Text -- Joshua 16:1--17:18 (NET)

Joseph’s Tribal Lands

16:1 The land allotted to Joseph’s descendants extended from the Jordan at Jericho to the waters of Jericho to the east, through the desert and on up from Jericho into the hill country of Bethel. 16:2 The southern border extended from Bethel to Luz, and crossed to Arkite territory at Ataroth. 16:3 It then descended westward to Japhletite territory, as far as the territory of lower Beth Horon and Gezer, and ended at the sea. 16:4 Joseph’s descendants, Manasseh and Ephraim, were assigned their land. 16:5 The territory of the tribe of Ephraim by its clans included the following: The border of their assigned land to the east was Ataroth Addar as far as upper Beth Horon. 16:6 It then extended on to the sea, with Micmethath on the north. It turned eastward to Taanath Shiloh and crossed it on the east to Janoah. 16:7 It then descended from Janoah to Ataroth and Naarah, touched Jericho, and extended to the Jordan River. 16:8 From Tappuah it went westward to the Valley of Kanah and ended at the sea. This is the land assigned to the tribe of Ephraim by its clans. 16:9 Also included were the cities set apart for the tribe of Ephraim within Manasseh’s territory, along with their towns. 16:10 The Ephraimites did not conquer the Canaanites living in Gezer. The Canaanites live among the Ephraimites to this very day and do hard labor as their servants. 17:1 The tribe of Manasseh, Joseph’s firstborn son, was also allotted land. The descendants of Makir, Manasseh’s firstborn and the father of Gilead, received land, for they were warriors. They were assigned Gilead and Bashan. 17:2 The rest of Manasseh’s descendants were also assigned land by their clans, including the descendants of Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, Hepher, and Shemida. These are the male descendants of Manasseh son of Joseph by their clans. 17:3 Now Zelophehad son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Makir, son of Manasseh, had no sons, only daughters. These are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. 17:4 They went before Eleazar the priest, Joshua son of Nun, and the leaders and said, “The Lord told Moses to assign us land among our relatives.” So Joshua assigned them land among their uncles, as the Lord had commanded. 17:5 Manasseh was allotted ten shares of land, in addition to the land of Gilead and Bashan east of the Jordan, 17:6 for the daughters of Manasseh were assigned land among his sons. The land of Gilead belonged to the rest of the descendants of Manasseh. 17:7 The border of Manasseh went from Asher to Micmethath which is near Shechem. It then went south toward those who live in Tappuah. 17:8 (The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but Tappuah, located on the border of Manasseh, belonged to the tribe of Ephraim.) 17:9 The border then descended southward to the Valley of Kanah. Ephraim was assigned cities there among the cities of Manasseh, but the border of Manasseh was north of the valley and ended at the sea. 17:10 Ephraim’s territory was to the south, and Manasseh’s to the north. The sea was Manasseh’s western border and their territory touched Asher on the north and Issachar on the east. 17:11 Within Issachar’s and Asher’s territory Manasseh was assigned Beth Shean, Ibleam, the residents of Dor, En Dor, the residents of Taanach, the residents of Megiddo, the three of Napheth, and the towns surrounding all these cities. 17:12 But the men of Manasseh were unable to conquer these cities; the Canaanites managed to remain in those areas. 17:13 Whenever the Israelites were strong militarily, they forced the Canaanites to do hard labor, but they never totally conquered them. 17:14 The descendants of Joseph said to Joshua, “Why have you assigned us only one tribal allotment? After all, we have many people, for until now the Lord has enabled us to increase in number.” 17:15 Joshua replied to them, “Since you have so many people, go up into the forest and clear out a place to live in the land of the Perizzites and Rephaites, for the hill country of Ephraim is too small for you.” 17:16 The descendants of Joseph said, “The whole hill country is inadequate for us, and the Canaanites living down in the valley in Beth Shean and its surrounding towns and in the Valley of Jezreel have chariots with iron-rimmed wheels.” 17:17 Joshua said to the family of Joseph– to both Ephraim and Manasseh: “You have many people and great military strength. You will not have just one tribal allotment. 17:18 The whole hill country will be yours; though it is a forest, you can clear it and it will be entirely yours. You can conquer the Canaanites, though they have chariots with iron-rimmed wheels and are strong.”

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Jos 16:1

That is, of Ephraim, and the half tribe of Manasseh, which are here put together in one; because in these first verses he speaks of them in common; and then of their several portions.

Wesley: Jos 16:4

That is, half Manasseh.

Wesley: Jos 16:4

Their several portions which here follow. It is said, they took their inheritance, which also Judah had done before them, because the tribes of Judah and Joseph did take their inheritances before the rest; and it was fit they should do so, for the security of the main camp, and the body of the people which were at Gilgal, Jos 18:5.

Wesley: Jos 16:5

side - That is, the north - east side. It is no wonder, if some of these descriptions are dark to us at this distance of time; there having been so many alterations made in places, and so many circumstances, being now altogether undiscoverable. But this is certain, that all the descriptions here mentioned, were then evident to the Israelites, because these were the foundations of all the possessions which then they took, and peaceably possessed in succeeding ages.

Wesley: Jos 16:6

The midland sea, towards the west.

Wesley: Jos 16:7

Not to the city of Jericho, which belonged to Benjamin's lot, Jos 18:21, but to its territory.

Wesley: Jos 16:9

That is, besides those cities which were within Ephraim's bounds, he had some other cities, to which all of all their territories were annexed out Manasseh's portion, because his tribe was all here, and was larger than Manasseh's.

Wesley: Jos 17:1

The sense is, though Ephraim was to be more potent and numerous, yet Manasseh was the first-born, and had the privilege of the first-born, which was translated to Joseph, namely, a double portion; and therefore though this was but half the tribe of Manasseh, yet they are not made intimates to Ephraim, but have a distinct lot of their own, as their brethren, or other half tribe had beyond Jordan.

Wesley: Jos 17:1

The only son of Manasseh, who therefore is here, put for the whole tribe.

Wesley: Jos 17:1

born - So even only sons are sometimes called, as Mat 1:25.

Wesley: Jos 17:1

That is, Machir, had given great proof of his valour (though the particular history be not mentioned) and his posterity were no degenerate sons, but had his valiant blood still running in their veins.

Wesley: Jos 17:1

Part of these countries; for part of them was also given to the Reubenites, and part to the Gadites. This may be added as a reason, either, why he got those places from the Amorites: or why they were allotted to him or his posterity, because this was a frontier country, and the out - works to the land of Canaan, and therefore required valiant persons to defend it.

Wesley: Jos 17:2

A distinct inheritance.

Wesley: Jos 17:2

Namely, those of them which had not received their possessions beyond Jordan.

Wesley: Jos 17:2

children - This expression is used to bring in what follows, concerning his female children.

Wesley: Jos 17:4

That is, Eleazar, or Joshua, with the consent of the princes appointed for that work.

Wesley: Jos 17:5

Five for the sons, and five for the daughters; for as for Hepher, both he and his son Zelophehad was dead, and that without sons, and therefore had no portion; but his daughters had several portions allotted to them.

Wesley: Jos 17:6

Not less than the son, so the sex was no bar to their inheritance.

Wesley: Jos 17:9

Tappuah, and the cities upon the coast descending to the river, &c. last mentioned.

Wesley: Jos 17:9

That is, are intermixed with their cities, which was not strange nor unfit, these two being linked together by a nearer alliance than the rest.

Wesley: Jos 17:10

Manasseh's, whose portion is here described, and whose name was last mentioned.

Wesley: Jos 17:10

That is, upon the tribe of Asher; for though Zebulon came between Asher and them for the greatest part of their land; yet it seems there was some necks of land, both of Ephraim's and of Manasseh's, which jutted out farther than the rest, and touched the borders of Asher. And it is certain there were many such incursions of the land of one tribe upon some parcels of another, although they were otherwise considerably distant one from the other.

Wesley: Jos 17:11

As Ephraim had some cities in the tribe of Manasseh, and as it was not unusual, when the place allotted to any tribe was too narrow for it, and the next too large, to give away part from the larger to the less portion; nay, sometimes one whole tribe was taken into another; as Simeon's was into Judah's portion, when it was found too large for Judah.

Wesley: Jos 17:11

Not the places only, but the people; whom they spared and used for servants.

Wesley: Jos 17:11

The words may be rendered, the third part of that country; and so the meaning may be, that the cities and towns here mentioned are a third part of that country, that is, of that part of Issachar's and Asher's portion, in which those places lay.

Wesley: Jos 17:14

That is, of Ephraim and Manasseh.

Wesley: Jos 17:14

That is, expostulated with him, when they went and saw that portion which was allotted them, and found it much short of their expectation.

Wesley: Jos 17:14

Either, because they really had but one lot, which was afterwards divided by the arbitrators between them. Or, because the land severally allotted to them, was but little enough for one of them.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

He retorts their own argument; seeing thou art a great and numerous people, turn thy complaints into action, and enlarge thy borders by thy own hand, to which thou mayest confidently expect God's assistance.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

country - To the mountain, as it is called, Jos 17:18, where among some towns there is much wood - land, which thou mayest without much difficulty possess, and so get the more room.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

The wood, for thy own advantage; in building more cities and towns; and preparing the land for pasture and tillage.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

Supposed to be a savage and brutish kind of people, that lived in woods and mountains.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

Who lived in caves and mountains, now especially when they were driven out of their cities.

Wesley: Jos 17:15

Or, seeing mount Ephraim is too narrow for thee, as thou complainest; take to thyself the rest of that hilly and wood country. Mount Ephraim was a particular portion of the land, belonging to the tribe of Ephraim. And this seems to be here mentioned, for all the portion allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh, as appears from their complaint, which was not, that this part, but that their whole portion was too strait for them.

Wesley: Jos 17:16

Heb. the hill will not be found, that is, obtained by us; those fierce and strong people the Perizzites and the giants will easily defend themselves, and frustrate our attempts, having the advantage of the woods and mountains.

Wesley: Jos 17:16

That is, and if thou sayest, that if the hill either cannot be conquered, or is not sufficient for us, we may go down and take more land out of the pleasant and fruitful valleys, we shall meet with no less difficulty there than in the mountains.

Wesley: Jos 17:16

Not all made of iron, but armed with iron, not only for defence, but for offence also, having as it were scythes and swords fastened to them, to cut down all that stood in their way.

Wesley: Jos 17:17

Thou needest and deservedst more than that lot, of which thou art actually possessed, and thou hast power to get more; which if thou endeavourest to do, God will bless thee, and give thee more.

Wesley: Jos 17:18

goings of it - The valleys and fields belonging or adjoining to it, for there the Canaanites were, Jos 17:16.

JFB: Jos 16:1

Hebrew, "went forth," referring either to the lot as drawn out of the urn, or to the tract of land thereby assigned. The first four verses describe the territory allotted to the family of Joseph in the rich domains of central Palestine. It was drawn in one lot, that the brethren might be contiguously situated; but it was afterwards divided. The southern boundary only is described here; that on the north being irregular and less defined (Jos 17:10-11), is not mentioned.

JFB: Jos 16:1

(2Ki 2:19), at the joint of its junction with the Jordan.

JFB: Jos 16:1

The ridge south of Beth-el. Having described the position of Joseph's family generally the historian proceeds to define the territory; first, that of Ephraim.

JFB: Jos 16:5-9

Ataroth-addar (now Atara), four miles south of Jetta [ROBINSON], is fixed on as a center, through which a line is drawn from Upper Beth-horon to Michmethah, showing the western limit of their actual possessions. The tract beyond that to the sea was still unconquered.

JFB: Jos 16:6-7

The northern boundary is traced from this point eastward to the Jordan.

JFB: Jos 16:8

It is retraced from east to west, to describe the prospective and intended boundary, which was to reach to the sea. Kanah ("reedy") flows into the Mediterranean.

JFB: Jos 16:9

(Jos 17:9), because it was found that the tract allotted to Ephraim was too small in proportion to its population and power.

JFB: Jos 16:10

This is the first mention of the fatal policy of the Israelites, in neglecting the divine command (Deu 20:16) to exterminate the idolaters.

JFB: Jos 17:1-6

Ephraim was mentioned, as the more numerous and powerful branch of the family of Joseph (Gen 48:19-20); but Manasseh still retained the right of primogeniture and had a separate inheritance assigned.

JFB: Jos 17:1-6

His descendants.

JFB: Jos 17:1-6

Though he had a son of that name (Num 26:29; Num 27:1), yet, as is evident from the use of the Hebrew article, reference is made, not to the person, but the province of Gilead. "Father" here means lord or possessor of Gilead. This view is confirmed by the fact that it was not Machir, but his descendants, who subdued Gilead and Bashan (Num 32:41; Deu 3:13-15). These Machirites had their portion on the east side of Jordan. The western portion of land, allotted to the tribe of Manasseh, was divided into ten portions because the male descendants who had sons consisted of five families, to which, consequently, five shares were given; and the sixth family, namely, the posterity of Hepher, being all women, the five daughters of Zelophehad were, on application to the valuators, endowed each with an inheritance in land (see on Num 27:4).

JFB: Jos 17:7-11

The southern boundary is here traced from the east. Asher (now Yasir), the starting point, was a town fifteen Roman miles east of Shechem, and anciently a place of importance.

JFB: Jos 17:9

The line which separated the possessions of the two brothers from each other ran to the south of the stream. Thus the river was in the territory of Manasseh; but the cities which were upon the river, though all were within the limits of Manasseh's possessions, were assigned partly to Ephraim, and partly to Manasseh; those on the south side being given to the former; those upon the north to the latter [KEIL]. It appears (Jos 17:10) that Manasseh was still further interlaced with other neighboring tribes.

JFB: Jos 17:11

Greek, "Scythopolis" (now Beisan), in the valley of the Jordan, towards the east end of the plain of Jezreel. "Beth-shean" means "house of rest," so called from its being the halting place for caravans travelling between Syria or Midian, and Egypt, and the great station for the commerce between these countries for many centuries.

JFB: Jos 17:11

In the neighborhood of Megiddo (2Ki 9:27).

JFB: Jos 17:11

(now Tantoura), anciently a strong fortress; a wall of wild precipitous rock defended the shore fortifications against attack from the land side.

JFB: Jos 17:11

Situated on a rocky eminence, four Roman miles south of Tabor.

JFB: Jos 17:11

These were near to each other, and they are generally mentioned in Scripture together. They were both royal and strongly fortified places (see on Jdg 1:27).

JFB: Jos 17:11

Districts or provinces. It is computed that Manasseh possessed in Asher and Issachar portions of ground to the extent of more than two hundred square miles.

JFB: Jos 17:12-13

Probably due to indolence, a love of ease. Perhaps a mistaken humanity, arising from a disregard or forgetfulness of the divine command, and a decreasing principle of faith and zeal in the service of God, were the causes of their failure.

JFB: Jos 17:14-18

The two tribes join in laying a complaint before the leader, as to the narrow boundaries of their allotment and its insufficiency to be the residence of tribes so vastly increased. But Joshua's answer was full of wisdom as well as patriotism. Knowing their character, he treated them accordingly, and sarcastically turned all their arguments against themselves. Thus he rebuked their unbelief and cowardice.

JFB: Jos 17:15

Called so here by anticipation. The Gilboa range between Beth-shean and the plain of Jezreel is meant, anciently covered with an extensive forest.

JFB: Jos 17:16

Unusually strengthened with that metal, and perhaps armed with projecting scythes.

Clarke: Jos 16:1

The children of Joseph - Ephraim and Manasseh, and their descendants. The limits of the tribe of Ephraim extended along the borders of Benjamin and Dan, from Jordan on the east to the Mediterranean on the west.

Clarke: Jos 16:2

From Bethel to Luz - From Gen 28:19 (note) it appears that the place which Jacob called Beth-el was formerly called Luz; see the note there: but here they seem to be two distinct places. It is very likely that the place where Jacob had the vision was not in Luz, but in some place within a small distance of that city or village, (see the note on Gen 28:12), and that sometimes the whole place was called Beth-el, at other times Luz, and sometimes, as in the case above, the two places were distinguished. As we find the term London comprises, not only London, but also the city of Westminster and the borough of Southwark; though at other times all three are distinctly mentioned

Clarke: Jos 16:2

Archi to Ataroth - Archi was the country of Hushai, the friend of David, 2Sa 15:32, who is called Hushai the Archite. Ataroth, called Ataroth-addar, Ataroth the illustrious, Jos 16:5, and simply Ataroth, Jos 16:7, is supposed to have been about fifteen miles from Jerusalem.

Clarke: Jos 16:3

Beth-horon the nether - This city was about twelve miles from Jerusalem, on the side of Nicopolis, formerly Emmaus. - Calmet. See the note on Jos 10:10.

Clarke: Jos 16:5

Ataroth-addar - See the note on Jos 16:2

Clarke: Jos 16:5

Beth-horon the upper - The situation of this town is little known. It was eastward of Beth-horon the nether, and consequently not far from it.

Clarke: Jos 16:8

Tappuah - This was a city in the tribe of Manasseh, and gave name to a certain district called the land of Tappuah. See Jos 17:8

Clarke: Jos 16:8

The sea - The Mediterranean, as before.

Clarke: Jos 16:9

And the separate cities - That is, the cities that were separated from the tribe of Manasseh to be given to Ephraim; see Jos 17:9.

Clarke: Jos 16:10

The Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer - It appears that the Canaanites were not expelled from this city till the days of Solomon, when it was taken by the king of Egypt his father-in-law, who made it a present to his daughter, Solomon’ s queen. See 1Ki 9:16. And see the note on Jos 10:33. The Ephraimites, however, had so far succeeded in subjecting these people as to oblige them to pay tribute, though they could not, or at least did not, totally expel them

Of the names and places in this chapter, we may say the same as of others already mentioned. See the note on Jos 15:1. Many of those towns were small, and, we may rationally conclude, slightly built, and consequently have perished perhaps more than a thousand years ago. It would be therefore useless to look for such places now. Several of the towns in England, a land not exposed to such revolutions as that of Palestine has ever been, mentioned by Caesar and other ancient writers, are no longer discernible. Several have changed their names, and not a few their situation. Tradition states that the city of Norwich anciently stood some miles from its present situation; and we have the fullest proof that this was the case with the city of Salisbury. Such changes do not affect the truth of the ancient geography of our own country; nor can they impeach that of the sacred historian before us.

Clarke: Jos 17:1

There was also a lot for the tribe of Manasseh - It was necessary to mark this because Jacob, in his blessing, (Gen 48:19, Gen 48:20), did in a certain sense set Ephraim before Manasseh, though the latter was the first-born; but the place here shows that this preference did not affect the rights of primogeniture

Clarke: Jos 17:1

For Machir - because he was a man of war - It is not likely that Machir himself was now alive; if he were, he must have been nearly 200 years old: It is therefore probable that what is spoken here is spoken of his children, who now possessed the lot that was originally designed for their father, who it appears had signalized himself as a man of skill and valor in some of the former wars, though the circumstances are not marked. His descendants, being of a warlike, intrepid spirit, were well qualified to defend a frontier country, which would be naturally exposed to invasion.

Clarke: Jos 17:2

The rest of the children of Manasseh - That is, his grandchildren; for it is contended that Manasseh had no other son than Machir; and these were very probably the children of Gilead, the son of Machir.

Clarke: Jos 17:3

Zelophehad - had no sons, but daughters - See this case considered at large in the notes on Num 27:1-7 (note); Num 36:1 (note), etc.

Clarke: Jos 17:5

There fell ten portions to Manasseh - The Hebrew word חבלי chabley , which we translate portions, signifies literally cords or cables, and intimates that by means of a cord, cable, or what we call a chain, the land was divided. We have but little account of the arts and sciences of the Hebrews, yet from the sketches which we find in different parts of the Old Testament it appears that their minds were in many respects well cultivated; nor could the division, which is mentioned in this book, have been made without such a measure of geographical knowledge, as we find it difficult to grant them. Suppose even in this case, the land was not measured with a chain, which in some cases would have been impracticable, because the ancient inhabitants still occupied the places which were allotted to certain tribes or families; yet the allusion to this mode of measurement shows that it was well known among them. As there were six sons and five daughters, among whom this division was to be made, there should be eleven portions; but Zelophehad, son of Hepher, having left five daughters in his place, neither he nor Hepher is reckoned. The lot of Manasseh therefore was divided into ten parts; five for the five sons of Gilead, who were Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, and Shemida; and five for the five daughters of Zelophehad, viz., Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. Calmet.

Clarke: Jos 17:9

Unto the river Kanah - Literally, the river or valley of the reeds, translated by the Vulgate, vallis arundintei . The tribe of Manasseh appears to have been bounded on the north by this torrent or valley, and on the south by the Mediterranean Sea.

Clarke: Jos 17:10

They met together in Asher on the north - The tribe of Asher extended from the Mediterranean Sea to Mount Carmel, Jos 19:26, and the tribe of Manasseh extended to Dor and her towns, (see the following verse, Jos 17:11 (note)), which were in the vicinity of Carmel; and thus it appears that these two tribes formed a junction at the Mediterranean Sea. This may serve to remove the difficulties in this verse; but still it does appear that in several cases the tribes were intermingled; for Manasseh had several towns, both in Issachar and in Asher, see Jos 17:11. In like manner, Judah had towns in Dan and Simeon; and Simeon had towns in Judah; and what is spoken of the boundaries of the tribes, may be sometimes understood of those towns which certain tribes had within the limits of others. For, in several cases, towns seem to be interchanged, or purchased, by mutual consent, so that in some instances the possessions were intermingled, without any confusion of the tribes or families.

Clarke: Jos 17:11

Beth-shean - Called afterwards Scythopolis; the city of the Scythians or Cuthites, those who were sent into the different Samaritan cities by the kings of Assyria

Clarke: Jos 17:11

Dor - On the Mediterranean Sea, about eight miles from Caesarea, on the road to Tyre

Clarke: Jos 17:11

En-dor - The well or fountain of Dor, the place where Saul went to consult the witch; 1Sa 28:7, etc.

Clarke: Jos 17:12

Could not drive out, etc. - They had neither grace nor courage to go against their enemies, and chose rather to share their territories with those whom the justice of God had proscribed, than exert themselves to expel them. But some commentators give a different turn to this expression, and translate the passage thus: But the children of Manasseh could not (resolve) to destroy those cities, but the Canaanites consented to dwell in the land. And as they were willing to pay tribute, and the others chose to tolerate them on those terms, they agreed to dwell together: but this paying of tribute seems not to have taken place till some time after, when the children of Israel were waxen strong, etc.

Clarke: Jos 17:15

If thou be a great people - Joshua takes them at their own word; they said, Jos 17:14, that they were a great people; then said he, If thou be a great people or seeing thou art a great people, go to the wood country, and clear away for thyself. Joshua would not reverse the decision of the lot; but as there was much woodland country, he gave them permission to clear away as much of it as they found necessary to extend themselves as far as they pleased.

Clarke: Jos 17:16

The hill is not enough for us - The mountain of Gilboa being that which had fallen to them by lot

Clarke: Jos 17:16

Chariots of iron - We cannot possess the plain country, because that is occupied by the Canaanites; and we cannot conquer them, because they have chariots of iron, that is, very strong chariots, and armed with scythes, as is generally supposed.

Clarke: Jos 17:18

The outgoings of it shall be thine - Clear away the wood, occupy the mountain, and you shall soon be able to command all the valleys; and, possessing all the defiles of the country, you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have chariots of iron: your situation will be advantageous, your numbers very respectable, and the hand of God will be upon you for good

1.    From the whole history of the Israelites we find that it was difficult to please them; they had a dissatisfied mind, and hence were rarely contented. From the above account we learn that the children of Joseph were much inclined to quarrel with Joshua, because they had not such a lot as they wished; though they could not be ignorant that their lot, as that of the others, had been determined by the especial providence of God

2.    Joshua treats them with great firmness; he would not attempt to alter the appointment of God, and he saw no reason to reverse or change the grant already made. They were both numerous and strong, and if they put forth their strength under the direction of even the ordinary providence of God, they had every reason to expect success

3.    Slothfulness is natural to man; it requires much training to induce him to labor for his daily bread; if God should miraculously send it he will wonder and eat it, and that is the whole. Strive to enter in at the strait gate is an ungracious word to many; they profess to trust in God’ s mercy, but labor not to enter into that rest: God will not reverse his purpose to meet their slothfulness; they alone who overcome shall sit with Jesus upon his throne. Reader, take unto thee the whole armor of God, that thou mayest be able to stand in the evil day, and having done all - to Stand. And remember, that he only who endures to the end shall be saved.

