midrash."[16] �ow, Phinehas was not the religious leader, Eleazar was! Joshua, the leader, was not suppressed here at all; he was an arm of the central government was in charge all the way. Phinehas, like the ten princes, was merely a delegate, albeit, the leader of the delegation, which was appropriate enough, since Phinehas was an expert in religious affairs. So, if someone

wants to make a seventh century B.C. Midrash out of this, he will have to come up with something a lot better than that!

"Apart from certain entrenched theories regarding a Priestly document dating from post-exilic times, there seems to be no reason to think of the figure of Phinehas as representing a priestly influence upon this account."[17]

In the speech of Phinehas, next reported, below, there are repeated references to many of the events in the then-recent history of Israel; and, when all of this is taken collectively into consideration, `There is no way to avoid the conclusion that Deuteronomy, as well as all the other books of the Pentateuch, were in existence when these events occurred."[18]

The punishment for such a sin as making another altar, as well as the designation of that offense as sinful, is found in Leviticus 17:4,8,9, in Deuteronomy 12:4-14, and in Deuteronomy 13:12-16.

WHEDO�, "13. Phinehas — Probably his father, Eleazar, was too aged for this service. Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, had signalized himself while quite a youth by his zeal and energy against licentiousness at Shittim.

�umbers 25:7. Subsequently he was chaplain of the expedition which destroyed the Midianites. �umbers 31:6. After his father’s death he became the third high priest.

PI�K, "At the solemn assembly the elders of Israel decided to make representation to their brethren: "The children of Israel sent unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, into the land of Gilead, Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, And with him ten princes, of each chief house a prince throughout all the tribes of Israel" (vv. 13-14). A large degree of wisdom is evinced in the choice of Phinehas. It was during a sad period of apostasy that he first distinguished himself. The Lord said concerning him: "Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy. Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace" (�um. 25:11-12). Their sending Phinehas was the outcome of his forceful resistance to apostasy and the consequent confidence this produced in the minds of his brethren. They knew that without doubt Phinehas would maintain the honor of Jehovah’s name, and that he would defend the monotheistic testimony of the nation. Furthermore, no more favorable choice could have been made for the two and a half tribes. To be exonerated by so zealous an individual as Phinehas would be a complete justification of blamelessness, and would result in an immediate restoration of confidence and national unity. The entire course of action proves the truth of the thrice repeated proverb, "In the multitude of counselors there is safety" (Prov. 11:14; 15:22; 24:6).

PETT, "Verse 13-14

‘And the children of Israel, sent to the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, into the land of Gilead, Phinehas, the son of Eleazar the priest, and with him ten princes, one prince of a father’s house for each of the tribes of Israel, and they were every one of them head of their father’s houses among the families (thousands) of Israel.’The deputation sent into the land of Gilead to confront the supposed rebels was a powerful one. Eleazar’s own son, Phinehas, who had already proved himself in dealing firmly with idolatry at Peor (�umbers 25:7; Psalms 106:28-31), was a very suitable choice, and was there to represent his father. He could be depended on to act firmly. With him was one prince from each of the tribes settling in the land of Canaan. ‘Prince of a father’s house’ may well have been a title depicting a certain status. They were important men. Indeed this is then made clear in the description of what they were, rulers over a sub-clan of their tribe.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 13-20To their credit the main body of Israelites did not attack and then ask questions later. Instead these Israelites sent a delegation of their leading men to persuade their brethren to take a different course of action.

"A noble example of moderation, forbearance, and charity, shines forth in this conduct. How many an unhappy strife might be prevented by similar precaution, by simply staying to inquire calmly into that which constitutes the avowed matter of offence! How often would a few words of candid explanation smother in embryo the most angry controversies, violent quarrels, and embittered persecutions! By barely adopting the prudent conduct of Israel on this occasion, individuals, families, churches, and communities, might, in a thousand instances, be saved a world of jealousy, enmity, discord, war and bloodshed." [�ote: Bush, p194.]

Phinehas accompanied this group ( Joshua 22:13). His presence would have impressed the two and one-half tribes with the importance of the delegation. It also would have reminded them of the war with the Midianites in which Phinehas figured as a prominent person ( �umbers 25; �umbers 31). The Israelites referred to that war here ( Joshua 22:17). They also mentioned Achan"s transgression ( Joshua 22:20) to warn the Gileadite (transjordanian) tribes that God would punish disobedience to the law. The western Israelites believed that the whole nation would experience God"s discipline if this act of rebellion went unpunished.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:13

Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest. Their messenger was well chosen. He was the representative of the high priest, whose duty it was to call attention to all infringements of the law. He had proved his own fiery zeal for the purity of Israelitish faith and life by his conduct at a critical moment of his countrymen's history, when Balaam's miserable intrigues had brought the Israelites to the brink of destruction (�umbers 25:7). Such an envoy, if the trans-Jordanic tribes had indeed disobeyed God's command, was well qualified to bring them to a sense of

their sin. Once again we find him in his proper position, at the head of the children of Israel ( 20:28), and that was when they were once more assembled to avenge the atrocious crime of the men of Gibeah.

14 With him they sent ten of the chief men, one from each of the tribes of Israel, each the head of a family division among the Israelite clans.

GILL, "And with him ten princes, of each chief house a prince,

throughout all the tribes of Israel,.... The nine tribes and a half, so that the half tribe of Manasseh sent a prince, as well as the whole tribes:

and each one was an head of the house of their fathers among the thousands of Israel; that is, among the rulers of the thousands of Israel; and so the Greek version calls them Chiliarchs, rulers of thousands; for the people were divided into tens, fifties, hundreds, and thousands, over whom there were distinct rulers, Exo_18:25. Now these were among the chief of them, of the highest rank and authority; they were the chief princes, heads of several tribes; a very honourable deputation this! the son of the high priest, and ten princes, the heads of the tribes; these were chosen and sent, partly in honour to their brethren beyond Jordan, and partly that they might carry the greater authority with them, and prevail upon them to hearken to them.

WHEDO�, "14. Ten princes — Who these princes were is so obscurely told in the rest of the verse that it is difficult to decide as to the precise meaning. The rest of the verse is, literally: One prince, one prince to the house of a father to all the tribes of Israel, and a chief man of the house of their fathers were they to all the thousands of Israel. It could not be that one was chosen from each chief house in all Israel, for then must more than ten have been chosen. Keil probably explains correctly when he says that this delegation, called in Joshua 22:30 princes of the congregation, “was composed partly of princes of tribes and partly of heads of families, some tribes being represented in one way and others in the other; and that the latter were sent in cases in which the heads of the tribes were either too old, or otherwise unfitted to take part in the deputation. This supposition is strongly confirmed by the fact that the tribe of Levi was not represented by the chief of the tribe, the high priest Eleazar, but by his son and presumptive successor, Phinehas, who was chosen instead.”

PULPIT, "And with him ten princes. Phinehas represented the tribe of Levi, the high priest being too great to permit of his forming part of such a deputation. The actual head of each tribe accompanied him; that is, the head of the family, as we should call it, in each tribe. This seems preferable to Keil's idea, that some tribes were represented by a prince, and some by heads of families, which seems inadmissible from the fact that the Hebrew states that each tribe was represented in the same manner, אחד נשיא אחד נשיא. What is doubtless intended here is to emphasize the weight and importance of the deputation sent with Phinehas, a weight and importance befitting an embassy which might have to announce the determination to exterminate the two and a half tribes as completely as Jericho had been exterminated. The mention of ten princes shows that the cis-Jordanic half tribe of Manasseh was represented. Tribes. The word here, after "father's house," is the genealogical מטה not the political שבט. The thousands. Or families (as in 6:15; 1 Samuel 10:19). See however Introduction, p. 29.

15 When they went to Gilead—to Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh—they said to them:

GILL, "And they came unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead,.... The deputation came thither; they either sent for the chiefs among the two tribes and a half, to meet them at some place, or they, having a notion of their coming, assembled together to receive them, and hear what they had to say to them:

and they spake with them, saying; as follows; very probably Phinehas was the mouth of the whole, for there could be but one speaker.

HE�RY, "JAMISO�, "PETT, "Verse 15-16‘And they came to the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, to the land of Gilead, and they spoke with them, saying, “Thus says the whole congregation of YHWH, ‘What trespass is this that you have committed against the God of Israel to turn this day from following YHWH, in that you have built yourselves an altar to rebel this day against YHWH?’ ” ’�ote that the congregation of Israel has become ‘the congregation of YHWH’. The

approach was in the name of YHWH because the alleged offence was a religious one. We can compare how the phrase was applied to the sin of Peor (�umbers 31:16). Their view was that the building of the altar was in order to rival the central sanctuary, and set up a rival place for worship. It was rebellion against YHWH Himself, the God of Israel. The point was that it was not a place in which YHWH had ‘recorded His name’ (Exodus 20:24), for there such an altar would have been permissible.

“The congregation of YHWH” is among other things the worshipping community at the Tabernacle (Deuteronomy 21:1-3; Deuteronomy 21:8. See also �umbers 16:3; �umbers 20:4; �umbers 27:17).

16 “The whole assembly of the Lord says: ‘How could you break faith with the God of Israel like this? How could you turn away from the Lord and build yourselves an altar in rebellion against him now?

GILL, "Thus saith the whole congregation of the Lord,.... By whom they were sent, and whom they represented; and they do not call them the congregation of Israel, but of the Lord, because it was not on a civil but religious account they were come, and not to plead their own cause, but the cause of God; and not so much to show a concern for their own honour and interest as for the glory of God:

what trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel; they took it for granted that they had committed a sin, and that so great, they were not able to express the greatness of it in all its aggravated circumstances, and plainly suggest it was idolatry; which was too premature, when as yet they had not inquired into it; but their zeal for God, and his honour, hurried them into this hasty step:

to turn away this day from following the Lord; they intimate, that they had begun a revolt from the worship of God, which is aggravated by their falling into it so soon, having received so many favours from God, and had so lately seen such wonderful appearances of his power and goodness, and had just had such excellent instructions, exhortations, and cautions given them by Joshua, when he dismissed them:

in that ye have built you an altar; which they supposed was to offer sacrifices upon;

whereas there was to be but one altar, and that in the place which the Lord should choose to put his name in, and which he had now chosen, where all sacrifices were to be brought and offered up; see Exo_20:24,

that ye might rebel this day against the Lord? against the commandment of the Lord expressed in the places referred to, which they charge with rebellion against himself, a very high and heavy charge indeed! but they should first have inquired whether they were guilty of the trespass, or with what view they had built the altar, whether for sacrifice, or for some other use; but they took it for granted it was for sacrifice.

HE�RY, " The ambassadors' management of this matter came fully up to the sense and spirit of the congregation concerning it, and bespeaks much both of zeal and prudence.

(1.) The charge they draw up against their brethren is indeed very high, and admits no other excuse than that it was in their zeal for the honour of God, and was now intended to justify the resentments of the congregation at Shiloh and to awaken the supposed delinquents to clear themselves, otherwise they might have suspended their judgment, or mollified it at least, and not have taken it for granted, as they do here (Jos_22:16), that the building of this altar was a trespass against the God of Israel, and a trespass no less heinous than the revolt of soldiers from their captain (you turn from following the Lord), and the rebellion of subjects against their sovereign: that you might rebel this day against the Lord. Hard words. It is well they were not able to make good their charge. Let not innocency think it strange to be thus misrepresented and accused. They laid to my charge things that I knew not.

K&D, "Assuming at the outset that the altar was intended for a second place of sacrifice in opposition to the command of God, the delegates, with Phinehas no doubt as their speaker, began by reproaching them for falling away from the Lord. “What

faithlessness is this (מעל: see at Lev_5:15) that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from Jehovah, in that ye have builded you an altar, that

ye might rebel this day against Jehovah?” מרד (to rebel) is stronger than מעל.

CALVI�, "16.Thus says the whole congregation, etc Just as if it had been known that this second altar was opposed to the one only altar of God, they begin with upbraiding them, and that in a very harsh and severe manner. They thus assume it as confessed, that the two tribes had built the altar with a view of offering sacrifices upon it. In this they are mistaken, as it was destined for a different use and purpose. Moreover, had the idea which they had conceived been correct, all the expostulation which they employ would have been just; for it was a clear case of criminal revolt to make any change in the Law of God, who values obedience more than all sacrifices, (1 Samuel 15:22) and there would have been perfect ground for condemning them as apostates, in withdrawing from the one only altar.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:16. Thus saith the whole congregation — Who do, and are resolved to cleave unto that God from whom you have revolted. What trespass is

this that you have committed? — How heinous a crime! To turn away this day —That is, so soon after God hath obliged you by such wonderful favours, and when he is now conducting you home to reap the fruits of all your pains and hazards. In that you have builded you an altar — For sacrifice, as they supposed. That ye might rebel — With a design to rebel against God, and against his express command enjoining you to worship him at one only altar.

WHEDO�, "16. What trespass is this — The erection of the altar is justly regarded as prima facie proof of violating the unity of divine worship, inasmuch as sacrifices offered in any other place than at the door of the tabernacle were strictly forbidden. Leviticus 17:7-8.

17 Was not the sin of Peor enough for us? Up to this very day we have not cleansed ourselves from that sin, even though a plague fell on the community of the Lord!

BAR�ES, "From which we are not cleansed until this day - Phinehas, who had borne a conspicuous part in vindicating the cause of God against those who fell away to Baal-peor, means that terrible as the punishment had been, there were still those among them who hankered after Baal worship, and even practiced it in secret. (Compare Joshua’s words, Jos_24:14-23.)

CLARKE, "Is the iniquity of Peor too little - See this history, Num_25:3 (note), etc., and the notes there. Phinehas takes it for granted that this altar was built in opposition to the altar of God erected by Moses, and that they intended to have a separate service, priesthood, etc., which would be rebellion against God, and bring down his curse on them and their posterity; and, in order to show that God is jealous of his glory, he refers to the business of Baal Peor, which took place in that very country they were now about to possess, the destructive consequences of which he, through his zeal for the glory of God, was the means of preventing.

GILL, "Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us,.... The worshipping of that idol, when in the plains of Moab; the history of which, see in Num_25:2, was that so small a

sin, that another must be added to it, or a greater committed? since building an altar seemed designed not for a single action of idolatrous worship, but for the continuance of it, whereas the sin of Peor was only committed at one time, and not continued in:

from which we are not cleansed until this day; not cleared from the shame and disgrace of it, or the guilt of it expiated or removed; but it might be expected, as in the case of the golden calf, that God would still at times punish for it, when provoked by new crimes; or the sense is, that there were those among them that were infected with the same contagion, and whose inclinations were to commit the same, or like sin of idolatry:

although there was a plague in congregation of the Lord; of which twenty four thousand died, Num_25:9.

HE�RY, "The aggravation of the crime charged upon their brethren is somewhat far-fetched: Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us? Jos_22:17. Probably that is mentioned because Phinehas, the first commissioner in this treaty, had signalized himself in that matter (Num_25:7), and because we may suppose they were not about the very place in which that iniquity was committed on the other side Jordan. It is good to recollect and improve those instances of the wrath of God, revealed from heaven against the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, which have fallen out in our own time, and which we ourselves have been eye-witnesses of. He reminds them of the iniquity of Peor, [1.] As a very great sin, and very provoking to God. The building of this altar seemed but a small matter, but it might lead to an iniquity as bad as that of Peor, and therefore must be crushed in its first rise. Note, The remembrance of great sins committed formerly should engage us to stand upon our guard against the least occasions and beginnings of sin; for the way of sin is down-hill. [2.] As a sin that the whole congregation had smarted for: “There was a plague in the congregation of the Lord, of which, in one day, there died no fewer than 24,000; was not that enough for ever to warn you against idolatry? What! will you bring upon yourselves another plague? Are you so mad upon an idolatrous altar that you will run yourselves thus upon the sword's point of God's judgments? Does not our camp still feel from that sin and the punishment of it? We are not cleansed from it unto this day; there are remaining sparks,” First, “Of the infection of that sin; some among us so inclined to idolatry that if you set up another altar they will soon take occasion from that, whether you intend it or no, to worship another God.” Secondly, “Of the wrath of God against us for that sin. We have reason to fear that, if we provoke God by another sin to visit, he will remember against us the iniquity of Peor, as he threatened to do that of the golden calf, Exo_32:34. And dare you wake the sleeping lion of divine vengeance?” Note, It is a foolish and dangerous thing for people to think their former sins little, too little for them, as those do who add sin to sin, and so treasure up wrath against the day of wrath. Let therefore the time past suffice, 1Pe_4:3.

K&D, "To show the greatness of the sin through apostasy from the Lord, the speaker reminds them of two previous acts of sin on the part of the nation, which had brought severe judgments upon the congregation. “Is there too little for us in the iniquity of Peor(i.e., with Peor, or through the worship of Peor, Num_25:3), from which we have not cleansed ourselves till this day, and there came the plague upon the congregation of

Jehovah?” את־עון is an accusative: see Ges. §117, 2; Ewald, §277, d. That plague, of which 24,000 Israelites died, was stayed through the zeal of Phinehas for the honour of the Lord (Num_25:4-9, Num_25:11). The guilt connected with the worship of Peor had thereby been avenged upon the congregation, and the congregation itself had been saved

from any further punishment in consequence of the sin. When Phinehas, therefore, affirmed that the congregation had not yet been cleansed from the crime, he did not mean that they were still bearing or suffering from the punishment of that crime, but that they were not yet cleansed from that sin, inasmuch as many of them were still attached to idolatry in their hearts, even if they had hitherto desisted from it outwardly from fear of the infliction of fresh judgment.

