Joshua 14:2

By lot [was] their inheritance,.... Every tribe had its part and portion assigned to it, by the casting of lots; which was done to prevent any future quarrels, animosities and strifes among the

By lot was their inheritance, as the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes, and for the half tribe. No JFB commentary on these verses.

This course God ordained, partly to prevent discontents, enmities, animosities, and quarrels among the tribes about the quality of their several portions; and partly to demonstrate the truth and wisdom of his providence, by which alone those parts fell to each of them, which Jacob long since, and Moses lately, foretold; so that, as a learned man saith, He must be more stupid than stupidity, and more impudent than impudence itself, that doth not acknowledge and confess a Divine hand and providence in this matter. The lot did only determine the several parts or provinces to the several tribes, but did not precisely fix all the bounds of it, but these might be either enlarged or diminished according to the greater or smaller number of the tribes, ,56 33:54, and that by the direction of those persons mentioned 17:14-18.

Joshua 14:2 By lot [was] their inheritance, as the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes, and [for] the half tribe.Ver. 2. By lot was their inheritance.] To prevent all murmurings and discontents, since it was the Lord that cut them out their several conditions; who, as he is Lord of all, and may do with his own as he pleaseth, so he is the only wise God, who doth all things well - “ Pondere, mensura, numero facit omnia. ” See Proverbs 16:33; Proverbs 18:18.

(2) By lot . . . as the Lord commanded . . . Moses.—See Numbers 26:52-56; Numbers 34:17-29. The nine tribes, and for the half tribe; and (3) For Moses had given; and (4) For the children of Joseph were two tribes.—The argument of these verses can only mean that the tribal inheritances were to be twelve in number, and therefore the Levites were excluded from any distinct territorial position, for the children of Joseph were to be two tribes. Of Ephraim and Manasseh, Jacob had said to Joseph, “as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine:” i.e., though grandsons, they shall count as sons of Jacob, and each one shall be the head of a tribe. Thus there are two ways of counting Jacob’s sons, each making twelve; and these two seem to be recognised as distinct in Exodus 28. There we are told that the high priest should bear the names of the children of Israel on his shoulders according to their birth (i.e., Joseph being counted as well as Levi, but not Ephraim and Manasseh). On his breastplate he must have them according to the twelve tribes (i.e., Ephraim and Manasseh being specified, but Joseph and Levi left out). Both ways of reckoning were necessary in order that the complete Israel might be represented by the high priest. And in each way the number twelve was preserved and emphasised, as it is evidently intended to be in this place,

Verse 2. By lot was their inheritance] Concerning the meaning and use of the lot, see the note on Numbers 26:55; and concerning the manner of casting lots in the case of the scapegoat, see the note on Leviticus 16:8-9. On this subject Dr. Dodd has selected some good observations from Calmet and Masius, which I here borrow: "Though God had sufficiently pointed out by the predictions of Jacob when dying, and those of Moses, what portions he designed for each tribe, we readily discern an admirable proof of his wisdom in the orders he gave to decide them by lot. By this means the false interpretations which might have been given to the words of Jacob and Moses were prevented; and by striking at the root of whatever might occasion jealousies and disputes among the tribes, he evidently secured the honesty of those who were to be appointed to distribute to them the conquered countries in the land of Canaan. Besides, the success of this method gave a fresh proof of the Divinity of the Jewish religion, and the truth of its oracles. Each tribe finding itself placed by lot exactly in the spot which Jacob and Moses had foretold, it was evident that Providence had equally directed both those predictions and that lot. The event justified the truth of the promises. The more singular it was, the more clearly we discern the finger of God in it. The portion, says Masius, fell to each tribe just as Jacob had declared two hundred and fifty years before in the last moments of his life, and Moses, immediately before his death; for to the tribe of JUDAH fell a country abounding in vineyards and pastures; to ZEBULUN and ISSACHAR, seacoasts; in that of ASHER was plenty of oil, wheat, and metals; that of BENJAMIN, near to the temple, was, in a manner, between the shoulders of the Deity; EPHRAIM and MANASSEH were distinguished with a territory blessed in a peculiar manner by Heaven; the land of NAPHTALI extended from the west to the south of the tribe of Judah. Since therefore the lot so well corresponded to these predictions, would it not be insolence and stupidity in the highest degree, not to acknowledge the inspiration of God in the word of Jacob and Moses, the direction of his hand in the lot, and his providence in the event?" How the lot was cast in this case cannot be particularly determined. It is probable, 1. That the land was geographically divided into ten portions. 2. That each portion was called by a particular name. 3. That the name of each portion was written on a separate slip of parchment, wood, c. 4. That the names of the claimants were also written on so many slips. 5. The names of the portions, and of the tribes, were put into separate vessels. 6.

2. By lot was their inheritance] See Numbers 26:55; Numbers 33:54, and note above on the use of “lots” ch. Joshua 7:18. (a) The use of lots was specially characteristic of the ancient world. Thus it was a standing custom of the Athenians to divide the land of conquered enemies to colonists by lot (Diod. xv. 23, 29), and we find it resorted to by them (a) in Eubœa (Herod. v. 77; vi. 100), (b) in Lesbos (Thuc. III. 50). The Romans also assigned territory to the victorious legions by lot (Cic. Ep. ad Div. xi. 20). (b) How the lot was taken on this occasion we are not told. The Rabbins conjecture that there were two urns; in one had been placed little tablets with the names of the tribes, and in the other similar tablets with the names of the districts, and that one of each was drawn at the same time. (c) The decision was made by lot, not merely to prevent all disputes with reference to their respective possessions, and to remove every ground of discontent and complaint, but also in order that each tribe might cheerfully and thankfully accept the share awarded to it, as the inheritance intended for it by God. “For the casting of lots is not regulated either by the opinion, or caprice, or authority of men.” (Calvin.) “It is true that it seems as though this might have been as easily accomplished, if Joshua or the High Priest had been divinely inspired to give to every tribe its inheritance. But men are never so ready to submit cheerfully to the decisions of another man, even though they may be the result of Divine Inspiration, as they are to a decision arrived at by a lot over which the Lord presides, and thus entirely raised above human caprice.” (See Proverbs 18:18; Proverbs 16:33.)

By lot - We are not told in what manner the lot was cast. Perhaps two urns were employed, one containing a description of the several districts to be allotted, the other the names of the tribes; and