Calvin: Jos 16:1

1.And the lot of the children of Joseph fell, etc The sacred writer first states what the lot was which fell to the two children of Joseph, and then describes the lot of Ephraim. It is strange, however, that when the half of the tribe of Manasseh had already been settled beyond the Jordan, more words are employed in describing the remaining half than in describing the whole of the inheritance of the tribe of Ephraim, though the latter was the more populous, and justly claimed for itself a larger territory. But the longer detail given concerning the posterity of Manasseh is owing to particular circumstances. First, the writer repeats how a settlement had been given them without lot in the country of Basan. Secondly, he mentions the ratification by Joshua of the command which Moses had given by divine authority in regard to the daughters of Selophead. Seeing, then, there was no doubt in regard to the boundaries of Ephraim, and there was no danger of dispute, their allocation is only briefly glanced at.

But here a new question arises. When the right of primogeniture had passed from Manasseh to Ephraim, how did the posterity of that tribe which had precedence in rank obtain their cities among the children of Manasseh? For theirs seems in this way to have been the inferior condition. My explanation is this, When the portion of Manasseh was too extensive in proportion to the amount of population, a calculation was made, and certain cities were deducted to complete the just share of the tribe of Ephraim; not that they were mixed up with the children of Manasseh, to hold their dwellings among them by a precarious tenure, ¹⁵³ but their boundaries were merely extended in the direction of the Manassites whom a narrower possession might suffice.

In the end of the chapter, Ephraim is severely censured for his effeminacy in not having expelled the Canaanites from Gezer. For had they proceeded in a manly and hearty manner to make good their right to the land which had fallen to them by lot, the victory was in their hands. There would have been no temerity in the attempt, since the decision of the lot was as valid as if the Lord himself had stretched forth his hand from heaven. But their disgraceful sloth is more clearly expressed and their culpability greatly heightened by the fact, that they made tributaries of those with whom it was not lawful to enter into any kind of arrangement. Seeing, then, God had distinctly forbidden his people to transact business of any kind with those nations, and least of all to enter into pactions with them, stipulating for their pardon and safety, the Ephraimites sinned much more grievously in exacting tribute than if they had tolerated them without paction. ¹⁵⁴

Calvin: Jos 17:1

The historian returns to the tribe of Manasseh with the view of confirming what we formerly saw with regard to the daughters of Selophead. For though it was a novelty for females to succeed indiscriminately with males, yet as five of them had survived their father, they proved it to be equitable that they should be admitted to a portion, lest while he was innocent he should lie under the reproach of having died childless. God had replied to Moses by his oracle, that in regard to succession they should be counted as one head. They now demand that the decision thus given by the mouth of the Lord shall be carried into effect. As to the name of first-born, still given to Manasseh, it must be understood so as not to be at variance with the prophecy of Jacob; or rather his primogeniture is here in a manner buried, and his dignity restricted to the past. Here, however, it is to be observed, that men are so tenacious and so much devoted to their own interests, that it seldom occurs to them to give others their due. The daughters of Selophead had obtained a portion by a heavenly decree; nor had any one dared to utter a word against it; and yet if they had remained silent no regard would have been paid to them. Therefore, lest the delay should prove injurious to them, they apply to Joshua and Eleazar, and insist that they shall not be deprived of their legitimate succession. No delay is interposed by Joshua to prevent their immediately obtaining what is just, nor is there any murmuring on the part of the people. Hence we infer, that all were disposed to act equitably; but every one is occupied with his own interest, and too apt carelessly to overlook that of others.

Calvin: Jos 17:5

5.And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, etc The children of Manasseh are in this passage classed under seven stems. Machir, the first-born, is placed apart; the other six follow. Here the question arises, How was the inheritance divided into ten parts? Some expositors cunningly disguise the difficulty; ¹⁵⁵ others, because they are unable to solve it, indulge in the merest trifling. It is certainly very absurd that four portions should be given to five daughters; and it is not a whit more congruous that their share should be doubled because their father was the first-born. It is beyond all controversy, that Gilead, son of Machir, and great-grandfather of the females of whom we are now speaking, chose his settlement in mount Gilead and Bashan. Therefore, seeing he had already obtained an inheritance by privilege without lot, he ought not to have obtained one by lot in the land of Canaan, unless perhaps he settled only a part of his family beyond the Jordan. For Hepher was one of his sons, but not the only one; and likewise the offspring of five other brothers might be distinguished into several heads according to the number of which the allocation by lot might be made. For it is not known in what degree families whose portion fell in the land of Canaan were taken. And all we read here is, that ten lots were east among the sons of Manasseh in addition to the country which they had formerly acquired for themselves beyond the Jordan. It is thus vain to dispute concerning the number, which cannot be ascertained with certainty from the present narrative, because the first thing necessary to be known is the exact number of families to whom the division was common. Nay, it is not impossible that the daughters of Selophead obtained their patrimony there. They are said, indeed, to have dwelt among the brethren of their father; but the place is not given. Be this as it may, I have no doubt that mutual equity was observed, and that after provision was made for others, the land which had been submitted to lot was distributed among ten families whose names are here omitted.

Calvin: Jos 17:11

11.And Manasseh had in Issachar, etc How they were so mingled as to possess some cities in the lot of Asher and Issachar, while the tribe of Ephraim dwelt between their limits, it is not easy to divine, unless, perhaps, it was perceived that a more commodious habitation would not be liable to many complaints, ¹⁵⁶ or, perhaps, after the whole country had become more certainly known, some change was made on principles of equity in the former partition. This, therefore, seems to have been a new acquisition after it was discovered that the children of Manasseh might occupy a wider extent without loss to others. Nor was the habitation given to them a subjugated one, which they might immediately enjoy, but it was an inheritance treasured up in hope, and founded more upon heavenly promise than on actual possession. And yet their not gaining possession of those cities is attributed to their fault, because the lot assigning it to them was an indubitable pledge of victory. The reason, therefore, why they could not expel the inhabitants was, because they were not fully persuaded in their minds that God is true, and stifled his agency by their own sluggishness. But another crime still less pardonable was committed when, having it in their power easily to destroy all, they not only were slothful in executing the command of God, but, induced by filthy lucre, ¹⁵⁷ they preserved those alive whom God had doomed to destruction. For persons, on whom we impose tribute, we in a manner take under our faith and protection. God had appointed them the ministers of his vengeance, and he supplies them with strength to execute it: they not only delay, but deprive themselves of the liberty of acting rightly. It is not strange, therefore, that God severely punished this perverse heartlessness, by making those nations whom they had pardoned in the face of a clear prohibition, to become like thorns to pierce their eyes and pricks to gall their sides.

Here, again, a question arises, How were cities granted to them in the tribe of Asher and Issachar, when the portions of both were as yet unknown? Here, therefore, that which had not yet taken place is related by way of anticipation. Be this as it may, we gather that from ignorance of the localities, single portions were not divided so exactly as not to make it necessary afterwards to correct what had been more or less decided. ¹⁵⁸ And we must hold in general, with regard both to the tribe of Ephraim and the others, that many of the cities which they gained were of no account because of the devastation. I doubt not that many ruins here lie buried. On the other hand, we must conclude that in fertile spots, or spots possessed of other advantages, where petty villages only existed, their famous cities were founded. It is certain that Sichem was of sufficient importance to hold both a name and rank, and yet there is no mention of it here. The same is the case with Samaria, which, as is well known, belonged to the same tribe of Ephraim when it was the metropolis of the kingdom of Israel. It is plain, therefore, that each tribe possessed several cities, which are here passed over in silence.

Calvin: Jos 17:14

14.And the children of Joseph spoke unto Joshua, etc Although they clothe their complaint with some color of excuse, yet they dishonestly disguise the fact, that more was comprehended in one lot than was proper for one tribe. I know not, however, whether or not the lot was cast indefinitely for the sons of Joseph: it certainly does not seem congruous that it should be so. Joshua and the other dividers were not unaware that Ephraim and Manasseh formed two heads, or two stems: and it has repeatedly been said before that the land was divided into ten tribes, which number was not accurate, unless the tribe of Manasseh was considered distinct from that of Ephraim. It is certain, therefore, that they had not fallen into such a gross blunder as to throw the two names into one lot. Now, to conceal two tribes under the name of Joseph, in order to defraud them of half their right, would have been intolerable injustice. We may add, that the domain of each was distinctly explained and described by its proper boundaries. ¹⁵⁹

We are therefore led to conclude, that when the lots were cast for the two tribes, the admirable counsel of God arranged that the brothers, who had a common father, should be contiguous and neighbors to each other. It is unworthy in them, therefore, to complain and plead that only one inheritance had been given to them, because Joshua had neither such heartlessness nor so much malice as to defraud them of a clear right either through thoughtlessness or envy. ¹⁶⁰ But herein lay the falsehood of their complaint concerning narrow boundaries, that they counted all that was yet to be acquired by warlike prowess as nothing; as if the lot had assigned portions to the other tribes only in subjugated territory. Joshua, accordingly, in a single sentence, refutes and disposes of their plea, and retorts upon them a charge by which they were trying to throw obloquy upon him. If your resources and your numbers are so great, why, he asks, do you not make an inroad on the enemy, whose country has been given to you? Nor will the event disappoint you, if, trusting to the promise of God, you boldly proceed to the inheritance which he has bestowed upon you. We see how, although proper provision had been made for them, they were so blinded by sloth as to complain that they were straitened for room, because they were unwilling to move their finger to seek the full possession of their inheritance. Wherefore, this passage teaches us, that if at any time we think less is performed for us than is due, we ought carefully to shake off all delays, and not rashly throw upon others the blame which is inherent in ourselves.

Calvin: Jos 17:16

16.And the children of Joseph said, etc It is too apparent that they were thinking only of themselves, because they quibble as much as they can, in order to avoid following the suggestion of Joshua, than which, however, nothing was more reasonable. They object, that the mountain is rugged and little better than a desert, and therefore, though it were added to them, they would derive very little benefit from it. In regard to the plain, which was cultivated and fertile, they object that they are shut out and debarred from it because of the formidable array of the enemy. Accordingly, they make mention of their iron chariots, as if they had not already learned by experience that the Lord was able, without any difficulty, to trample down both horses and chariots. Joshua, however, by a simple and right-hearted answer, administers due castigation, as well to their avarice as their effeminacy and torpor. If the forest, as it now stands, is not sufficiently productive, cut down the trees and convert it into good fields; provided you are not sparing of your labor, you will have no reason to be dissatisfied with your habitation. Iron chariots, moreover, cannot prevent the Lord from performing what he has promised to you. The inheritance is yours; do only your part by entering with due confidence on the possession of it.

TSK: Jos 16:1

fell : Heb. went forth

the water : Jos 8:15, Jos 15:61, Jos 18:12; 2Ki 2:19-21

TSK: Jos 16:2

Bethel : Jos 18:13; Gen 28:19; Jdg 1:22-26

Archi : 2Sa 16:16; 1Ch 27:33

TSK: Jos 16:3

Bethhoron : Eusebius says that the two Beth-horons were twelve miles from Jerusalem, towards Nicopolis or Emmauscaps1 . ocaps0 f which the one, called upper Beth-horon, from its situation, was built (rebuilt) by Solomon, and the other, called nether Beth-horon, was given to the Levites. Josephus places Beth-oron about 100 furlongs from Jerusalem. Dr. Clarke mentions an Arab village called Bethoor, about twelve miles from Jerusalem, a small distance from Rama, which he supposes, from its situation on a hill, to be Beth-horon the upper. Jos 18:13; 1Ki 9:15-17; 1Ch 7:24, 1Ch 7:28; 2Ch 8:5

Gezer : Probably the Γαζαρα of Eusebius, four miles from Nicopolis.

the sea : Num 34:6

TSK: Jos 16:4

Jos 17:14

TSK: Jos 16:5

Atarothaddar : Jos 16:2, Jos 18:13

TSK: Jos 16:6

Michmethah : Jos 17:7

Taanathshiloh : Placed by Eusebius ten miles of Neapolis or Shechem. Jos 18:1

Janohah : Eusebius calls it Ιανω , in Acrabatene, twelve miles east from Neapolis.

TSK: Jos 16:7

Ataroth : 1Ch 7:28

Jericho : Jos 3:16, Jos 6:1, Jos 6:26; Num 33:48

TSK: Jos 16:8

Tappuah : Jos 12:17, Jos 17:8

river Kanah : Jos 17:9, Jos 19:28

the sea : Jos 16:3-6; Num 34:6

TSK: Jos 16:9

Jos 17:9

TSK: Jos 16:10

they drave : Jos 15:63; Jdg 1:29; 1Ki 9:16, 1Ki 9:21

the Canaanites dwell : Num 33:52-55; Deu 7:1, Deu 7:2

TSK: Jos 17:1

the firstborn : Gen 41:51, Gen 46:20, Gen 48:18; Deu 21:17

Machir : Gen 50:23; Num 26:29, Num 27:1, Num 32:39, Num 32:40; Jdg 5:14; 1Ch 2:23, 1Ch 7:14, 1Ch 7:15

Gilead : Num 26:29, Num 32:33, Num 32:40; Deu 3:13-15

TSK: Jos 17:2

the rest : Num 26:29-32

the children : Jdg 6:11, Jdg 8:2; 1Ch 7:18

Abiezer : Num 26:30, Jeezer

children of Asriel : Num 26:31

children of Hepher : Num 26:32

TSK: Jos 17:3

Num 26:33, Num 27:1, Num 36:2-11

TSK: Jos 17:4

Eleazar : Jos 14:1; Num 34:17-29

The Lord commanded : Num 27:6, Num 27:7; Gal 3:28

TSK: Jos 17:5

ten portions : As there were six sons and five daughters, among whom this division was to be made, there should be eleven portions, but Zelophehad, son of Hepher, having left five daughters in his place, neither he nor Hepher is reckoned. The lot of Manasseh therefore was divided into ten parts; five for the five sons of Gilead, Abiezer, Helek, Asriel, Shechem, and Shemida; and five for the five daughters of Zelophehad, Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. Jos 17:2, Jos 17:3, Jos 17:14

beside : Jos 13:29-31; Num 32:30-42

TSK: Jos 17:7

Asher : Eusebius says this was a town in his time not far from Neapolis, towards Scythopolis or Bethshan; between which towns it is also placed by the old Jerusalem Itinerary.

Michmethah : Situated, probably, east of Shechem, though its precise situation, as well as that of many others, cannot, at this distance of time, be ascertained. Many of these towns were small, and we may rationally conclude, slightly built; and consequently have perished more than two thousand years ago. It would therefore be useless now to look for such places; though in many instances, their ancient names have been preserved, and their sites identified. Several towns even in England, mentioned by Cesar and other ancient writers, are no longer discernible; several have changed their names, and not a few their situation. Jos 16:6-8

Shechem : Jos 20:7, Jos 21:21, Jos 24:1, Jos 24:32; Gen 34:2, Gen 37:12, Gen 37:14; Jdg 9:1; 1Ki 12:1, 1Ki 12:25; 1Ch 6:67

TSK: Jos 17:8

of Tappuah : Jos 12:17, Jos 15:34, Jos 15:53, Jos 16:8

TSK: Jos 17:9

river Kanah : or, brook of reeds, The brook Kanah seem to be what is now called Nahr el Kasab, which falls into the Mediterranean a few miles south of Cesarea of Palestine, mentioned by the Hon. C. L. Irby, and J. Mangles. Jos 16:8

these cities : Jos 16:9

the outgoings : Jos 16:3, Jos 16:8, Jos 19:29

the sea : The Mediterranean

TSK: Jos 17:11

Manasseh : Jos 16:9; 1Ch 7:29; Beth-shean, the Scythopolis of the Greek and Roman writers, was situated in the plain of Jordan, west of that river, 120 furlongs (south) from Tiberias, according to Josephus, and 600 furlongs (north) from Jerusalem (2; Mac 1Ch 12:29). It was the largest city of the Decapolis, and the only one on that side of Jordan. It is now called Bisan, 8 hours or 24 miles from Tiberias; and described by Dr. Richardson, exclusive of its ruins, as a ""collection of miserable hovels, containing 200 inhabitants.""1Sa 31:10, 1Sa 31:12, Beth-shan, 1Ki 4:12

Ibleam : 2Ki 9:27; 1Ch 6:70, Bileam

Dor : Dor, according to Eusebius, was situated on the Mediterranean, nine miles from Cesarea Palestine, towards Carmel. The village of Tortura, four leagues north of Cesarea, is supposed to nearly occupy it site. Jos 12:23; Jdg 1:27; 1Ki 4:11

Endor : 1Sa 28:7; Psa 83:10

Taanach : Jos 12:21; Jdg 5:19

Megiddo : Jdg 1:27, Jdg 5:19; 1Ki 4:12, 1Ki 9:15; 2Ki 9:27, 2Ki 23:29, 2Ki 23:30; 2Ch 35:22; Zec 12:11

TSK: Jos 17:12

Jos 15:63, Jos 16:10; Exo 23:29-33; Num 33:52-56; Jdg 1:27, Jdg 1:28; Rom 6:12-14

TSK: Jos 17:13

waxen strong : Jdg 1:28; 2Sa 3:1; Eph 6:10; Phi 4:13; 2Pe 3:18

put the : Jos 16:10; Deu 20:11-18; Jdg 1:30, Jdg 1:33, Jdg 1:35; 2Ch 8:7, 2Ch 8:8

TSK: Jos 17:14

one lot : Gen 48:22; Num 26:34-37; Deu 33:13-17

a great : Gen 48:19, Gen 49:22-26

TSK: Jos 17:15

If thou be : Luk 12:48

the Perizzites : Gen 13:7; Exo 33:2; Ezr 9:1

giants : or, Rephaims, Gen 14:5, Gen 15:20; 2Sa 5:18, 2Sa 5:22

TSK: Jos 17:16

chariots : Jos 17:18; Jdg 1:19, Jdg 4:3

Bethshean : Jos 17:11; 1Ki 4:12

Jezreel : Jos 19:18; Jdg 6:33; 1Ki 4:12, 1Ki 18:46, 1Ki 21:1, 1Ki 21:23; 2Ki 9:10, 2Ki 9:37; Hos 1:4, Hos 1:5

TSK: Jos 17:17

Thou art a great : Jos 17:14

TSK: Jos 17:18

the mountain : Jos 17:15, Jos 15:9, Jos 20:7

for thou shalt : Jos 11:4-6, Jos 13:6; Num 14:6-9; Deu 20:1-4; Psa 27:1, Psa 27:2; Isa 41:10-16; Isa 51:12, Isa 51:13; Rom 8:31, Rom 8:37; Heb 13:6

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Jos 16:1

To the wilderness - Strike out "to,"for the word is in apposition to "lot."The wilderness is Jos 18:12 "the wilderness of Bethaven."

Barnes: Jos 16:2

Of Archi - (Read "of the Archite,"also a designation of David’ s friend Hushai (2Sa 15:32; 2Sa 16:16, etc.). The word is derived from Erech Gen 10:10. But whether there was in the neighborhood of Bethel a place bearing this Babylonian name, or whether a colony from the East had settled in this spot and brought the name with them, is unknown.

Ataroth - Called Jos 16:5; Jos 18:13 Ataroth-adar (= "crowns of fame or greatness") perhaps to distinguish it from two other places bearing the same name but, situated on the other side of Jordan, in the territory of Gad Num 32:34. It is identified with Atara, near the road from Jerusalem to Nablous.

Barnes: Jos 16:3

Of Japhleti - Rather "of the Japhletite."All history of the name is lost.

Barnes: Jos 16:5-8

From the abrupt manner in which the statements are introduced, as well as from their imperfect character, there is probability in the conjecture that some words have, in these verses, fallen out of the text. Few of the places are known for certain.

Barnes: Jos 16:9

The verb "were,"introduced by the King James Version in this verse should be omitted; and the full stop after Jos 16:8 replaced by a colon. The purport of Jos 16:9 is simply to add to the inheritance of Ephraim, defined by the preceding context, "the separate cities"or more properly "single cities"which were allotted to them in addition within the borders of Manasseh. The reasons for granting these additional cities to the Ephraimites can only be conjectured. Perhaps the territory assigned to this numerous tribe proved on experiment to be too small; and therefore some towns, which are named in 1Ch 7:29, were given to them from the kindred Manassites, the latter being recompensed (Jos 17:11 note) at the expense of Issachar and Asher.

Barnes: Jos 17:1

Manasseh, as the "first-born,"was to receive not only the territory on the east of Jordan won by the valor of the Machirites, but also a portion with the other tribes on the west of Jordan, the holy land of promise strictly so called. Thus, though Ephraim took precedence of Manasseh, according to the prediction of Joseph Gen 48:20, yet Manasseh received "the double portion"which was the special privilege of the first-born Deu 21:17.

Barnes: Jos 17:2

For the rest ... - i. e. for those who were not settled on the east of Jordan.

Barnes: Jos 17:5

Ten portions - i. e. five for the five families descended from the male children of Gilead, and five others for the five daughters of Zelophehad, who represented the sixth family, the Hepherites.

Barnes: Jos 17:7

Asher - Not the tribe so called, but a place somewhere toward the eastern end of the boundary line here drawn: perhaps "Teyasir,"on the road from Sichem to Beth-shean.

Barnes: Jos 17:9

These cities ... - The text is possibly corrupt. The intention seems to be to state that the cities lying south of the river, though within the limits of Manasseh, were in fact made over to Ephraim, and were among the "separate cities"Jos 16:9. On the contrary, the north bank of the river, both land and towns, belonged to Manasseh exclusively.

Barnes: Jos 17:10

Southward - i. e. of the river Kanah.

Render, "they (i. e. the two kindred tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, the northern border being treated here as common to the two) reached unto Asher."(See the map.) The northern border is only indicated in general terms, perhaps because the Israelites were not yet completely masters of this part of the country, and so had not precisely determined it.

Barnes: Jos 17:11

Perhaps Beth-shean (in Issachar) and the other five towns (in Asher) were given to the Manassites in compensation for towns in the Manassite territory allotted to the Ephraimites. (See Jos 17:9. Compare Jos 21:9.) To the wall of Beth-shean, or Bethshah ("Beisan,"about 5 miles west of the Jordan), the bodies of Saul and his sons were fastened by the Philistines after the battle on Mount Gilboa. After the exile it received the Greek name of Scythopolis, perhaps because it was principally tenanted by a rude and pagan population, styled in contempt Scythians. It was a border city of Galilee, and the chief town of the Decapolis. In Christian times it was the see of a bishop, who is enumerated as present at Nicaea and other Councils of the Church.

Ibleam (Bileam, 1Ch 6:70), perhaps "Jelameh,"was a Levitical town (Jos 21:25 note). Near this place Ahaziah was mortally wounded by Jehu (2Ki 9:27), and fled to Megiddo, which was no doubt not far distant.

Three countries - Rather "the three hills."The district belonging to the last-mentioned three towns had a common name, derived no doubt from its natural features, and was called "the three hills."Compare Decapolis, Tripolis, etc.

Barnes: Jos 17:14

Seeing I am a great people - The assertion can hardly have been warranted by facts, for at the census Num. 26 the two tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim together were not greatly more numerous than the single tribe of Judah; and now that half the Manassites were provided for on the eastern side of Jordan, the remaining children of Joseph could hardly be stronger than the Danites or the Issacharites. The children of Joseph seem therefore to exhibit here that arrogant and jealous spirit which elsewhere characterises their conduct (Jdg 8:1; Jdg 12:1; 2Sa 19:41; 2Ch 28:7 etc.). A glance at the map shows that their complaint was in itself unreasonable. Their territory, which measured about 55 miles by 70 miles, was at least as large in proportion to their numbers as that of any other tribe, and moreover comprehended some of the most fertile of the whole promised land.

Barnes: Jos 17:15

Joshua was himself of the tribe of Ephraim, but far from supporting the demands of his kinsmen he reproves them, and calls upon them to make good their great words by corresponding deeds of valor. He bids them clear the country of its woods and thus make room for settling their people. The "wood country"means probably the range which runs along the northern border of Manasseh, and which connects the mountains of Gilboa with Carmel. Mount Ephraim, (a name perhaps used by anticipation) called "the hill"Jos 17:16, and "the mountain of Israel"Jos 11:16, is the eastern portion of the territory of Ephraim and Manasseh extending toward the Jordan. This was a hilly, though by no means barren, district.

Barnes: Jos 17:16

The possession by the Canaanites of chariots strengthened and tipped with iron, such as were used by the Egyptians Exo 14:7, is named here by the children of Joseph as a reason why they could not possess themselves of the plains. "The valley of Jezreel"is the broad low valley which sweeps from "Zerin"between the mountains of Gilboa and the range of little Hermon eastward down to the Jordan. It was most likely in this valley that the host of the Midianites was encamped, when attacked by Gideon Jdg 7:1, Jdg 7:8. The great plain of Jezreel, called the plain of Esdraelon (Esdrelom, Judith 1:8), extends from Carmel on the west to the hills of Gilboa, little Hermon, and Tabor on the east, a distance of full sixteen miles; and its breadth between the rocky mass of southern Palestine and the bolder mountains of Galilee on the north, is about twelve miles. Its position as well as its open area make it the natural battlefield of Palestine.