CALVI�, "17.Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us? etc They represent the crime as more heinous, from their perverse obstinacy in not ceasing ever and anon to provoke the Lord by their abominations. They bring forward one signal example of recent occurrence. While they were encircling the sanctuary of God from the four cardinal points, like good watchmen of God, and when they had received the form of due worship, and were habituated to it by constant exercise, they had allowed themselves, through the seductive allurements of harlots, to be polluted by foul superstitions, and had worshipped Baal-Peor. As the whole people were implicated in this crime, the ten ambassadors do not hesitate to admit, that they were partners in the guilt. They therefore ask, Is not the iniquity which we contracted in the matter of Baal-Peor sufficient? They add, that they were not yet purified from it, just as if they had said, that the remembrance of it was not yet entirely buried, or that the vengeance of God was not yet extinguished; and hence they infer, that the two tribes and the half tribe, while with impious contumacy they turn aside from God, and shake off his yoke, not only consult ill for themselves, but are calling down similar destruction on the whole people, because God will avenge the insult offered him to a wider extent. This they confirm by the example of Achan, who, though he was alone when he secretly stole of the accursed thing, did not alone undergo the punishment of his sacrilege, but also dragged others along with him, as it was seen that some fell in the line of battle, while all were shamefully put to flight, because pollution attached to the people.

They reason from the less to the greater. If the anger of God burnt against many for the clandestine misdeed of one man, much less would he allow the people to escape if they connived at manifest idolatry. A middle view, however, is inserted, that if the two tribes and half tribe built up an altar, and if their condition was worse from not dwelling in the land of Canaan, let them rather come and obtain a settlement also in the land of Canaan, but let them not provoke God by a wicked rivalship. (184) Hence we infer, that they were not urged by some turgid impetus, since, even at their own loss and expense, they are willing kindly to offer partnership to those who had demanded a settlement and domicile for themselves elsewhere.

COKE, "Verse 17Ver. 17. Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, &c.— "Were not the abominable transgressions of which ye were guilty, respecting the idol of Peor, enough; and was it necessary, by adding sin to sin, to draw down fresh evils upon the nation, and shew yourselves to be so imperfectly cleansed, so badly cured of that fatal propensity to idolatry, which has already caused us so much affliction; though heaven has not yet punished us for the offence so highly as we deserve?" Phinehas, as we may see, supposes throughout, that the Israelites beyond Jordan had built

altar against altar, with idolatrous views. To explain his mind, he recals the unhappy affair of Peor, which happened in the very country that had been assigned to these Israelites; that thus, after the zeal which he had displayed upon that occasion, his argument deduced therefrom might have the more peculiar weight.

COFFMA�,"Verse 17"Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, from which we have not cleansed ourselves unto this day, although there came a plague upon the congregation of Jehovah, that ye must turn away this day from following Jehovah? and it will be, seeing ye rebel today against Jehovah, that tomorrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel. Howbeit, if the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of Jehovah, wherein Jehovah's tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us: but rebel not against Jehovah, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar besides the altar of Jehovah our God. Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the devoted thing, and wrath fell upon all the congregation of Israel? and that man perished not alone in his iniquity."

"The iniquity of Peor ..." (Joshua 22:17). The full account of this is in �umbers 25, all of which is presupposed by Phinehas' statement here.

"From which we have not cleansed ourselves unto this day ..." (Joshua 22:17). This indicates the long-lasting influence of the events at Baal-Peor. What Phinehas said here, is that there were a lot of people in Israel still around who were hankering after the sinful and sensuous worship of Baal.

"Jehovah will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel ..." (Joshua 22:18). This truth is the key to Israel's fear, and their determination to root out the evil they supposed to have occurred. They feared that God would be angry with all Israel. Phinehas reinforced that argument, by pointing out that although only one man had sinned in the instance of Achan and the devoted thing, yet God was angry with all Israel, and that Achan did not perish alone. Others also died because of his sin. This also presupposes all of the events regarding the repulse of Israel at Ai and the execution of Achan. In fact every line of the preceding Five Books of Moses cast their long shadow over Joshua from the first verse of it to the last.

"If the land of your possession be unclean ..." (Joshua 22:19). Phinehas in this, apparently, was seeking to give the Trans-Jordanic group some kind of an excuse.

If their erecting an altar had been due to their fear that the eastern Jordan tribes did not share in the promises concerning the "land of Canaan," due to their not being, in fact, in the land of Canaan, then, very well, Phinehas suggested, it would be better for them to abandon the Trans-Jordanic territories and come over to the western side and inherit with all the others. The meaning of this verse is considered to be somewhat ambiguous.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:17. Is the iniquity of Peor — That is, of worshipping Baal-peor; too little for us? — Is it not enough that we provoked God to wrath then, but

we must provoke him again now? Probably this is mentioned the rather, because Phinehas, the first commissioner in this treaty, had signalized himself in that matter; and because they were now at, or near, the very place where that iniquity was committed. From which we are not cleansed to this day — For though God had pardoned it, as to the national punishment of it, (�umbers 25:11,) yet they were not yet thoroughly purged from it; partly because the shame and blot of that odious practice were not yet wiped off, and partly because some of that corrupt leaven still remained among them; and though smothered for a time, yet was ready to break forth upon all occasions: see Joshua 24:33. And God also took notice of these idolatrous inclinations in particular persons, and found out ways to punish them.

WHEDO�, "17. Is the iniquity of Peor too little — Phinehas had a vivid remembrance of that dreadful outbreak of crime whose curse his active zeal had turned away from the congregation by a bold thrust of his javelin. �umbers 25:1-13. Hence the naturalness of this historical allusion.

�ot cleansed until this day — Though the divine wrath was turned away, the sad consequences of that crime were still visible.

Although there was a plague — Rather, and the plague was in the congregation.

PI�K, "Phinehas and the princes which accompanied him, with candor and concern stated their suspicions of idolatry and rebellion, and from the bitterness of national disaster at Peor presented the case from the perspective of the tribes gathered at Shiloh. If such sins were permitted, the entire congregation would suffer. Since "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump," and there were still some among them so tainted (v. 17), all would be implicated and exposed to divine displeasure. Had the men of Reuben, of Gad, and of half Manasseh forgotten? "Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel?" (v. 20).

PETT, "Verse 17-18“Is the iniquity of Peor too small for us, from which we have not cleansed ourselves to this day, although there came a plague on the congregation of YHWH, that you must turn away this day from following YHWH? And it will be, seeing you rebel today against YHWH, that tomorrow he will be filled with wrath against the whole congregation of Israel.”Israel ever remembered the sin of worshipping Baal-peor (the lord of Peor), which was probably another name for Chemosh, the national god of Moab, as a result of the seducement of the daughters of Moab (�umbers 25:1-3). It was a stain never completely removed, even though a plague from YHWH had followed (�umbers 25:8-9) which was only stayed by the action of the same Phinehas as is mentioned here (�umbers 25:6-8; �umbers 25:11). �ow they were afraid that the action of the Transjordan tribes would bring a similar plague on them all.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:17

Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us? How natural the illustration in the mouth of the speaker! It was Phinehas who had avenged the iniquity of Peer, and arrested the judgment for that offence as it was about to fall. How natural that the occurrence should be, as it were, branded upon his memory with a hot iron, and that the mention of it should spring at once to his lips when he saw his brethren, as he thought, upon the verge of a similar offence! Peor is, of course, a contraction for Baal-Peor (�umbers 25:3). This god derives his name probably from Mount Peer, or "the cloven mountain" (�umbers 23:28). From which we are not cleansed until this day. Here we have the expression of the feeling which was never removed until Christ came. It was not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats could take away sin. �o ceremonial lustrations could "cleanse us from its guilt and power." �o destruction of the prime mover of the offence, though it may avert the wrath of God, can remove the moral reproach which lies upon the sinner. �ot even the destruction of twenty-four thousand persons (�umbers 25:9) can purify Israel from the taint of pollution. In the eyes of a sincere servant like Phinehas, the stigma rests upon Israel still, nor could anything avail to take it away. Truly, the law was, indeed, "our schoolmaster, to bring us to Christ." What Keil says of Calvin's explanation, that "the remembrance was not yet quite buried, nor the anger of God extinct," is unsatisfactory. His own explanation, that "the heart of Israel still delighted in their sin," is even more so, since we have no evidence whatever that this was the case at the time of which we are speaking. We have here again to remark that the history in �umbers is here presupposed, and an allusion to an incident in �umbers is here placed in the mouth of one of the chief actors in it. How natural, if the history be a veracious one! How marvellously ingenious, if it he not! The circumstance is mentioned again in Hosea, in the time of Jotham or Hezekiah, and again in Psalms 106:1-48; which would appear to have been written during the captivity. Thus we have a chain of testimony concerning it which makes it difficult to assign a time for the invention of the story, if it be invented, since all references to it in Scripture are perfectly consistent with each other, and display none of the signs of gradual growth which we invariably find in the case of legends. A plague. The original is noticeable, the plague; a natural mode of speech for one who well remembered it.

18 And are you now turning away from the Lord?

“‘If you rebel against the Lord today, tomorrow he will be angry with the whole community of Israel.

GILL, "But that you must turn away this day from following the Lord?.... From the worship of the Lord, as the Targum, and so on Jos_22:16; not content with the former transgression, but must add this revolt unto it, and at a time which sadly aggravates it:

and it will be, that seeing ye rebel to, day against the Lord; against the Word of the Lord, as the Targum, and so on Jos_22:16,

that tomorrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel; or, in a little time, if a stop is not put to this revolt, the whole body of the people will suffer for it: here they express a concern for the whole nation of Israel, as well as for the glory of God; for sometimes the whole congregation has been charged with the sins of individuals, and punished for it, as a case after mentioned shows; see Jos_7:1.

K&D, " “And to-day ye turn away from the Lord again,” and are about to bring His wrath upon the whole congregation again through a fresh rebellion.

HE�RY, " The reason they give for their concerning themselves so warmly in this matter is very sufficient. They were obliged to it, in their own necessary defence, by the law of self-preservation: “For, if you revolt from God today, who knows but tomorrow his judgments may break in upon the whole congregation (Jos_22:18), as in the case of Achan? Jos_22:20. He sinned, and we all smarted for it, by which we should receive instruction, and from what God did then infer what he may do, and fear what he will do, if we do not witness against your sin, who are so many, and punish it.” Note, The conservators of the public peace are obliged, in justice to the common safety, to use their power for the restraining and suppressing of vice and profaneness, lest, if it be connived at, the sin thereby become national, and bring God's judgments upon the community. Nay, we are all concerned to reprove our neighbour when he does amiss, lest we bear sin for him, Lev_19:17.

JAMISO�, "BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:18. But ye must turn away this day — Commit more sins of that nature. For whether they intended to worship other gods, or to worship the God of Israel in a manner he did not allow, it was idolatry, in the judgment of Phinehas. Ye rebel to-day, to-morrow he will be wroth — That is, soon and suddenly, as the expression often signifies. With the whole congregation — With you for doing so, and with us for suffering or not punishing it.

WHEDO�, "18. To-morrow he will be wroth — The moral universe is pervaded by laws as inflexible as those of the physical world, or, rather, more certain in their consequences; for the physical laws may be suspended for moral ends.

With the whole congregation — And not with you eastern tribes only. Such are our

social and political relations that the crimes of a part are punished on the whole of the nation.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:18

But that ye must turn. The original has the imperfect, of an action not completed, "and ye are turning." There is no need to give the adversative sense to! The ye also is emphatic. "Ye are turning against the Lord today, tomorrow ye will involve the whole congregation in calamity." That tomorrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel. This passage also is quite consistent with the circumstances and with the position of the speaker. �ot merely anger but fear is visible throughout—fear of His wrath who had manifested His power so signally of late. There was no longer any temptation to rebel against Him. The Israelites were no longer suffering the daily pressure of comparative privation and distress, such as it was impossible to avoid in the wilderness. While, on the contrary, there was every reason to remember His power Who had driven the heathen out before them and planted them in, Who had not failed to punish them when they deserved it, and Who, by the fate of their enemies, had made it clear that His hands were not waxen short. Thus the heads of the tribes, and Phinehas especially, were alarmed lest Israel should forfeit the prosperity they at present enjoyed, and exchange it for those terrible woes that God had shown He could inflict when His people rebelled against Him.

19 If the land you possess is defiled, come over to the Lord’s land, where the Lord’s tabernacle stands, and share the land with us. But do not rebel against the Lord or against us by building an altar for yourselves, other than the altar of the Lord our God.

BAR�ES, "Unclean - i. e. unholy because the sanctuary was not in it, but on the other side of Jordan.

CLARKE, "If the land of your possessions be unclean - The generous mind of Phinehas led him to form this excuse for them. If ye suppose that this land is impure, as not having been originally included in the covenant, and ye think that ye cannot expect the blessing of God unless ye have an altar, sacrifices, etc., then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord’s tabernacle dwelleth, the only legitimate place where sacrifices and offerings can be made. We will divide this land with you, and rather straiten ourselves than that you should conceive yourselves to be under any necessity of erecting a new altar besides the altar of the Lord our God.

GILL, "Notwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean,.... That is, if it was judged to be so by them, because not cleansed from the sins of the former inhabitants of it by sacrifice, or because there was no altar in it to offer up sacrifice for the expiation of sin:

then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord,

wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth; if you repent of the choice you have made of a country to dwell in, quit it, and come over into the land of Canaan, which the Lord has taken possession of, and residence in, and where his tabernacle is fixed, the place of his presence and worship, and where an altar is erected to sacrifice upon:

and take possession among us; they were willing to quit possession of their own, and make room for them in each of their tribes, and even though they straitened themselves, and parted with much of their estates, rather than they should make a schism, or go into idolatrous practices; which was a brave, noble, spirit indeed, and showed their great concern for the honour and glory of God, and his worship, and their love to their brethren, and affectionate regard for their spiritual welfare, above their own private, personal, and temporal good:

but rebel not against the Lord: the Word of the Lord, as the Targum, either Christ the essential Word, the Angel of Jehovah's presence, or his word of command:

nor rebel against us; by breaking off from us, and setting up another religion or form of worship:

in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God: which ought to be common to both, and no other to be set up against it, or used beside it.

HE�RY, "The offer they make is very fair and kind (Jos_22:19), that if they thought the land of their possession unclean, for want of an altar, and therefore could not be easy without one, rather than they should set up another in competition with that at Shiloh they should be welcome to come back to the land where the Lord's tabernacle was, and settle there, and they would very willingly straiten themselves to make room for them. By this they showed a sincere and truly pious zeal against schism, that rather than their brethren should have any occasion to set up a separate altar, though their pretence for it, as here supposed, was very weak and grounded upon a great mistake, yet they were willing to part with a considerable share of the land which God himself had by the lot assigned them, to comprehend them and take them in among them. This was the spirit

of Israelites indeed.

K&D, "“And truly,” the speaker continued, “if the land of your possession should be unclean,” sc., so that you think it necessary to have an altar in the neighbourhood to expiate your sins and wipe away your uncleanness, “pass over into the land of Jehovah's possession, where His dwelling-place stands, and settle in the midst of us ('settle,' as in Gen_34:10); but do not rebel against Jehovah nor against us, by building an altar

beside the (one) altar of Jehovah our God.” מרד is construed first of all with � , and then with the accusative; the only other place in which the latter occurs is Job. Jos_24:13.

COKE, "Verse 19Ver. 19. �otwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean— This fully justifies the piety, disinterestedness, and benevolent intentions of Phinehas: he even himself seeks out some plausible pretence for the step against which he inveighs. He supposes, that the Israelites beyond the river may have thought their land would be defiled; that it would not be a holy land, consecrated to God, and under his protection, unless they beheld there some token of his presence, some sacred edifice, which might publicly signify that the Lord was their God. And on this charitable supposition, he addresses them thus: "Did not you rear this altar, as thinking that the country in which you dwell would be an impure and profane land, unless this monument supplied the presence of the tabernacle and altar of the Lord at Shiloh, from which the Jordan divides you? If this be the case, come back, repass the river, and partake with us of our possessions. We would rather put ourselves to straits, by receiving you among us, than see you deviate into schism and revolt against God."

�ote; (1.) Many a heavy charge is sometimes brought, where there is the purest innocence; and this even by those who have zeal for God. (2.) They who have smarted for sin, dread the thoughts of renewing their provocations. (3.) They who desire to recover their brethren from schism, must show their charity towards them, and readiness to yield every thing that they lawfully may to a tender conscience, lest by unchristian violence the rent be made worse.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:19. If the land of your possession be unclean — If you apprehend it to be so, and that it is not regarded by God for want of the tabernacle and altar there, but is like heathen lands; if you now repent of your former choice in preferring the worldly commodities of that country before the advantage of God’s presence, and more frequent opportunities of his service; pass ye over, and take possession among us — We will readily resign part of our possessions to you for the prevention of this sin and mischief. Thus Phinehas manifests his piety, disinterestedness, and benevolent intentions: “he even,” as Dr. Dodd observes, “himself seeks out some plausible pretence for the step against which he inveighs. He supposes that the Israelites beyond the river may have thought their land would be defiled, that it would not be a holy land, consecrated to God, and under his protection, unless they beheld there some token of his presence, some sacred edifice, which might publicly signify that the Lord was their God.” Rebel not against the

Lord, nor against us — For as all the tribes were united in one body politic, and made one commonwealth, and one church; and each tribe was subject to the laws and commands of the whole society, and of the chief ruler or rulers thereof; so its disobedience to their just commands was properly rebellion against them. The tribes appear here to have been possessed of a wonderful zeal for God and the common good, inasmuch as they were willing and desirous rather to put themselves to straits, and give up some of their own land to their brethren, than see them deviate into schism, and revolt against God.

WHEDO�, "19. If the land of your possession be unclean — �ot consecrated by the presence of the tabernacle and altar. “If ye think that God has not received your land into the same favour as ours, because he seems to dwell with us, and it is for that reason that ye are about to establish a worship of your own, change your abode and come over to us.” — Masius.