Barnes: Jos 17:17

Thou shalt not have one lot only - i. e. by dispossessing the Canaanites, thou shalt double the portion of land at thy disposal. The "but"with which the King James Version begins Jos 17:18 should be "for."

Poole: Jos 16:1

Of Joseph i.e. of Ephraim, and the half tribe of Manasseh, which are here put together in one; not because they had but one lot, for Ephraim had one here, Jos 16:5 , and Manasseh another, Jos 17:1 ; but because in these first verses he speaks of them in common, and of the south border, which seems to be the same, either wholly or in a great part; and then he comes to the particular description of their several portions. It is here further remarkable, that God so disposed of these lots, that they came forth in decent and due order; Judah’ s first, to whom the sovereignty was promised; and then Joseph’ s, who succeeded Reuben in the other privilege of the birth-right, the double portion, 1Ch 5:1,2 .

The water of Jericho of which see 2Ki 2:19-22 . The wilderness that goeth up from Jericho the wilderness of Beth-aven , as appears by comparing Jos 18:12 , which speaks of the very same border which was on the south of Ephraim, and on the north of Benjamin.

Poole: Jos 16:2

From Beth-el to Luz or, from Bethel-luzah , as the LXX. here join the words; for Beth-el was anciently called Luz , Gen 28:19 48:3 ; though some think this was another Luz , spoken of Jud 1:26 . Others make Beth-el and Luz two neighbouring towns, which afterwards being more built and inhabited, became one, as oft hath happened.

Poole: Jos 16:3

Of the two

Beth-horons see Jos 10:10,11 .

Poole: Jos 16:4

Manasseh i.e. half Manasseh, by a synecdoche. Their inheritance, i.e. their several portions which here follow. Some think that they had but one lot between them; and therefore they are now said

to take their inheritance to wit, by dividing it between them according to the direction of Joshua and Eleazar, &c.; for that phrase being used of them, and not to my remembrance of any other tribes, may seem to have some peculiar signification, which doth not agree to the other tribes. But there being mention of a peculiar lot taken out for Manasseh, Jos 17:1 , shows that their several inheritances fell to them, as the rest did to the other tribes, even by several lots; and it is said of them, that

they took their inheritance which also Judah had done before them, because the tribes of Judah and Joseph did take their inheritances before the rest; and it was fit they should do so, for the security of the main camp, and the body of the people which were at Gilgal. See Jos 18:5 .

Poole: Jos 16:5

On the east side i.e. the north-east side. It is no wonder, if some of these descriptions are dark and doubtful to us at this distance of time and place; there having been so many alterations made in places, and so many circumstances being now altogether undiscoverable. But this is evident to every man of common sense, that this and all the descriptions here mentioned were then certain and evident to the Israelites, because these were the foundation of their present practice, and of all the possessions which then they took and peaceably possessed in succeeding ages.

Poole: Jos 16:6

Toward the sea the midland sea, towards the west.

Poole: Jos 16:7

Not to the city of Jericho, which belonged to Benjamin’ s lot, Jos 18:21 , but to its territory.

Poole: Jos 16:9

The separate cities i.e. besides those cities which were within Ephraim’ s bounds, he had some other cities, to which all their territories were annexed out of Manasseh’ s portion, because his tribe was all here, and was larger than Manasseh’ s.

Poole: Jos 16:10

The Canaanites were not driven out until Solomon’ s time, 1Ki 9:16 .

Under tribute as Jos 17:13 1Ki 9:16 .

Poole: Jos 17:1

He was the first-born of Joseph: the sense is, though Ephraim was to be more potent and numerous, yet Manasseh was the first-born, and had the privilege of the first-born, which was translated to Joseph, to wit, a double portion; and therefore though this were but half the tribe of Manasseh, yet they are not made inmates to Ephraim, but have a distinct lot of their own, as their brethren or other half tribe had beyond Jordan. Machir the only son of Manasseh, who therefore is here, and Jud 5:14 , put for the whole tribe. The first-born so even only sons are sometimes called, as Mat 1:25 : See Poole "Exo 4:22" .

The father of Gilead or, and the father , or who was also the father of Gilead ; not of the land of Gilead , but of the man Gilead , who was Machir’ s son, Num 26:29 .

He was a man of war he, i.e. Machir , had given great proof of his valour in his generation, (though the particular history be not mentioned,) and his posterity were no degenerate sons, but had his valiant blood still running in their veins. Gilead and Bashan i.e. part of those countries; for part of them was also given to the Reubenites, and part to the Gadites, as appears from Jos 13:30,31 . This may be added as a reason, either,

1. Why he got those places from the Amorites; or,

2. Why they were allotted to him or his posterity, because this was a frontier country, and the outworks to the land of Canaan, and therefore required such valiant persons to defend it.

Poole: Jos 17:2

A lot or, a portion, or distinct inheritance.

The rest of the children of Manasseh to wit, those of them which had not received their possessions beyond Jordan, Num 26:29 , &c.

These were the male children: this expression is used to bring in what follows, concerning his female children.

Poole: Jos 17:3

No sons, but daughters of whom See Poole "Num 26:33" ; See Poole "Num 27:1" .

Poole: Jos 17:4

He gave them i.e. Eleazar, or Joshua, with the consent of the princes appointed for that work.

Poole: Jos 17:5

Ten portions either,

1. Six portions for the six sons, whereof one was Hepher; and because he had no sons, his part was subdivided into five equal parts, for each of the daughters. Or,

2. Ten portions, five for the sons, and five for the daughters; for as for Hepher, both he and his son Zelophehad were dead, and that without sons, and therefore he had no portion; but his daughters had several portions allotted to them.

Poole: Jos 17:6

Among his sons i.e. no less than the sons; so their sex was no bar to their inheritance.

Poole: Jos 17:9

These cities of Ephrain Tappuah , and the cities upon the coast descending to the river , &c., last mentioned. Are among the cities of Manasseh , i.e. are intermixed with their cities, which was not strange nor unfit, these two being linked together by a nearer alliance than the rest.

Poole: Jos 17:10

His border either,

1. Manasseh’ s, whose portion is here described, and whose name was last mentioned. Or,

2. Ephraim’ s and Manasseh’ s, both expressed in the foregoing words, and implied in the following,

they

In Asher i.e. upon the tribe of Asher; for though Zebulun came between Asher and them for the greatest part of their land, yet it seems there were some necks or parcels of land, both of Ephraim’ s and of Manasseh’ s, which jutted out farther than the rest, and touched the borders of Asher. And it is certain there were many such incursions of the land of one tribe upon some parcels of another, although they were otherwise considerably distant one from the other. See Jos 19:34 . And you must not judge of these things by the present maps, which are drawn according to the opinions of late authors, which many times are false; and they are to be judged by the Scripture, and not the Scripture by them: but that part of Manasseh did reach to Asher, appears from hence, that Dor, a city of Manasseh, Jos 17:11 , was, as Josephus witnesseth, near Carmel, which belonged to Asher, Jos 19:26 .

Poole: Jos 17:11

In Issachar and in Asher either,

1. Bordering upon them, as in Asher is taken, Jos 17:10 , and as Aaron’ s rod is said to be in the ark, i.e. close by it, Heb 9:4 ; or,

2. Properly in them, as Ephraim had some cities in the tribe of Manasseh, Jos 16:9 , and as it was not unusual, when the places allotted to any tribe was too narrow for it, and the next too large, to give away part from the larger to the less portion; nay, sometimes one whole tribe was taken into another, as Simeon was into Judah’ s portion, when it was found too large for Judah, Jos 19:9 .

The inhabitants of Dor ; not the places only, but the people; whom, contrary to God’ s command, they spared and used for servants, whom therefore they are said to have or possess.

Three countries: this may be referred either to some, to wit, the three last places, or to all the places named in this verse, which are here said either to have three countries or tracts of land belonging to them, or to be in three several countries or portions, as they seem to have been, some in Issachar, and some in Asher, and yet both belonging to Manasseh. Or, the words may be rendered the third part of that country ; for the Hebrew word is of the singular number, and the article seems emphatical; and so the meaning may be, that the cities and towns here mentioned are a third part of that country, i.e. of that part of Issachar’ s and Asher’ s portion, in which those places lay.

Poole: Jos 17:12

See Poole "Jos 15:63" .

Would dwell were resolved to fight, rather than be turned out of their ancient habitations.

Poole: Jos 17:13

Which they were obliged to, now they were strong and numerous enough to possess those places.

Poole: Jos 17:14

The children of Joseph i.e. of Ephraim and Manasseh, as is manifest, partly from Jos 17:17 , where it is so explained; and partly because they mention it as an unreasonable thing, that they, being two, should have out one lot.

Spake unto Joshua i.e. expostulated with him, when they went and saw that portion which was allotted to them, and found it much short of their expectation.

One lot, and one portion either,

1. Because they really had but one lot, which was afterwards divided by the arbitrators between them. Or,

2. Because the land severally allotted to them was no more than was little enough for one of them.

A great people or numerous; for so the Hebrew word oft signifies.

Poole: Jos 17:15

He retorts their own argument: Seeing thou art a great and numerous people, turn thy complaints into actions and valiant exploits, and enlarge thy borders by thy own hand, to which thou mayst confidently expect God’ s assistance.

To the wood country to the mountain, as it, is called, Jos 17:18 , where among some towns there is much wood land, which thou mayst without much difficulty possess, and so get the more room.

Cut down i.e. the wood, Jos 17:18 , for thy own advantage and use; partly in building more cities and towns; and partly for preparing the land for the use of pasture and tillage.

The Perizzites supposed to be a savage and brutish kind of people, that lived in woods and mountains.

Of the giants who lived in caves and mountains, now especially when they were driven out of their cities.

If Mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee or, seeing Mount Ephraim is too narrow for thee , as thou complainest, take to thyself the rest of that hilly and wood country. Mount Ephraim was a particular and eminent portion of the land, belonging to the tribe of Ephraim, as appears from Jos 19:50 20:7 21:21 Jud 4:5 . And this seems to be here mentioned synecdochically, for all the portion allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh, as appears from their complaint, which was not that this part, but that their whole portion, was too strait for them.

Poole: Jos 17:16

The hill is not enough for us if we should invade and conquer it, and cut down both wood and men, yet it would not be sufficient for us. Heb. The hill will not be found , i.e. obtained, by us; those fierce and strong people the Perizzites and the giants will easily defend themselves, and frustrate our attempts, having the advantage of the woods and mountains.

The Canaanites that dwell in the land of the valley i.e. And if thou sayest, as we know thou wilt reply, that if the hill either cannot be conquered, or be not sufficient for us, we may go down and take more land out of the pleasant and fruitful valleys, we shall meet with no less difficulty there than in the mountains. Or thus, In going to the hills to which thou directest us, we must pass through valleys, where we shall be waylaid by powerful and armed enemies.

Chariots of iron not all made of iron but armed with iron, not only for defence, but for offence also, having as it were scythes and swords fastened to them, to cut down all that stood in their way.

The valley of Jezreel which was either in the tribe of Issachar, or upon the borders of it, Jos 19:18 .

Poole: Jos 17:17

Thou needest and deservest more than that lot of which thou art actually possessed, and thou hast power to get more; which if thou endeavourest to do, God will bless thee, and give thee more.

Poole: Jos 17:18

The outgoings of it either,

1. The productions or of that land, when it is cleared from the wood, and purged; or rather,

2. The valleys and fields belonging or adjoining to it, for there the Canaanites were, Jos 17:16 .

Haydock: Jos 16:1

Joseph. The double portion is given to him, as Ruben forfeited his birth-right. (Chaldean) (Worthington) ---

Waters; or the celebrated fountain, which renders the territory so fruitful, and which was made sweet, by Eliseus casting salt into it, 4 Kings ii. 19. ---

Wilderness of Bethaven, chap. xviii. 12., and viii. 14. (Calmet) ---

Which, is not to be referred to wilderness, but to the word lot. (Masius; Menochius)

Haydock: Jos 16:2

To Luza. The Vulgate reads Bethel Luza, which may be supposed to be two names, (chap. xviii. 13.; Haydock) for the same city. (Menochius) (Genesis xxviii. 29.) ---

Bethel was probably the country, (Calmet) or mountain, (Haydock) to the east of Luza, on the frontiers of Benjamin and of Ephraim; for which reason it is sometimes attributed to both. ---

To Atharoth. This city, and Archi, are supposed by some to be the same city. Archi seems, however, to have been a distinct place, where Chusai ws born, 2 Kings xv. 32. Atharoth is styled Addar, "the illustrious," ver. 5. It was 15 miles from Jericho.

Haydock: Jos 16:3

Nether. See chap. x. 11. The upper Bethoron was of much less note, near the Jordan. ---

Gazer was in the vicinity of Azotus, 1 Machabees xiv. 34., chap. x. 33. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jos 16:4

Possessed it, or divided the country between them. The territories of Ephraim are henceforward described, to the end of the chapter. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jos 16:6

Looketh to the north, &c. The meaning is, that the border went towards the north, by Machmethath; and then turned eastward to Thanathselo. (Challoner) ---

Borders. It should be terminus. "The border turneth eastward," Septuagint. (Bonfrere) ---

Janoe, twelve miles east of Sichem. (Eusebius) (4 Kings xv. 29.)

Haydock: Jos 16:8

Reeds. Septuagint, "of Cana." The vale belonged to Manasses, but the cities were ceded to Ephraim, ver. 9., chap. xvii. 19. The limits of these two tribes are very confused. (Calmet) ---

Most salt. This is the title generally applied to the lake of Sodom. But here the Mediterranean is meant, which, compared with many of the seas of Palestine, is certainly most salt. (Menochius) ---

The epithet is not, however, found in Hebrew or Septuagint (Calmet) and Serarius thinks it has crept in here by mistake. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jos 16:10

Gazer. It is not certain when the Ephraimites rendered this city tributary, or when it threw off the yoke. The king of Egypt afterwards conquered it, and gave it with his daughter to Solomon, chap. x. 33. (Calmet) See Judges i. 29. ---

The negligence of Ephraim was contrary to God's order, Exodus xx. (Menochius) ---

The Alexandrian Septuagint here inserts after day, "till Pharao, king of Egypt, went up and took the city, and burnt it with fire, and the Chanaanites and Pherezites, and the inhabitants of Gazer, he slew; and Pharao gave it as a dowry to his daughter." Grabe adds what seems deficient, "and they became tributary slaves." (Haydock)

Haydock: Jos 17:1

East. These two tribes are contiguous to the tribe of Joseph, taken all together, ver. 14. (Menochius) ---

Aser extended as far as Mount Carmel, which was not far from Dor, a city of Manasses, ver. 11., chap. xix. 26. The tribes of Issachar and of Zabulon seem, indeed, to come between Manasses and Aser; so that we might say, that the tribe of Joseph finding itself too much straitened, was forced to seek for more room in the cities of the other tribes, which we find it really inhabited, ver. 11. We might avoid all difficulties, by translating "they invaded (or made an irruption into) the tribe of Aser," &c., as the Hebrew will allow. Thus Dan conquered Lais, which lies at so great a distance from his own portion, and the tribes of Juda and Simeon were frequently intermixed. (Calmet) ---

Aser and Manasses may, however, have been really united on the north-west, or Mediterranean point. (Menochius)

Haydock: Jos 17:1

Born. Machir was the only son of Manasses. But the Scripture uses the word first-born for such, as it does for our Saviour, Matthew i. (Menochius) ---

If Machir was living when Moses assigned the territory to the half tribe of Manasses, he must have been 180 years old. (Calmet) ---

But he probably received the inheritance only in his posterity. (Haydock) ---

Galaad did not give his name to the country, as it was called so in the days of Jacob. Perhaps he took his name from the land, as many noblemen do, though he is styled Galaad before the war against Sehon commenced, Numbers xxvi. 29. By giving Ephraim the preference before his elder brother, Jacob did not deprive the latter of his birth-right. (Calmet) ---

In effect, Manasses was partly (Haydock) provided for before Ephraim received any portion. (Calmet) ---

This, however, was a privilege, and not a right. He had also two allotments, because his numbers required so much land. (Haydock)

Haydock: Jos 17:2

Children here comprises grandchildren, &c. These who are specified sprang from Galaad or from Jair, as they all dwelt on the east side of the Jordan, 1 Paralipomenon v. 23., and vii. 14. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jos 17:4

Father, adjoining to Ephraim. See Numbers xxvii., and xxxvi.

Haydock: Jos 17:5

Jordan. Some of the families, which had possessions there already, were permitted to have a share on the west side also. Here Manasses had ten portions, schœnus, or cords, which Herodotus (ii. 6,) reckons to contain each 60 stadia; so that he would have 600 stadia, (Calmet) or at least half of that quantity, chap. xv. 58. (Herodotus ii.) (Haydock) ---

There were six sons and five daughters to be provided for. But the portion of Hepher, the father of Salphaad, being given to his granddaughters, his is not counted. (Masius) ---

The Jews say the five daughters had only four portions, two for their grandfather, who, they say, was the eldest of the family; one for their father, and another for their uncle, who died without children. (Selden) ---

But of this no proof is adduced. (Calmet) ---

The five daughters would only have the one portion, which would have been enjoyed by the father. (Menochius) See 1 Paralipomenon v. 23.

Haydock: Jos 17:7

Aser was contiguous to Machmethath, 15 miles from Sichem, towards Scythopolis. (St. Jerome) (Calmet) ---

The limits of Manasses are described from the south, where he joins Ephraim, chap. xvi. 6. (Calmet)

Haydock: Jos 17:8

Taphua; which city, though situated in the territory of Manasses, belonged to Ephraim, (Worthington) as the Hebrew intimates.

Haydock: Jos 17:11

In Aser. The following towns were upon the frontiers of these two tribes, (Menochius) or they properly belonged to them respectively. But the children of Manasses took possession of them, after conquering by degrees, the former inhabitants, who were suffered to live among them, as the Jebusites were for some time, at Jerusalem, chap. xv. 63. (Haydock) ---

Bethsan, or Scythopolis, as it was called by the Greeks, after the Scythians had invaded those countries, (Herodotus l. 105,) in the year of the world 3391, almost 100 years from the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. Unless these Scythians may rather be the Cutheans, who were sent to people the kingdom of Samaria, most of whom embraced the Jewish religion, while those of Bethsan adhered to their ancient idolatry, and therefore retained their name. Even in the days of Josephus, most of the inhabitants were heathens: the kings of Juda were not able to subdue them entirely. Bethsan was situated to the south of the sea of Tiberias, 600 stadia from Jerusalem; (2 Machabees xii. 29,) that is, about 37 leagues, (Calmet) or 111 miles. (Haydock) ---

Dor, nine miles north of Cæsarea. ---

Endor, "the fountain of Dor," four miles south of Mount Thabor. (Eusebius) ---

Here Saul consulted the witch, 1 Kings xxxviii. 7. ---

Thenac, near Legion, and the torrent of Cisson, where Barac gained a victory, Judges v. ---

Nopheth, means "a canton," and thus Manasses may have had three portions of land round the three aforesaid cities, in which sense it is translated, chap. xi. 2. (Calmet; Masius) ---

But Serarius takes Nopheth to mean a city, (Menochius) agreeably to the Septuagint, "the third part of Naphetha, and its villages." (Haydock) ---

The other two parts of the city might be occupied by Zabulon. (Bonfrere) ---

No mention is made of Nopheth, Judges i. 27. (Haydock)

Haydock: Jos 17:12

Could, because they would not, Judges i. 27. The children of Manasses took these cities; but not putting the inhabitants to death, the latter got possession again, as was the case with respect to many other cities taken (Calmet) and destroyed (Haydock) by Josue. Hebrew, "the Chanaanites consented to dwell," &c. The Israelites spared their lives on their paying tribute; and this prevarication was the cause of their being afterwards reduced to submit to the yoke of these nations. (Calmet) (Judges ii. 20., Deuteronomy xx. 16.) (Menochius) ---

The Chanaaites dwelt with Manasses for a time; (Worthington) perhaps they were never wholly expelled. (Haydock)

Haydock: Jos 17:14

Spoke. Septuagint, "contradicted Josue." In effect, they spoke with a good deal of emotion. ---

Portion. Hebrew, "cord." (Calmet) ---

They addressed themselves to the general, before their territory was divided. (Masius) ---

Or they insinuate that the portion allotted to them both, would scarcely suffice for one tribe, and there was but little room for them to enlarge their dominion by subduing the Chanaanites, as the rest might do. Manasses was most concerned, as his numbers had increased 20,500 since he left Egypt, while his brother had diminished, Numbers xxvi. 34. (Calmet) ---

But then he had an extensive country on the other side of the Jordan. (Haydock)

Haydock: Jos 17:16

Thee. Destroy the Pherezite, &c., (Menochius) take their cities, and destroy the inhabitants, like so many trees, or cut down the wood to build houses, and in order to cultivate the land for the production of corn and grass.

Haydock: Jos 17:17

Iron, armed with scythes, who will obstruct our passage to the mountains, as we dare not encounter them in the open field. (Haydock) (4 Kings xx. 23.) ---

Hebrew, "the hill is not enough for us, (or it will not be found, or be attacked by us) and all the Chanaanites," &c. (Calmet) ---

Septuagint, "the mountain of Ephraim will not contain us; all the Chanaanites who dwell in the land of Emek, (of of the valley) in Bethsan, and its villages, and in the vale of Jezrael, have chosen cavalry and iron." (Haydock) ---

They are invincible. (Calmet) ---

The slothful man saith there is a lion without, Proverbs xxii. 13. Josue over-rules the cowardly objection, and argues, from their own boasting, that they were numerous enough to overcome all their opponents. He was himself of the tribe of Ephraim. (Haydock) ---

Valley, extending about 10,000 paces from Bethsan to Legion. Jezrael ws in the middle of it, and is attributed to Issachar, chap. xix. 18. But it was probably on the frontiers of Manasses, who seems to have spoken as if it would belong to the first who had driven out the Chanaanites. The kings of Israel had a palace at Jezrael, and the vineyard of Naboth being contiguous to it, gave occasion to the sin of Jazabel, and to the destruction of Achab's family, 3 Kings xxi. 1. In this vale, Gedeon routed the Madianites, Judges vi. 33.

Haydock: Jos 17:18

Mountain, probably of Gelboe, as that of Ephraim was not sufficient, ver. 15. Gelboe extended almost as far as Bethsan, and it would afford a fine opportunity of attacking the nations below. Josue persists in his first resolution; and though of the same tribe, he is so little actuated by partiality towards his brethren, that they alone seem to have been dissatisfied with their portion. (Calmet)

Gill: Jos 16:1

And the lot of the children of Joseph fell,.... Or, "went out" ^a; of the pot or urn, this being the next lot that was drawn to that of Judah, the government being Judah's, and the birthright Joseph's, 1Ch 5:2; and by his children are here meant the tribe of Ephraim, and the tribe of Manasseh: or the line and border according to the lot went forth

from Jordan by Jericho unto the water of Jericho on the east; by which it appears, that this was the southern border of the lot; for the tribe of Benjamin, in which Jericho was, lay between Judah and Ephraim, and the border began at Jordan, where it flowed near Jericho, and proceeded to a water which belonged to that city, and is generally thought to be the waters Elisha healed, 2Ki 2:19,

to the wilderness that goeth up throughout Mount Bethel; this was the wilderness of Bethaven, Jos 18:12; Jarchi interprets it of the border that went up through Mount Bethel; which is true, and so might the wilderness also, for which the Targum is express; mention is made of a mountain on the east of Bethel, Gen 12:8.

Gill: Jos 16:2

And goeth out from Bethel to Luz,.... For though these two places in time became one, yet they were originally distinct. Bethel, at which Jacob stopped, and who gave it its name, was a field adjacent to the city of Luz, Gen 38:11; and therefore with propriety may be, as they here are, distinguished:

and passeth along unto the borders Archi to Ataroth; or to Archiataroth; these two words being the name of one and the same place, and to be joined as they are, in the Greek version, and others; and is the same with Atarothaddar, Jos 16:5. Ataroth was its proper name, but it had these additional epithets to distinguish it from another Ataroth; see Jos 16:7; Jerom ^b makes mention of Atharoth by Ramma, in the tribe of Joseph, and of another in the tribe of Ephraim, now a village at the north of Sebaste, or Samaria, four miles from it, called Atharus; the former is here meant.

Gill: Jos 16:3

And goeth down westward to the coast of Japhleti,.... This place is now unknown, though no doubt well known to the sons of Joseph, when this lot fell to them, and its border was described:

unto the coast of Bethhoron the nether: so called to distinguish it from Bethhoron the upper, Jos 16:5; this was about twelve miles from Jerusalem; See Gill on Jos 10:10; and to Gezer: which was about a day's journey from Bethhoron, as appears from the passages in the Apocrypha:"39 So Nicanor went out of Jerusalem, and pitched his tents in Bethhoron, where an host out of Syria met him. 40 But Judas pitched in Adasa with three thousand men, and there he prayed, saying, ... 45 Then they pursued after them a day's journey, from Adasa unto Gazera, sounding an alarm after them with their trumpets.'' (1 Maccabees 7)Jerom ^c says in his time it was a village called Gazara, four miles from Nicopolis, or Emmaus. It is the same with Gadara, as it is sometimes called by Josephus, who says ^d, the tribe of Ephraim took in the land from the river Jordan to Gadara; this was a royal city; see Jos 10:33,

and the outgoings thereof are at the sea: the Mediterranean sea.

Gill: Jos 16:4

So the children of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, took their inheritance. As it fell to them by the lot; by Manasseh is meant the half tribe of Manasseh, one half of that tribe having been settled by Moses on the other side Jordan; and next follows an account of the borders of the inheritance of Ephraim in particular, as that of the half tribe of Manasseh is given in Jos 17:1.

Gill: Jos 16:5

And the border of the children of Ephraim, according to their families, was thus,.... Or what follows is the description of it:

even the border of their inheritance on the east side was Atarothaddar, unto Bethhoron the upper; the first was on the south of the inheritance, and the latter on the north, as Masius has placed them: who has given us a type of this description, by which it appears that this lot is here described in its breadth from south to north.

Gill: Jos 16:6

And the border went out towards the sea,.... The Mediterranean sea:

to Michmethah on the north side; of the border, the same on which Bethhoron was, from whence the border proceeded on to this place, of which we have no other account but in Jos 17:7; by which it appears to have been near Shechem, and in sight of it:

and the border went about eastward unto Taanathshiloh; this seems to be the same Jerom ^e calls Thenath in the tribe of Joseph; and who observes there was in his day a village of this name ten miles from Neapolis (or Shechem) to the east, as you go down to Jordan:

and passed by it on the east to Janohah: which the above writer ^f wrongly calls Janon, and says, that in his time a village of this name was shown in the country of Acrabatena, twelve miles to the east from Neapolis or Shechem; the border passed by Taanath on the east of it, and went on this place.

Gill: Jos 16:7

And it went down from Johanan to Ataroth,.... This is different from Ataroth before mentioned, Jos 16:2; there were several places of this name, as before observed; this seems to be that which Jerom places four miles from Sebaste or Samaria; see Gill on Jos 16:2,

and to Naarath; Jerom ^g says, that Naarath was in his time called Naorath, a village of the Jews, five miles from Jericho; and is the village Josephus ^h calls Neara, where was a water, half of which Archelaus turned, and led to the field planted with palm trees, near Jericho; and, according to the Jewish writers ⁱ: there was a place called Noaran near to Jericho, which seems to be this:

and came to Jericho, and went out at Jordan; where it ended this way, which was eastward.

Gill: Jos 16:8

The border went out from Tappuah westward,.... Which was different from the Tappuah in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:34; this was in the tribe of Ephraim on the border of Manasseh, Jos 17:8,

unto the river Kanah; supposed by some to be the brook Cherith, by which Elijah hid himself, 1Ki 17:3; though objected to by others; it seems to have had its name from the reeds which grew in it, or on the banks of it:

and the goings out thereof were at the sea; if the river Kanah was the brook Cherith, this must be the dead or salt sea: but that is never called "the sea", rather the Mediterranean sea is meant, and consequently Kanah could not be Cherith, which was at too great a distance from this sea:

this is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim by their families; that is, this is the description of the border of it; for the cities within are not mentioned, and the descriptions in general are very obscure.

Gill: Jos 16:9

And the separate cities for the children of Ephraim,.... The tribe of Ephraim, being much larger than the half tribe of Manasseh, besides the lot that fell to it, described before by its boundaries, had several particular and distinct cities given to it: which

were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh; some that were upon the borders of Ephraim, and within the territory of Manasseh, and it may be where it jetted out in a nook or corner, see Jos 17:8,

all the cities with their villages; not the separate cities only, but the little towns adjacent to them.

Gill: Jos 16:10

And they drove not out the Canaanites which dwelt in Gezer,.... Which was the border of their tribe length ways, and was near the sea, Jos 16:3; in this they did not obey the command of God, and either they did not drive them out, because they could not, God not delivering them up into their hands, because of their sins; or through their slothfulness, or it may be through covetousness, being willing to make some advantage to themselves by them, being a trading people, which seems to be intended in the next clause:

but the Canaanites dwelt among the Ephraimites unto this day; which Joshua, the writer of this book, might truly say, and be no objection to it, since the same is observed after his death, Jdg 1:29; and indeed they continued to dwell there until the times of Solomon, when it was taken by Pharaoh king of Egypt, and given as a present to his daughter, the wife of Solomon, 1Ki 9:15; and though this clause does not furnish out an argument against the writing of this book by Joshua, yet, from the instance given, it appears it must have been written before the times of Solomon, and so not by Ezra, as some:

and serve under tribute; so that they were under their power, and therefore could have driven them out, or slain them, as by the command of God they should; but they spared them for the sake of the tribute they received from them, which seems to agree with the character of the Ephraimites, Hos 12:8.

Gill: Jos 17:1

There was also a lot for the tribe of Manasseh,.... As well as for the tribe of Ephraim:

for he was the firstborn of Joseph; and therefore ought to have his part and share in the lot of the children of Joseph, though Ephraim was preferred before him in the blessing of Jacob. Some think this is given as a reason why he had a double portion, one on the other side Jordan, and another in the land of Canaan:

to wit, for Machir, the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead; who was the only son of Manasseh, and so through him, and by his son Gilead, the whole tribe sprung from that patriarch: and

because he was a man of war, therefore he had Gilead and Bashan; which were given to his posterity by Moses, and lay on the other side Jordan, see Deu 3:13. This Machir very likely had shown his warlike disposition and courage in Egypt, and had fought under the kings there against the common enemy of that country; for it is highly probable he was dead before the children of Israel came out from thence, but the same warlike spirit continued in his posterity; they had their part assigned them on the other side Jordan, to defend that country, while the tribes of Reuben and Gad attended to the care of their flocks and herds.

Gill: Jos 17:2

There was also a lot for the rest of the children of Manasseh by their families,.... For such that had no part in Gilead and Bashan on the other side Jordan, even for the other half tribe, whose families are particularly mentioned, as follows:

for the children of Abiezer; who is called Jeezer in Num 26:30; and was a son of Gilead, the son of Machir, as the rest that follow were:

and for the children of Helek, and for the children of Asriel, and for the children of Shechem, and for the children of Hepher, and for the children of Shemida; hence the families of the Jeezerites, Helekites, Asrielites, Shechemites, Hepherites, and Shemidaites, mentioned in Num 26:30; and for which families was the lot here spoken of:

these were the male children of Manasseh the son of Joseph by their families; which is observed for the sake of, and to lead unto what follows, otherwise in common none but males inherited; but the following is an excepted and remarkable case.

Gill: Jos 17:3

But Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, had no sons, but daughters,.... The descent of this man is particularly given, to show the truth and reality of it, upon which his daughters made their request, and that granted and now claimed:

and these are the names of his daughters, Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah,

Milcah, and Tirzah; by the same names, and in the same order they are called in Num 26:33; the order is a little different in Num 36:11.

Gill: Jos 17:4

And they came near before Eleazar the priest, and before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the princes,.... The ten princes, who, with Eleazar and Joshua, were appointed to divide the land, Num 34:17; and were now met together for that purpose, Jos 14:1,

saying, the Lord commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brethren; those of the same tribe with them; for upon their application to Moses he inquired of the Lord, who ordered him to grant their request, Num 27:1,

therefore according to the commandment of the Lord he gave them an inheritance among the brethren of their fathers; that is, to the half tribe of Manasseh.

Gill: Jos 17:5

And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan,.... The lot which fell to the half tribe of Manasseh was divided into ten parts: according to the Jewish writers, the six families before mentioned had six parts, and the daughters of Zelophehad had four parts; one on the account of Zelophehad their father, two on the account of their grandfather Hepher, who they say was the firstborn, and one on account of their uncle, their father's brother, who died in the wilderness without children; so Jarchi and Kimchi relate from the Talmud ^k; but the true case seems to be this, there were six portions for the six families, but there being no sons in Hepher's family, his part was divided into five, and given to the five daughters of Zelophehad:

beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan: which were given to the other half tribe, as before observed, Jos 13:29.

Gill: Jos 17:6

Because the daughters of Manasseh had an inheritance among his sons,.... Which occasioned such a number of portions; the daughters of Zelophehad are meant, who descended from Manasseh:

and the rest of Manasseh, some had the land of Gilead; that is, those besides the six families before expressed, namely, the two families of the Machirites and Gileadites, Num 26:29.

Gill: Jos 17:7

And the coast of Manasseh was from Asher,.... Not from the border of the tribe of Asher, as Kimchi, in which he is followed by Vatablus; for that was at too great a distance; but a city of the tribe of Manasseh; and in Jerom's ^l time a village of this name was shown fifteen miles from Neapolis or Shechem, as you go from thence to Scythopolis, near the public road:

to Michmethah, that lieth before Shechem; the same place mentioned in the description of the border of Ephraim; see Gill on Jos 16:6,

and the border went along on the right hand, unto the inhabitants of Entappuah; that is, leaving this place, and its inhabitants to the right, which was a place in the land of that name, next mentioned; and seems to be so called from a fountain in it, or near it, as well as from a multitude of apples growing there, and with which perhaps the country abounded, of which in Jos 17:8.

Gill: Jos 17:8

Now Manasseh had the land of Tappuah,.... The whole territory that went by that name, from a city of note in it, next mentioned; all the fields and villages in it belonged to the tribe of Manasseh:

but Tappuah on the border of Manasseh belonged to the children of Ephraim; and was one of those separate cities they had among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh; though it seems they had only the city, not the territory adjacent to it, and which was named from it.

Gill: Jos 17:9

And the coast descended unto the river Kanah, southward of the river,.... The same mentioned in the account of the coast of Ephraim, Jos 16:8; which was north of that river, as Manasseh was to the south of it:

these cities of Ephraim are among the cities of Manasseh; that is, the cities before mentioned, Asher, Michmethah, Entappuah, and Tappuah; though they were in the tribe of Manasseh, yet they were inhabited by the Ephraimites:

the coast of Manasseh also was on the north side of the river; of the river Kanah, as well as on the south of it; it had cities there, though possessed by the tribe of Ephraim:

and the outgoings of it were at the sea; the Mediterranean sea.

Gill: Jos 17:10

Southward it was Ephraim's, and northward it was Manasseh's,.... As Ephraim lay to the south of Manasseh, Manasseh lay to the north of Ephraim:

and the sea is his border; the Mediterranean sea was their boundary on the west:

and they met together in Asher on the north; that is, on the northwest towards the Mediterranean sea, as, at Mount Carmel:

and in Issachar on the east; towards Jordan.

Gill: Jos 17:11

And Manasseh had in Issachar, and in Asher, Bethshean, and her towns,.... As Ephraim had cities in Manasseh, so had Manasseh cities in these two tribes, which in some parts bordered on it, before described, even the cities following, and the first that is named is Bethshean: this lay in the tribe of Issachar, and was the uttermost border of Manasseh that way; it was, as Josephus ^m says, called Scythopolis; but not from the Scythians, as Pliny ⁿ suggests, but from Succoth, a place where Jacob resided, and which was not far from it, Gen 33:17; it lay before the great plain of Jezreel, and was at the entrance into it,"After this went they over Jordan into the great plain before Bethsan.'' (1 Maccabees 5:52)and was six hundred furlongs, or seventy five miles, from Jerusalem, according to:"From thence they departed to Scythopolis, which lieth six hundred furlongs from Jerusalem,'' (2 Maccabees 12:29)and was one of the cities of Decapolis, from whence our Lord had hearers, Mat 4:25. It was such a pleasant place, that it is said in the Talmud ^o, that if the garden of Eden was in the land of Israel, Bethshean was the gate of it; on which the gloss says, that its fruits were the sweetest in the land of Israel:

and Ibleam and her towns; it seems to be the same with Bileam, by a transposition of the two first letters, 1Ch 6:70; and was a place not far from Megiddo, after mentioned, as appears from 2Ki 9:27,

and the inhabitants of Dor and her towns; this had been a royal city; see Gill on Jos 11:2 and See Gill on Jos 12:23,

and the inhabitants of Endor and her towns; this place became famous for a witch there in the times of Saul, 1Sa 28:7; in the times of Jerom ^p it was a large village near Mount Tabor, four miles to the south, which he calls Aeudor, of or in Jezreel; and elsewhere ^q he speaks of Endor, as near the town of Nain, where our Lord raised the widow's son the dead, and is about: Scythopolis:

and the inhabitants of Taanach and her towns; this had been a royal city; see Gill on Jos 12:22,

and the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: this was another royal city mentioned with the former; See Gill on Jos 12:21; there

even three countries; the three last cities, with their towns, that are mentioned, Endor, Taanach, and Megiddo; all which perhaps belonged to Dor, and may be the Naphothdor spoken of Jos 11:2; where the same word is used as here; so Jarchi interprets it.

Gill: Jos 17:12

Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of these cities,.... Mentioned in Jos 17:11; they had not strength at first to do it, or either were negligent and slothful, and suffered them to dwell among them, and did not take the advantage they might have done; and afterwards it was too late, they became too strong and numerous for them, at least for a time:

but the Canaanites would dwell in the land; whether they would or not.

Gill: Jos 17:13

Yet it came to pass, when the children of Israel were waxed strong,.... Increased in numbers, and became superior to the Canaanites, not only those of the tribe of Manasseh, but of the other tribes also:

that they put the Canaanites to tribute; they did not take away their lives, as they were commanded to do, but made them tributaries to them, which seems to arise from a covetous disposition, and done for the sake of gain:

but did not utterly drive them out; which they were ordered to do, and could now have done; for if they were able to make them pay tribute to them, they had power sufficient to drive them out, or destroy them, and therefore broke the commandment of God, Deu 7:1.

Gill: Jos 17:14

And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua,.... Which some understand of the children of Manasseh only; and, indeed, the complaint and arguments used, as well as some circumstances in the account, best agree with them; yet certain it is, that the children of Ephraim accompanied the children of Manasseh, and were present at this interview, as appears from Jos 17:17; and if they did not join with them in the request and complaint expressly, they countenanced and encouraged the same by their presence:

saying, why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit: this seems to suit better with one than both; for there was a lot for the tribe of Manasseh also, as well as for Ephraim, Jos 17:1; by which it should seem that there were two, and if both made this expostulation, it was not fact; but it may be, that the inheritance which came to them by lot was not as yet divided, and so they called it one lot and one portion, and then it might with propriety be said by them both; and their sense be, that the lot or portion assigned them was only sufficient for one of them, and not for both:

seeing I am a great people; as especially both tribes put together were:

forasmuch as the Lord hath blessed me hitherto? this best agrees with the tribe of Manasseh, which, since their coming out of Egypt, was increased twenty thousand five hundred, whereas the tribe of Ephraim was decreased; compare Num 1:33 with Num 26:34. Now it might have been expected by them, that as Joshua was of the tribe of Ephraim, that he would have favoured their cause on that account, and that they should have obtained the grant of an addition by that means; but Joshua was impartial in his administration, and showed no favour and affection on that score, as appears by what follows.

Gill: Jos 17:15

And Joshua answered them,.... By retorting their own argument upon them:

if thou be a great people; which he does not deny, as they were for numbers and power:

then get thee up to the wood country; which was near them, and within their borders, and lay on hills and mountains, perhaps the mountains of Gilboa, and therefore are bid to go up:

and cut down for thyself there; cut down the trees of the wood, clear the ground of them, and so make it habitable, and by that means enlarge the places of their habitation:

in the land of the Perizzites, and of the giants; or Rephaim; the former of these were one of the seven nations of the Canaanites, who from their name seem to have dwelt not in the cities, and walled towns, but in villages, and scattered houses, in desert places, and among the woods, where also the giants had retired and dwelt after Joshua had driven them out of the cities; and by driving these out of their present habitations, they would gain more room to dwell in, and would find their lot sufficient for them:

if Mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee; either meaning all Ephraim, and even the whole lot of the sons of Joseph, or rattler the mount particularly so called; for the words may be rendered, "for Mount Ephraim hastens for thee" ^q; was clear or open for thee; ready to be delivered to thee, and thou mayest possess it at once.

Gill: Jos 17:16

And the children of Joseph said, the hill is not enough for us,.... Meaning either Mount Ephraim, and all included in it; or it may be rather the wood country on the hills and mountains they were bid to go up to; signifying, that if they could gain that out of the hands of the Perizzites and giants, and clear it of the wood, and make it habitable, even that would not be sufficient for them; or that hill and mountain cannot be "found by us" ^r or obtained and possessed by us; we are not able to get it into our hands; there being a valley between us and that:

and all the Canaanites that dwell in the land of the valley have chariots of iron; not chariots made of iron, but chariots with iron scythes fastened to the sides, or axle trees of them, which when driven with great force and fury, would cut down the infantry in battle, as grass is cut down with scythes, see Jdg 4:2,

both they who are of Bethshean and her towns, and they who are of the valley of Jezreel; both which belonged to the tribe of Manasseh, or were on the borders of it, though as yet they had not got possession, see Jos 17:11; and this circumstance seems to favour the notion, that tribe of Manasseh were at least chiefly concerned in this address.

Gill: Jos 17:17

And Joshua spake unto the house of Joseph, even to Ephraim and to Manasseh,.... From whence it is clear that some of both were present; and they being brethren, and their interests united, and their cities intermixed, it would be to their mutual advantage to have an enlargement; which the tribe of Manasseh wanted more especially, more of their cities that fell to their lot being in the hands of the Canaanites, than of any other:

saying, thou art a great people, and hast great power; were very numerous, and so able to contend with the Canaanites, and make themselves more room:

thou shalt not have one lot only; or only have what they were possessed of, but should have more; and, as they wanted more, they were able enough to get more; and if they exerted their power, relying on the providence of God, through his blessing on their endeavours, they would certainly have an increase of their portion.

Gill: Jos 17:18

But the mountains shall be thine,.... Or "for" ^s it shall be thine; thou shalt get the possession of it, though attended with difficulties that seem insuperable:

for, or "if, though" ^t.

it is a wood; the habitation of the Perizzites, and giants, and so dangerous to go un to it, and full of trees, and so seems unprofitable and useless:

and thou shalt cut it down; both the inhabitants of it, and the trees of it, and clear it of both, and make it both safe and commodious to dwell in, which would be a fine enlargement for them:

and the outgoings of it shall be thine; all it produces when cultivated, and all the parts adjacent to it:

for thou shall drive out the Canaanites; this Joshua assures them of, to encourage them to attempt it:

though they have iron chariots, and though they be strong; be not afraid of their chariots, though terrible, nor of their giants and mighty men, God will be on your side, and you have nothing to fear from them, see Jos 11:4; whether the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh took this advice of Joshua is not said.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Jos 16:1

¹ map For location see Map5 B2; Map6 E1; Map7 E1; Map8 E3; Map10 A2; Map11 A1.

² tn Heb “The lot went out to the sons of Joseph from the Jordan [at] Jericho to the waters of Jericho to the east, the desert going up from Jericho into the hill country of Bethel.”

map For location see Map4 G4; Map5 C1; Map6 E3; Map7 D1; Map8 G3.

NET Notes: Jos 16:2

¹ tn Heb “it”; the referent (the southern border) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn In the Hebrew text the place name “Luz” has the directive ending, indicating that the border went from Bethel to Luz. Elsewhere Luz and Bethel appear to be names for the same site (cf. Judg 1:23), but here they appear to be distinct. Note that the NIV translates “from Bethel (that is, Luz)” here, following the reading of the LXX, εἰς Βαιθηλ Λουζα (eis Baiqhl Louza, “from Bethel [Luz]”).

NET Notes: Jos 16:4

¹ tn Or “received their inheritance.”

NET Notes: Jos 16:5

¹ tn Heb “The territory of the sons of Ephraim was for their clans.”

NET Notes: Jos 16:7

¹ map For location see Map5 B2; Map6 E1; Map7 E1; Map8 E3; Map10 A2; Map11 A1.

² tn The word “River” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Jos 16:8

¹ tn Heb “This is the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Ephraim.”

NET Notes: Jos 16:9

¹ tn Heb “and the cities set apart for the sons of Ephraim in the midst of the inheritance of the sons of Manasseh, all the cities and their towns.”

NET Notes: Jos 16:10

¹ tn Heb “they”; the referent (the Ephraimites) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Jos 17:1

¹ tn Heb “and the lot belonged to the tribe of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph.”

² tn Heb “to Makir, the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, for he was a man of war.”

³ tn Heb “Gilead and Bashan belonged to him.”

sn On the assignment of Manasseh’s territory in Gilead and Bashan, see Josh 13:31.

NET Notes: Jos 17:2

¹ tn Heb “and it belonged to the sons of Manasseh who remained.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:4

¹ tn Heb “The Lord commanded Moses to assign to us an inheritance in the midst of our brothers.” Since Zelophehad had no sons, “brothers” must refer to their uncles, as the next sentence makes clear.

² tn Heb “he.” The referent is probably Joshua, although Eleazar is mentioned first in the preceding list.

³ tn Heb “and he assigned to them in accordance with the mouth [i.e., command] of the Lord an inheritance in the midst of the brothers of their father.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:5

¹ tn Heb “and the allotted portions of Manasseh fell out ten.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:7

¹ tn Heb “was.”

² tn Heb “in front of”; perhaps “east of.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:9

¹ tn Heb “these cities belonged to Ephraim in the midst of the cities of Manasseh.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:10

¹ tn Heb “his”; the referent (Manasseh) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn Heb “they”; the referent (their territory) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Jos 17:11

¹ map For location see Map1 D4; Map2 C1; Map4 C2; Map5 F2; Map7 B1.

² tn Or “the third [is] Napheth”; or “Napheth-dor.” The meaning of the Hebrew phrase is uncertain.

³ tn Heb “Beth Shean and its surrounding towns, Ibleam and its surrounding towns, the residents of Dor and its surrounding towns, the residents of En Dor and its surrounding towns, the residents of Taanach and its surrounding towns, the residents of Megiddo and its surrounding towns, three of Nepheth.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:12

¹ tn Heb “sons”; “men” has been used in the translation because the context involves the conquest of cities; therefore, warriors (hence males) would be in view here.

² tn Or “were determined.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:13

¹ sn On the Israelites’ failure to conquer the Canaanites completely, see Judg 1:27-28.

NET Notes: Jos 17:14

¹ tn Heb “Why have you given me as an inheritance one lot and one portion, though I am a great people until [the time] which, until now the Lord has blessed me?” The construction עַד אֲשֶׁר־עַד־כֹּה (’ad-’asher-’ad-koh, “until [the time] which, until now”) is extremely awkward. An emendation of the first עַד (’ad) to עַל (’al) yields a more likely reading: “for until now” (see HALOT 2:787).

NET Notes: Jos 17:15

¹ tn Heb “If you are a great people.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:16

¹ tn The Hebrew text has simply “the hill country,” which must here include the hill country of Ephraim and the forest regions mentioned in v. 15.

² tn Heb “and there are iron chariots among all the Canaanites who live in the land of the valley, to those who are in Beth Shean and its daughters and to those who are in the Valley of Jezreel.” Regarding the translation “chariots with iron-rimmed wheels” see Y. Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands, 255 and R. Drews, “The ‘Chariots of Iron’ of Joshua and Judges,” JSOT 45 (1989): 15-23.

NET Notes: Jos 17:17

¹ tn Heb “house.”

NET Notes: Jos 17:18

¹ tn The Hebrew text has simply “the hill country,” which must here include the hill country of Ephraim and the forest regions mentioned in v. 15.

² tn Heb “and its limits will be yours.”

Geneva Bible: Jos 16:1

And the lot of the ^{( a )} children of Joseph fell from Jordan by Jericho, unto the water of Jericho on the east, to the wilderness that goeth up from Jericho throughout mount Bethel,

^{( a )} That is, to Ephraim and his children: for Manasseh's portion follows.