PETT, "Verse 19“However, if the land of your possession seems to you unclean, then pass you over to the land of the possession of YHWH, in which YHWH’s Dwellingplace (Tabernacle) abides, and take possession among us. But do not rebel against YHWH, nor rebel against us, in building yourselves an altar besides the altar of YHWH our God.”It was probably the fact that the altar had been built on the side of the Jordan belonging to the land of Canaan that gave them the impression that the Transjordan tribes had done this because they thought that their own land was unclean, that is, not totally separated to YHWH, and not hallowed by YHWH’s presence. It was not ‘His land’. If that was their view (and it was probably the view of many of the Israelites who lived in Canaan) then they had only to come across the Jordan and allotment would be given to them so that they could live in the land that belonged to YHWH, where YHWH had His dwellingplace. But let them not rebel by building a false altar.

It was clear that they saw this altar as not one that YHWH had caused to be built by revelation, it was not in a place where YHWH had recorded His name. Thus it was a sacrilegious altar. The main altar of YHWH was that which accompanied the Tabernacle at the central sanctuary. Others could be built where YHWH revealed Himself and commanded it. These came within the definition of ‘the altar of YHWH our God’. But not this one where there was no suggestion of YHWH having spoken.

�ote the stress on rebellion. They were rebelling against God because they were disobeying His command about building altars where He had not given a revelation, and they were rebelling against their brothers because they were setting up a rival altar to that of the central sanctuary and thus breaching the covenant unity.

PI�K, "�evertheless, with this stern reprimand of what to them seemed a grievous error, there was a gracious recommendation for peaceful settlement. "If the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the LORD, wherein the LORD’s tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us:

but rebel not against the LORD, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the LORD our God" (v. 19). There are those who see in this appeal an allusion to indiscretion on the part of the two and a half tribes choosing to remain on the east of Jordan. They look upon the altar as another instance of indiscreet action arising from a selfish and covetous attitude.

The carrying out of the advice given by the heads of Israel might cause considerable inconvenience, might require relocation of territory, might result in overcrowding in some areas within the original boundaries. Whatever a recrossing of Jordan might involve, it would be an insignificant consideration if only the secession be abandoned and the nation be spared. The words of the princes were mellowed by grace and truth; they spoke the truth in love (Eph. 4:15). Truth alone will make one too intolerant; love alone will make him too tolerant. Where these are properly combined, they produce a maturity that will express itself in vigor and kindness, in discernment and sympathy, in righteousness and compassion, in stability and flexibility. The firm yet gentle manner in which the men from Gilead were treated probably helped them to be courteous and humble.

As there were serious internal difficulties within Israel, early in her history, there were also internal difficulties within the Church in her early history. The same firm and gracious principles which led to the solution in Israel were applied in the Church. Errors in practice, like those propagated in Antioch, led to a council at Jerusalem where, after a careful and prayerful examination of the difficulties under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, proper recommendation was made to Gentile believers, a recommendation made by capable representatives (Acts 15). The Church would have been spared many a heartache had she followed the example set by the apostles and elders on that occasion.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:19

If the land of your possession be unclean. Rather, be defiled, either by the idolatrous nations around, or by being cut off from the worship of the true God at Shiloh. The only satisfactory explanation of this somewhat difficult passage which has yet been given is that of Masius, who explains it of a possible belief on the part of the two and a half tribes, that they were cut off by Jordan into another land, a land which had no title to the promises and privileges of Israel, no share in the worship of the one true God at Shiloh. If they entertained such an idea, then, however unfounded their conviction, it were better far to abandon the land, how suited to their circumstances soever it might be, and come across the Jordan, and dwell in the midst of their brethren, and under the protection of the tabernacle of the Lord. Beside. That is, separate from, suggesting the idea of an exclusion of those who committed such an act from the worship of the Lord.

20 When Achan son of Zerah was unfaithful in regard to the devoted things,[a] did not wrath come on the whole community of Israel? He was not the only one who died for his sin.’”

CLARKE, "Did not Achan the son of Zerah - Your sin will not be merely against yourselves; your transgressions will bring down the wrath of God upon all the people; this was the case in the transgression of Achan; he alone sinned, and yet God on that account turned his face against the whole congregation, so that they fell before their enemies. We cannot therefore be unconcerned spectators of your transgression, we may all be implicated in its criminality; let this and the dishonor which we apprehend is done to our God plead our excuse, and vindicate the necessity of the present warlike appearance which we make before you. See the history of Achan referred to here, (Joshua 7:11-26 (note)), and the notes there.

GILL, "Did not Achan the son of Zerah,.... One that descended from Zerah the son of Judah, Jos_7:18,

commit a trespass in the accursed thing; in taking what was devoted to sacred uses:

and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? and which was what was feared now; and this instance is brought to show that such fears were not groundless:

and that man perished not alone in his iniquity: which seems to confirm the notion of those who think that his children suffered with him; though it may be observed, that it was through his sin that thirty six men were slain by the men of Ai, Jos_7:5.

K&D, "He finally reminded them of the sin of Achan, how that had brought the wrath of God upon the whole congregation (Josh 7); and, moreover, Achan was not the only man who had perished on account of the sin, but thirty-six men had fallen on account of it at the first attack upon Ai (Jos_7:5). The allusion to this fact is to be understood as an argument a minori ad majus, as Masius has shown. “If Achan did not perish alone when he committed sacrilege, but God was angry with the whole congregation, what think ye will be the consequence if ye, so great a number, commit so grievous a sin against God?”

WHEDO�, "20. Achan — Phinehas now argues that if the sin of an individual brought disasters upon the body politic, much more will that of the eastern tribes.

Perished not alone — But involved his family and all his possessions in the penal vengeance which came upon himself. See on Joshua 7:24.

PETT, "Verse 20“ Did not Achan the son of Zerah, commit a trespass in the devoted thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? And that man did not perish alone in his iniquity.”The Israelites now cited a second case, the case of Achan (Joshua 7). There too there had been disobedience to God in relation to a religious matter, and as a result many had suffered and Israel had been defeated. The man had not suffered alone but had brought suffering on many.

An alternative translation more in line with Hebrew usage might be ‘wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel, though he was but one man. Did he not perish in his iniquity?’

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:20

Did not Achan the son of Zerah. Here again the reference to the past history of Israel is suited to the speaker and the circumstances, and this appeal, therefore, strengthens our conviction that in the history of Achan we have fact and not fiction. The case of Achan is even more in point than that of Peer. In his case the Israelites had a clear proof that "one man's sin," unless completely and absolutely put away, brought God's dis. pleasure on "all the congregation" (�umbers 16:22). The repulse at Ai, fresh as it must have been in the memory of all, was sufficient evidence of this. How much more then would His displeasure fall upon Israel, if they condoned this act (as it seemed) of gross and open rebellion against the Lord who had brought them out of Egypt, and had put them in possession of the land He had promised them? Commit a trespass (see note on Joshua 22:16). In the accursed thing (see note on Joshua 7:1). And that man perished not alone in his iniquity. Literally, and he, one man, did not expire in his iniquity. The Vulgate has, "and he was one man, and would that he had perished alone in his iniquity." The sense is the same as in our version. Achan did not perish alone, for not only did he involve his family in his ruin, but the loss of life at the first assault of Ai lay also at his door (see Joshua 7:5).

21 Then Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh replied to the heads of the clans of Israel:

CLARKE, "Then the children of Reuben - answered - Though conscious of their own innocency they permitted Phinehas to finish his discourse, though composed of little else than accusations; there was a decency in this, and such a full proof of good breeding, as does them the highest credit. There are many public assemblies in the present day which lay claim to the highest refinement, who might take a very useful lesson from these Reubenites and their associates.

GILL, "Then the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, answered,.... By some person whom they appointed to deliver the answer in their name:

and said unto the heads of the thousands of Israel; who were over those that were rulers of the thousands of Israel, persons of greater authority than they, being princes of the respective tribes to which they belonged.

HE�RY, "We may suppose there was a general convention called of the princes and great men of the separate tribes, to give audience to these ambassadors; or perhaps the army, as it came home, was still encamped in a body, and not yet dispersed; however it was, there were enough to represent the two tribes and a half, and to give their sense. Their reply to the warm remonstrance of the ten tribes is very fair and ingenuous. They do not retort their charge, upbraid them with the injustice and unkindness of their threatenings, nor reproach them for their rash and hasty censures, but give them a soft answer which turns away wrath, avoiding all those grievous words which stir up anger;they demur not to their jurisdiction, nor plead that they were not accountable to them for what they had done, nor bid them mind their own business, but, by a free and open declaration of their sincere intention in what they did, free themselves from the imputation they were under, and set themselves right in the opinion of their brethren, to do which they only needed to state the case and put the matter in a true light.

JAMISO�, "Then the children of Reuben ... answered— repudiating, in the strongest terms, the alleged crime, and deponing that so far from entertaining the intention imputed to them, their only object was to perpetuate the memory of their alliance with Israel [Jos_22:24, Jos_22:25], and their adherence to the worship of Israel’s God [Jos_22:26, Jos_22:27].

K&D 21-25, "In utter amazement at the suspicion expressed by the delegates of the congregation, the two tribes and a half affirm with a solemn oath, that it never entered into their minds to build an altar as a place of sacrifice, to fall away from Jehovah. The combination of the three names of God-El, the strong one; Elohim, the Supreme Being to be feared; and Jehovah, the truly existing One, the covenant God (Jos_22:22), -serves to strengthen the invocation of God, as in Psa_50:1; and this is strengthened still further by the repetition of these three names. God knows, and let Israel also know, sc.,

what they intended, and what they have done. The אם which follows is the usual particle

used in an oath. “Verily (it was) not in rebellion, nor in apostasy from Jehovah,” sc., that this was done, or that we built the altar. “Mayst Thou not help us to-day,” sc., if we did it in rebellion against God. An appeal addressed immediately to God in the heat of the statement, and introduced in the midst of the asseveration, which was meant to remove all doubt as to the truth of their declaration. The words which follow in Jos_22:23, “that we have built,” etc., continue the oath: “If we have done this, to build us an altar, to turn away from the Lord, or to offer thereon burnt-offering, meat-offering, or

peace-offering, may Jehovah himself require it (�רש, as in Deu_18:19; cf. 1Sa_20:16). Another earnest parenthetical adjuration, as the substance of the oath, is continued in

Jos_22:24. “But truly (לא with an affirmative signification) from anxiety, for a ,ואם

reason (lit. on account of a thing) have we done this, thinking (לאמר, since we thought) in time to come your sons might say to our sons, What have ye to do with Jehovah, the God of Israel?” i.e., He does not concern you; He is our God. “Jehovah has made the Jordan a boundary between us and your sons; ye have no part in Jehovah. Thus your sons might make our sons cease to fear Jehovah,” i.e., might make them desist from the

worship of Jehovah (for the infinitive form ירא instead of the abbreviated form לרא used

in 1Sa_18:29, there are analogies in יצק in Eze_24:3, and לישון, Ecc_5:11, whereas יר%ה is the only form used in the Pentateuch). There was some reason for this anxiety. For, inasmuch as in all the promises and laws Canaan alone (the land on this side of the Jordan, Num_34:1-12) is always mentioned as the land which Jehovah would give to His people for their inheritance, it was quite a possible thing that at some future time the false conclusion might be drawn from this, that only the tribes who dwelt in Canaan proper were the true people of Jehovah.

CALVI�, "21.Then the children of Reuben, etc The state of the case turns on the definition. For the children of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, explain that they had a different intention, and thus exculpate themselves from the charge, inasmuch as the nature of the proceeding was quite different from what the others supposed. In not making a disturbance, (185) nor picking a quarrel for the injustice done, to them they give an example of rare modesty, which is held forth for our imitation; so that if at any time anything we have rightly done happen to be unjustly and falsely blamed by those not acquainted with its nature, we may deem it sufficient to refute the censure only so far as may be necessary for clearing ourselves. Moreover, that the more credit may be given to them, and that they may the better attest their integrity, they, by a solemn protest, put far from them the wickedness of which they were suspected. For there is force and meaning in the reduplication, The Lord God of gods, the Lord God of gods, by which they with vehemence affirm, how faithfully they desire to persevere in the doctrine of the Law, and how greatly they abhor all contrary superstitions. But as their intention was not patent to men, and every one explained it variously, according to his own sense, they appeal to the judgment of God, and offer to submit to punishment if he decide that they had attempted anything wickedly. And to prove that they are not like hypocrites who, with abandoned wickedness, appeal to God a hundred times as judge even when they are convicted in their own minds, they not only bring forward conscience, but at the same time declare, that the whole people will be witness; as if they had said, that it

will be made palpable by the fact itself, that they never had any intention of devising any new form of worship; and they rightly explain, how the altar would have been unlawful, namely, if they had built it for the purpose of offering sacrifice. For the Law did not condemn the mere raising of heaps of stones, but only enjoined that sacrifices should be offered in one place, for the purpose of retaining the people in one faith, lest religion should be rent asunder, lest license should be given to human presumption, and thus every man might turn aside to follow his own fictions. We thus see how an explanation of the nature of the deed removes the detestation which the ten tribes had conceived of it. (186)

It is not strictly correct, though appropriate enough, for the rudeness of sense, to place our God above all gods. For it is impossible to compare him with others, seeing that no others actually exist. Hence, in order to avoid the apparent absurdity, some interpreters substitute angels for gods; this meaning holds in some cases, though not in all. It ought not, however, to seem harsh when he who is the one sole supreme being is called the God of gods, inasmuch as he has no equal, standing forth conspicuous above all other height, and so, by his glory, obscuring and annihilating all names of deity which are celebrated in the world. Hence this mode of speaking ought to be viewed with reference to the common sense of the vulgar.

COKE, "Verse 21-22Ver. 21, 22. Then the children of Reuben, &c.—answered—The Lord God of gods, &c.— �o sooner had Phinehas ended his discourse, than the president of the congregation of the two tribes and a half, to remove the suspicions that had been entertained of their faith, takes up the conference, and begins by calling God to witness the purity of their intentions. "The Lord God of gods," they begin; in which their design is first to shew, that they worshipped no other God than Him, whom their fathers had worshipped, that great Being, who, infinitely exalted above all the creatures, is the first and original cause of every thing that exists: after which, in a noble emotion of zeal, they immediately repeat the same appellation; the Lord God of gods: which flows as it were from an ardent desire to wash off the reproach that Phinehas had just cast upon them; and is a mark of the sincerity wherewith they dared to call God to witness their fidelity in his service. These lively and emphatical modes of expression are common to all languages.

If in transgression against the Lord, save us not this day— In proportion as the apologist for the Israelites of Gilead proceeds in his discourse, he speaks with more fire; displaying a soul, touched with the most sensible concern at the heavy reproach cast upon his fellow-citizens. He calls on the Deity to testify their integrity; he repeatedly invokes the Most High, and still this is not sufficient; waving, therefore, his address to Phinehas and the deputies his companions, he lifts up his voice to God immediately, and cries out with great emphasis, "O Lord, protect us not, if guilty of that revolt whereof our brethren have suspected us!" Perhaps this is one of those soft-ened expressions, which have in reality more energy than one would at first imagine: as if he had said, "May heaven punish us on the spot, if we entertained the design charged upon us."

COFFMA�, "Verse 21THE REPLY OF THE EASTER� TRIBES

"Then the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh answered, and spake unto the heads of the thousands of Israel, The Mighty One, God, Jehovah, the Mighty One, God, Jehovah, he knoweth; and Israel he shall know: if it be in rebellion, or if in trespass against Jehovah, save us not this day, that we have built us an altar to turn away from following Jehovah; or if to offer thereon burnt-offering or meal-offering, or if to offer sacrifices of peace-offerings thereon, let Jehovah himself require it; and if we have not rather out of carefulness done this, and of purpose, saying, in time to come your children might speak unto our children, saying, What have ye to do with Jehovah the God of Israel? for Jehovah hath made the Jordan a border between us and you, ye children of Reuben and children of Gad; ye have no portion in Jehovah: so might your children make our children cease from fearing Jehovah. Therefore we said, Let us now prepare to build us an altar, not for burnt-offering, nor for sacrifice: but it shall be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we may do the service of Jehovah before him with our burnt-offerings, and with our sacrifices, and with our peace-offerings; that your children may not say to our children in time to come, Ye have no portion in Jehovah. Therefore said we, It shall be, when they so say to us or to our generations in time to come, that we shall say, Behold the pattern of the altar of Jehovah, which our fathers made, not for burnt-offering, nor for sacrifice; but its a witness between us and you. Far be it from us that we should rebel against Jehovah, and turn away this day from following Jehovah, to build an altar for burnt-offering, for meal-offering, or for sacrifice, besides the altar of Jehovah our God that is before his tabernacle."

There are here a number of exceedingly interesting things:

(1) �ote that the Trans-Jordanic group waited patiently until the full extent of Phinehas' charges were made and understood by the accused. There were no interruptions and no display of resentment.

(2) The accused tribes professed total innocence on the charge of rebelling against God.

(3) They patiently explained why they had built this great altar.

(4) Incidentally, we learn here that it was a giant replica of the one actually in the tabernacle.

(5) �otice that even the accused tribes accepted fully the Word of God that there could be but one altar (one at a time, that is).

(6) Also, notice that the location of that sacred altar was given in Joshua 22:19. It was the one before the tabernacle! How does the Jerusalem temple stack up against that requirement? This is EXCEEDI�GLY important. If post-exilic priests wrote

this alleged Midrash to defend the one sanctuary in Jerusalem, which was in the temple, why should this line have been put in about the true altar being the one before "God's tabernacle"? Any careful study of that theory will show that it is a worthless error!

Joshua 22:22 is of particular interest. "The Hebrew most impressively combines the names of God, [~'El] [~'Elohiym] [~Yahweh]!"[19] The same combination appears in Psalms 50:1, where it is translated, "The Mighty One, God, Jehovah." "�o translation can do justice to the original. The three names of God, [~'El], [~'Elohiym], and [~Yahweh], are each twice repeated in that order!"[20] Most of the critical commentators make no reference at all to these three names in one breath. Could it be that this does �OT fit their theories?