Geneva Bible: Jos 16:3

And goeth down westward to the coast of Japhleti, unto the coast of Bethhoron the nether, and to Gezer: and the goings out ^{( b )} thereof are at the sea.

^{( b )} Of their inheritance.

Geneva Bible: Jos 16:4

So the children of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, ^{( c )} took their inheritance.

^{( c )} Severally, first Ephraim, and then Manasseh.

Geneva Bible: Jos 16:7

And it went down from Janohah to Ataroth, and to Naarath, and came to Jericho, ^{( d )} and went out at Jordan.

^{( d )} For so far the coasts reach.

Geneva Bible: Jos 16:9

And the ^{( e )} separate cities for the children of Ephraim [were] among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.

^{( e )} Because Ephraim's tribe was far greater than Manasseh, therefore he had more cities.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:2

There was also [a lot] for the ^{( a )} rest of the children of Manasseh by their families; for the children of Abiezer, and for the children of Helek, and for the children of Asriel, and for the children of Shechem, and for the children of Hepher, and for the children of Shemida: these [were] the male children of Manasseh the son of Joseph by their families.

^{( a )} For the other half tribe had their portion beyond Jordan.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:4

And they came near before Eleazar the priest, and before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the princes, saying, The LORD commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our ^{( b )} brethren. Therefore according to the commandment of the LORD he gave them an inheritance among the brethren of their father.

^{( b )} Among them of our tribe.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:5

And there fell ten portions to ^{( c )} Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which [were] on the other side Jordan;

^{( c )} In the land of canaan: five to the males: and other five to the daughters of Zelophehad.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:8

[Now] Manasseh had the land of Tappuah: but ^{( d )} Tappuah on the border of Manasseh [belonged] to the children of Ephraim;

^{( d )} Meaning, the city itself.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:9

And the coast descended unto the river Kanah, southward of the river: these cities of Ephraim [are] among the cities of Manasseh: the coast of Manasseh also [was] on the north side of the river, and the outgoings of it were at the ^{( e )} sea:

^{( e )} That is, toward the main sea.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:10

Southward [it was] Ephraim's, and northward [it was] Manasseh's, and the sea is his border; and they met together in ^{( f )} Asher on the north, and in Issachar on the east.

^{( f )} In the tribe of Asher, and tribe of Issachar.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:12

Yet the children of Manasseh ^{( g )} could not drive out [the inhabitants of] those cities; but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.

^{( g )} For at first they lacked courage, and later agreed with them on condition, contrary to God's commandment.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:14

And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua, saying, Why hast thou given me [but] one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I [am] a great people, forasmuch as the LORD hath ^{( h )} blessed me hitherto?

^{( h )} According to my father Jacob's prophecy, (Gen 48:19).

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:15

And Joshua answered them, If thou [be] a great people, [then] get thee up to the wood [country], and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, ^{( i )} if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.

^{( i )} If this mount is not large enough, why do you not get more by destroying God's enemies, as he has commanded.

Geneva Bible: Jos 17:18

But the mountain shall be thine; for it [is] a wood, and thou shalt cut it down: and the outgoings of it shall be thine: ^{( k )} for thou shalt drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots, [and] though they [be] strong.

^{( k )} So that you shall enlarge your portion by it.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Jos 16:1-10

1 The general borders of the sons of Joseph.

5 The border of the inheritance of Ephraim.

10 The Canaanites of Gezer not conquered.

TSK Synopsis: Jos 17:1-18

1 The lot of Manasseh.

7 His coast.

12 The Canaanites not driven out.

14 The children of Joseph obtain another lot.

MHCC: Jos 16:1-10

This and the following chapter should not be separated. They give the lots of Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, who, next to Judah, were to have the post of honour, and therefore had the first and best portion in the northern part of Canaan, as Judah in the southern part. God's people now, as of old, suffer his enemies to remain. Blessed Lord, when will all our enemies be subdued? 1Co 15:26. Do thou drive them all out; thou alone canst do it. These settled boundaries may remind us, that our situation and provision in this life, as well as our future inheritance, are appointed by the only wise and righteous God, and we should be content with our portion, since he knows what is best for us, and all we have is more than we deserve.

MHCC: Jos 17:1-6

Manasseh was but half of the tribe of Joseph, yet it was divided into two parts. The daughters of Zelophehad now reaped the benefit of their pious zeal and prudent forecast. Those who take care in the wilderness of this world, to make sure to themselves a place in the inheritance of the saints in light, will have the comfort of it in the other world; while those who neglect it now, will lose it for ever. Lord, teach us here to believe and obey, and give us an inheritance among thy saints, in glory everlasting.

MHCC: Jos 17:7-13

There was great communication between Manasseh and Ephraim. Though each tribe had its inheritance, yet they should intermix one with another, to do good offices one to another, as became those, who, though of different tribes, were all one Israel, and were bound to love as brethren. But they suffered the Canaanites to live among them, against the command of God, to serve their own ends.

MHCC: Jos 17:14-18

Joshua, as a public person, had no more regard to his own tribe than to any other, but would govern without favour or affection; wherein he has left a good example to all in public trusts. Joshua tells them, that what was fallen to their share would be a sufficient lot for them, if they would but work and fight. Men excuse themselves from labour by any pretence; and nothing serves the purpose better than having rich and powerful relations, able to provide for them; and they are apt to desire a partial and unfaithful disposal of what is intrusted to those they think able to give such help. But there is more real kindness in pointing out the advantages within reach, and in encouraging men to make the best of them, than in granting indulgences to sloth and extravagance. True religion gives no countenance to these evils. The rule is, They shall not eat who will not work; and many of our " cannots" are only the language of idleness, which magnifies every difficulty and danger. This is especially the case in our spiritual work and warfare. Without Christ we can do nothing, but we are apt to sit still and attempt nothing. if we belong to Him, he will stir us up to our best endeavours, and to cry to him for help. Then our coast will be enlarged, 1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10, and complainings silenced, or rather, turned into joyful thanksgivings.

Matthew Henry: Jos 16:1-4

Though Joseph was one of the younger sons of Jacob, yet he was his eldest by his most just and best beloved wife Rachel, was himself his best beloved son, and had been the greatest ornament and support of his family, kept it from perishing in a time of famine, and had been the shepherd and stone of Israel, and therefore his posterity were very much favoured by the lot. Their portion lay in the very heart of the land of Canaan. It extended from Jordan in the east (Jos 16:1) to the sea, the Mediterranean Sea, in the west, so that it took up the whole breadth of Canaan from side to side; and no question the fruitfulness of the soil answered the blessings both of Jacob and Moses, Gen 49:25, Gen 49:26, and Deu 33:13, etc. The portions allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh are not so particularly described as those of the other tribes; we have only the limits and boundaries of them, not the particular cities in them, as before we had the cities of Judah and afterwards those of the other tribes. For this no reason can be assigned, unless we may suppose that Joshua being himself of the children of Joseph they referred it to him alone to distribute among them the several cities that lay within their lot, and therefore did not bring in the names of their cities to the great council of their princes who sat upon this affair, by which means it came to pass that they were not inserted with the rest in the books.

Matthew Henry: Jos 16:5-10

Here, 1. The border of the lot of Ephraim is set down, by which it was divided on the south from Benjamin and Dan, who lay between it and Judah, and on the north from Manasseh; for east and west it reached from Jordan to the great sea. The learned, who aim to be exact in drawing the line according to the directions here, find themselves very much at a loss, the description being short and intricate. The report of those who in these latter ages have travelled those countries will not serve to clear the difficulties, so vastly unlike is it now to what it was then; not only cities have been so destroyed as that no mark nor footstep of them remains, but brooks are dried up, rivers alter their courses, and even the mountain falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place, Job 14:18. Unless I could hope to solve the doubts that arise upon this draught of the border of Ephraim, it is to no purpose to mention them: no doubt it was then perfectly understood, so as that the first intention of recording it was effectually answered, which was to notify the ancient landmarks, which posterity must by no means remove. 2. Some separate cities are spoken of, that lay not within these borders, at least not if the line was drawn direct, but lay within the lot of Manasseh (Jos 16:9), which might better be read, and there were separate cities for the children of Ephraim among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, because it proved that Manasseh could spare them, and Ephraim had need of them, and it might be hoped that no inconvenience would arise from this mixture of these two tribes together, who were both the sons of Joseph, and should love as brethren. And by this it appears that though, when the tribes were numbered in the plains of Moab, Manasseh had got the start of Ephraim in number, for Manasseh was then 52,000, and Ephraim but 32,000 (Num 26:34, Num 26:37), yet by the time they were well settled in Canaan the hands were crossed again, and the blessing of Moses was verified, Deu 33:17, They are the ten thousands of Ephraim and they are the thousands of Manasseh. Families and kingdoms are diminished and increased, increased and diminished again, as God pleases. 3. A brand is put upon the Ephraimites, that they did not drive out the Canaanites from Gezer (Jos 16:10), either through carelessness or cowardice, either for want of faith in the promise of God, that he would give them success if they would make a vigorous effort, or for want of zeal for the command of God, which obliged them utterly to drive out the Canaanites, and to make no peace with them. And, though they hoped to satisfy the law by putting them under tribute, yet (as Calvin thinks) this made the matter worse, for it shows that they spared them out of covetousness, that they might be profited by their labours, and by dealing with them for their tribute they were in danger of being infected with their idolatry; yet some think that, when they brought them under tribute, they obliged them to renounce their idols, and to observe the seven precepts of the sons of Noah; and I should think so, but that we find in the sequel of the story that the Israelites were so far from restraining idolatry in others that they soon fell into it themselves. Many famous places were within this lot of the tribe of Ephraim, though not mentioned here. In it were Ramah, Samuel's city (called in the New Testament Arimathea, of which Joseph was, that took care of our Saviour's burial), and Shiloh, where the tabernacle was first set up. Tirzah also, the royal city of Jeroboam and his successors, and Deborah's palm-tree, under which she judged Israel, were in this tribe. Samaria, built by Omri after the burning of the royal palace of Tirzah, was in this tribe, and was long the royal city of the kingdom of the ten tribes; not far from it were Shechem, and the mountains Ebal and Gerizim, and Sychar, near which was Jacob's well, where Christ talked with the woman of Samaria. We read much of Mount Ephraim in the story of the Judges, and of a city called Ephraim, it is probable in this tribe, to which Christ retired, Joh 11:54. The whole kingdom of the ten tribes is often, in the prophets, especially in Hosea, called Ephraim.

Matthew Henry: Jos 17:1-6

Manasseh was itself but one half of the tribe of Joseph, and yet was divided and subdivided. 1. It was divided into two parts, one already settled on the other side Jordan, consisting of those who were the posterity of Machir, Jos 17:1. This Machir was born to Manasseh in Egypt; there he had signalized himself as a man of war, probably in the contests between the Ephraimites and the men of Gath, 1Ch 7:21. His warlike disposition descended to his posterity, and therefore Moses gave them Gileaxdand Bashan, on the other side Jordan, of which before, Jos 13:31. It is here said that the lot came to Manasseh, for he was the first-born of Joseph. Bishop Patrick thinks it should be translated, though he was the first-born of Joseph, and then the meaning is plain, that the second lot was for Manasseh, because, though he was the first-born, yet Jacob had preferred Ephraim before him. See the names of those heads of the families that settled on the other side Jordan, 1Ch 5:24. 2. That part on this side Jordan as subdivided into ten families, Jos 17:5. There were six sons of Gilead here named (Jos 17:2), the same that are recorded Num 26:30-32, only that he who is there called Jezeer is here called Abiezer. Five of these sons had each of them their portion; the sixth, which was Hepher, had his male line cut off in his son Zelophehad, who left daughters only, five in number, of whom we have often read, and these five had each of them a portion; though perhaps, they claiming under Hepher, all their five portions were but equal to one of the portions of the five sons. Or if Hepher had other sons besides Zelophehad, in whom the name of his family was kept up, their posterity married to the daughters of Zelophehad the elder brother, and in their right had these portions assigned them. See Num 36:12. Here is, (1.) The claim which the daughters of Zelophehad made, grounded upon the command God gave to Moses concerning them, Jos 17:4. They had themselves, when they were young, pleaded their own cause before Moses, and obtained the grant of an inheritance with their brethren, and now they would not lose the benefit of that grant for want of speaking to Joshua, but seasonably put in their demand themselves, as it should seem, and not their husbands for them. (2.) The assignment of their portions according to their claim. Joshua knew very well what God had ordered in their case, and did not object that they having not served in the wars of Canaan there was no reason why they should share in the possessions of Canaan, but readily gave them as inheritance among the brethren of their father. And now they reaped the benefit of their own pious zeal and prudent forecast in this matter. Thus those who take care in the wilderness of this world to make sure to themselves a place in the inheritance of the saints in light will certainly have the comfort of it in the other world, while those that neglect it now will lose it for ever.

Matthew Henry: Jos 17:7-13

We have here a short account of the lot of this half tribe. It reached from Jordan on the east to the great sea on the west; on the south it lay all along contiguous to Ephraim, but on the north it abutted upon Asher and Issachar. Asher lay north-west, and Issachar north-east, which seems to be the meaning of that (Jos 17:10), that they (that is, Manasseh and Ephraim, as related to it, both together making the tribe of Joseph) met in Asher on the north and Issachar on the east, for Ephraim itself reached not those tribes. Some things are particularly observed concerning this lot: - 1. That there was great communication between this tribe and that of Ephraim. The city of Tappuah belonged to Ephraim, but the country adjoining to Manasseh (Jos 17:8); there were likewise many cities of Ephraim that lay within the border of Manasseh (Jos 17:9), of which before, Jos 16:9. 2. That Manasseh likewise had cities with their appurtenances in the tribes of Issachar and Asher (Jos 17:11), God so ordering it, that though every tribe had its peculiar inheritance, which might not be alienated from it, yet they should thus intermix one with another, to keep up mutual acquaintance and correspondence among the tribes, and to give occasion for the doing of good offices one to another, as became those who, though of different tribes, were all one Israel, and were bound to love as brethren. 3. That they suffered the Canaanites to live among them, contrary to the command of God, serving their own ends by conniving at them, for they made them tributaries, Jos 17:12, Jos 17:13. The Ephraimites had done the same (Jos 16:10), and from them perhaps the Manassites learned it, and with their example excused themselves in it. The most remarkable person of this half tribe in after-time was Gideon, whose great actions were done within this lot. He was of the family of Abiezer; Cesarea was in this lot, and Antipatris, famed in the latter ages of the Jewish state.

Matthew Henry: Jos 17:14-18

Here, I. The children of Joseph quarrel with their lot; if they had had any just cause to quarrel with it, we have reason to think Joshua would have relieved them, by adding to it, or altering it, which it does not appear he did. It is probable, because Joshua was himself of the tribe of Ephraim, they promised themselves that they should have some particular favour shown them, and should not be confined to the decision of the lot so closely as the other tribes; but Joshua makes them know that in the discharge of his office, as a public person, he had no more regard to his own tribe than to any other, but would administer impartially, without favour or affection, wherein he has left an excellent example to all in public trusts. It was a very competent provision that was made for them, as much, for aught that appears, as they were able to manage, and yet they call it in disdain but one lot, as if that which was assigned to them both was scarcely sufficient for one. The word for complainers (Jud 1:16) is mempsimoiroi , blamers of their lot: - 1. That they were very numerous, through the blessing of God upon them (Jos 17:14): I am a great people, for the Lord has blessed me; and we have reason to hope that he that hath sent mouths will send meat. " I am a great people, and in so small a lot shall not have room to thrive. "Yet observe, when they speak thankfully of their present increase, they do not speak confidently of the continuance of it. "The Lord has blessed me hitherto, however he may see fit to deal with me for the future."The uncertainty of what may be must not make us unthankful for what has been and is done in kindness to us. 2. That a good part of that country which had now fallen to their lot was in the hands of the Canaanites, and that they were formidable enemies, who brought into the field of battle chariots of iron (Jos 17:16), that is, chariots with long scythes fastened to the sides of them, or the axle-tree, which made great destruction of all that came in their way, mowing them down like corn. They urge that though they had a good portion assigned them, yet it was in bad hands, and they could not come to the possession of it, wishing to have their lot in those countries that were more thoroughly reduced than this was.

II. Joshua endeavours to reconcile them to their lot. He owns they were a great people, and being two tribes ought to have more than one lot only (Jos 17:17), but tells them that what had fallen to their share would be a sufficient lot for them both, if they would but work and fight. They desired a lot in which they might indulge themselves in ease and luxury. "No,"says Joshua, "you must not count upon that; in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread is a sentence in force even in Canaan itself."He retorts their own argument, that they were a great people. "If so, you are the better able to help yourselves, and have the less reason to expect help from others. If thou hast many mouths to be filled, thou hast twice as many hands to be employed; earn, and then eat."1. He bids them work for more (Jos 17:15): " Get thee up to the wood-country, which is within thy own border, and let all hands be set to work to cut down the trees, rid the rough lands, and make them, with art and industry, good arable ground."Note, Many wish for larger possessions who do not cultivate and make the best of what they have, think they should have more talents given them who do not trade with those with which they are entrusted. Most people's poverty is the effect of their idleness; would they dig, they need not beg. 2. He bids them fight for more (Jos 17:17, Jos 17:18), when they pleaded that they could not come at the wood-lands he spoke of because in the valley between them and it were Canaanites whom they durst not enter the lists with. "Never fear them,"said Joshua, "thou hast God on thy side, and thou shalt drive out the Canaanites, if thou wilt set about it in good earnest, though they have iron chariots. "We straiten ourselves by apprehending the difficulties in the way of our enlargement to be greater than really they are. What can be insuperable to faith and holy resolution?

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:1-4

Territory of the tribe of Joseph . - Jos 16:1. "And there came out the lot of the children of Joseph from Jordan by Jericho." "The lot came out," viz., from the turn (cf. Jos 19:1, Jos 19:17, Jos 19:24). The expression "came up"is used in the same sense in Jos 18:11. The connection of these two words with the rest of the sentence, "from Jordan by Jericho," may be explained on the supposition that the lot which came out of the urn determined the inheritance that fell to the tribe, so that we might paraphrase the verse in this manner: "There came out the lot to the children of Joseph, namely, the inheritance, which goes out from, or whose boundary commences at, the Jordan by Jericho,"i.e., from that part of the Jordan which is opposite to Jericho, and which is still more precisely defined by the additional clause, "by the water of Jericho eastward."The water of Jericho is the present fountain of es Sultan , half an hour to the north-west of Riha , the only large fountain in the neighbourhood of Jericho, whose waters spread over the plain, and form a small brook, which no doubt flows in the rainy season through the Wady Kelt into the Jordan (see Rob. ii. pp. 283-4; Tobler , Topogr. v. Jerus. ii. pp. 558-9). "The wilderness"is in opposition to "the lot,"so that the sense is, "namely, the desert going up from Jericho to the mountains to Bethel." According to Jos 18:12, the reference is to the desert of Beth-aven, which was on the east of Bethel, between the Wady Suwar ( Tuwar ) and Mutyah (see at Jos 7:2). Towards the east this desert terminates with the Jebel Kuruntul (Quarantana) on the north-west of Jericho, where it descends precipitously into the valley of the Jordan, or v. v. , where it rises out of the Jordan valley. According to Jos 18:12, the same boundary went up by the shoulder of Jericho towards the north, i.e., along the northern range of mountains by Jericho, which cannot be any other than the "conspicuous double height, or rather group of heights,"in front of the mountain of Quarantana, at the eastern foot of which lies the fountain of Ain es Sultan ( Rob. ii. p. 284). In all probability, therefore, the boundary ran up towards the north-west, from the Sultan fountain to Ain Duk, and thence in a westerly direction across to Abu Seba (along which road Robinson had a frightful desert on his right hand: Pal. ii. p. 310), and then again towards the north-west to Beitin (Bethel), according to Jos 18:13, along the southern shoulder (or side) of Luz, i.e., Bethel.

Jos 16:2

"And it went out from Bethel to Luz." Bethel is distinguished from Luz in this passage, because the reference is not to the town of Bethel, which was called Luz by the Canaanites (vid., Gen 28:19), but to the southern range of mountains belonging to Bethel, from which the boundary ran out to the town of Luz, so that this town, which stood upon the border, was allotted to the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:22). From this point the boundary went over "to the territory of the Arkite to Ataroth," We know nothing further about the Arkite than that David's friend Hushai belonged to that family (2Sa 15:32; 2Sa 16:16; 1Ch 27:33). Ataroth , called Ataroth-Adar in Jos 18:13, was not the present village of Atâra , an hour and a half to the south of Jiljilia ( Rob. iii. p. 80), as I once supposed, but the ruins of Atâra, three-quarters of an hour to the south of Bireh (Beeroth, Rob. ii. p. 314), with which the expression " descended "in Jos 18:13 perfectly harmonizes. Consequently the boundary was first of all drawn in a south-westerly direction from Beitin to Bireh (Jos 18:25), and then southwards to Atârah.

Jos 16:3

From this point "it went down westward to the territory of the Japhletites to the territory of lower Beth-horon ,"or, according to Jos 18:13, "to the mountain (or range) which is on the south by lower Beth-horon."The Japhletite is altogether unknown as the Asherite of this name cannot possibly be thought of (1Ch 7:32-33). Lower Beth-horon is the present Beit-Ur Tachta , a village upon a low ridge. It is separated from Upper Beth-horon, which lies farther east, by a deep wady (see at Jos 10:10, and Rob. iii. p. 59). "And to Gezer," which was probably situated near the village of el Kubab (see at Jos 10:33). " And the goings out thereof are at the sea "(the Mediterranean), probably running towards the north-west, and following the Wady Muzeireh to the north of Japho, which was assigned to the Danites, according to Jos 19:46.

Jos 16:4

The territory commencing at the boundary lines mentioned was allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh as their inheritance.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:5-6

Territory of the tribe of Ephraim, according to its families . - Jos 16:5. " The border of their inheritance was from the east Atroth-addar and (along the line) to Upper Beth-horon ,"- a brief description of the southern boundary, which is more minutely described in Jos 16:1-3. Upper Beth-horon is mentioned here instead of Lower Beth-horon (Jos 16:3). This makes no difference, however, as the two places stood quite close to one another (see at Jos 10:10). In Jos 16:6-8 the northern boundary of Ephraim is given, namely, from the middle, or from "a central point near the watershed"( Knobel ), first towards the east (Jos 16:6 and Jos 16:7), and then towards the west (Jos 16:8). The eastern half of the northern boundary went ימּה , i.e., when regarded from the west, or looked at towards the west, to the north side of Michmethah . According to Jos 17:7, this place was before Shechem, and therefore in any case it was not far from it, though it has not been discovered yet. Knobel supposes it to have been on the site of the present Kabate ( Seetzen , ii. p. 166), Kubatiyeh , an hour and a half to the south of Jenin ( Rob. iii. 154), assuming that Michmethah might also have been pronounced Chemathah , and that ב may have been substituted for מ . But Kabate is six hours to the north of Shechem, and therefore was certainly not " before Shechem "(Jos 17:7). It then turned " eastward to Taanath-shiloh "( Τηαν̀θ Σηλώ , lxx), according to the Onom. ( s. v. Thenath ) ten Roman miles from Neapolis (Sichem), on the way to the Jordan, most probably the Thena of Ptol . (v. 16, 5), the present Tana , Ain Tana , a heap of ruins on the south-east of Nabulus, where there are large cisterns to be found (see Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 295; Ritter , Erdk. xv. p. 471). And " then went by on the east to Janoah "(i.e., Jano in Acrabittena regione , twelve Roman miles from Neapolis: Onom. ), the present ruins of Janûn , a miserable village, with extensive ruins of great antiquity, about three hours to the south-east of Nabulus, three-quarters of an hour to the north-east of Akrabeh ( Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 297; Van de Velde , R. ii. p. 268).

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:7

From Janoah the boundary went down "to Ataroth and Naarath," Ataroth , a different place from the Ataroth or Atroth-addar mentioned in Jos 16:3 and Jos 16:5, is apparently to be sought for on the eastern slope of the mountains by the side of the Ghor, judging from the expression "went down;"but it has not yet been discovered. Naarath , probably the same as Naaran , in eastern Ephraim (1Ch 7:28), is described in the Onom. ( s. v. Naaratha ) as viculus Judaeorum Naorath , five Roman miles (i.e., two hours) from Jericho, probably on the north-east. The boundary line then touched Jericho, i.e., the district of Jericho, namely on the north side of the district, as Jericho was allotted to the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:21). At this point it also coincided with the southern boundary of the tribe of Joseph (Jos 16:1) and the northern boundary of Benjamin (Jos 18:12).

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:8

The western half of the northern boundary went from Tappuah westwards to the Cane-brook, and terminated at the sea. Tappuah, called En-tappuah in Jos 17:7, as the southern boundary of Manasseh, which is there described, and which ran from Michmethah to En-tappuah, coincides with the northern boundary of Ephraim, must not be identified with the royal town of that name mentioned in Jos 12:17, and therefore was not Kefr Kud (Capercota), on the west of Jenin (Ginäa). This place was so far to the north, viz., seven hours to the north of Nabulus, that the boundary from Michmethah, in the neighbourhood of Shechem (Nabulus) onwards, would have run from south to north instead of in a westerly direction. Still less can En-tappuah be found, as Van de Velde supposes, in the old well of the deserted village of Atüf, five hours to the east of Nabulus. It must have been to the west of Shechem; but it has not yet been discovered, as the country to the west of Nabulus and Sebastieh has "not been examined" ( Van de Velde ). The Cane-brook is no doubt the brook of that name mentioned by Bohad. (vita Salad. pp. 191, 193); only it is not quite clear "whether the Abu Zabura is intended, or a brook somewhat farther south, where there is still a Nahr el Kassab."

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:9

The tribe of Ephraim also received some scattered towns in the territory of the tribe of Manasseh, in fact all those towns to which Tappuah belonged, according to Jos 17:8, with the dependent villa Ges.

(Note: The reason why the Ephraimites received scattered towns and villages in the tribe-territory of Manasseh, is supposed by Calvin , Masius , and others, to have been, that after the boundaries had been arranged, on comparing the territory allotted to each with the relative numbers of the two tribes, it was found that Ephraim had received too small a possession. This is quite possible; at the same time there may have been other reasons which we cannot discover now, as precisely the same thing occurs in the case of Manasseh (Jos 17:11).)

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 16:10

From Gezer, however (see Jos 16:3), they could not drive out the Canaanites, so that they still dwelt among the Ephraimites, but were reduced to a state of serfdom. This notice resembles the one in Jos 15:63, and is to be interpreted in the same way.

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 17:1-13

The inheritance of Manasseh on this side of the Jordan was on the north of Ephraim.

Jos 17:1-6

Before proceeding to the more detailed description of the inheritance, the historian thinks it necessary to observe that the Manassites received a double inheritance. This remark is introduced with the words "for he was the first-born of Joseph." On this account, in addition to the territory already given to him in Gilead and Bashan, he received a second allotment of territory in Canaan proper. With the word למכיר (for Machir) the more minute account of the division of the Manassites commences. וגו למכיר is first of all written absolutely at the beginning of the sentence, and then resumed in לו ויהי : "to Machir, the first-born of Manasseh ... to him were Gilead and Bashan assigned, because he was a man of war," i.e., a warlike man, and had earned for himself a claim to the inheritance of Gilead and Bashan through the peculiar bravery which he had displayed in the conquest of those lands. By Machir , however, we are not to understand the actual son of Manasseh, but his family; and הגּלעד אבי does not mean "father of Gilead,"but lord (possessor) of Gilead , for Machir's son Gilead is always called גלעד without the article (vid., Jos 17:3; Num 26:29-30; Num 27:1; Num 36:1; 1Ch 7:17), whereas the country of that name is just as constantly called הגּלעד (see Jos 17:1, the last clause, Jos 17:5; Jos 13:11, Jos 13:31; Num 32:40; Deu 3:10.). " And there came , i.e., the lot fell (the lot is to be repeated from Jos 17:1), to the other descendants of Manasseh according to their families ,"which are then enumerated as in Num 26:30-32. "These are the male descendants of Manasseh." הזּכרים must not be altered, notwithstanding the fact that it is preceded and followed by הגּותרים ; it is evidently used deliberately as an antithesis to the female descendants of Manasseh mentioned in Jos 17:3.

Jos 17:3-6

Among the six families of Manasseh (Jos 17:2), Zelophehad , a descendant of Hepher , left no son; but he had five daughters, whose names are given in Jos 17:3 (as in Num 26:33; Num 27:1; Num 36:10). These daughters had petitioned Moses for a separate portion in the promised land, and their request had been granted (Num 27:2., compared with Josh 36). They therefore came before the committee appointed for dividing the land and repeated this promised, which as at once fulfilled. Consequently there were ten families of Manasseh who had received portions by the side of Ephraim, five male and five female. " And (Jos 17:5) there fell the measurements of Manasseh (as) ten ,"i.e., ten portions were assigned to the Manassites (on the west of the Jordan), beside the land of Gilead, because (as is again observed in Jos 17:6) the daughters of Manasseh, i.e., of Zelophehad the Manassite, received an inheritance among his sons (i.e., the rest of the Manassites).

Jos 17:7-11

Boundaries and extent of the inheritance of the ten families of Manasseh . - Jos 17:7-10, the southern boundary, which coincides with the northern boundary of Ephraim described in Jos 16:6-8, and is merely given here with greater precision in certain points. It went "from Asher to Michmethah, before Shechem." Asher is not the territory of the tribe of Asher, but a distinct locality; according to the Onom. ( s. v. Asher ) a place on the high road from Neapolis to Scythopolis, fifteen Roman miles from the former. It is not to be found, however, in the ruins of Tell Um el Aschera ( V. de Velde ) or Tell Um Ajra ( Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 310, 327), an hour to the south of Beisan, as Knobel supposes, but in the village of Yasir, where there are magnificent ruins, about five hours and ten minutes from Nabulus on the road to Beisan ( V. de Velde , Mem. pp. 237, 289; R. ii. p. 295). Michmethah , before Shechem, is still unknown (see Jos 16:6). Shechem was founded by the Hivite prince Shechem (Gen 33:18), and is frequently mentioned in the book of Genesis. It stood between Ebal and Gerizim, was given up by Ephraim to the Levites, and declared a free city (city of refuge: Jos 21:21; Jos 20:7). It was there that the ten tribes effected their separation from Judah 1Ki 12:1.), and Jeroboam resided there (1Ki 12:25). In later times it was the chief city of the country of Samaria, and the capital of the Samaritans (Joh 4:5); and the name of Neapolis , or Flavia Neapolis , from which the present Nabulus or Nablus has come, was given to it in honour of Vespasian (see v. Raumer , Pal. pp. 161ff.). From this point the boundary went אל־היּמין (i.e., either "to the right side," the south side, or to Yamin ), "To the inhabitants of En-tappuah." Whether Yamin is an appellative or a proper name is doubtful. But even if it be the name of a place, it is quite certain that it cannot be the village of Yamôn , an hour to the south-east of Taanuk ( Rob. iii. pp. 161, 167, etc.), as this is much too far north, and, judging from Jos 17:11, belonged to the territory of Asher. In the case of En-tappuah , the inhabitants are mentioned instead of the district, because the district belonged to Manasseh, whilst the town on the border of Manasseh was given to the Ephraimites. The situation of the town has not yet been discovered: see at Jos 16:8. From this point the boundary ran down to the Cane-brook (see Jos 16:8), namely to the south side of the brook.

" These towns were assigned to Ephraim in the midst of the towns of Manasseh, and (but) the territory of Manasseh was on the north of the brook ."The only possible meaning of these words is the following: From Tappuah, the boundary went down to the Cane-brook and crossed it, so that the south side of the brook really belonged to the territory of Manasseh; nevertheless the towns on this south side were allotted to Ephraim, whilst only the territory to the north of the brook fell to the lot of the Manassites. This is expressed more plainly in Jos 17:10 : "To the south (of the brook the land came) to Ephraim, and to the north to Manasseh." In Jos 17:10 the northern and eastern boundaries are only briefly indicated: " And they (the Manassites) touched Asher towards the north, and Issachar towards the east ."The reason why this boundary was not described more minutely, was probably because it had not yet been fixed. For (Jos 17:11) Manasseh also received towns and districts in (within the territory of) Issachar and Asher, viz., Beth-shean, etc. Beth-shean , to the wall of which Saul's body was fastened (1Sa 31:10.; 2Sa 21:12), was afterwards called Scythopolis . It was in the valley of the Jordan, where the plain of Jezreel slopes off into the valley; its present name is Beisan , a place where there are considerable ruins of great antiquity, about two hours from the Jordan (vid., Seetzen , ii. pp. 162ff.; Rob. iii. p. 174; Bibl. Res. p. 325; v. Raumer , Pal. pp. 150-1). This city, with its daughter towns, was in the territory of Issachar, which was on the east of Manasseh, and may have extended a considerable distance towards the south along the valley of the Jordan, as the territory of Manasseh and Ephraim did not run into the valley of the Jordan; but Asher (Yasir) is mentioned in Jos 17:7 as the most easterly place in Manasseh, and, according to Jos 16:6-7, the eastern boundary of Ephraim ran down along the eastern edge of the mountains as far as Jericho, without including the Jordan valley. At the same time, the Ghor on the western side of the Jordan below Beisan, as far as the plain of Jericho, was of no great value to any tribe, as this district, according to Josephus (de Bell. Jud. iv. 8, 2, and iii. 10, 7), was uninhabited because of its barrenness. The other towns, Ibleam , etc., with the exception of Endor perhaps, were in the territory of Asher, and almost all on the south-west border of the plain of Esdraelon. Ibleam , called Bileam in 1Ch 6:55 (70), a Levitical town (see at Jos 21:25), was not very far from Megiddo (2Ki 9:27), and has probably been preserved in the ruins of Khirbet-Belameh , half an hour to the south of Jenin; according to Schultz , it is the same place as Belamon , Belmen , or Belthem (Judith 4:4; 7:3; 8:3). With דאר ואת־ישׁבי the construction changes, so that there is an anacolouthon, which can be explained, however, on the ground that ל היה may not only mean to be assigned to, but also to receive or to have. In this last sense ואת is attached. The inhabitants are mentioned instead of the towns, because the historian had already the thought present in his mind, that the Manassites were unable to exterminate the Canaanites from the towns allotted to them. Dor is the present Tortura (see at Jos 11:2). Endor , the home of the witch (1Sa 28:7), four Roman miles to the south of Tabor ( Onom. ), at present a village called Endôr , on the northern shoulder of the Duhy or Little Hermon (see Rob. iii. p. 225; Bibl. Res. p. 340). Taanach and Megiddo , the present Taanuk and Lejun (see at Jos 12:21). The three last towns, with the places dependent upon them, are connected more closely together by הנּפת שׁלשׁת , the three-hill-country, probably because they formed a common league.

Jos 17:12-13

The Manassites were unable to exterminate the Canaanites from these six towns, and the districts round; but when they grew stronger, they made them tributary slaves (cf. Jos 16:10).

Keil-Delitzsch: Jos 17:14-18

Complaint of the Descendants of Joseph respecting the inheritance allotted to them . - Jos 17:14. As the descendants of Joseph formed two tribes (Ephraim and Manasseh), they gave utterance to their dissatisfaction that Joshua had given them ("me," the house of Joseph, Jos 17:17) but one lot, but one portion ( חבל , a measure, then the land measured off), for an inheritance, although they were a strong and numerous people. " So far hath Jehovah blessed me hitherto ." עד־אשׁד , to this (sc., numerous people), is to be understood de gradu ; עד־כּה , hitherto, de tempore . There was no real ground for this complaint. As Ephraim numbered only 32,500 and Manasseh 52,700 at the second census in the time of Moses (Num 26), and therefore Ephraim and half Manasseh together did not amount to more than 58,000 or 59,000, this tribe and a half were not so strong as Judah with its 76,500, and were even weaker than Dan with its 64,400, or Issachar with its 64,300 men, and therefore could not justly lay claim to more than the territory of a single tribe. Moreover, the land allotted to them was in one of the most fertile parts of Palestine. For although as a whole the mountains of Ephraim have much the same character as those of Judah, yet the separate mountains are neither so rugged nor so lofty, there being only a few of them that reach the height of 2500 feet above the level of the sea (see Ritter , Erdk. xv. pp. 475ff.; V. de Velde , Mem. pp. 177ff.); moreover, they are intersected by many broad valleys and fertile plateaux, which are covered with fruitful fields and splendid plantations of olives,vines, and fig trees (see Rob. iii. p. 78, Bibl. Res. pp. 290ff.; Seetzen , ii. pp. 165ff., 190ff.). On the west the mountains slope off into the hill country, which joins the plain of Sharon, with its invariable fertility. "The soil here is a black clay soil of unfathomable depth, which is nearly all ploughed, and is of such unusual fertility that a cultivated plain here might furnish an almost unparalleled granary for the whole land. Interminable fields full of wheat and barley with their waving ears, which were very nearly ripe, with here and there a field of millet, that was already being diligently reaped by the peasants, presented a glorious sight"( Ritter , Erdk. xvi. pp. 567-8).

Jos 17:15

Joshua therefore sent them back with their petition, and said, "If thou art a strong people, go up into the wood and cut it away," i.e., make room for houses, fields, and meadows, by clearing the forests, "in the land of the Perizzites and Rephaim, if the mountain of Ephraim is too narrow for thee." The name "mountain of Ephraim"is used here in a certain sense proleptically, to signify the mountain which received its name from the tribe of Ephraim, to which it had only just been allotted. This mountain, which is also called the mountain of Israel (Jos 11:16, Jos 11:21), was a limestone range running from Kirjath-jearim, where the mountains of Judah terminate (see at Jos 11:21), to the plain of Jezreel, and therefore embracing the greater part of the tribe-territory of Benjamin. The wood, which is distinguished from the mountain of Ephraim, and is also described in Jos 17:18 as a mountainous land, is either the mountainous region extending to the north of Yasir as far as the mountains at Gilboa, and lying to the west of Beisan, a region which has not yet been thoroughly explored, or else, as Knobel supposes, "the broad range of woody heights or low woody hills, by which the mountains of Samaria are connected with Carmel on the north-west ( Rob. iii. p. 189), between Taanath and Megiddo on the east, and Caesarea and Dor on the west."Possibly both may be intended, as the children of Joseph were afraid of the Canaanites in Beisan and in the plain of Jezreel (Jos 17:16). The Rephaim were dwelling there, a tribe of gigantic stature (see at Gen 14:5), also the Perizzites (see at Gen 13:7).

Jos 17:16

The children of Joseph replied that the mountain (allotted to them) would not be enough for them ( מצא , as in Num 11:22; Zec 10:10); and that all the Canaanites who dwelt in the land of the plain had iron chariots, both those in Beth-shean and its daughter towns, and those in the valley of Jezreel. ארץ־העמק , the land of the plain or valley land, includes both the valley of the Jordan near Beisan, and also the plain of Jezreel, which opens into the Jordan valley in the neighbourhood of Beisan ( Rob. iii. p. 173). The plain of Jezreel , so called after the town of that name, is called the "great field of Esdrelom"in Judith 1:4, and τὸ μέγα πεδίον by Josephus . It is the present Merj (i.e., pasture-land) Ibn Aamer , which runs in a south-westerly direction from the Mediterranean Sea above Carmel, and reaches almost to the Jordan. It is bounded on the south by the mountains of Carmel, the mountain-land of Ephraim and the range of hills connecting the two, on the north by the mountains of Galilee, on the west by the southern spurs of the Galilean highland, and on the east by the mountains of Gilboa and the Little Hermon (Jebel Duhy). Within these boundaries it is eight hours in length from east to west, and five hours broad; it is fertile throughout, though very desolate now (see v. Raumer , Pal. iii. pp. 39ff.). " Iron chariots "are not scythe chariots, for these were introduced by Cyrus, and were unknown to the Medes, Persians, and Arabians, i.e., to the early Asiatics before his time ( Xen. Cyr. vi. 1, 27, 30), as well as to the ancient Egyptians (see Wilkinson , Manners and Customs, i. p. 350); they were simply chariots tipped with iron, just as the Egyptian war-chariots were made of wood and strengthened with metal nails and tips ( Wilkinson , pp. 342, 348).

Jos 17:17-18

As the answer of the children of Joseph indicated cowardice and want of confidence in the help of God, Joshua contented himself with repeating his first reply, though more fully and with the reasons assigned. " Thou art a strong people, and hast great power; there will not be one lot to thee: "i.e., because thou art a numerous people and endowed with strength, there shall not remain one lot to thee, thou canst and wilt extend thine inheritance. "For the mountain will be thine, for it is forest, and thou wilt hew it out, and its goings out will become thine." By the mountain we are not to understand the mountains of Ephraim which were assigned to the Ephraimites by the lot, but the wooded mountains mentioned in Jos 17:15, which the children of Joseph were to hew out, so as to make outlets for themselves. " The outgoings of it "are the fields and plains bordering upon the forest. For the Canaanites who dwelt there (Jos 17:15) would be driven out by the house of Joseph, just because they had iron chariots and were strong, and therefore only a strong tribe like Joseph was equal to the task. "Not one of the tribes of Israel is able to fight against them (the Canaanites) because they are strong, but you have strength enough to be able to expel them"( Rashi ).

Constable: Jos 13:1--21:45

II. THE DIVISION OF THE LAND chs. 13--21

Chapters 13-24 describe how Joshua divided the land and the results of that division. Many if not all the Israelite tribes did not conquer or control all the land allotted to them (15:63; 16:10; 17:12-13). The record of the actual division of the land is in chapters 13-21, and the arrangements for settlement in it follow in chapters 22-24.

At the end of the seven-year period of conquest Israel occupied very little of the Promised Land. "Very much" of it remained for them to possess (v. 1).¹⁶⁰ Consequently dividing all the land among the tribes required faith that God would give His people all the land. Joshua had removed the significant military threats to Israel's existence. From now on each tribe was responsible to conquer and colonize its designated territory.

"Resisting the temptation to skip over this section of Joshua [chs. 13-21] can result in an appreciation of important features of God's covenant with Israel. Beyond the obvious detail of the content of these chapters and the means by which God blessed those who remained faithful in the conquest of the land, this passage also addresses the question why the land formed so significant a part of God's promises to the patriarchs and remained a key feature of the covenant."¹⁶¹

Constable: Jos 16:1--17:18

4. Joseph's inheritance chs. 16-17

The writer may have dealt with the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh together since Jacob had given Joseph the second largest blessing after Judah (Gen. 49). Moreover half the tribe of Manasseh had already received its inheritance, and the remaining half would have been small compared with the other tribes. These one and one-half tribes together formed a large group of Israelites. Their lot fell in central Canaan. Their territory consisted of two parts with Ephraim settling in the southern portion and Manasseh in the northern.

16:1-4 The writer described the whole territory of Joseph first.

16:5-10 The writer traced the borders of Ephraim's allotment here. Ephraim lay north of the area later given to Dan and Benjamin, and south of western Manasseh. The Ephraimites failed to drive out the inhabitants of Gezer (v. 10).

17:1-13 These verses describe the territory of the half tribe of Manasseh west of the Jordan and north of Ephraim. It extended north to the valley of Jezreel. The Manassehites also failed to exterminate all the Canaanites in their area (vv. 12-13).

17:14-18 The extent of the territory given these two tribes was not sufficient for them, in their opinion. Consequently they asked Joshua for more land. He dealt with them very diplomatically by complimenting and encouraging them (v. 18). Their complaint seems to have sprung from a spirit of carnality (cf. v. 16).¹⁷⁵ They did not share Caleb's spirit (14:6-15). Evidently they counted as their land only the parts that were then easily accessible to them. They discounted the forested areas that needed clearing and the parts dominated by the Perizzites and the Rephaim (v. 15). Joshua assured them that when they subdued their inheritance it would prove adequate for them (v. 18).

"The purpose of inserting this episode at the conclusion of the description of Joseph's portion may be to alert the reader to the fact that the promised land, if it is to be possessed, requires the activity of the tribes, who must not be deterred by the threats of Canaan's superior military force."¹⁷⁶

The writer of the Book of Joshua noted carefully the failures of the tribes to drive the Canaanites out of their territories as well as their successes in doing so (e.g., Caleb). The extent of their occupation of their land depended on the extent of their ability to annihilate the Canaanites by God's power.

Guzik: Jos 16:1-10

Joshua 15, 16, 17 - The Inheritance of Judah, Ephraim and Western Manasseh

B. The inheritance of the sons of Joseph.

1. (16:1-4) The borders of the province belonging to the sons of Joseph, Ephraim and the half-tribe of Manasseh settling on the west side of the Jordan.

The lot fell to the children of Joseph from the Jordan, by Jericho, to the waters of Jericho on the east, to the wilderness that goes up from Jericho through the mountains to Bethel, then went out from Bethel to Luz, passed along to the border of the Archites at Ataroth, and went down westward to the boundary of the Japhletites, as far as the boundary of Lower Beth Horon to Gezer; and it ended at the sea. So the children of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, took their inheritance.

2. (5-10) The borders of the province of Ephraim.

The border of the children of Ephraim, according to their families, was thus: The border of their inheritance on the east side was Ataroth Addar as far as Upper Beth Horon. And the border went out toward the sea on the north side of Michmethath; then the border went around eastward to Taanath Shiloh, and passed by it on the east of Janohah. Then it went down from Janohah to Ataroth and Naarah, reached to Jericho, and came out at the Jordan. The border went out from Tappuah westward to the Brook Kanah, and it ended at the sea. This was the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim according to their families. The separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages. And they did not drive out the Canaanites who dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites to this day and have become forced laborers.

a. And they did not drive out the Canaanites who dwelt in Gezer: Their failure to completely drive out the Canaanites is typical of all the tribes. Even within the Promised Land there remains important work to do and battles to fight.

b. The Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites to this day and have become forced laborers: Perhaps the people of Ephraim were guilty of this compromise because they wanted forced laborers among them. Even this convenience does not justify their disobedience to God's command.

i. If they had the power to make the people of Gezer forced laborers, they certainly had the power to defeat them completely, especially because Gezer was a city that Joshua had already conquered (Joshua 10:33 and Joshua 12:12).

ii. This sort of compromise seems innocent, but it became the way that much idolatry and immoral worship came into the people of Israel. This is one reason why we see so many struggles in the days of the Judges.

c. The Israelites did not fully conquer for two reasons. First, they wanted peace at any cost. Second, they wanted wealth. For the sake of ease and money, they disobeyed God and fell short of what He had for them - as we do today also.

© 2001 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Guzik: Jos 17:1-18

Joshua 15, 16, 17 - The Inheritance of Judah, Ephraim and Western Manasseh

3. (17:1-2) Distribution of the land among the remaining families of the tribe of Manasseh.

There was also a lot for the tribe of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph: namely for Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, because he was a man of war; therefore he was given Gilead and Bashan. And there was a lot for the rest of the children of Manasseh according to their families: for the children of Abiezer, the children of Helek, the children of Asriel, the children of Shechem, the children of Hepher, and the children of Shemida; these were the male children of Manasseh the son of Joseph according to their families.

4. (3-6) The inheritance of Zelophehad's daughters.

But Zelophehad the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, had no sons, but only daughters. And these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. And they came near before Eleazar the priest, before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the rulers, saying, "The LORD commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brothers." Therefore, according to the commandment of the LORD, he gave them an inheritance among their father's brothers. Ten shares fell to Manasseh, besides the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side of the Jordan, because the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance among his sons; and the rest of Manasseh's sons had the land of Gilead.

a. Zelophehad . . . had no sons, but only daughters: This is noted in the text because it was unusual for women to receive an inheritance. It was more important that the land remain in the ancestral families than it was to follow this custom. Therefore the daughters of Zelophehad could inherit their father's land.

b. This is actually merely the implementation of a decision arrived at by Moses in Numbers 27:1-11.

5. (7-13) The boundaries of the western half-tribe of Manasseh and their incomplete occupation of that land.

And the territory of Manasseh was from Asher to Michmethath, that lies east of Shechem; and the border went along south to the inhabitants of En Tappuah. Manasseh had the land of Tappuah, but Tappuah on the border of Manasseh belonged to the children of Ephraim. And the border descended to the Brook Kanah, southward to the brook. These cities of Ephraim are among the cities of Manasseh. The border of Manasseh was on the north side of the brook; and it ended at the sea. Southward it was Ephraim's, northward it was Manasseh's, and the sea was its border. Manasseh's territory was adjoining Asher on the north and Issachar on the east. And in Issachar and in Asher, Manasseh had Beth Shean and its towns, Ibleam and its towns, the inhabitants of Dor and its towns, the inhabitants of En Dor and its towns, the inhabitants of Taanach and its towns, and the inhabitants of Megiddo and its towns; three hilly regions. Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities, but the Canaanites were determined to dwell in that land. And it happened, when the children of Israel grew strong, that they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but did not utterly drive them out.

a. Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities: Their failure here is after the same pattern as the failure of the tribe of Ephraim in Joshua 16:10.

b. Of course the Canaanites would be determined to dwell in that land. What was lacking was complete determination from the people of Israel. They were satisfied to put the Canaanites to forced labor.