Philbeck properly discerned the importance of the doctrine of having one central sanctuary for all Israel, saying:

"It was of pivotal importance. It served as the focal point of Israel's government. Only in their worship of the Lord were the independent tribes of Israel united in any real sense. To build a rival altar was to violate the covenant by seceding from the nation."[21]Morton commented fully upon the exemplary conduct of the Israelites in a number of instances during this episode: (1) The western tribes did not begin a disastrous war without investigating the rumors upon which they were tempted to declare it. (2) They placed the investigation in the hands of competent and fair-minded people. (3) They went straight to the persons accused of sin, confronting them with what they had heard. (4) They listened patiently to the explanations offered. (5) They accepted them as true, and unity was at once restored. He summarized these views thus: "Rumor was supplanted by reason; reason led to understanding; understanding averted war; God was in their midst."[22] It would be wonderful today if brethren would exercise such basic precautions before receiving charges against one another.

PETT, "Verse 21‘Then the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, answered, and spoke to the heads of the sub-tribes (thousands) of Israel, “God, the God YHWH, God, the God YHWH, he knows, and Israel, he will know, if it be in rebellion, or if in trespass against YHWH, (do not save us this day), that we have built ourselves an altar to turn away from following YHWH, or if to offer on it burnt offering or meal offering, or if to offer sacrifices of peace offerings on it, let YHWH himself require it.” ’We should probably translate ‘El Elohim YHWH’ as ‘God, the God YHWH’ emphasising His uniqueness or as ‘God of the elohim (angels), YHWH’ stressing His greatness rather than as ‘the God of gods, YHWH’. Either way the stress is on the fact that He knows men’s minds and therefore knows that their own particular thoughts are innocent. The repetition of the name stressed the intensity of their feeling. This was the land of El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, and here Israel claimed it for YHWH their God as the true El.

On the other hand Israel yet awaits that knowledge in the future. They have yet to learn the truth. But they will know. And what will they know? Whether they have built the altar in rebellion and disobedience to God’s Law in order to offer offerings and sacrifices on it, thus being seen as turning away from following YHWH, or not. �ote the acceptance of the idea that to build an altar other than at the revelation of YHWH, in order to offer sacrifices on it, was rebellion and disobedience. Israel could not set up altars at will like the Canaanites did. Only altars in places where God had recorded His name (patently revealed Himself) were acceptable, and especially that at the central sanctuary.

Their words were doubly emphasised by expostulations - ‘do not save us this day!’ and ‘let YHWH Himself require it!’ This reveals their agitation and calls on their listeners to recognise the genuineness of their declaration by their act of calling on YHWH to punish them if they were lying.

�ote again the use of eleph for sub-tribes, which could also be translated ‘thousands’. The basic idea behind ‘a thousand’ at this early date is that of a subgroup rather than a specific number. �ote also the different offerings mentioned, burnt offerings, meal offerings and sacrifices of peace offerings.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 21-29The leaders of the Gileadites explained that their motive was not to use the altar to promote departure from Yahweh or the tabernacle. It was to memorialize the unity of the12tribes for future generations. The Israelites had, of course, erected other memorials for this purpose in the Jordan, at Gilgal (ch4), and on Mt. Ebal ( Joshua 8:30-35). However, God had not ordered the building of this altar as He had the other monuments. He had made provision for preserving the unity of the nation by calling all the males in Israel back to the tabernacle three times each year. He had also done so through the stone memorials and altars that He had ordained.

"The combination of the three names of God-El, the strong one; Elohim, the Supreme Being to be feared; and Jehovah, the truly existing One, the covenant God ( Joshua 22:22)-serves to strengthen the invocation of God, as in Psalm 1:1; and this is strengthened still further by the repetition of these three names." [�ote: Keil and Delitzsch, p220.]

22 “The Mighty One, God, the Lord! The Mighty One, God, the Lord! He knows! And let Israel

know! If this has been in rebellion or disobedience to the Lord, do not spare us this day.

BAR�ES, "The repeated invocation of God, and that by His three names - ,êl' אל

yehovâh: compare Psa_50:1 יהוה ,ĕlohı-ym' אלהים - marks the earnestness of the

protestation. The conduct of the two tribes and a half has often been noted as exemplary. They had had a grave and capital crime most unexpectedly laid to their charge, of which they were entirely innocent. Yet there is no word of reproach or recrimination in their vindication of themselves. They are contented simply to repudiate the false accusation and to explain the real motives of conduct perhaps suggested to them by a precedent set by Moses Exo_17:15.

Save us not this day - The words are a direct appeal to God, exactly equivalent in effect to our form “So help me God.”

CLARKE, "The Lord God of gods - The original words are exceedingly emphatic,

and cannot be easily translated. יהוה�אלהים�אל El�Elohim�Yehovah, are the three principal names by which the supreme God was known among the Hebrews, and may be thus translated, the strong God, Elohim, Jehovah, which is nearly the version of Luther, der starcte Gott der Herr, “The strong God the Lord.” And the Reubenites, by using these in their very solemn appeal, expressed at once their strong unshaken faith in the God of Israel; and by this they fully showed the deputation from the ten tribes, that their religious creed had not been changed; and, in the succeeding part of their defense they show that their practice corresponded with their creed. The repetition of these solemn names by the Reubenites, etc., shows their deep concern for the honor of God, and their anxiety to wipe off the reproach which they consider cast on them by the supposition that they had been capable of defection from the pure worship of God, or of disaffection to their brethren.

Save us not this day - This was putting the affair to the most solemn issue; and nothing but the utmost consciousness of their own integrity could have induced them to make such an appeal, and call for such a decision. “Let God the Judge cause us to perish this day, if in principle or practice we have knowingly departed from him.”

GILL, "The Lord God of gods, the Lord God of gods,.... They first set out in their answer with asserting their firm belief of Jehovah, the God of Israel, being the supreme God, God over all; over all that are called gods, whether angels, of whom Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret it; or civil magistrates and judges of the earth, who bare the same name; nor are the gods of the Gentiles to be spoken of with Jehovah, the God of Israel, who is the supreme Being, self-existent, the Being of beings, eternal and immutable, all which is contained in his name Jehovah; now this is repeated by them for the

confirmation of their faith in this great article of it, and shows the steadiness of it, and to express their earnest and vehement affection for this truth, and to clear themselves from any imputation of idolatry, or thought of it, or doing anything that might have a tendency to it:

he knoweth; he is the omniscient God, the searcher of the hearts and the trier of the reins of the children of men; he knows our cordial belief of this truth, the integrity of our hearts, the intention of our minds, that we never had a thought in us of departing from his worship, and of setting up an altar beside his in opposition to it:

and Israel he shall know; our brethren the Israelites that dwell in the land of Canaan, whose representatives you are, shall know, not only by our present declaration, but by our future conduct, and strict adherence to the pure worship of God in time to come, that it was never our view by what we have done to depart from it:

if it be in rebellion, or if in transgression against the Lord; with a design to rebel against his word, and transgress his command:

save us not this day; this is said with respect to God, and as an apostrophe to him, as Jarchi, Kimchi, and Abarbinel observe; as expressing their desire to have no mercy shown them by him, but that vengeance might be taken on them by him, to whom all things were naked and open, and who full well knew whether they were guilty or not; or else the address is to Phinehas, and the princes, that they would rise up and put them to death by sword, if this appeared to be the case; or that all the other tribes would rise up, and make war against them, and cut them off with the edge of the sword, and n

HE�RY, " They solemnly protest against any design to use this altar for sacrifice or offering, and therefore were far from setting it up in competition with the altar at Shiloh, or from entertaining the least thought of deserting that. They had indeed set up that which had the shape and fashion of an altar, but they had not dedicated it to a religious use, had had no solemnity of its consecration, and therefore ought not to be charged with a design to put it to any such use. To gain credit to this protestation here is,

1. A solemn appeal to God concerning it, with which they begin their defence, intending thereby to give glory to God first, and then to give satisfaction to their brethren, Jos_22:22. (1.) A profound awe and reverence of God are expressed in the form of their appeal: The Lord God of gods, the Lord God of gods, he knows. Or, as it might be read somewhat closer to the original, The God of gods, Jehovah, the God of gods, Jehovah, he knows, which bespeaks his self-existence and self-sufficiency; he is Jehovah, and has sovereignty and supremacy over all beings and powers whatsoever, even those that are called gods, or that are worshipped. This brief confession of their faith would help to obviate and remove their brethren's suspicion of them, as if they intended to desert the God of Israel, and worship other gods: how could those entertain such a thought who believed him to be God over all? Let us learn hence always to speak of God with reverence and seriousness, and to mention his name with a solemn pause. Those who make their appeals to heaven with a slight, careless, “God knows,” have reason to fear lest they take his name in vain, for it is very unlike this appeal. (2.) It is a great confidence of their own integrity which they express in the matter of their appeal. They refer the controversy to the God of gods, whose judgment, we are sure, is according to truth, such as the guilty have reason to dread and the upright to rejoice in. “If it be in rebellion or transgression that we have built this altar, to confront the altar of the Lord at Shiloh, to make a party, or to set up any new gods or worships,” [1.] “He

knows it (Jos_22:22), for he is perfectly acquainted with the thoughts and intents of the heart, and particularly with all inclinations to idolatry (Psa_44:20, Psa_44:21); this is in a particular manner before him. We believe he knows it, and we cannot by any arts conceal it from him.” [2.] “Let him require it, as we know he will, for he is a jealous God.” Nothing but a clear conscience would have thus imprecated divine justice to avenge the rebellion if there had been any. Note, First, In every thing we do in religion, it highly concerns us to approve ourselves to God in our integrity therein, remembering that he knows the heart. Secondly, When we fall under the censures of men, it is very comfortable to be able with a humble confidence to appeal to God concerning our sincerity. See 1Co_4:3, 1Co_4:4.

2. A sober apology presented to their brethren: Israel, he shall know. Though the record on high, and the witness in our bosoms, are principally to be made sure for us, yet there is a satisfaction besides which we owe to our brethren who doubt concerning our integrity, and which we should be ready to give with meekness and fear. if our sincerity be known to God, we should study likewise to let others know it by its fruits, especially those who, though they mistake us, yet show a zeal for the glory of God, as the ten tribes here did.

WHEDO�, "22. The Lord God of gods — El Elohim Jehovah — This is a most solemn oath. They who twice utter the three names of God declare that they revere him as the mighty, living Being, and are not in rebellion against him.

Save us not this day — Or, help us not. This implies that they should be left to miserably perish.

Let the Lord himself require it — That is, Let him punish it. Another strong adjuration is here uttered.

PI�K, "The reply and the denial of the men of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh were characterized by simplicity and sincerity. Their appeal to the witness of God (v. 22) as a proof of their blamelessness is forceful. In this they employed three distinct names: El, Elohim, and Jehovah, God in His power, in His trinitarian nature, and in His eternal essence. Furthermore, there is a suggestion in this appeal that God alone, as He had revealed Himself, was acknowledged by them, and that they claimed Him as their covenant-keeping Lord. God was their witness, and should they be prevaricating, so they asserted, then let God require it of them, let Him not spare them.

In their repudiation of all evil intentions, they made reference to the anxiety that had motivated their action: "For fear of this thing, . . . In time to come your children might speak unto our children, saying, What have we to do with the LORD God of Israel?" (v. 24). Whether or not some in Israel had manifested an attitude that caused them this concern is not known. It may have been the product of evil surmisings on their own part. Many of the fears of the human heart are self-imposed. In spite of the excellent arrangement made between Moses and themselves (�um. 32), they may have experienced a guilt complex over deflecting from the original plan.

Their fear was not over the attitude of their own posterity but that of others. If they had doubts about the behavior of the descendants of the other tribes, they seemed quite self-assured. The future history of these two and a half tribes (1 Chron. 5:25-26) leads to the conclusion that they had more to fear in their self-complacence then they had in the imaginary attitude and action of others. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" (Jer. 17:9).

Apparently unconscious of self-complacence, these men from Gilead presented their explanation with sincerity and clarity. Yes, they had built an altar patterned after the brazen altar in the Tabernacle, only larger. They may have thought that the pattern itself would have been a link between them and their brethren on the west side of Jordan. They may also have thought that in an altar of such shape, they would have a reminder of God’s demands, the demands of the one and only true God. They may likewise have thought that its presence would confirm in their lives, and in those of future generations, that God could be approached only on the basis of atonement. One thing was sure, it was not to be used for animal sacrifices. They averred their plan: "Let us now prepare to build us an altar, not for burnt-offering, nor for sacrifice: But that it may be a witness between us, and you, and our generations after us" (vv. 26-27). Following their explanation they disclaimed any attempt to rebel against the Lord, or to depart from the service of the Tabernacle at Shiloh.

The reply of Phinehas expressed pleasure, not in that they had built an altar, but in that they had not trespassed against the Lord, and consequently the nation had been saved from God’s wrath against apostasy. The absence of any reference to the altar by Phinehas at this time might be interpreted as a disapproval. It was the fact that the two and a half tribes had not transgressed that pleased the children of Israel when Phinehas and his associates on their return reported the matter. A civil war to extirpate the evil from the congregation had been averted. The joy that was Israel through this clear understanding expressed itself in worship. "The children of Israel blessed God." Open strife and armed conflict had been avoided, and so praise ascended to the Lord.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:22. The Lord God of gods — In the Hebrew it is, The God of gods, Jehovah; the God of gods, Jehovah; or, rather, there are three names of God, El, Elohim, and Jehovah, signifying that they owned no other God but him whom their forefathers worshipped, by what name soever he was called, as if he had said, That Jehovah, who is infinitely above all creatures, and the fountain of all other beings, whom we no less than you acknowledge as the God of gods. The multiplying of his titles, and the repetition of these words, show their zeal and earnestness in this matter.

He knoweth — To him we appeal who knoweth all things, and the truth of what we are now saying. �ot only our present words, but our future and constant course shall satisfy all Israel of our perseverance in the true religion. If it be in rebellion —If this have been done by us with such design, or in such a manner. Save us not —

Thou, O Lord, to whom we have appealed, and without whom we cannot be saved and preserved, save us not from any of our enemies, nor from the sword of our brethren. It is a sudden apostrophe to God, usual in such vehement speeches.

PULPIT,"Joshua 22:22

The Lord God of gods. The double repetition of this adjuration is suited to the greatness of the occasion. �o words can suffice to express the horror and detestation of the two and a half tribes at the sin of which they have been supposed guilty. �or does our version at all approach the majesty of the original form of oath. The Vulgate and Luther approach nearer to it when they render the one, "fortissimus Deus Dominus," and the other, "der starke Gott, der Herr." But no translation can do justice to the vigour of the original. The three names of God, El, Elohim, and Jehovah, are each twice repeated in their order. El representing the earliest Hebrew idea of God, strength (as that of the Aryans was splendour) comes first. Then Elohim, with its pluralis excellentiae, suited to a nation whose theological holizon was expanding, and suggesting the manifold ways in which El the mighty one displayed His greatness, as the source of all power, mental, moral, and physical, in heaven and in earth. Then came the name by which He had revealed Himself to Moses, Jehovah, the Self-existent One, the author of all being, He whose supreme prerogative it was to have existed from all eternity, and from whose will all things were derived. It was impossible for any Israelite to have devised a more awful formula by which to clear themselves from the charge of rebellion against God. The same striking phrase is adopted by Asaph in the fiftieth Psalm, when he desires to give especial emphasis to the words of God which follow. Some of the Babbis interpret Elohim here of angels, and explain, "the God of angels." Dr. Perowne, on Psalms 50:1; prefers the LXX. θεὸς θεῶν. Lange, on this passage, translates feebly, "God, God Jehovah," but he abandons this in his commentary on Psalms 1:1-6. for the interpretation given above. Ewald prefers the LXX. rendering. Vaihinger suggests, "the mighty God Jehovah." But the majority of recent commentators prefer the rendering given above, and it is supported by Jewish authorities of credit (cf. Jeremiah 32:14; �ehemiah 9:32). He knoweth. These words are in the strictest Hebrew form of the present tense. It is not merely implied that "God knows" as a general fact, but He is called to witness in the most emphatic manner. "He is at this moment aware that we are speaking the truth." Save us not this day. These words are not parenthetical, as in our version, but in their eagerness to clear themselves (another fact of vivid narration not to be lost sight of, as indicating that the information came originally from an eyewitness) they change the construction. "El Elohim Jehovah, El Elohim Jehovah, He is witness, and Israel shall know—if in rebellion, and if in transgression against the Lord, mayest Thou not save us this day—to build an altar to us, to turn from after the Lord." The whole sentence betokens the strong agitation of those who uttered it—"ex vehementissima animi perturbatione effundunt illi potiusquam pronuneiant" (Masius)—and to whatever period we may attribute the composition of the Book of Joshua, there can be little doubt that he had access to authentic documents, written by eyewitnesses of the scenes that are described. Rosenmuller discusses another interpretation, which regards these words as an address to Phinehas; but while admitting that it is a

possible one, rejects it as less suitable to the context. Besides, it may be remarked that "save us" can only be addressed to God. To man, "spare us" would have been said.

23 If we have built our own altar to turn away from the Lord and to offer burnt offerings and grain offerings, or to sacrifice fellowship offerings on it, may the Lord himself call us to account.

GILL, "That we have built us an altar, to turn from following the Lord,.... That is, we desire, as we deserve, to be cut to pieces, and not saved, if it should appear to be our view, in building this altar, to revolt from the pure worship of God:

or if to offer thereon burnt offering, or meat offering, or if to offer peace offerings; even to the Lord himself: they declare that as they had no design to apostatize from God, and worship idols, so it was not their intention to offer any kind of sacrifice on the altar they had built, even to the Lord himself; and they take notice of every kind of offering, to remove every charge of this sort from them, and to purge themselves of every imputation of this nature: then

let the Lord himself require it; seek it out, who is the omniscient God, and revenge it, who is the Lord God Almighty, just and true.