6. (14-18) Joshua answers the complaint of the sons of Joseph.

Then the children of Joseph spoke to Joshua, saying, "Why have you given us only one lot and one share to inherit, since we are a great people, inasmuch as the LORD has blessed us until now?" So Joshua answered them, "If you are a great people, then go up to the forest country and clear a place for yourself there in the land of the Perizzites and the giants, since the mountains of Ephraim are too confined for you." But the children of Joseph said, "The mountain country is not enough for us; and all the Canaanites who dwell in the land of the valley have chariots of iron, both those who are of Beth Shean and its towns and those who are of the Valley of Jezreel." And Joshua spoke to the house of Joseph; to Ephraim and Manasseh; saying, "You are a great people and have great power; you shall not have only one lot, but the mountain country shall be yours. Although it is wooded, you shall cut it down, and its farthest extent shall be yours; for you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots and are strong."

a. Why have you given us only one lot and one share to inherit, since we are a great people: Manasseh and Ephraim were somewhat large tribes. Their combined number was greater than any other single tribe. Here, they complain that they have not been allotted adequate land.

b. If you are a great people: Joshua's reply is both wise and wonderful. He tells them, "if you are a great people, then go and get the land for yourself; fully occupy what the LORD has given you." These tribes had not completely taken the mountain country in their midst, because it would be hard and dangerous work.

i. How different is their attitude than Caleb's attitude (Joshua 14:11-12)! They want "easy land" given to them, instead of taking God's promises and going out and taking what God has given them. The principle applies just as strongly for us today; if we desire more of something, the first thing to do is to be a faithful as we can where we are.

ii. Perhaps they appealed to Joshua as a fellow Ephraimite, because he was a descendent of Joseph himself.

© 2001 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Joshua (Book Introduction)

JOSHUA. The title of this book is derived from the pious and valiant leader whose achievements it relates and who is commonly supposed to have been its author. The objections to this idea are founded chiefly on the clause, "unto this day," which occurs several times (Jos 4:9; Jos 6:25; Jos 8:28). But this, at least in the case of Rahab, is no valid reason for rejecting the idea of his authorship; for assuming what is most probable, that this book was composed toward the close of Joshua's long career, or compiled from written documents left by him, Rahab might have been still alive. A more simple and satisfactory way of accounting for the frequent insertion of the clause, "unto this day," is the opinion that it was a comment introduced by Ezra, when revising the sacred canon; and this difficulty being removed, the direct proofs of the book having been produced by a witness of the transactions related in it, the strong and vivid descriptions of the passing scenes, and the use of the words "we" and "us," (Jos 5:1-6), viewed in connection with the fact, that, after his farewell address to the people, Joshua "wrote these words in the book of the law of God" [Jos 24:26] --all afford strong presumptive proof that the entire book was the work of that eminent individual. Its inspiration and canonical authority are fully established by the repeated testimonies of other Scripture writers (compare Jos 6:26 with 1Ki 16:34; compare Jos 10:13 with Hab 3:11; Jos 3:14 with Act 7:45; Jos 6:17-23 with Heb 11:30; Jos. 2:1-24 with Jam 2:25; Psa 44:2; Psa 68:12-14; Psa 78:54-55). As a narrative of God's faithfulness in giving the Israelites possession of the promised land, this history is most valuable, and bears the same character as a sequel to the Pentateuch, that the Acts of the Apostles do to the Gospels.

JFB: Joshua (Outline)

• THE LORD APPOINTS JOSHUA TO SUCCEED MOSES. (Jos. 1:1-18)
• RAHAB RECEIVES AND CONCEALS THE TWO SPIES. (Jos 2:1-7)
• THE COVENANT BETWEEN HER AND THEM. (Jos 2:8-21)
• JOSHUA COMES TO JORDAN. (Jos 3:1-6)
• THE LORD ENCOURAGES JOSHUA. (Jos 3:7-8)
• JOSHUA ENCOURAGES THE PEOPLE. (Jos 3:9-13)
• THE WATERS OF JORDAN ARE DIVIDED. (Jos 3:14-17)
• TWELVE STONES TAKEN FOR A MEMORIAL OUT OF JORDAN. (Jos 4:1-8)
• TWELVE STONES SET UP IN THE MIDST OF JORDAN. (Jos 4:9)
• THE PEOPLE PASS OVER. (Jos 4:10-13)
• GOD MAGNIFIES JOSHUA. (Jos 4:14-24)
• THE CANAANITES AFRAID. (Jos 5:1)
• CIRCUMCISION IS RENEWED. (Jos 5:2-12)
• AN ANGEL APPEARS TO JOSHUA. (Jos 5:13-15)
• JERICHO SHUT UP. (Jos 6:1-7)
• THE CITY COMPASSED SIX DAYS. (Jos 6:8-19)
• THE WALLS FALL DOWN. (Jos 6:20-21)
• RAHAB IS SAVED. (Jos 6:22-25)
• THE REBUILDER OF JERICHO CURSED. (Jos 6:26-27)
• ACHAN'S TRESPASS. (Jos 7:1)
• THE ISRAELITES SMITTEN AT AI. (Jos. 7:2-26)
• GOD ENCOURAGES JOSHUA. (Jos. 8:1-28)
• THE KING HANGED. (Jos 8:29)
• JOSHUA BUILDS AN ALTAR. (Jos 8:30-31)
• THE KINGS COMBINE AGAINST ISRAEL. (Jos. 9:1-27)
• FIVE KINGS WAR AGAINST GIBEON. (Jos 10:1-5)
• JOSHUA RESCUES IT. (Jos 10:6-9)
• GOD FIGHTS AGAINST THEM WITH HAILSTONES. (Jos 10:10-11)
• THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL AT THE WORD OF JOSHUA. (Jos 10:12-15)
• DIVERS KINGS OVERCOME AT THE WATERS OF MEROM. (Jos 11:1-9)
• THE TWO KINGS WHOSE COUNTRIES MOSES TOOK AND DISPOSED OF. (Jos 12:1-6)
• THE ONE AND THIRTY KINGS ON THE WEST SIDE OF JORDAN, WHICH JOSHUA SMOTE. (Jos. 12:7-24)
• BOUNDS OF THE LAND NOT YET CONQUERED. (Jos. 13:1-33)
• THE NINE TRIBES AND A HALF TO HAVE THEIR INHERITANCE BY LOT. (Jos 14:1-5)
• CALEB BY PRIVILEGE REQUESTS AND OBTAINS HEBRON. (Jos 14:6-15)
• BORDERS OF THE LOT OF JUDAH. (Jos 15:1-12)
• CALEB'S PORTION AND CONQUEST. (Jos 15:13-15)
• OTHNIEL, FOR HIS VALOR, HAS ACHSAH TO WIFE. (Jos 15:16-20)
• THE GENERAL BORDERS OF THE SONS OF JOSEPH. (Jos 16:1-4)
• THE BORDERS OF THE INHERITANCE OF EPHRAIM. (Jos 16:5-9)
• LOT OF MANASSEH. (Jos 17:1-6)
• THIS COAST. (Jos 17:7-11)
• CANAANITES NOT DRIVEN OUT. (Jos 17:12-13)
• THE CHILDREN OF JOSEPH ASK FOR ANOTHER LOT. (Jos 17:14-18)
• THE TABERNACLE SET UP AT SHILOH. (Jos 18:1)
• THE REMAINDER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED. (Jos 18:2-9)
• DIVIDED BY LOT. (Jos 18:10)
• THE LOT OF SIMEON. (Jos 19:1-9)
• OF ZEBULUN. (Jos 19:10-16)
• OF ISSACHAR. (Jos 19:17-23)
• OF ASHER. (Jos 19:24-31)
• OF NAPHTALI. (Jos 19:32-39)
• OF DAN. (Jos 19:40-48)
• THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL GIVE AN INHERITANCE TO JOSHUA. (Jos 19:49-51)
• THE LORD COMMANDS THE CITIES OF REFUGE. (Jos 20:1-6)
• THE ISRAELITES APPOINT BY NAME THE CITIES OF REFUGE. (Jos 20:7-9)
• EIGHT AND FORTY CITIES GIVEN BY LOT OUT OF THE OTHER TRIBES UNTO THE LEVITES. (Jos 21:1-8)
• GOD GAVE THEM REST. (Jos 21:43-45)
• JOSHUA DISMISSES THE TWO TRIBES AND A HALF, WITH A BLESSING. (Jos 22:1-9)
• THEY BUILD THE ALTAR OF TESTIMONY ON THEIR JOURNEY. (Jos 22:10)
• THE DEPUTIES SATISFIED. (Jos 22:30-34)
• JOSHUA'S EXHORTATION BEFORE HIS DEATH. (Jos 23:1-2)
• BY FORMER BENEFITS. (Jos 23:3)
• BY PROMISES. (Jos 23:5-11)
• BY THREATENINGS IN CASE OF DISOBEDIENCE. (Jos 23:12)
• JOSHUA ASSEMBLING THE TRIBES. (Jos 24:1)
• RELATES GOD'S BENEFITS. (Jos 24:2-13)
• HIS AGE AND DEATH. (Jos 24:29-30)

TSK: Joshua (Book Introduction)

The Book of Joshua is one of the most important documents in the Old Testament. The rapid conquest of the Promised Land, and the actual settlement of the Israelites in it, afford a striking accomplishment of the Divine predictions to Abraham and the succeeding patriarchs; and at the same time bear the most unequivocal and ample testimony to the authenticity of this sacred book. Several of the transactions related in it are confirmed in a very extraordinary manner, by the traditions current among heathen nations, and preserved by ancient profane historians of undoubted character. Thus there are monuments still in existence, which prove that the Carthaginians were a colony of Syrians who escaped from Joshua; as also that the inhabitants of Leptis, in Africa, came originally from the Sidonians, who abandoned their country on account of the calamities with which it was overwhelmed. Procopius relates that the Phoenicians fled before the Hebrews into Africa, and spread themselves abroad as far as the pillars of Hercules; and adds, " In Numidia, where now stands the city Tigisis (Tangiers), they have erected two columns, on which, in Phoenician characters, is the following inscription: " We are the Phoenicians who fled from the face of Jesus (Joshua) the son of Naue" (Nun).

TSK: Joshua 16 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Jos 16:1, The general borders of the sons of Joseph; Jos 16:5, The border of the inheritance of Ephraim; Jos 16:10, The Canaanites of Gezer not conquered.

TSK: Joshua 17 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Jos 17:1, The lot of Manasseh; Jos 17:7, His coast; Jos 17:12, The Canaanites not driven out; Jos 17:14, The children of Joseph obtain another lot.

Poole: Joshua (Book Introduction)

BOOK OF JOSHUA

THE ARGUMENT

IT is not material to know who was the penman of this book, whether Joshua, as seems most probable from Jos 24:26 , or some other holy prophet. It is sufficient that this book was a part of the Holy Scriptures, or oracles of God, committed to and carefully kept by the Jews, and by them faithfully delivered to us, as appears by the concurring testimony of Christ and his apostles, who owned and approved of the same Holy Scriptures which the church of the Jews did. But this is certain, that divers passages in this book were put into it after Joshua’ s death, as Jos 10:13 , compared with 2Sa 1:18 Jos 19:47 , compared with Jud 18:1 ; and Jos 24:29,30 . And such like insertions have been observed in the five books of Moses.

Poole: Joshua 16 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 16

The general borders of the sons of Joseph, Jos 16:1-4 . The borders of Ephraim, Jos 16:5-9 . Some of the Canaanites not expelled, but made tributary, Jos 16:10 .

Poole: Joshua 17 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 17

The inheritance of Manasseh, and its borders, Jos 17:1-11 . They could not drive out the Canaanites, but made them tributary, Jos 17:12,13 . The children of Joseph complain that their borders are too narrow: Joshua promises them the subduing of the Canaanites, Jos 17:14-18 .

MHCC: Joshua (Book Introduction)

Here is the history of Israel's passing into the land of Canaan, conquering and dividing it, under the command of Joshua, and their history until his death. The power and truth of God in fulfilling his promises to Israel, and in executing his justly threatened vengeance on the Canaanites, are wonderfully displayed. This should teach us to regard the tremendous curses denounced in the word of God against impenitent sinners, and to seek refuge in Christ Jesus.

MHCC: Joshua 16 (Chapter Introduction)

The sons of Joseph.

MHCC: Joshua 17 (Chapter Introduction)

(Jos 17:1-6) The lot of Manasseh.

(Jos 17:7-13) The boundaries of Manasseh, The Canaanites not driven out.

(Jos 17:14-18) Joseph desires a larger portion.

Matthew Henry: Joshua (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of Joshua

I. We have now before us the history of the Jewish nation in this book and those that follow it to the end of the book of Esther. These books, to he end of the books of the Kings, the Jewish writers call the first book of the prophets, to bring them within the distribution of the books of the Old Testament, into the Law, the Prophets, and the Chetubim, or Hagiographa, Luk 24:44. The rest they make part of the Hagiographa. For, though history is their subject, it is justly supposed that prophets were their penmen. To those books that are purely and properly prophetical the name of the prophet is prefixed, because the credibility of the prophecies depended much upon the character of the prophets; but these historical books, it is probable, were collections of the authentic records of the nation, which some of the prophets (and the Jewish church was for many ages more or less continually blessed with such) were divinely directed and helped to put together for the service of the church to the end of the world; as their other officers, so their historiographers, had their authority from heaven. - It should seem that though the substance of the several histories was written when the events were fresh in memory, and written under a divine direction, yet, under the same direction, they were put into the form in which we now have them by some other hand, long afterwards, probably all by the same hand, or about the same time. The grounds of the conjecture are, 1. Because former writings are so often referred to, as the Book of Jasher (Jos 10:13, and 2Sa 1:18), the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and Judah, and the books of Gad, Nathan, and Iddo. 2. Because the days when the things were done are spoken of sometimes as days long since passed; as 1Sa 9:9, He that is now called a prophet was formerly called a seer. And, 3. Because we so often read of things remaining unto this day; as stones (Jos 4:9; Jos 7:26; Jos 8:29; Jos 10:27; 1Sa 6:18), names of places (Jos 5:9; Jos 7:26; Jdg 1:26; Jdg 15:19; Jdg 18:12; 2Ki 14:7), rights and possessions (Jdg 1:21; 1Sa 27:6), customs and usages (1Sa 5:5; 2Ki 17:41), which clauses have been since added to the history by the inspired collectors for the confirmation and illustration of it to those of their own age. And, if one may offer a mere conjecture, it is not unlikely that the historical books, to the end of the Kings, were put together by Jeremiah the prophet, a little before the captivity; for it is said of Ziklag (1Sa 27:6) that it pertains to the kings of Judah (which style began after Solomon and ended in the captivity) unto this day. And it is still more probable that those which follow were put together by Ezra the scribe, some time after the captivity. However, though we are in the dark concerning their authors, we are in no doubt concerning their authority; they were a part of the oracles of God, which were committed to the Jews, and were so received and referred to by our Saviour and the apostles.

In the five books of Moses we had a very full account of the rise, advance, and constitution, of the Old Testament church, the family out of which it was raised, the promise, that great charter by which it was incorporated, the miracles by which it was built up, and the laws and ordinances by which it was to be governed, from which one would conceive and expectation of its character and state very different from what we find in this history. A nation that had statutes and judgments so righteous, one would think, should have been very holy; and a nation what had promises so rich should have been very happy. But, alas! a great part of the history is a melancholy representation of their sins and miseries; for the law made nothing perfect, but this was to be done by the bringing in of the better hope. And yet, if we compare the history of the Christian church with its constitution, we shall find the same cause for wonder, so many have been its errors and corruptions; for neither does the gospel make any thing perfect in this world, but leaves us still in expectation of a better hope in the future state.

II. We have next before us the book of Joshua, so called, perhaps, not because it was written by him, for that is uncertain. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that Phinehas wrote it. Bishop Patrick is clear that Joshua wrote it himself. However that be, it is written concerning him, and, if any other wrote it, it was collected out of his journals or memoirs. It contains the history of Israel under the command and government of Joshua, how he presided as general of their armies, 1. In their entrance into Canaan, ch. 1-5. 2. In their conquest of Canaan, ch. 6-12. 3. In the distribution of the land of Canaan among the tribes of Israel, ch. 22-24. In all which he was a great example of wisdom, courage, fidelity, and piety, to all that are in places of public trust. But this is not all the use that is to be made of this history. We may see in it, 1. Much of God and his providence - his power in the kingdom of nature, his justice in punishing the Canaanites when the measure of their iniquity was full, his faithfulness to his covenant with the patriarchs, and his kindness to his people Israel, notwithstanding their provocations. We may see him as the Lord of Hosts determining the issues of war, and as the director of the lot, determining the bounds of men's habitations. 2. Much of Christ and his grace. Though Joshua is not expressly mentioned in the New Testament as a type of Christ, yet all agree that he was a very eminent one. He bore our Saviour's name, as did also another type of him, Joshua the high priest, Zec 6:11, Zec 6:12. The Septuagint, giving the name of Joshua a Greek termination, call him all along Iesous Jesus, and so he is called Act 7:45, and Heb 4:8. Justin Martyr, one of the first writers of the Christian church ( Dialog. cum Tryph. p. mihi 300), makes that promise in Exo 23:20, My angel shall bring thee into the place I have prepared, to point at Joshua; and these words, My name is in him, to refer to this, that his names should be the same with that of the Messiah. It signifies, He shall save. Joshua saves God's people from the Canaanites; our Lord Jesus saves them from their sins. Christ, as Joshua, is the captain of our salvation, a leader and commander of the people, to tread Satan under their feet, to put them in possession of the heavenly Canaan, and to give them rest, which (it is said, Heb 4:8) Joshua did not.

Matthew Henry: Joshua 16 (Chapter Introduction)

It is a pity that this and the following chapter should be separated, for both of them give us the lot of the children of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, who, next to Judah, were to have the post of honour, and therefore had the first and best portion in the northern part of Canaan, as Judah now had in the southern part. In this chapter we have, I. A general account of the lot of these two tribes together (Jos 16:1-4). II. The borders of the lot of Ephraim in particular (Jos 16:5-10). That of Manasseh following in the next chapter.

Matthew Henry: Joshua 17 (Chapter Introduction)

The half tribe of Manasseh comes next to be provided for; and here we have, I. The families of that tribe that were to be portioned (Jos 17:1-6). II. The country that fell to their lot (Jos 17:7-13). III. The joint request of the two tribes that descended from Joseph, for the enlargement of their lot, and Joshua's answer to that request (Jos 17:14-18).

Constable: Joshua (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The name of this book in Hebrew, Greek, and English comes from the principle character in it rather than from the writer. Joshua may or may not have been the writer of this book.

The title is appropriate because "Joshua" means, "Yahweh saves." Joshua is the Hebrew name that translates into Aramaic as Jesus. What Jesus is to God's people in a larger sense Joshua was to the Israelites in a smaller sense. Joshua brought God's people into the realization of many of God's plans and purposes for them. This book is a record of God's deliverance of the Israelites into what He had promised them.

In the English Bible, Joshua is one of the historical books (Genesis through Esther). In the Hebrew Bible, it is in the second of the three main divisions of the Old Testament, namely, the Prophets. The Law and the Writings are the first and third divisions. Joshua is the first book in the first half of the Prophets, the Former Prophets. The Former Prophets section contains four books (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) as does the second division, the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve [minor prophets]). The fact that the Hebrews included mainly historical books such as Joshua in the Prophets section reveals a basic attitude of God's people. They viewed what God revealed here not primarily as a historical record as much as an authoritative record of selected historical events designed to teach important spiritual lessons. We should recognize Joshua, therefore, not simply as a record of history but as a selective history intended to reveal God's will. In the Prophets section of the Old Testament, God revealed Himself through historical events as well as through the oracles of individual prophets.

"The Book of Joshua, like all other books of the Bible, is primarily a book of theology. Through it God has revealed himself and continues to do so."¹

Date and Writer

The Book of Joshua evidently came into being several years after the events recorded in the book took place. A number of statements point to a time of composition beyond the conquest and perhaps beyond the lifetime of Joshua. For example, the phrase "to this day" (4:9; 5:9; 6:25; 7:26; 8:28, 29; 9:27; 13:13; 14:14; 15:63; 16:10) refers to a time considerably after the events referred to happened. How much later is hard to say. These references point to a time of composition many years later than the actual occurrence of the events recorded.²

However the writer claims to have crossed the Jordan River when Israel entered the land (5:1 [marginal reading], 6). Therefore he must have written the book not too long after the conquest. This conclusion finds support in the general impression the reader receives that an eyewitness of the events recorded wrote the book. An editor may or may not have added the account of Joshua's death (24:29-33) to the book later (cf. Deut. 34:10-12). This depends on whether the writer wrote it before or after Joshua died.

According to Jewish tradition Joshua himself wrote the book.³ Many modern conservative Old Testament scholars believe that he did.⁴ However other good, conservative scholars believe the writer was not Joshua but a contemporary of his, possibly one of the elders of Israel.⁵ Many more scholars are unsure.⁶ I prefer the traditional view that Joshua wrote the book because I find the arguments of those who believe the writer could not have been Joshua unconvincing.

Scope

As I have explained previously, the date of the Exodus was about 1446 B.C. (cf. 1 Kings 6:1).⁷ Israel spent 40 years in the wilderness (Exod. 16:35; Num. 14:33-34). Thus Israel crossed the Jordan River and entered the land about 1406 B.C. The Book of Joshua therefore begins with events in or very close to the year 1406 B.C.

Josephus said the conquest of the land took five years.⁸ However when Caleb received his town of Hebron he said God had promised that he would enter Canaan 45 years earlier (14:10; cf. Num. 14:24). Since God gave that promise 38 years before Israel crossed the Jordan the conquest seems to have taken closer to seven years (ca. 1406-1399 B.C.). The record of this conquest occupies the first half of the Book of Joshua.

When Caleb said these words he was 85 years old (14:10). Joshua appears to have been about the same age as Caleb, perhaps a little younger. Joshua died when he was 110 (24:29). Assuming Joshua was 75 when the Israelites crossed the Jordan River, the amount of time the Book of Joshua spans may be about 35 years.⁹

The first half of the book (chs. 1-12) covers about seven years. Most of this material, specifically, chapters 1-9, deals with events that probably happened in less than one full year.

Message¹⁰

Joshua reveals that God hates sin because He loves people. (This is the message statement.) Of course He also hates sin because it offends His holiness. However in Joshua I believe the emphasis is on God's concern for the Israelites more than the vindication of His holiness.

The writer of this book portrayed Yahweh as a God of war. This side of God's character has created problems for many people. How could God be loving and yet deal so severely with the Canaanites? In view of Jesus Christ's commands to love our enemies (Matt. 5:44) and be peacemakers (Matt. 5:9) how can we justify God's dealings with the Canaanites that this book records?

The righteous side of God's character is, of course, a consistent emphasis throughout Scripture. In the Pentateuch God dealt severely with all those who oppressed the patriarchs and their descendents (cf. Exod. 15:3). In the historical books we find the same thing. The psalmist referred to Yahweh as "mighty in battle" against the forces opposed to His will (e.g., Ps. 24:8; 45:3). The prophets, especially Jeremiah, warned that God will judge sin. In the Gospels we hear and see the wrath of God manifested in Jesus' words and works against the Pharisees for their sins. In the Book of Revelation, especially chapters 6-19, John pictured the wrath of God being poured out in judgment on the whole world. In Joshua, too, we see God commanding and leading the Israelites in violent mortal conflict with sinners.

The reason God wages war against sin and sinners is that He loves people and wants to save them from destruction by sin and its consequences (cf. Rom. 6:23). If God is not a God of war, then He cannot be a God of love.

We can see God's hatred of sin in His dealings with the Canaanites and in His dealings with the Israelites in Joshua.

In the Pentateuch we discovered many statements and warnings about the Canaanites. Their wickedness was great even in Abraham's day. The Sodomites were Canaanites (Gen. 19), but the measure of their iniquity was not yet full (Gen. 15:16; cf. Lev. 18:24-28). The Ras Shamra Tablets have shed much light on Canaanite religion and culture. Archaeologists discovered these written records in northwest Syria at the site of an ancient city, Ugarit. They date from the fourteenth century B.C., the time of the conquest by Joshua.

The Canaanites wrote them in the Ugaritic language in cuneiform script. These records reveal that Canaanite culture was extremely immoral and inhumane. The Canaanites practiced prostitution of both sexes, many kinds of sexual perversion, and human sacrifice widely. They were religious practices.