COKE, "Verses 23-25Ver. 23-25. What have ye to do with the Lord God of Israel? &c.— �ot satisfied with justifying themselves from the crime imputed to them, of having dared to erect a new altar, to rival, as it were, the holy altar: not content with having submitted in that case to whatever the most formidable judgment of divine vengeance might inflict, let the Lord himself require it; (see Deuteronomy 18:19.) the accused candidly explain what were their views in the step which had alarmed the other tribes; an ill-grounded though a pious fear. "We apprehended," say they, "that in a course of time, on seeing ourselves separated by the Jordan from the place at which the sanctuary of the Lord is situated, we should be looked upon as strangers, as a people who had no share or right in the worship of the tabernacle, and that our posterity, biassed and persuaded by speeches to this purpose, should absolutely

grow relaxed, and turn aside from the fear and worship of the true God."

BE�SO�, "Verses 23-25Joshua 22:23-25. Let the Lord himself require it — That is, call us to an account and punish us for it. What have you to do with the Lord — You have no relation to him, nor interest in him, or his worship. The Lord hath made Jordan a border —To shut you out of the land of promise, and consequently from the covenant made between God and our fathers. Ye have no part in the Lord — �othing to do with him; no right to serve him or expect favour from him. Cease from fearing the Lord — For they that are cut off from public ordinances, usually by degrees lose all religion. It is true the form and profession of godliness may be kept without the life and power of it. But the life and power will not long be kept without the form and profession of it.

24 “�o! We did it for fear that some day your descendants might say to ours, ‘What do you have to do with the Lord, the God of Israel?

CLARKE, "For fear of this thing - The motive that actuated us was directly the reverse of that of which we have been suspected.

GILL, "And if we have not rather done it for fear of this thing,.... So far they suggest were they from doing this, in order to turn from the pure worship of God, and introduce idolatrous worship, that it was to guard against everything of that kind for the future; and through fear of it, and anxiety and distress of mind, lest some time or another there should be any temptation to it in their posterity, had they built this altar:

saying, in time to come your children might speak unto our children; or "tomorrow" (m), in a short time after your heads, and ours, are laid in the grave, your posterity will accost us:

saying, what have you to do with the Lord God of Israel? you are aliens and strangers from the commonwealth of Israel, live in a foreign land, and not in the land, of Canaan; are separated from us by the river Jordan, are a different people from us, and have nothing to do with the tabernacle of the Lord, and the service of it, or with the altar of the Lord, to offer sacrifice on it. Now as they returned to their own country, or when got there, such anxious thoughts and fears rose up in their minds, which they

communicated to one another, and thought of this expedient to prevent what would be so fatal to their posterity. The Targum is,"you have no part in the Word of the Lord God of Israel;''see Joh_13:8.

HE�RY, " They gave an account of the fears they had lest, in process of time, their posterity, being seated at such a distance from the tabernacle, should be looked upon and treated as strangers to the commonwealth of Israel (Jos_22:24); it was for fear of this thing, and the word signifies a great perplexity and solicitude of mind which they were in, until they eased themselves by this expedient. As they were returning home (and we may suppose it was not thought of before, else they would have made Joshua acquainted with their purpose), some of them in discourse started this matter, and the rest took the hint, and represented to themselves and one another a very melancholy prospect of what might probably happen in after-ages, that their children would be looked upon by the other tribes as having no interest in the altar of God and the sacrifices there offered. Now indeed they were owned as brethren, and were as welcome at the tabernacle as any other of the tribes; but what if their children after them should be disowned? They, by reason of their distance, and the interposition of Jordan, which it was not easy at all times to pass and repass, could not be so numerous and constant in their attendance on the three yearly feasts as the other tribes, to make a continual claim to the privileges of Israelites, and would therefore be looked upon as inconsiderable members of their church, and by degrees would be rejected as not members of it at all: So shall your children (who in their pride will be apt to monopolize the privileges of the altar) make our children (who perhaps will not be so careful as they ought to be to keep hold of those privileges) cease from fearing the Lord. Note, (1.) Those that are cut off from public ordinances are likely to lose all religion, and will by degrees cease from fearing the Lord. Though the form and profession of godliness are kept up by many without the life and power of it, yet the life and power of it will not long be kept up without the form and profession. You take away grace if you take away the means of grace. (2.) Those who have themselves found the comfort and benefit of God's ordinances cannot but desire to preserve and perpetuate the entail of them upon their seed, and use all possible precautions that their children after them may not be made to cease from following the Lord, or be looked upon as having no part in him.

WHEDO�, "24. For fear — The Hebrew word indicates great and distressing solicitude. The motive of their action was just the opposite of that ascribed to them. It was their intense desire to preserve themselves and their children in the worship of Jehovah that had induced the erection of the memorial altar.

Our children — The truly pious man will seek to place the safeguards of piety about the path of his offspring. These eastern tribes had received by far the best portion of the Holy Land, yet they are not satisfied with worldly good. Their broad acres and vast herds are worthless without a portion in the God of Israel.

PETT, "Verse 24-25“And if we have not rather done this out of deep concern and with a purpose, saying, ‘In time to come your children might speak to our children, saying, “What have you to do with YHWH, the God of Israel? For YHWH has made Jordan a

border between us and you, you children of Reuben, and you children of Gad. You have no portion in YHWH.” So will your children make our children cease from fearing YHWH.’ ”The Transjordan tribes clearly saw the altar as a symbol of their right to a presence in the land of promise. Their altar there, as it were, represented them. Thus in the future they would not be able to be told that they had no part in the land or in YHWH, for they now had their part within the border. Previously their rights had been preserved because their contingents were in the land fighting on behalf of YHWH, but now that they were leaving they felt that they must leave behind some presence in the land as a symbol of their right to a place in the covenant.

This brings out how deep an issue their settlement outside the boundaries of the land as promised had become to some in Israel. There are always those who cannot cope with change. It helps to explain why in Joshua we constantly find the emphasis on the fact that their settlement there was under command from YHWH, was their inheritance from Him, and was in accordance with the words of Moses (Joshua 1:14-15; Joshua 12:6; Joshua 13:8; Joshua 13:15; Joshua 13:24; Joshua 13:29; Joshua 13:32; Joshua 18:7). It was also seen as confirmed by the fact that they had Levites, whose inheritance was YHWH, living among them, which is specifically brought out by contrasting the inheritance in Transjordan with the inheritance of the Levites three times to bring out its genuineness (Joshua 13:14; Joshua 13:33; Joshua 14:3).

So the purpose of the altar, rather than being with the intention of breaking the tribal covenant, was in fact in order to ensure its continuation and to guarantee that they would not be excluded from it.

“Out of deep concern.” Consider the same word in Proverbs 12:25; Ezekiel 4:16; Ezekiel 12:18-19.

"In time to come" is literally ‘tomorrow’ (see also Joshua 22:27-28; Joshua 4:6; Joshua 4:21; Exodus 13:14; (Deuteronomy 6:20). ‘A border between us and you.’ Some Israelites would see this as emphasised by the importance YHWH Himself placed on the crossing of the Jordan (Joshua 3 and Joshua 4), forgetting that representatives of the Transjordan tribes had crossed over with them (Joshua 1:14; Joshua 4:12) and had placed the memorial stones (Joshua 4:4).

PULPIT, "From fear of this thing. This translation cannot be correct. Had the Hebrew original intended to convey this meaning, we should have had מדאגת הדבר The literal rendering is, "from anxiety, from a word." The word here translated הזה"anxiety" (LXX. εὐλάβεια) is applied to the sea, and is translated "sorrow" in Jeremiah 49:23. It is translated "heaviness" in Proverbs 12:25. In Ezekiel 4:16; Ezekiel 12:18, Ezekiel 12:19, it is translated "care," "carefulness," and is applied to eating food. It obviously refers to agitation or anxiety of mind, and the proper translation here is, "we did it out of anxiety, for a cause." So Masius and Rosenmuller, who render the word דאגה here by sollicitudo.

PULPIT, "Joshua 22:24, Joshua 22:25

What have you to do with the Lord God of Israel? For the Lord hath made Jordan a border. Literally, What to you and to Jehovah the God of Israel, since He hath given a border between us and between you, sons of Reuben and sons of Gad, even the Jordan. Thus the reason for the erection of the altar was the very converse of what it had been supposed to be. So far from considering themselves as shut out from the communion of Israel by the natural boundary formed by Jordan, the two and a half tribes were resolved that no one else should ever think so. If the descendants of the remainder of the Israelites should ever venture to assert anything of the kind, there was the altar, erected in a conspicuous position on the west side of Jordan, left as a perpetual memorial of the great struggle in which Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh had taken part, and which had resulted in the final occupation of the land of Canaan. Keil and Delitzsch remark that there was some reason for this anxiety. The promises made to Abraham and his posterity related only to the land of Canaan. For their own advantage these tribes had chosen to remain in the trans-Jordanic territory conquered by Moses. It was quite possible that in future ages they might be regarded as outside the blessings and privileges of the Mosaic covenant. For the present, at least, they value those blessings and privileges, and desired to have some permanent memorial of the fact that they had a right to share them. From fearing. It may be worth while to notice, as a sign of later, or at least of different authorship, that the Pentateuch employs a different (the feminine) form of the infinitive for the form found here.

25 The Lord has made the Jordan a boundary between us and you—you Reubenites and Gadites! You have no share in the Lord.’ So your descendants might cause ours to stop fearing the Lord.

GILL, "For the Lord hath made Jordan a border between us and you,.... And by it separated them from them, as if they were a distinct people; not that this was really the case, but so they feared it would be represented in time to come; for though Jordan was the border of the land of Canaan, strictly so called, eastward, Num_34:12; yet it did

not exclude the land of the two tribes and a half from being part of the land of promise; for the Amorites, which before inhabited it, and were driven out of it, were Canaanites, and were one part of the people, whose land the Lord promised to Abraham, Gen_15:18,

ye children of Reuben, and children of Gad, have no part in the Lord; in his covenant and promises, in his worship, word, and ordinances; these are things you have nothing to do with, being separated from us his peculiar people; or "have no part in the Word of the Lord", as the Targum, the promised Messiah, being without, or separated from him, as the Gentiles are said to be, Eph_2:12,

so shall your children make our children cease from fearing the Lord; from worshipping the Lord, the fear of the Lord being often put for the whole worship of God, external and internal, Ecc_12:13; by behaving in the above manner towards them, they would be the cause and occasion of their apostasy from the true God, and it would be in effect to say to them, "go, serve other gods", 1Sa_26:19.

�ISBET, "O�E THOUGH DIVIDED‘The Lord hath made Jordan a border between us and you.’Joshua 22:25The special subject of the Lesson is the readiness with which the two-and-a-half tribes met and responded to the claims of the brotherhood. In this setting us an example of ‘not looking only on our own things, but looking also on the things of others.’ We may, however, give attention to the whole incident connected with their settlement east of Jordan.

I. Were the two-and-a-half tribes right or wrong in interfering with the Mosaic arrangement?—In thinking this out, we must make due account of the following points:—(1) The land given by God to the children of Israel was not limited to the west bank of Jordan. (2) The north-eastern limit being the river Euphrates, suggests the occupation of the country east of Jordan. (3) Moses naturally thought of getting the people into the ordinarily recognised Canaan. (4) Divine Providence worked out a larger thought than Moses cherished. (5) These particular tribes, keeping to their earlier custom of feeding animals, were more fitted for a wide pastoral country, than for land which must be highly farmed because so sub-divided. (6) The narrative gives no sign of their making their request in a bad spirit. So we may say that, though this idea had not been thought of by Moses, it was in the plan of God, and brought about by the overrulings of Divine Providence.

II. Did they estimate the dangers involved in their choice?—Probably not. Honestly intending to be faithful to the nation, and to Jehovah, they could not realise how the practical separation would influence later generations. �or could they see how exposed they would be to surrounding foes, when the kingdom across the Jordan became unfaithful, and so became disunited and weak. Close association with religious people, and religious worship, is a more important help to the godly life than we usually estimate. It is perilous work to ‘forsake the assembling of ourselves together.’

III. How did their choice of territory prove to be for the good of their brethren?—

They became a protecting border country. The tribes that were accustomed to make inroads into Canaan had to approach Canaan through the territory of these tribes.

IV. Explain the moral test applied to these two and-a-half tribes by Moses.—Did they want to separate themselves from responsibility and privilege, or were they willing still to link their fortunes with God’s people? That could be seen by their consenting to take a fair share of the fatigue and danger of the enterprise that was before them. See how character was tested, and how well it stood the test. These men were not wanting to secure some special good for themselves, and shirk their duty. In good judgment they fixed on the countries unexpectedly seized from Sihon and Og; and in a thoroughly honourable way asked for it. We may never get for ourselves save upon due consideration of the claims others may have upon us. Those who are in any way advanced beyond others are bound to help the others on. These tribes gained their homes first, then they were bound to help their brethren to secure their homes as speedily as possible. The worldly idea is, Get the best you can, and let others do the best they can. The unworldly idea is, Make your own success the means of helping others on. Show the danger of the self-seeking spirit. From the Christian point of view, ‘my brother’ stands before, or at least, close up alongside, ‘I myself.’

Illustrations

(1) ‘The one bond that knits all divisions of God’s people together, however different their modes of life and thought, is the similarity of relation to God. They are one in a common faith, a common love, a common obedience. Wider waters than Jordan part them. Graver differences of tasks and outlooks than separated these two sections of Israel part them. But all are one who love and obey the one Lord. The closer we cleave to Him the nearer we shall be to all the tribes.’

(2) ‘He that knows all things and hates all evil things would not punish the worst of criminals, but He would first go down and see (Genesis 18:21). Many an unhappy strife would be prevented or soon taken up by an impartial and favourable inquiry into that which is the matter of the offence. The rectifying of mistakes and misunderstandings and the setting of misconstrued words and actions in a true light, would be the most effectual way to accommodate both private and public quarrels, and bring them to a happy period.’

26 “That is why we said, ‘Let us get ready and build an altar—but not for burnt offerings or sacrifices.’

CLARKE, "An altar, not for burnt-offering, nor for sacrifice - Because this would have been in flat opposition to the law, Lev_17:8, Lev_17:9; Deu_12:4-6, Deu_12:10, Deu_12:11, Deu_12:13, Deu_12:14, which most positively forbade any sacrifice or offering to be made in any other place than that one which the Lord should choose. Therefore the altar built by the Reubenites, etc., was for no religious purpose, but merely to serve as a testimony that they were one people with those on the west of Jordan, having the same religious and civil constitution, and bound by the same interests to keep that constitution inviolate.

GILL, "Therefore we said,.... One to another, in order to prevent the apostasy of our children from God, their departure from his worship, and going into idolatry:

let us now prepare to build us an altar; get materials ready, and set about it instantly, without any delay, while the thing dwells upon our minds:

not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice; not for offerings of any kind required by the law, neither for sin offerings nor trespass offerings, nor any other not named.

HE�RY 26-28, "The project they had to prevent this, Jos_22:26-28. “Therefore, to secure an interest in the altar of God to those who shall come after us, and to prove their title to it, we said, Let us build an altar, to be a witness between us and you,” that, having this copy of the altar in their custody, it might be produced as an evidence of their right to the privilege of the original. Every one that saw this altar, and observed that it was never used for sacrifice and offering, would enquire what was the meaning of it, and this answer would be given to that enquiry, that it was built by those separate tribes, in token of their communion with their brethren and their joint-interest with them in the altar of the Lord. Christ is the great altar that sanctifies every gift; the best evidence of our interest in him will be the pattern of his Spirit in our hearts, and our conformity to him. If we can produce this it will be a testimony for us that we have a part in the Lord, and an earnest of our perseverance in following him.

K&D 26-28, "“So we thought, we will make ourselves to build an altar (an expression derived from the language of ordinary life, for 'we will build ourselves an altar'), not for burnt-offerings and slain-offerings; but it shall be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we may perform the service of Jehovah before His face (i.e., before the tabernacle in which Jehovah was enthroned), with our burnt-offerings, slain-offerings, and peace-offerings,” - in order, as they repeat in Jos_22:27 from Jos_22:24, Jos_22:25, that they might not be denied a part in Jehovah in time to come. For if it should so happen in time to come, that this should be said to them and to their descendants, they would say (or reply), “Behold the copy of the altar of Jehovah, which our fathers made, not for burnt-offerings,” etc. (Jos_22:28, as in Jos_22:26, Jos_22:27). For this reason they had built the altar according to the

pattern of the altar before the tabernacle, and that not in their own land, but on the western side of the Jordan, where the dwelling-place of Jehovah was standing, as a witness that they worshipped one and the same God with the tribes on this side.

CALVI�, "26.Therefore we said, etc The gross impiety of which they had been accused was now well refuted; and yet they seem not to have been in every respect free from blame, because the Law forbids the erection of any kind of statues. It is easy, however, to excuse this by saying, that no kind of statues are condemned except those which are intended to represent God. To erect a heap of stones as a trophy, or in testimony of a miracle, or a memorial of some signal favor of God, the Law has nowhere prohibited. (Exodus 20:4; Leviticus 26:1; Deuteronomy 5:8) Otherwise, Joshua and many holy judges and kings after him, would have defiled themselves by profane innovation. But the only thing displeasing to God was to see the minds of men drawn hither and thither, so as to worship him in a gross and earthly manner. The children of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh do all that is required for their exculpation, when they declare that they would use the altar only as a bond of brotherly union; and add a sufficient reason, namely, the danger there was, lest, after a long course of time, the ten tribes might exclude the others as strangers, because they did not inhabit the same land. For as the country beyond the Jordan was not at first comprehended in the covenant, a difference of habitation might ultimately prove a cause of dissension. They therefore consult timelessly for their posterity, that they may be able by means of the altar as a kind of public document to defend their right, that they may mutually recognize each other, and unite in common in serving one God.

PETT, "Verse 26-27‘Therefore we said, “Let us now build us an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice, But it shall be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we might do the service of YHWH before him, with our burnt offerings, and with our sacrifices, and with our peace offerings, that your children may not say to our children in time to come, ‘You have no part in YHWH’.” ’The purpose of the altar is clearly stated. It was not for use but as a witness that they too were the true people of God with rights of inheritance given by YHWH. Thus would they be able to join in the tribal gathering at the central sanctuary for worship and sacrifice without fear of being turned away. This all brings out how deeply they had had burned within them the centrality of the central sanctuary to the covenant and to their part in YHWH. At this time the true faith of YHWH was held with fervour.

“Let us now build us an altar.” Literally ‘Let us now do (what is necessary to prevent this) in building us an altar’.

“Burnt offerings -- sacrifices -- peace offerings”, compare Joshua 22:23. They were well aware of the different types of sacrifices to be offered to YHWH.

27 On the contrary, it is to be a witness between us and you and the generations that follow, that we will worship the Lord at his sanctuary with our burnt offerings, sacrifices and fellowship offerings. Then in the future your descendants will not be able to say to ours, ‘You have no share in the Lord.’

BAR�ES, "But that it may be a witness between us and you, and our generations after us,.... That we are one people, worship one God, and serve at one altar, of which this built was a resemblance, and would put them in mind of it:

that we might do the service of the Lord before him; in the tabernacle, and at the altar, in the place where he had chosen to put his name and dwell:

with our burnt offerings, and with our sacrifices, and with our peace offerings; to be brought at stated times, or as occasion required:

that your children may not say to our children, in time to come, ye have no part in the Lord; nor right to his altar, and so forbid them offering their sacrifices on it; or"have no part in the Word of the Lord,''as the Targum; the Messiah, whose sacrifice was typified by the sacrifices of the legal dispensation, and all such, who offered theirs in the faith of that, had a part in it, and their sins were expiated by it.

GILL, "But that it may be a witness between us and you, and our generations after us,.... That we are one people, worship one God, and serve at one altar, of which this built was a resemblance, and would put them in mind of it:

that we might do the service of the Lord before him; in the tabernacle, and at the altar, in the place where he had chosen to put his name and dwell:

with our burnt offerings, and with our sacrifices, and with our peace offerings; to be brought at stated times, or as occasion required:

that your children may not say to our children, in time to come, ye have no part in the Lord; nor right to his altar, and so forbid them offering their sacrifices on it; or"have no part in the Word of the Lord,''as the Targum; the Messiah, whose sacrifice was typified by the sacrifices of the legal dispensation, and all such, who offered theirs in

the faith of that, had a part in it, and their sins were expiated by it.

HE�RY, " They fully explain their true intent and meaning in building this altar; and we have all the reason in the world to believe that it is a true representation of their design, and not advanced now to palliate it afterwards, as we have reason to think that these same persons meant very honestly when they petitioned to have their lot on that side Jordan, though then also is was their unhappiness to be misunderstood even by Moses himself. In their vindication, they make it out that the building of this altar was so far from being a step towards a separation from their brethren, and from the altar of the Lord at Shiloh, that, on the contrary, it was really designed for a pledge and preservative of their communion with their brethren and with the altar of God, and a token of their resolution to do the service of the Lord before him (Jos_22:27), and to continue to do so.

JAMISO�, "BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:27. But that it may be a witness — It was an ancient way of preserving the remembrance of things to raise such structures. That we might do the service of the Lord before him — That we and ours may have and retain the privilege of serving and worshipping God, not upon this altar, but in the place of God’s presence, in your tabernacle, and upon your altar.

WHEDO�, "27. That it may be a witness — Having disavowed that their altar was intended for sacrificial uses, they now plainly declare that it was intended for a memorial that their children were entitled to appear as worshippers before that altar in Shiloh of which this was a facsimile.

ELLICOTT, "(27) Ye have no part in the Lord.—Something of the kind was insinuated in the abuse of the Gileadites by the men of Ephraim (Judges 12:4), when they said, “Ye Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim among the Ephraimites, and among the Manassites.” That taunt cost the Ephraimites the lives of 42,000 men. The person who made it the law of Israel to have no part in Jehovah was “Jeroboam the son of �ebat, who made Israel to sin” by setting up the calves, and thus diverting the stream of national worshippers from Jerusalem, the place chosen by the Lord. It may be further observed that Joshua’s efforts under the direction of Jehovah for the establishment of national unity in Israel are proved by the narrative in this chapter to have taken considerable effect. At whatever cost, it was felt that the unity of national worship must be maintained. Rebellion “against Jehovah” is treated by the heads of Israel (Joshua 22:19) as rebellion “against us.”

28 “And we said, ‘If they ever say this to us, or to our descendants, we will answer: Look at the replica of the Lord’s altar, which our ancestors

built, not for burnt offerings and sacrifices, but as a witness between us and you.’

GILL, "Therefore said we,.... To prevent any such usage of our children, and that they might have a ready answer to give:

that it shall be, when they should so say unto us, or to our generations, in time to come; as above suggested, that they were a separate people from them, and had no interest in the Lord, nor right to his altar, nor concern in his worship:

that we may say again; in reply, that is, our posterity:

behold the pattern of the altar of the Lord, which our fathers made; which exactly agrees with the Mosaic altar, and which they could never have framed in so exact a manner if they had not seen it, and served at it; wherefore this was a plain proof of their being originally worshippers of the same God, partakers of the same altar, and were in the faith, fellowship, and communion of Israel. According to Gussetius (n), this was not the altar the Reubenites, &c. built, which the children of Israel would be bid to behold, but the Mosaic altar at the tabernacle or temple, which was the archetype and exemplar, according to which that of the Reubenites was formed; and therefore say not, come and behold, but behold the altar present before them, that of Moses, and acknowledge that to be a type and exemplar, which they had related, and so confess it to be a testimony of their mutual fellowship: and what they had made in imitation of it, which exactly answered to it, was

not for burnt offerings, nor for sacrifices; of any sort, that was not the intention of erecting it:

but it is a witness between us and you; that we worship the same God, and are of the same faith and fellowship.

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:28. Behold the pattern of the altar — An exact representation and resemblance of it; but which they could not have imitated, if they had not been acquainted with it, and worshipped God there with their brethren. But it is a witness between us and you — That we both serve one God, and approve and make use of the same altar.

PETT, "Verse 28‘Therefore we said, “It shall be when they say so to us, or to our generations in time to come, that we shall say, ‘See the pattern of the altar of YHWH, which our fathers made, not for burnt offerings, nor for sacrifice. But it is a witness between us and

you’.” ’Thus the presence of the altar, and the fact that it was patterned on the altar in the Tabernacle, which they could not have known had they not have been members of the covenant, would be evidence in the future of their part in YHWH and act as a witness of their religious rights. The fact that it was not used for burnt offerings or sacrifice would in fact emphasise that it was a symbol.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 28(28) The altar of the Lord, which our fathers made, not for burnt offerings, nor for sacrifices.—The words suggest the reflection that there are many other “altars” so called in the present day, also an occasion of dispute; and it would tend greatly to peace and acquiescence in their existence if we could be assured that, like this altar, they are “not for sacrifice” but for a witness to that common worship of Christ as God which is an essential feature of Christianity.

PULPIT, "Behold the pattern. Rather, Look at this facsimile. The Hebrew is even stronger than our version. The existence of an exact reproduction of the altar in Shiloh, erected on Canaanitish ground by the two and a half tribes before their departure across Jordan, was an incontestible proof of their original connection with Israel. And the fact that they had erected it, not on their own territory, but on that of their brethren, was, though they do not use the argument, proof positive that it was not intended to be used in contravention of the precepts of the law. The nature of the facsimile is explained by Exodus 20:24, where the precise form of altar seems to have been presented as a contrast to the stone altars employed by the heathen.

29 “Far be it from us to rebel against the Lord and turn away from him today by building an altar for burnt offerings, grain offerings and sacrifices, other than the altar of the Lord our God that stands before his tabernacle.”

CLARKE, "God forbid that we should rebel - These words not only express their strong abhorrence of this crime, but also show that without God they could do no good

thing, and that they depended upon him for that strength by which alone they could abstain from evil.

GILL, "God forbid that we should rebel against the Lord,.... Against the command of the Lord, who ordered one altar to be made, to which all sacrifices were to be brought from the several parts of the land of Israel, and there to be offered on it; or

"against the Word of the Lord,''as the Targum, Christ typified both by the altar and the sacrifices on it; and who is but one, one priest, one sacrifice, one altar, one Mediator and Saviour:

and turn this day from following the Lord; apostatize from him, and from his worship:

to build an altar for burnt offerings, for meat offerings, or for sacrifices; which was never our intention, or ever entered into our hearts to erect one for such a purpose:

besides the altar of the Lord our God, that is before his tabernacle; it standing in the court of the tabernacle before the holy place.

HE�RY, " A serious abjuration or renunciation of the design which they were suspected to be guilty of. With this they conclude their defence (Jos_22:29): “God forbid that we should rebel against the Lord, as we own we should if we had set up this altar for burnt-offerings; no, we abhor the thought of it. We have as great a value and veneration for the altar of the Lord at Shiloh as any of the tribes of Israel have, and are as firmly resolved to adhere to it and constantly to attend it; we have the same concern that you have for the purity of God's worship and the unity of his church; far be it, far be it from us, to think of turning away from following God.”

K&D, "The speakers conclude with an expression of horror at the thought of rebelling

against Jehovah. מ89ו לנו _1Sa ,מיהוה = מ89ו) far be it from us away from Him“ ,חלילה24:7; 1Sa_26:11; 1Ki_21:3), to rebel against Jehovah,” etc.

COKE, "Verse 29Ver. 29. God forbid that we should rebel against the Lord, &c.— They conclude, as they began, by protesting in the most sacred manner before God, that they have an utter abhorrence of the very idea, of the least tendency to rebellion against Jehovah; or, as the Chaldee paraphrase, both here and in the foregoing verses, has it, against the word of the Lord. Thus ended the conference in behalf of the Israelites beyond Jordan: how admirable is the mildness with which their judicious apologist repels the most dreadful suspicions, and the most ignominious accusations! using for this purpose no offensive retort, over-bearing arrogance, or affronting language. Happy they who can imitate the amiable example, and have virtue enough never to oppose to the false judgments passed upon them, and the groundless accusations they undergo, aught but proofs demonstrative of their innocence, and of the unjust

treatment they meet with! A closer attention to this maxim would often have spared Christians the shame of striving rather to rail at their adversaries, than to reclaim them by informing their understandings. See Divine Legat. vol. 4: p. 15, &c.

�ote; (1.) We are to be careful not only to act simply before God, but to make our integrity appear before men. (2.) The perpetuating the means of grace to our posterity, is the best method we can take to secure them in the ways of God. (3.) They who neglect the ordinances of God's worship, will soon prove apostates from his truth.

PETT, "Verse 29“God forbid that we should rebel against YHWH, and turn away this day from following YHWH, to build an offering for burnt offering, for meal offering, or for sacrifice, besides the altar of YHWH our God which is before his Dwellingplace (Tabernacle).”The Transjordan tribes then swore through their representatives to be faithful to the command only to offer sacrifices at the Altar of YHWH ‘before His Dwellingplace’ (the Tabernacle). (This would not, of course, exclude offering sacrifices on altars exclusively set up at YHWH’s command on the basis of Exodus 20:24). �ote the threefold repetition of the �ame YHWH, putting YHWH at the centre of their thoughts.

PULPIT, "God forbid. Literally, profane or accursed to us be it from Him. So Keil, Gesenius, and Knobel. That we should rebel against the Lord. The embassy had the effect not only of eliciting an explanation, but of showing how earnest, at that time at least, the tribes of Israel were in the service of God. And we may learn here, as Robertson remarks of St. Paul's frank and explicit vindications of himself, the value of explanations. Many a misunderstanding would be averted, many a feeling of rankling displeasure, culminating in an inexcusable explosion of anger, might be avoided, nay, many an unjust suspicion against a fellow Christian's honesty and sincerity of purpose might be dispelled, if men would but follow the example of the ten tribes on this occasion, or lay to heart the words of our Lord in St. Matthew 18:15, "If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother."

30 When Phinehas the priest and the leaders of the community—the heads of the clans of the Israelites—heard what Reuben, Gad and Manasseh had to say, they were pleased.

GILL, "And when Phinehas the priest,.... For he was, being the son of Eleazar the high priest, so the word "priest", Jos_22:13; is to be joined, not to Eleazar but to Phinehas:

and the princes of the congregation; the ten princes, who were sent by the congregation of Israel, one out of each tribe:

and heads out of the thousands of Israel; these are the same with the princes, and this belongs to their title, who were heads of the Chiliarchs, or those who were rulers of thousands in Israel:

which were with him; with Phinehas, who were joined with him in the embassy, and now present with him:

heard the words that the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad,

and the children of Manasseh; spake; in defence of themselves, explaining the meaning and design of the altar they had built:

it pleased them; they were not only satisfied with their answer, but highly delighted with what they had done, as tending to preserve the common faith and fellowship of Israel.

HE�RY 30-31, "We have here the good issue of this controversy, which, if there had not been on both sides a disposition to peace, as there was on both sides a zeal for God, might have been of ill consequence; for quarrels about religion, for want of wisdom and love, often prove the most fierce and most difficult to be accommodated. But these contending parties, when the matter was fairly stated and argued, were so happy as to understand one another very well, and so the difference was presently compromised.

I. The ambassadors were exceedingly pleased when the separate tribes had given in a protestation of the innocency of their intentions in building this altar. 1. The ambassadors did not call in question their sincerity in that protestation, did not say, “You tell us you design it not for sacrifice and offering, but who can believe you? What security will you give us that it shall never be so used?” No. Charity believes all things, hopes all things, believes and hopes the best, and is very loth to give the lie to any. 2. They did not upbraid them with the rashness and unadvisedness of this action, did not tell them, “If you would do such a thing, and with this good intention, yet you might have had so much respect for Joshua and Eleazar as to have advised with them, or at least have made them acquainted with it, and so have saved the trouble and expense of this embassy.” But a little want of consideration and good manners should be excused and overlooked in those who, we have reason to think, mean honestly. 3. Much less did they go about to fish for evidence to make out their charge, because they had once exhibited it, but were glad to have their mistake rectified, and were not at all ashamed to own it. Proud and peevish spirits, when they have passed an unjust censure upon their brethren, though ever so much convincing evidence be brought of the injustice of it, will

stand to it, and can by no means be persuaded to retract it. These ambassadors were not so prejudiced; their brethren's vindication pleased them, Jos_22:30. They looked upon their innocency as a token of God's presence (Jos_22:31), especially when they found that what was done was so far from being an indication of their growing cool to the altar of God that, one the contrary, it was a fruit of their zealous affection to it: You have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the Lord, that is, “You have not, as we feared, delivered them into the hand of the Lord, or exposed them to his judgments by the trespass we were jealous of.”

JAMISO�, "Jos_22:30-34. The deputies satisfied.

K&D, "This explanation pleased the delegates of the congregation, so that Phinehas bore this testimony to the tribes on the east of the Jordan: “Now (to-day) we perceive

that Jehovah is in the midst of us; because (אשר, quod, as in Gen_31:49, etc.) ye have

not committed this unfaithfulness towards Jehovah, since (ז%, then, if ye had only this intention) ye have saved the children of Israel out of the hand of Jehovah,” i.e., preserved them from His judgments.

CALVI�, "30.And when Phinehas the priest, etc Phinehas and the ambassadors rightly temper their zeal, when, instead of harshly insisting and urging the prejudice which they had conceived, they blandly and willingly admit the excuse. Many persons, if once offended and exasperated by any matter, cannot be appeased by any defense, and always find something maliciously and unjustly to carp at, rather than seem to yield to reason. The example here is worthy of observation. It teaches us that if at any time we conceive offence in regard to a matter not sufficiently known, we must beware of obstinacy, and be ready instantly to take an equitable view. Moreover, when the children of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh are found free from crime, Phinehas and the ambassadors ascribe it to the grace of God. For by the words, We know that Jehovah is in the midst of us, they intimate that God was propitious to them, and had taken care of their safety.

This is to be carefully observed; for we are able to infer from it that we never revolt from God, or fall off to impiety unless he abandon us, and give us up when thus abandoned to a reprobate mind. All idolatry, therefore, shows that God has previously been alienated, and is about to punish us by inflicting judicial blindness. Meanwhile, we must hold that we persevere in piety only in so far as God is present to sustain us by his hand, and confirm us in perseverance by the agency of his Spirit. Phinehas and the ambassadors speak as if they had been delivered by the children of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, because there was no longer any ground to fear the divine vengeance, when all suspicion of criminality had been removed. At last similar equity and humanity are displayed by the whole people, when accepting the defense of their brethren they gave thanks to God for having kept his people free from criminality.

Though they had been suddenly inflamed, they depart with calm minds. In like

manner the two tribes and the half tribe carefully exert themselves to perform their duty by giving a name to the altar, which, by explaining its proper use, might draw off the people from all superstition.

COFFMA�, "Verse 30"And when Phinehas the priest, and the princes of the congregation, even the heads of the thousands of Israel that were with him, heard the words that the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh spake, it pleased them well. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest said unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the children of Manasseh, This day we know that Jehovah is in the midst of us, because ye have not committed this trespass against Jehovah: now have ye delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of Jehovah. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad, out of the land of Gilead, unto the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel, and brought them word again. And the thing pleased the children of Israel; and the children of Israel blessed God, and spake no more of going up against them to war, to destroy the land wherein the children of Reuben and the children of Gad dwelt. And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad called the altar Ed, said they, it is a witness between us that Jehovah is God."