As Israel anticipated entering the land occupied by these people it was a case of destroy or be destroyed. In commanding the Israelites to annihilate the Canaanites God was performing surgery to remove a cancer from human society. He was not murdering an innocent primitive people as the liberal critics of the Bible used to say. God had been extremely patient with the Canaanite tribes. They had had hundreds of years to repent after the witness of Melchizedek, Abraham, and many other God-fearing people who had lived among them. Because they did not repent, God used Israel as a broom to sweep away their filth and purify the land. He did not drive the Canaanites out simply to make room for Israel. He did so also to remove this cancerous society and its malignant influence. Israel exercised considerable restraint in dealing with the Canaanites compared with the way some other ancient Near Eastern countries dealt with people they defeated. The Assyrians, for example, were very brutal.

God also manifested His hatred of sin in His dealings with the Israelites. We have seen this already in the Pentateuch as God disciplined His chosen people when they sinned. In Joshua, when Israel lusted after the things of Canaan He dealt with her severely. Achan's sin (ch. 7) affected the whole nation. God judged Achan as He did to teach the Israelites a strong lesson concerning how serious sin is. God's dealings with His own people were even more severe than His dealings with the Canaanites.

In short, Joshua reveals that God wages war against sin wherever He finds it. He patiently waits for people to repent, but if they do not judge sin themselves, He will judge it (Acts 17:30-31; 1 Cor. 11:31). God deals more severely with His own people than with others because privilege heightens responsibility.

Not only does Joshua reveal that God wages war against sin, but it also teaches us how He does it.

God uses the forces of nature to wage war against sin. He restrained the waters of a river, shook the walls of a city, sent hail from heaven, and lengthened the hours in a day to accomplish His purposes. God rarely works in as direct ways to judge sin today. This should not lead us to conclude that He never did or never will. He will again shake the heavens and the earth to bring down His wrath on sinners (cf. Rev. 6-19). We have the privilege of living in the day of His grace when God is being patient with sinners (2 Pet. 3:9-10). Nevertheless that day will end, and He will bring judgment on our world as He did on the world of the Canaanites.

God also uses people who are loyal to Him to wage war against sin. The people God used in Joshua were men and women of faith (Heb. 11:30). God's methods are unpredictable and often seem strange to His servants. They frequently appear foolish to us. Therefore God asks that we simply trust and obey Him. Faith in Joshua means refraining from what God forbids (e.g., at Ai) as well as doing all that God directs (e.g., at Jericho). Joshua is one of the clearest illustrations in the Bible that consistent trust in and obedience to the Word of God results in overcoming, victorious, powerful, successful living. Joshua clarifies three characteristics of faith.

1. Faith involves accepting God's standard of holiness. We tend to undervalue the need for personal and corporate holiness in our day because God is not judging sin immediately as He did in Joshua's day. This is the day of His patience. Nevertheless Joshua teaches that without holiness there can be no spiritual power or consistent victory in our experience (cf. 1:8; 24:19-25).

2. Faith also means abandonment to God's will. God has revealed in His Word how His people can experience all He wants them to have. Because God's ways are not the ways we would choose from our finite carnal viewpoint we have trouble trusting God and committing ourselves wholeheartedly to His will. The Israelites succeeded at Jericho as they did because they committed themselves completely to engaging in that battle as God had commanded. They did so even though it must have looked like suicide to obey.

3. Faith also involves achievement in God's might. It is God who wins the victories. Without God His people can do nothing productive (John 15:5). However with Him all things are possible (Matt. 19:26; Phil. 4:13). The Israelites learned this when they failed at Ai. Success does not really come as a result of our action as we obey God. It comes as a result of God's action working through instruments that He finds usable.

In summary, Joshua reveals that God hates sin. He is at war with it because it offends Him but also because it destroys the people He has created to have fellowship with Himself. God uses the forces of nature and people who are loyal to Him to root out sin and bring deliverance to His people. However the people He uses must accept His standard of holiness for themselves. They must abandon themselves to His way of doing things. They must also acknowledge that victories are the result of His might, not their own.

Constable: Joshua (Outline)

Outline

I. The conquest of the land chs. 1-12

A. Preparations for entering Canaan chs. 1-2

1. God's charge to Joshua 1:1-9

2. Joshua's charge to Israel 1:10-18

3. The spying out of Jericho ch. 2

B. Entrance into the land 3:1-5:12

1. Passage through the Jordan chs. 3-4

2. Circumcision and celebration of the Passover 5:1-12

C. Possession of the land 5:13-12:24

1. The conquest of Jericho 5:13-6:27

2. Defeat at Ai ch. 7

3. Victory at Ai 8:1-29

4. Renewal of the covenant 8:30-35

5. The treaty with the Gibeonites ch. 9

6. Victory over the Amorite alliance at Gibeon 10:1-27

7. Other conquests in southern Canaan 10:28-43

8. Conquests in northern Canaan 11:1-15

9. Summary of Joshua's conquests 11:16-12:24

II. The division of the land chs. 13-21

A. The land yet to be possessed 13:1-7

B. The land east of the Jordan 13:8-33

C. The land west of the Jordan chs. 14-19

1. The rationale for the allotments 14:1-5

2. Caleb's inheritance 14:6-15

3. Judah's inheritance ch. 15

4. Joseph's inheritance chs. 16-17

5. Survey of the remaining land 18:1-10

6. The inheritance of the remaining tribes 18:11-19:51

D. The special cities 20:1-21:42

1. The cities of refuge ch. 20

2. The cities of the Levites 21:1-42

E. The faithfulness of God 21:43-45

III. Joshua's final acts and death chs. 22-24

A. The return of the two and one-half tribes to their inheritances ch. 22

B. Joshua's farewell address to the Israelites ch. 23

1. A reminder of past blessings 23:1-13

2. A warning of possible future cursing 23:14-16

C. Israel's second renewal of the covenant 24:1-28

1. Preamble 24:1

2. Historical prologue 24:2-13

3. Covenant stipulations 24:14-24

4. Provisions for the preservation of the covenant 24:25-28

D. The death and burial of Joshua and Eleazar 24:29-33

Constable: Joshua

Joshua

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan. "The Province-List of Judah." Vetus Testamentum 9 (1959):225-46.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

Archer, Gleason L. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology From Moses to David." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):99-115.

_____. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Armerding, Carl. Conquest and Victory. Chicago: Moody Press, Moody Pocket Books, 1967.

Beek, M. A. "Rahab in the Light of Jewish Exegesis." In Von Kanaan bis Kerala, pp. 37-44. Edited by W. C. Delsman, et al. Kevelaer, Germany: Verlag Butzer and Bercker, 1982.

Begg, Christopher T. "The Function of Josh 7, 1-8, 29 in the Deuteronomistic History." Biblica 67:3 (1986):320-34.

Briggs, Peter. "Testing the Factuality of the Conquest of Ai Narrative in the Book of Joshua." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Colorado Springs, Colo., Nov. 15, 2001.

Bush, George. Notes on Joshua. New York: Newman & Ivison, 1852; reprint ed., Minneapolis: James & Klock, 1976.

Butler, Trent C. Joshua. Word Biblical Commentaries series. Waco: Word Books, 1983.

Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Book of Joshua. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Campbell, Donald K. "Joshua." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 325-71. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

_____. No Time for Neutrality. Wheaton: Scripture Press, Victor Books, 1981.

Cawood, John. "The Godly Features of Caleb." Confident Living 44:10 (November 1986):53-55.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Divine Hardening in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):410-34.

_____. "The Polemic against Baalism in Israel's Early History and Literature." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September 1994):267-83.

Constable, Thomas L. "A Theology of Joshua, Judges, and Ruth." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 89-113. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

_____. "The Tablets From Ugarit and Their Importance for Biblical Studies." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):62-72.

_____. Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davis, Dale Ralph. No Falling Words. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

Davis, John J. "Conquest and Crisis." In A History of Israel by John J. Davis and John C. Whitcomb. 1970; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Dearman, J. Andrew. "The Problem of War in the Old Testament: War, Peace, Justice." Austin Seminary Bulletin 99:3 (October 1983):5-14.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Fawver, Jay D., and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September):270-85.

Fensham, F. Charles. "The Treaty Between Israel and the Gibeonites." Biblical Archaeologist 27:3 (1964):96-100.

Finkelstein, Israel. "Shiloh Yields Some, But Not All, of Its Secrets." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:1 (January-Feburary 1986):22-41.

Foster, Harry. "Joshua. Walking into Battle." Toward the Mark 11:6 (November-December 1982):116-19.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Goetz, Ronald. "Joshua, Calvin, and Genocide." Theology Today 32 (October 1975):263-74.

Good, Robert M. "The Just War in Ancient Israel." Journal of Biblical Literature 104:3 (September 1985):385-400.

Hall, J. Contemplations on the Old and New Testaments. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1859.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Leslie F. Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

_____. A Exposition of the Old and New Testament. Vol. 2: Joshua-1 Kings. New ed. London: James Hisbet & Co., 1934.

Herr, Larry G. "What Archaeology Can and Cannot Do." Ministry 56:2 (February 1983):28-29.

Hess, Richard S. Joshua: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, England, and Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Holladay, John S., Jr. "The Day(s) the Moon Stood Still." Journal of Biblical Literature 87 (1968):167-78.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Howard, David M., Jr. "Three Days' in Joshua 1-3: Resolving a Chronological Conundrum." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:4 (December 1998):539-50.

Hughes, R. Kent. Living on the Cutting Edge. Westchester, Ill.: Good News Publishers, Crossway Books, 1987.

Isserlin, B. S. J. "Israelite Architectural Planning and the Question of the Level of Secular Learning an Ancient Israel." Vetus Testamentum 34:2 (April 1984):169-78.

Jacobsen, Henry. Claiming God's Promises. New ed. Bible Knowledge series. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1963.

Jamieson, Robert; A. R. Fausset; and David Brown. A Commentary Critical, Experimental and Practical on the Old and New Testaments. 6 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1948.

Jefferys, William H. "Sun, Stand Thou Still': An Astronomical Critique of a Creationist Biblical Chronology." Creation/Evolution 21 (Summer 1987):18-30.

Jensen, Irving L. Joshua. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kallai, Zecharia. "The Conquest of Northern Palestine in Joshua and Judges." Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol 1. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1969.

Kearney, Peter J. "The Role of the Gibeonites in the Deuteronomic History." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35:1 (1973):1-19.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kelso, J. L. Archaeology and Our Old Testament Contemporaries. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1966.

Kemp, Barry J. "Preliminary Report on the El-'Amarna Expedition, 1981-2." Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 69:5 (1983):5-24.

Kempinski, Aharon. "Joshua's Altar--An Iron Age I Watchtower." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:1 (January-February 1986):42, 44-49.

Kenyon, Kathleen M. The Bible and Recent Archaeology. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1978.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. The Bible In Its World. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 3 From Joshua to Solomon." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 61 (1971):5-14.

Kline, Meredith G. "Deuteronomy." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 155-204. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Kuyper, Abraham. Women of the Old Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 2: Numbers-Ruth, by John Peter Lange, William J. Schroeder, F. R. Fay, and Paulus Cassel. Translated by Samuel T. Lowrie, A Gosman, George R. Bliss, and P. H. Steenstra.

Laughlin, John C. H. "Dan." Biblical Illustrator 9:4 (Summer 1983):40-46.

Livingston, G. Herbert. The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Macartney, Clarence. The Greatest Texts of the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1947.

Machlin, Milt. "Joshua and the Archaelolgist." Reader's Digest 137:821 (September 1990):135-40.

Madvig, Donald H. "Joshua." In Deuteronomy-2 Samuel. Vol. 3 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Mattill, A. J., Jr. "Representative Universalism and the Conquest of Canaan." Concordia Theological Monthly 35:1 (1967):8-17.

Mayes, A. D. H. "The Gibeonites as a Historical and Theological Problem in the Old Testament." Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association 10 (1986):13-25.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "The Late Bronze/Early Iron Age Transition and the Emergence of Israel." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):145-62.

_____. "Palestinian Archaeology and the Date of the Conquest: Do Tells Tell Tales?" Grace Theological Journal 3:1 (Spring 1982):107-21.

Meyer, Frederick B. Joshua. New York: Fleming H. Revell, n.d.; reprint ed., Fort Washington, Pa.: Christian Literature Crusade, 1977.

Milgrom, Jacob. "The Levitical Town: An Exercise in Realistic Planning." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):185-88.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the Author, P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Mosca, Paul G. "Who Seduced Whom? A Note on Joshua 15:18//Judges 1:14." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 (1984):18-22.

Na'aman, Nadav. "Habiru and Hebrews: The Transfer of a Social Term to the Literary Sphere." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 45:4 (October 1986):271-88.

Nelson, Richard D. "Josiah in the Book of Joshua." Journal of Biblical Literature 100:4 (1981):531-40.

The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed. S.v. "Hazor," by T. C. Mitchell, pp. 507-8.

Palau, Luis. The Moment to Shout. Portland: Multnomah Press, 1977.

Paterson, John H. "The Touchy Tribe." Toward the Mark 16:6 (November-December 1987):110-13.

Peckham, Brian. "The Composition of Joshua 3-4." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46:3 (July 1984):413-31.

Pfeiffer, Charles F. Ras Shamra and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962.

_____. Tell El Amarna and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1963.

"Possessing the Land." Christianity Today, 18 April 1986, p. 19.

Rattigan, Mary. "Hazor and Its Significance." The Bible Today 23:1 (January 1985):44-50.

Riley, W. B. "The Challenge to Carry On." Reprinted in Fundamentalist Journal 2:2 (February 1983):39-41.

Schaeffer, Francis A. Joshua and the Flow of Biblical History. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1975.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Scroggie, W. Graham. The Land and Life of Rest. London: Pickering & Inglis Ltd., 1950.

Seger, Joe D. "Investigations at Tell Halif, Israel, 1976-1980." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 252 (Fall 1983):1-23.

Sell, Henry T. Bible Study by Periods. Chicago: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1899.

Shanks, Hershel. "Two Early Cult Sites Now Questioned." Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-February 1988):48-52.

"Space Men And Astronauts Read Bible, Find Missing Day." McKinney [Texas] Examiner,14 May 1970, sec. 2, p. 1.

Stockton, Ronald. "Possessing the Land: a chronology of events in the dispute over Palestine." Christianity Today, April 18, 1986, p. 19.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Thompson, J. A. "War in Ancient Israel." Buried History 21:3 (April 1985):61-69.

Thompson, Leonard L. "The Jordan Crossing: Sidqot Yahweh and World Building." Journal of Biblical Literature 100:3 (1981):343-58.

Unger, Merrill F. Introductory Guide to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1951.

Ussishkin, David. "Lachish--Key to the Israelite Conquest of Canaan?" Biblical Archaeology Review 13:1 (January-February 1987):18-39.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Palestinian Artifactual Evidence Supporting the Early Date of the Exodus." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March 1972):33-47.

Waterhouse, Douglas. "Who Are the Habiru of the Amarna Letters?" Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 12:1 (Spring 2001):31-42.

Weinfeld, Moshe. The Promise of the Land: The Inheritance of the Land of Canaan by the Israelites. The Taubman Lectures in Jewish Studies series. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

West, Jim. "Rahab's Justifiable Lie." Christianity and Civilization 2 (Winter 1983):66-74.

Wilson, Robert Dick. "Understanding The Sun Stood Still.'" In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 61-65. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Wood, Bryant G. "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho?" Biblical Archaeology Review 16:2 (1990):44-59.

Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Woudstra, Marten H. The Book of Joshua. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1981.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. "The Proofs, Problems, and Promises of Biblical Archaeology." Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 36:3 (September 1984):129-38.

Zertal, Adam. "Has Joshua's Altar Been Found on Mt. Ebal?" Biblical Archaeology Review 11:1 (January-February 1985):26-42.

_____. "How Can Kempinski Be So Wrong!" Biblical Archaeology

Review 12:1 (January-February 1986):43, 49-53.

Zevit, Ziony. "Archaeological and Literary Stratigraphy in Joshua 7-8." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 251 (Summer 1983):23-35.

_____. "The Problem of Ai." Biblical Archaeology Review 11:2 (March-April 1985):58-69.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Joshua (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

THE BOOK OF JOSUE.

This book is called Josue , because it contains the history of what passed under him, and, according to the common opinion, was written by him. The Greeks call him Jesus; for Josue and Jesus, in the Hebrew, are the same name, and have the same signification, viz., A Saviour. And it was not without a mystery, that he who was to bring the people into the land of promise, should have his name changed from Osee (for so he was called before, Numbers xiii. 17,) to Josue , or Jesus , to give us to understand, the Moses, by his law, could only bring the people within sight of the promised inheritance, but that our Saviour, Jesus , was to bring us into it. (Challoner) --- The Hebrews who had been so rebellious under Moses, behaved with remarkable fidelity and respect towards his successor; who, by these means, more forcibly represented the Christian Church, (Du Hamel) which will be ever obedient to her divine head and observe his directions. Josue had been trained up a long time under the hand of Moses, and God had given him the commission to govern his people, in so public a manner, that no one offered to claim that high and arduous office. In effect, the whole conduct of Josue before and after his exaltation, shewed him to be most deserving of command. (Haydock) --- Josue, says the Holy Ghost, (Ecclesiasticus xlvi. 1,) was successor of Moses among the prophets , or, according to the Greek, "in prophecies." Many explain this of the obligation incumbent on him, to continue the sacred history (Calmet) and revelations where Moses had left off. The last chapter of this book informs us that he did so. Perhaps some additions, by way of farther explication, have been made by subsequent inspired writers, though most of the passages which are adduced to prove this assertion, seem to be of little force. Respecting the death of Josue, we may make the same observations as on that of Moses. It may have been written by the author of the Book of Judges. Theodoret seems to have thought that the work before us, was compiled out of the public registers, which are quoted chap. x. under the name of the book of the Lord . See Numbers xxi. 14. The Samaritans have a book or chronicle of Josue, which relates in 39 or 47 chapters, many facts of scriptural history, (Haydock) down to the reign of Adrian, intermingled with a variety of fables. It seems to be of modern date. Hottinger undertook to publish it in Latin, but was prevented by death. (Calmet) --- The true history of Josue sets before us the passage of the Jordan, the conquest of Chanaan, and the distribution of the country. After the pious general had performed all that could be expected from him, after he had twice ratified the covenant between God and his people, and exhorted the latter, with his last breath, to observe an inviolable fidelity to the only Lord, he departed this life in peace, in the 110th year of his age, and was buried at Thamnath Sare, which he had built for the place of his abode. (Haydock) --- As the five books of Moses contain the law, intermixed with history, so this first of the historical books exhibits a variety of useful precepts and predictions. The prophetical and sapiential books must be considered in the same light. (Worthington) --- They all tend to promote true wisdom and the salvation of men, provided they be perused in the same spirit with which they were written. (Haydock)

Gill: Joshua (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOSHUA

The Jews distinguish the prophets into former and latter; the first of the former prophets is Joshua, or Sepher Joshua, the book of Joshua, as it is commonly called in the Hebrew copies; the Syriac inscription is,

"the book of Joshua, the son of Nun, the disciple of Moses:''

in the Arabic version it is reckoned a book of the judges, which adds,

"the first among the judges of the children of Israel was Joshua, the son of Nun, the twenty eighth from Adam, who reigned over Israel after the Prophet Moses.''

This book bears the name of Joshua, either because it is concerning him, his actions and exploits in the land of Canaan, or because it was written by him, or both; though some ascribe it to Ezra, and others to Isaiah; but it must have been written before the times of Ahab, as appears from 1Ki 16:34; and even before the times of David, as is clear from Jos 15:63, compared with 2Sa 5:6; for though mention is made in it of the mountains of Judah and of Israel, from whence some have concluded, that the writer must have lived after the times of Rehoboam, in whose days the kingdom was divided; yet we find the distinction of Israel and Judah took place before, even in the times of David and Asaph, Psa 76:1; It is most likely that this book was written by Joshua himself, as the Jews in their Talmud ^a assert; and, indeed, who more fit for it than himself? and if written or put together by another, it is most probable that it was taken out of his diary, annals, or memoirs; and though there are some things recorded in it, which were done after his death, these might be inserted under a divine direction and influence by Eleazar, or Phinehas, or Samuel, to each of whom some ascribe the writing of this book, just as Joshua is supposed to add some verses concerning Moses at the end of the Pentateuch: however, be it wrote by whom it may, there is no doubt to be made of the divine inspiration and authenticity of it by us Christians, since some histories recorded in it are taken from it, or referred to, in Heb 11:30; and the promise made to Joshua is quoted, and applied to every believer, Heb 13:5; and the Apostle James refers to the case of Rahab, her character and conduct in it, Jam 2:25. The subject matter of this book is Joshua's taking upon him the government of the children of Israel, after the death of Moses, by a divine commission, exhortation, and encouragement given him to engage in war with the Canaanites; his conquests of them, the division of the land of Canaan to the children of Israel, and their settlement in it. It is of great use not only to give us the geography of the land of Canaan, and the history of the church of God, from the death of Moses to the times of the judges; but shows the exact fulfilment of prophecy, and the faithfulness of God to his promises in giving the land of Canaan to Israel, according to those made to their fathers, and the justice of God in punishing the Canaanites for their abominable sins, as had been foretold; and the wonderful care, of God, and his love to the people of Israel in preserving and protecting them, and in settling them in such a good land, notwithstanding all their murmurings, ingratitude, and unbelief, in the wilderness; and may serve to lead us to Christ, whose type Joshua was in the whole affair here related: his name has the signification of the salvation of the Lord in and he is by the Greek writers, and so in the New Testament, called Jesus, a Saviour, Act 7:45, Heb 4:8; and as they agree in their name, so they do in their state, condition, and character; Joshua was a servant of Moses, Christ was made under the law, and became subject to it, both moral and ceremonial; and also in their office, Joshua was the governor of Israel, and the commander of their forces, for which he was well qualified with wisdom, courage, and integrity; Christ is King of saints, the Leader and Commander of the people, who has fought their battles for them, being abundantly qualified, having the spirit of wisdom, counsel, might, and of the fear of the Lord, resting on him. Joshua was a type of Christ in various actions of his; in leading the people through the river Jordan, an emblem either of baptism, or of afflictions, or of death itself, in which Christ is with his people, and carries them through; in saving Rahab and her family, so Christ saves the worst and chief of sinners; in receiving the Gibeonites, who submitted to him, as Christ does all that come to him; in his conquest of the several kings of the Canaanites, so Christ has conquered all the spiritual enemies of his people, sin, Satan, and the world; in bringing and settling the people of Israel in the land of Canaan, their rest, and dividing it to them by lot, which Moses might not do; so Christ only brings souls into the true rest, into spiritual rest here, and eternal rest hereafter; in whom they obtain the inheritance of the heavenly glory by lot, and by whom only they enjoy salvation and eternal life, and not by the works of the law. This book contains an history of Joshua, of his government, his acts and deeds, from the death of Moses to his own; how long that was is not certain; the Jewish chronologers ^b observe, that the time of his principality we find not in the text; though they ^c say he succeeded Moses when he was eighty two years of age, and governed Israel twenty eight years; Eupolemus ^d, an Heathen writer, says thirty years. Christian writers commonly make his reign to be twenty seven years ^e; but an Arabic writer ^f stretches it further to thirty one years; he says, he took the government of the people in the seventy ninth year of his age, and reigned thirty one; but it seems more probable that he was ninety three years of age when Moses died, who lived to be an hundred ten, so that only seventeen years intervened between the death of the one and of the other; seven years Joshua was in subduing the land, and ten years more were taken up in dividing it to the people, and settling them in it, and in the government of them; after which Eleazar might rule ten years more, whose death is mentioned in it; so indeed the book may be reckoned an history of twenty seven years, though Joshua lived only seventeen of them. The Chronicle, to which the Samaritans give the name of the book of Joshua, is a spurious work; an epitome of which Hottinger ^g has compiled, and translated out of the Arabic exemplar into Latin.

Gill: Joshua 16 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOSHUA 16

This chapter gives us an account of the lot of the children of Joseph, Ephraim, and the half tribe of Manasseh, one half having settled on the other side Jordan; and first the borders of the whole lot in general are given, Jos 16:1; and then the borders of the tribe of Ephraim in particular, Jos 16:4; and it is observed, that this tribe had besides separate cities among the children of Manasseh, and that there were some Canaanites, particularly in Gezer, not driven out by the Ephraimites, Jos 16:9.

Gill: Joshua 17 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO JOSHUA 17

This chapter gives an account of the lot that fell to the half tribe of Manasseh, to the male children of Manasseh, and to the daughters of Zelophehad, Jos 17:1; and describes the coast of that lot, Jos 17:7; and relates the request of the sons of Joseph, to have their lot enlarged, which was granted, Jos 17:14.