Manasseh is dropped out of the last few repetitions of the names of the Trans-Jordanic tribes; and, from this, some have supposed that perhaps Reuben and Gad were the principals in the building of that altar.

"Gilead ..." as used here is applied to all of the Trans-Jordanic area.

�ote that Phinehas dutifully reported to his superiors in Shiloh and that he thus properly fulfilled his mission as one sent on a task that was then accomplished.

It was the plan of God outlined fully in the Pentateuch that three times in the year: (1) at Passover; (2) at Pentecost; and (3) at the feast of Tabernacles, all of Israel was to report at the one and only general sanctuary for the purpose of observing those special national feasts. This, of course, was designed to cultivate and preserve the unity of all Israel. The need for this unity existed a thousand times more urgently in the times of the wilderness wanderings and during the conquest and afterward, than it did, either in the times of the monarchy or in post-exilic times. How U�TE�ABLE, therefore, is the notion that this conception of "only one sanctuary" did not happen in Israel until centuries after the need for such unity no longer existed. As stated earlier, this noble chapter buries forever the false theories whose advocates have tried so diligently to silence it by their denials. But the chapter lives on. We have never seen a Bible that did not include it.

We rejoice in the unity of Israel under Joshua, a unity they never again fully achieved. Unity of God's people is the crying need of all generations. As Unger stated it, "How desperately the Lord's people need to exemplify that unity before men in a genuine testimony of the power of the gospel, not by a man-made

monument, but by the outshining of genuine faith in God's Word exemplifying spiritual vitality from within the heart."[23]

We conclude this chapter with the following comment from Jamieson:

"This episode reflects honour upon all parties, and shows that piety and zeal for the honour and worship of God animated the people that entered Canaan to an extent far beyond what was exemplified in many other periods of Israel's history"[24]

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:30-31. It pleased them — They were fully satisfied with this answer. We perceive that the Lord is among us — By his gracious presence and preventing goodness, in keeping you from so great an offence, and all of us from those calamities that would have followed it. Out of the hand of the Lord — That is, from the wrath and dreadful judgments of God. By avoiding that sin which would have involved both you and us in a most bloody war, you have delivered us from the evils we feared. He that prevents an approaching disease or mischief, doth as truly deliver a man from it, as he that cures or removes it after it hath been inflicted.

PETT, "Verse 30‘And when Phinehas the priest, and the princes of the congregation, even the heads of the families (thousands) of Israel who were with him, heard the words that the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the children of Manasseh, spoke, it pleased them well.’Phinehas and the princes considered the words spoken by the Transjordan tribal representatives and were satisfied as to their rightness and their genuineness as is demonstrated by the fact that ‘it pleased them well’. �ow they knew for certain the commitment of the Transjordan tribes to the tribal covenant. Because Phinehas was acting as his father’s representative, and in his father’s name, he is called ‘the priest’. It seems probable that at his great age Eleazar was in fact unable to make the journey, and it may indeed be that this also prevented him from functioning at the Tabernacle so that Phinehas had been appointed to act for him there as well. Such deputation of authority is assumed in Exodus 28 where not only Aaron is set apart but also his sons, and was, of course, necessary in case of infirmity or indisposition.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 30-34The Gileadites" explanation relieved and satisfied Phinehas and his companions. They were glad to discover that their brethren were not apostatizing and that the nation would not therefore fall under God"s discipline. They allowed this altar to remain in place and apparently felt its presence would do more good than harm.

Probably the Israelites should not have allowed this altar to stand. God had not ordained it. In the future, other people would misunderstand its existence as some had already done. Though there is no record in Scripture that this particular altar became a snare to the Israelites, the practice of building altars continued in Israel. It resulted in the weakening of tribal ties and allegiance to Yahweh rather than

strengthening them (e.g, Judges 17:5).

This incident illustrates the fact that sometimes, action taken with the best of motives and for worthy purposes, can result in worse rather than better conditions. This can be the outcome if people do not clearly understand and carefully obey the whole revealed will of God. This kind of mistake often results from enthusiasm over a previous blessing, as was true here.

�evertheless, the major lessons of this chapter are positive. The zeal of the two and one-half tribes for the unity of their nation and the purity of their faith was commendable. The other Israelites" unwillingness to judge their brethren"s motive on the basis of circumstantial evidence is also admirable. Furthermore, we learn that gentle confrontation and candid discussion of problems can often result in the resolution of misunderstandings (cf. Proverbs 15:1). [�ote: Campbell, �o Time ..., p131.] The Israelites dealt wisely with a situation that could have split the people of God. Instead they were able to continue to follow God faithfully in unity.

PULPIT, "It pleased them. The genuine. ness of their zeal for God's service is shown by their readiness to be appeased by a plain explanation. Had they been actuated by jealousy or party spirit, they would have admitted no defence, or have endeavoured out of the clearest exculpation to find some new topic for complaint. So religious party spirit has been wont to inflame men's minds in later times, so that they desired rather victory over a supposed antagonist than the discovery that no offence at all bad been committed. True religious zeal is slow to anger, and easy to be appeased, when it appears that no harm has been intended. It might have been contended in this case, if controversy rather than truth had been the object, that the action had a dangerous tendency; that though the altar was not intended for sacrifice, it might be used for that purpose; that it was unwise to put a temptation in the way of future ages to substitute worship there for worship in the tabernacle. Such arguments are not unknown even to Christian zealots. Israel was satisfied that no harm was intended. It was not thought necessary to point out possibilities which were not likely to be realised.

PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY R. GLOVERJoshua 22:30

A misunderstanding.

Rarely do we find such an instance of misconception as is here recounted. The two and a half tribes, whose territory lay to the west of Jordan, had acted with the highest honour. During the five or six years occupied in the conquest of their land, they had voluntarily accepted the task of fighting—and fighting in the van in all the battles of Israel. When they leave completed task behind them, they return laden with spoil: rich in the gratitude of their brethren; solemnly blessed by Joshua. And yet within a few weeks, all their brethren—including those of their own tribes who had settled to the west of Jordan—are up in arms, ready to exterminate them. All this change is brought about by one of the most deplorable things in life—A

MISU�DERSTA�DI�G. Such things happen still, and it may illustrate and remove some of them if we observe the course of this. In the misunderstanding before us, we observe, first—

I. THE I��OCE�T CAUSE. The two and a half tribes were, as they explain, solicitous to keep in unity with Israel. The possibility of their being treated as outsiders weighed on them. The erection of an altar precisely the same in pattern with that in the tabernacle struck them as a means of embodying a testimony that they had enjoyed the same access to the sanctuary with their brethren on the west of Jordan. By weighty precepts, Moses had forbidden any multiplication of altars. One God, one worship, one people, was to be the rule: Levites in every tribe, sacrifice only in the central consecrated spot. They were alive to the sin of schism, and the wickedness of seceding from their people, and the thought of it does not enter their minds. They would have acted more wisely if they had consulted the priests first, explaining their desire and purpose. But their very innocence makes them neglect to take precautions against being misunderstood. So far from desiring to break, they are solicitous to keep the unity of Israel. And the altar which their brethren think will destroy was erected by them to keep it. Yet they are misunderstood. So shall we be, and so will others be by us. There is hardly a word we can speak but can carry two meanings, or an act we can do but can carry two aspects. And if we attempt by the avoidance of speech or action to escape misunderstanding the endeavour will be in vain. At the same time, the fact that a large proportion—say 75 per cent—of misunderstandings have an innocent cause should set us on our guard against the next thing we observe here, viz.—

II. A HASTY CO�STRUCTIO� PUT UPO� IT. How discreditable was this haste to assume that the worst explanation was the truest! If any part of the community had proved their patriotism, brotherliness, their honour, and their faith, it was these unselfish warriors who had laboured so generously for the general well being. But haste always leaves its fair judgment at home. It argues from its fears, its temper, its prejudice, its suspicions. Judgment being a slow-moving thing, that does net come to conclusions quick enough for its purpose. And so here, instantly there is put upon this act the construction that it evinces a purpose of secession, first, from the religion, and, next, from the people of Israel. Israel is not the only community disposed to hasty and harsh constructions. There is in all of us a vile readiness to believe the worst of men; a certain disposition to chuckle over the discover, of what seems a fault; an evil suspicion, arrogating to itself peculiar wisdom, suggests always that the worst view must be true. Observe here, the hasty construction is not only miststaken but utterly mistaken. It has concluded the very opposite of the truth. And our hasty constructions are not more accurate. Let us be on our guard. The truth may be the very opposite of what on the first blush it appears to be. What seems presumptuous and unholy may spring from the deepest devoutness. Observe thirdly—

III. A SE�SIBLE I�QUIRY. Phinehas, the high priest, and the ten princes of the nine and a half tribes are sent first of all to ask, "What trespass is this that ye have committed?" Some cooler heads and calmer hearts have suggested that before civil

war be entered on there should he, at least, an explanation sought. �one can cavil at a suggestion so prudent and pertinent. The best men for such a task are sent, not with weapons of war, but with words of peace—words still hasty and suspicious, but yet spoken in love and with a desire for the right. Then, for the first time, the two and a half tribes learn the evil construction which might be put on their deed. And the surprise with which they receive the accusation, convince all of their innocence of the things of which they were accused. The simple inquiry was all that was necessary to get the most perfect satisfaction. How many misunderstandings would at once be billed if men had just the courage to ask a question! But the suspicion which hastily concludes the worst is generally wedded to the cowardice which dare not ask if its conclusions are right, and so misunderstandings endure. If in a friend there is that which pains you, ask himself why he does it. Let the inquiry be a respectful one. Let the priestly and princely part of your nature make it. Let it be direct and full. Let no fear of being suspected to be yourself uncharitable permit you to be uncharitable. "If thy brother sin against thee, go and tell him his fault, between thee and him alone." If there was more of the manliness that would expostulate, there would be more of the saintliness that could forgive. Lastly, observe that the inquiry leads to—

IV. A HAPPY TERMI�ATIO�. There was every probability of the misunderstanding having a most disastrous termination. What would have been the issue of such a war? To crush a third part of Israel, and that the most warlike portion, would probably have cost the lives of another third; and the remnant surviving would at once have been at the mercy of the remnants of the Canaanite still surviving, and able to form strong alliances with Phoenician and Philistine neighbours. The extinction of Israel neither more nor less trembled on the verge of probability through this misunderstanding. Blessed are the peacemakers. The inquiry elicits the most satisfactory facts. The momentary, doubt of their brethren's good faith passes away. Their confidence in their faith and patriotism is resumed; for many, many centuries mutual suspicion is destroyed, and Israel on both sides of Jordan is an undivided people. A little wisdom, a little delay in speech or action until knowledge becomes certainty, a brotherly approach to those who have offended us, might bring outmost hopeless misunderstandings to the same .satisfactory end.—G.

31 And Phinehas son of Eleazar, the priest, said to Reuben, Gad and Manasseh, “Today we know that the Lord is with us, because you have not been unfaithful to the Lord in this matter. �ow you have rescued the Israelites from the Lord’s

hand.”

CLARKE, "We perceive that the Lord is among us - Or, according to the Targum of Jonathan. “This day we know that the majesty of Jehovah dwelleth among us, because ye have not committed this prevarication against the Word of the Lord, and thus ye have delivered the children of Israel from the hand of the Word of the Lord.” They rejoice to find them innocent, and that there is no ground of quarrel between the children of the same family. And from this they draw a very favorable conclusion, that as God was among them as the sole object of their religious worship, so he would abide with them as their protector and their portion; and as they were his friends, they take it for granted that he will deliver them from the hands of their enemies.

GILL, "And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest,.... As the mouth of the deputation, and in their name:

said unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the children of Manasseh; the representatives of them assembled together on this occasion:

this day we perceive that the Lord is among us; his Shechinah, as the Targum; his powerful Presence in preserving their brethren from committing a trespass, as they feared; his gracious Presence smiling upon them; and as the God of peace and order, and not of confusion, uniting and cementing their hearts in love to one another:

because ye have not committed this trespass against the Lord; which they were fearful and jealous of they had, but they found that the Lord had been good and gracious in preserving them from it:

now ye have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the Lord; into which they would have fallen, had that been the case, and would have felt the effects of the divine resentment, but now they were secure from them.

COKE, "Verse 31Ver. 31. This day we perceive that the Lord is among us, because, &c.— Rejoiced to find by the answer of their brethren, that they were perfectly innocent, Phinehas and his associates think it their duty to acknowledge that God was among them; that they had done nothing unworthy of his protection; and that, consequently, neither of them had any thing to apprehend from the divine displeasure, as they had feared at seeing the altar on the bank of the Jordan: the latter clause might in this view be rendered thus; �ow, therefore, behold, we are happily delivered from our fears. Jonathan, in his paraphrase, reads the whole sentence as follows: This day we

perceive that the SHECHI�AH is amongst you, because ye have not committed this trespass against the word of the Lord: thus ye have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the word of the Lord.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 31(31) We perceive that the Lord is among us, because ye have not committed this trespass . . .—The best token of the Divine presence among men is the Divine likeness and holiness in men. “if we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie . . . but if we walk in the light, we have fellowship one with another.”

WHEDO�, "31. The Lord is among us — The commission were more than satisfied with the explanation; they were delighted with the loyalty and fidelity of their misjudged brethren. This whole account is highly honourable to both the accusing party and the accused, inasmuch as it shows that both were animated with the high and holy purpose of cleaving to the worship of the true God.

PETT, "Verse 31‘And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, said to the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the children of Manasseh, “This day we know that YHWH is among us, because you have not committed this trespass against YHWH. �ow you have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of YHWH.” ’The official verdict was given. The Transjordan tribes were not guilty of what they had been accused of. They had done nothing contrary to the Law. The great relief that was felt comes out in the final comment. There would be no punishment on Israel from YHWH as a result of this behaviour. They had been ‘delivered’ from such by the facts. �ot the threefold repetition of YHWH which parallels the threefold usage by the Transjordanians, bringing home the importance that they too laid on being pleasing to Him.

“The son of Eleazar the priest.” In giving the official verdict, which was probably recorded in writing, Phinehas’ position was made clear. He was acting as his father’s representative and in his name.

“Among us.” See Leviticus 26:11-12, ‘I will set my Dwellingplace (Tabernacle) among you and not abhor you, and I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you will be my people.’ The sense of God’s presence among them, and of His love and severity against sin, was very real.

PULPIT, "�ow ye have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of the Lord. The word here rendered "now" is rather then. But the Hebrew word, like our own, is used as implying not only consecution of time, but consequence of action (see Psalms 40:8; Psalms 69:5; Jeremiah 22:15). Thus the meaning here is, "We see, then, that instead of bringing upon us heavy chastisement, as we had feared, ye have acted in a way which secures us from the punishment of which we were afraid."

32 Then Phinehas son of Eleazar, the priest, and the leaders returned to Canaan from their meeting with the Reubenites and Gadites in Gilead and reported to the Israelites.

GILL, "And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes,.... Being fully satisfied with the relation of things that had been given them, and having taken their leave of the assembly:

returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad; the Greek version adds, "and from the half tribe of Manasseh"; which, though not in the Hebrew text, is undoubtedly meant:

out of the land of Gilead: which, though only a part of the country these tribes inhabited, is put for the whole, and it is not improbable that the assembly might be held in it:

unto the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel; the rest of the children of Israel who dwelt in the land of Canaan, properly so called:

and brought them word again; reported the whole affair, related all that had passed, and acquainted them with the intention and design of their brethren erecting the altar, and what had been the issue of their embassy to them.

HE�RY, 32-33, "The congregation was abundantly satisfied when their ambassadors reported to them their brethren's apology for what they had done. It should seem they staid together, at least by their representatives, until they heard the issue (Jos_22:32); and when they understood the truth of the matter it pleased them (Jos_22:33), and they blessed God. Note, Our brethren's constancy in religion, their zeal for the power of godliness, and their keeping the unity of the Spirit in faith and love, notwithstanding the jealousies conceived of them as breaking the unity of the church, are things which we should be very glad to be satisfied of, and should make the matter both of our rejoicing and of our thanksgiving; let God have the glory of it, and let us take the comfort of it. Being thus satisfied, they laid down their arms immediately, and were so far from any thoughts of prosecuting the war they had been meditating against their brethren that we may suppose them wishing for the next feast, when they should meet them at Shiloh.

K&D, "They then returned to Canaan and informed the congregation. And the thing pleased them, so that they praised the Lord, sc., for having kept their brethren on the other side from rebellion, and they thought no more of going to war against them, or laying waste the land of the tribes on the east of the Jordan.

PETT, "Verse 32‘And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes, returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad, out of the land of Gilead, to the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel and brought them word again.’Phinehas and the princes now returned to the waiting children of Israel, who were no doubt on a war footing, with the good news. Phinehas’ official title is repeated as a result of its use in the previous verse.

“From the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad.” The lack of mention of the half tribe of Manasseh is at first surprising, yet the fact that it happens again twice more is against any idea that it dropped out accidentally. The probable explanation is that the meeting had taken place in Reuben/Gaddite territory, and that the representatives of Manasseh had already returned home. This would explain the use here. Then we can only assume that this then carried on into the next verses because they were still prominent in the mind.

It also suggests that the main feelings had been against these two tribes, with the influence of the western Manassites speaking on behalf of their eastern brothers and excluding them from suspicion. The latter would, however, have wanted a part in the discussions. (It is, however, quite common in Scripture for a part to be taken as representing the whole. Compare how ‘Moab’ represents three tribes or nations (Judges 3:28-30 with Judges 3:13), and how Midian/the Midianites (Judges 8:28; Judges 6:1-2; Judges 7:16) represents three tribes or nations (Joshua 6:3). But it is more unusual here).

33 They were glad to hear the report and praised God. And they talked no more about going to war against them to devastate the country where the Reubenites and the Gadites lived.

CLARKE, "And did not intend to go up against them in battle - That is, they now relinquished the intention of going against them in battle, as this explanation proved there was no cause for the measure.

GILL, "And the thing pleased the children of Israel,.... They were quite satisfied with the account of things, and were pleased and delighted with what their brethren, the other two tribes, had done:

and the children of Israel blessed God: returned thanks to him, that there was no trespass committed against him, and no schism like to be made among them, nor any wrath to come upon them:

and did not intend to go up against them in battle; for though upon first hearing of their building an altar, which they supposed was for idolatry, they had intended to make war against them, but now understanding the design of that building, they laid aside all thoughts of that kind:

to destroy the land wherein the children of Reuben and Gad dwelt; which they judged by the law in Deu_13:12 they were obliged to do. The Greek version here adds also, "and the half tribe of Manasseh", and renders the last clause, and "they dwelt in it"; continued to dwell in it undisturbed by their brethren.

JAMISO�, "the thing pleased the children of Israel— The explanation not only gave perfect satisfaction to the deputies, but elicited from them expressions of unbounded joy and thankfulness. “This day we perceive that the Lord is among us” [Jos_22:31], that is, by His gracious presence and preventing goodness, which has kept you from falling into the suspected sin and rescued the nation from the calamity of a fratricidal war or providential judgments. This episode reflects honor upon all parties and shows that piety and zeal for the honor and worship of God animated the people that entered Canaan to an extent far beyond what was exemplified in many other periods of the history of Israel.

BE�SO�,"Joshua 22:33. The children of Israel blessed God — As Phinehas had done, that their brethren had not offended the Divine Majesty as they suspected. And did not intend to go up against them — Laid aside the intention which had been in their minds. To destroy the land — As, by the law of God, they would have been obliged to do, if these two tribes and a half had been guilty of the crime of which they had been suspected, and had persisted in their sin; as afterward they nearly destroyed the tribe of Benjamin for a similar reason.

PETT, "Verse 33‘And the thing pleased the children of Israel, and the children of Israel blessed God, and did not speak any more of going up against them to war, to destroy the land in which the children of Reuben and the children of Gad dwelt.’This seems to confirm that the warlike plans had centred on attacking Reuben and

Gad, with the western Manassites speaking up on behalf of their brothers and guaranteeing their behaviour and intentions. They gave up their plans for attacking Reuben and Gad.

So they gave thanks and praise to God. ‘They blessed God.’ A rare idea in the Old Testament (but see Psalms 66:20; Psalms 68:26) for usually it is YHWH Who is blessed, or YHWH incorporated with God, and this is also the first use of ‘God’ by itself in this passage. The sudden change to ‘God’ must have some significance. It is clear that the writer felt that the name of YHWH was unsuitable here. It possibly brings out the solemnity of the situation, and the awful dread that they had felt about the seeming situation, a covenant betrayal. The theoretical circumstance that had brought the visit about had not been had not been of YHWH. It had been an idea outside the covenant. Thus the less intimate use of ‘God’.

34 And the Reubenites and the Gadites gave the altar this name: A Witness Between Us—that the Lord is God.

BAR�ES, "The word עד ‛êd is not found after “altar” in the text of most manuscripts,

nor is it represented in the Septuagint or Vulgate. The passage should probably run: “the children of Reuben and the children of Gad named the altar, that (as they said) it might be, etc.” The title placed on the altar was perhaps simply a witness between them that the Lord was God (Wordsworth).

CLARKE, "Called the altar Ed - The word עד Ed, which signifies witness or testimony, is not found in the common editions of the Hebrew Bible, and is supplied in Italics by our translators, at least in our modern copies; for in the first edition of this translation it stands in the text without any note of this kind; and it is found in several of Kennicott’s and De Rossi’s MSS., and also in the Syriac and Arabic. Several also of the

early printed editions of the Hebrew Bible have the word עד, either in the text or in the margin, and it must be allowed to be necessary to complete the sense. It is very probable that an inscription was put on this altar, which pointed out the purposes for which it was erected.

From the contents of this chapter we learn that the Israelites were dreadfully alarmed at the prospect of a schism in their own body, both as it related to ecclesiastical and civil matters. A few observations on this subject may not be useless.

Schism in religion is a dangerous thing, and should be carefully avoided by all who

fear God. But this word should be well understood. Σχισµα, in theology, is generally allowed to signify a rent in, or departure from, the doctrine and practice of the apostles, especially among those who had been previously united in that doctrine and practice. A departure from human institutions in religion is no schism, for this reason that the Word of God alone is the sufficient rule of the faith and practice of Christians; and as to human institutions, forms, modes, etc., those of one party may be as good as those of another.

When the majority of a nation agrees in some particular forms and modes in their religious service; no conscientious man will lightly depart from these; nor depart at all, unless he find that they are not only not authorized by the word of God, but repugnant to it. It is an object greatly to be desired, that a whole people, living under the same laws may, as much as possible, glorify God, not only with one heart, but also with one mouth.

But there may be a dissent from established forms without schism; for if that dissent make no rent in the doctrines or practice of Christianity, as laid down in the New Testament, it is an abuse of terms to call it a schism; besides, there may be a dissent among religious people relative to certain points both in creed and practice, which, not affecting the essentials of Christianity, nor having any direct tendency to alienate the affections of Christians from each other, cannot be called a schism; but when professing Christians separate from each other, to set up one needless or non-essential form, etc., in the place of others which they call needless or non-essential, they are highly culpable. This not only produces no good, but tends to much evil; for both parties, in order to make the points of their difference of sufficient consequence to justify their dissension, magnify these non-essential matters beyond all reason, and sometimes beyond conscience itself: and thus mint and cummin are tithed, while the weightier matters of the law - judgment and the love of God - are utterly neglected. If Christians either cannot or will not think alike on all points, surely they can agree to disagree, and let each go to heaven his own way. “But should we take this advice, would it not lead to a total indifference about religion?” Not at all; for in the things which concern the essentials of Christianity, both in doctrine and practice, we should ever feel zealously affected, and earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.

GILL, "And the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, called the altar Ed,.... Which signifies a "witness"; they caused such an inscription to be put upon it, or this word to be engraved on it, that so the intention of erecting it might be known in future time; that it was not for sacrifice, but to be a testimony of their being one with their brethren on the other side Jordan, in worship, faith, and fellowship:

for it shall be a witness between us that the Lord is God; is the one God, the God of them both, of all Israel, whether on the one or the other side of Jordan; to be worshipped by them in one and the same manner, and their sacrifices to be offered to him on his altar before the tabernacle.

HE�RY, " The separate tribes were gratified, and, since they had a mind to preserve among them this pattern of the altar of God, though there was not likely to be that occasion for it which they fancied, yet Joshua and the princes let them have their humour, and did not give orders for the demolishing of it, though there was as much reason to fear that it might in process of time be an occasion of idolatry as there was to hope that ever it might be a preservation from idolatry. Thus did the strong bear the infirmities of the weak. Only care was taken that they having explained the meaning of their altar, that it was intended for no more than a testimony of their communion with the altar at Shiloh, this explanation should be recorded, which was done according to the usage of those times by giving a name to it signifying so much (Jos_22:34); they called it Ed, a witness to that, and no more, a witness of the relation they stood in to God and Israel, and of their concurrence with the rest of the tribes in the same common faith, that Jehovah he is God, he and no other. It was a witness to posterity of their care to transmit their religion pure and entire to them, and would be a witness against them if ever they should forsake God and turn from following after him.

K&D, "The Reubenites and Gadites (half Manasseh is omitted in Jos_22:33, Jos_22:34, for the sake of brevity) called the altar “witness is it between us that Jehovah is

God” (�י introduces the words). This is at once a name and an explanation, namely in

this sense: they gave the altar the name of “witness between us,” because it was to be a witness that they also acknowledged and worshipped Jehovah as the true God.

COKE, "Verse 34Ver. 34. And the children of Reuben, and—Gad, called the altar Ed— The word עדad, is evidently wanting in the Hebrew, which only says the children of Reuben, &c. called the altar; for it is, or shall be OD, i.e. a witness between us, that Jehovah is God; or as the LXX very well translate it, that the Lord is our God. The Syriac, Arabic, and several modern versions supply the word Ed, as we do, and as the sense plainly requires; though it is omitted by the LXX, Jonathan, and the Vulgate. See Bishop Patrick, and Hallet's Study of the Scripture recommended, vol. 2: p. 18. Masius would render the passage thus: they made an inscription upon the altar, which expressed, that it should be an everlasting witness of their attachment to the Lord; and this conjecture he founds upon the Hebrew verb kara, which signifies commonly to call, to name, and sometimes to write: hence the Jews call the Holy Scripture, Karah and Mikrah; and hence the Arabic name of the Al-coran. See Poole's Synopsis, and Kennicott's Dissert. vol. 1. We are not to be surprised at seeing Joshua's name nowhere throughout this whole narration: some, indeed, have pretended to infer from this, that Joshua was dead when the affair of the altar happened; but this is only the better to ground a conclusion that he cannot have been the author of this book. Such frivolous observations serve but to discover the inclination of their authors to weaken the authority of sacred writ; for, we need only read, to be convinced that the event in question happened immediately after Joshua had dismissed the 40,000 Israelites. The context leaves not the least room to suppose the contrary: and of this the LXX were so well satisfied, that in the Vatican, which is the most common edition of their version, they tell us, that it was Joshua who gave the altar its name: their words are, Και επωνοµασεν ο Ιησους τον βωµον, &c. It is

impossible, as Le Clerc judiciously observes, that in so short a narration all the circumstances of the fact should be inserted. To raise a doubt about them because the author is silent, would be preposterous in any one who has read these books with a small share of attention.

REFLECTIO�S.—�ever was there a happier issue of religious controversy! Charity tempered the zeal of the complainants, and meekness adorned the integrity of the defendants; thus, when the matter was well explained, both sides were satisfied.

1. The princes' ambassadors are happy in being undeceived, and conclude that God is surely among them, when they discover such a zeal for his service and worship on both sides. They do not question their assertions, nor blame their rashness in not consulting them, but are glad to retract their warm expostulation. �ote; (1.) Charity is easily persuaded, while censoriousness refuses to acquiesce, or be convinced. (2.) They who are satisfied in their brethren's simplicity, will overlook their little slips of inadvertence or want of complaisance. (3.) It gives real joy to the heart, to find our brethren more faithful than we feared.

2. The people were as readily satisfied with their report, and gladly laid down their arms, blessing God for the tidings of their brethren's fidelity. �ote; They are often suspected to design a breach in the unity of the church, who are most diligently labouring to heal her divisions, and to preserve to posterity the purity of her doctrines and worship; but though mistaken zeal may cry, Down with them, yet shortly every dispute shall cease. In heaven at least we shall lay aside the arms of contention, and learn war no more.

BE�SO�, "Joshua 22:34. They called the altar Ed — That is, a witness; a witness of the relation they stood in to God and Israel, and of their concurrence with the other tribes in the common faith, that Jehovah he is God. It was a witness to posterity of their care to transmit their religion pure and entire; and it would be a witness against them, if ever they should turn from following the Lord.

WHEDO�, "34. Ed… shall be — These words are not in the original, nor need they be inserted in the translation. We may correctly render: The children of Gad named the altar that it might be a witness among us that Jehovah is the God. The lessons which this episode teaches are, first, That appearances do not always imply bad motives; second, That we should watch over each other and cautiously rebuke the first departure from God; third, That apostasy from God awakens in the truly pious great solicitude; and, finally, That a conscience void of offence is a great blessing.

PETT, "Verse 34‘And the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, called the altar [Ed], for ‘it is a witness between us that YHWH is God’.’The actual name is not in the Massoretic Text. However it is found in some Hebrew manuscripts and in the Peshitta (the Syriac version). We could translate ‘named the

altar’ (as LXX) but the explanatory phrase following it anticipates a name having been given. Thus the name Ed, meaning witness, is possibly to be inserted although it was not in the text used for the LXX which has ‘And Joshua gave a name to the altar of the children of Reuben, and the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and said, It is a testimony in the midst of them, that the Lord is their God.’

Whichever is correct it is clear that the altar was given a name that indicated that it was a witness between His people on the east of Jordan, and those on the west, that they recognised YHWH as their only God.

PI�K, ""And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad called the altar Ed: for it shall be a witness between us that the LORD is God" (v. 34). How long the altar Ed remained is not stated, but in little more than four centuries, its witness to God was forgotten. We read: "And they transgressed against the God of their fathers, and went a whoring after the gods of the people of the land, whom God destroyed before them. And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day" (1 Chron. 5:25-26).

Such are the good intentions of men. They do not have the strength to implement their good resolutions. The tendency of man is downward. The very generations for which the altar was intended despised its testimony and plunged into idolatry. Apart from the grace and power of God deterioration is stamped on all human plans.

A �ew Priest

Any scriptural reference to the believer’s walk is an allusion to his public habit of life; his walk is his manner of living before men by whatsoever influence directs him. According to the �ew Testament various powers control the walk of the child of God. He may walk after the flesh (Rom. 8:4), and thus be directed by sensual desires; or he may walk in darkness (1 John 1:6-7), and thus respond to ignorance. Instead, he may walk after the Spirit (Rom. 8:4), and follow the inward impulses of God the Holy Spirit; and he may walk by faith (2 Cor. 5:7), and live in reliance upon the Lord. Furthermore, he may walk in light (1 John 1:6-7), and enjoy the atmosphere of purity and holiness; and he may walk in truth (2 John 3; 3 John 4), and be guided by divine revelation. It is true that at times he may be called upon to walk through fire (Isa. 43:2), and experience in the trial the presence of the Son of God as did the three Hebrew youths (Dan. 3). The highest form of public living is a demonstration of the results of constantly walking with the Lord. To walk with God would be to hold communion with Him, and that communion would result in pleasing Him personally and glorifying Him publicly.

This high plane of spiritual living apparently is a very rare experience among men.

As far as actual biblical records are concerned only a very few men have received commendable mention in regard to this form of intimate, enjoyable, and spiritually successful living. The life of Enoch is summarized in these words: "Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him" (Gen. 5:24). �oah received a similar commendation: "�oah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and �oah walked with God" (Gen. 6:9).

David is given credit for walking before the Lord (1 Kings 3:14), but there seems to be a difference. Walking before the Lord would involve the ideas of walking in His presence under His scrutiny and fulfilling His will. It lacks the thought of companionship and pleasure expressed by the use of the preposition "with."

In Malachi 2:6, the Lord declared of a descendant of Levi, "He walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity." The prophet, in the immediate context, deplored the carnal state of the priesthood in his day. When its incumbents should have been the living exponents of the law, alas, such was their sin that God’s curse had descended upon them. In contrast to what they were, a reference is made to one of their ancestors, presumably Phinehas. (Compare �umbers 25:12 with Malachi 2:5.) It is believed by many that the Lord here recalled the zeal of Phinehas in the matter of Zimri and Cozbi (�um. 25).

Phinehas was the man who walked with God in peace and equity; consequently, the absence of inward conflict was well reflected in the uprightness of his behavior. In his relationship with God’s people, this man who walked with God in peace and equity was strict in discipline and keen in discretion. In all probability he had learned of the divine discipline that had consumed his two uncles, �adab and Abihu, in their sin (Lev. 10:1-7), and had been thereby warned. At any rate, he did not hesitate to vindicate the holiness of God with a javelin (�um. 25:7). With him the wages of sin were death. Righteousness demanded the punishment of evil, and justice the execution of the guilty, so in his zeal he justified the character of God.

Phinehas was not only a severe disciplinarian, but he was a discreet negotiator; that we saw in his plenipotentiary work for Israel as they dealt with the two and a half tribes which made the great altar. How true are the proverbs, "Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find? The just man walketh in his integrity: his children are blessed after him" (Prov. 20:6-7). Phinehas was a humble and faithful man of much ability.

The name Phinehas suggests one of bold countenance; if this trait is to be added to what has been already noticed, he was a man of courage, peace, and uprightness. How much are men of this type needed in the Church today! He was the third high priest of Israel in the line of direct descent, and some historians claim that he functioned as such for nineteen years.

While we admire zeal, it becomes necessary, notwithstanding, that we differentiate between spiritual and carnal zeal. Phinehas drew a javelin, and was approved of God; Peter drew a sword and in the flesh sought to defend his Master, and suffered

the Lord’s rebuke (John 18:10-11).

The Book of Joshua closes with a reference to the death and burial of Eleazar, the high priest of Joshua’s day. His natural successor was Phinehas. It is recorded, "And Israel served the LORD all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshua, and which had known all the works of the LORD, that he had done for Israel" (Josh. 24:31). Phinehas would be the high priest to these elders. From what has been learned of his character and actions, his influence would be beneficial.

Attention is frequently called to the progressive spiritual deterioration evident in certain family lines. In the case of Eleazar and his son Phinehas the opposite is obvious. Aaron, their father and grandfather, was influenced by the people for ill (Ex. 32:19-24); Phinehas, conversely, influenced the people for good (Josh. 22:32-34).

PULPIT, "Ed. This word is not in the original. It is found in some late MSS. and in the Syriac and Arabic versions, but not in the LXX. or Chaldee. Even in the MSS. which have it, the word is found sometimes before and sometimes after the Hebrew word signifying "altar." This may either be because, once omitted, it was conjecturally supplied, but it is more probable that it was never there at all. The passage may be rendered, "And the sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad gave a name to the altar, 'for it is a witness between us.'" But it seems more likely that the word "Ed," though not expressed, is in. tended to be understood. The LXX. and Vulgate give incorrect renderings of the passage. The Lord is God. Rather, as in 1 Kings 18:39, Jehovah is the God; that is, the one true God. Some MSS. have interpolated הוא here from the above cited passage. Such altars, or mounds, of witness seem not to have been unusual among the Eastern nations (see Genesis 31:47-52).