Joshua 7

Joshua 7:1

Apostolic Constitutions: “You shall not steal:” [Exodus 20:15] for Achan, when he had stolen in Israel at Jericho, was stoned to death; [Joshua 7:1] and Gehazi, who stole, and told a lie, inherited the leprosy of Naaman; [2 Kings 5:27] and Judas, who stole the poor’s money, betrayed the Lord of glory to the Jews, [John 12:6] and repented, and hanged himself, and burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out; [Matthew 27:5; Acts 1:18] and Ananias, and Sapphira his wife, who stole their own goods, and “tempted the Spirit of the Lord,” were immediately, at the sentence of Peter our fellow-apostle, struck dead. [Acts 5:1-11] — Apostolic Constitutions (Book VII), Section 1, II

Gregory of Neocaesarea: Behold, did not Achar the son of Zata transgress in the accursed thing, and trouble then lighted on all the congregation of Israel? And this one man was alone in his sin; but he was not alone in the death that came by his sin. And by us, too, everything of a gainful kind at this time, which is ours not in our own rightful possession, but as property strictly belonging to others, ought to be reckoned a thing devoted. For that Achar indeed took of the spoil; and those men of the present time take also of the spoil. But he took what belonged to enemies; while these now take what belongs to brethren, and aggrandize themselves with fatal gains. — CANONICAL EPISTLE 3

John Chrysostom: Suppose any one should make scrutiny into all the communicants in the world, what kind of transgression is there which he would not detect? and what if he examined those in authority? Would he not find them eagerly bent upon gain? making traffic of high places? envious, malignant, vainglorious, gluttonous, and slaves to money? Where then there is such impiety as this going on, what dreadful calamity must we not expect? And to be assured how sore vengeance they incur who are guilty of such sins as these, consider the examples of old. One single man, a common soldier, stole the sacred property, and all were smitten. Ye know, doubtless, the history I mean? I am speaking of Acham the son of Carmi, the man who stole the consecrated spoil.… On account of all these things, let us take heed to ourselves. Do ye not see these wars? Do ye not hear of these disasters? Do ye learn no lesson from these things? Nations and whole cities are swallowed up and destroyed, and myriads as many again are enslaved to the barbarians. If hell bring us not to our senses, yet let these things. What, are these too mere threats, are they not facts that have already taken place? Great is the punishment they have suffered, yet a greater still shall we suffer, who are not brought to our senses even by their fate. — HOMILIES ON Ephesians 6

Origen of Alexandria: But this too must not be run over idly: that when one man sinned, wrath came upon the whole people. How does this happen? When the priests, who are set over the people, wish to seem kindly toward wrongdoers, and, fearing the tongues of sinners lest perhaps they speak ill of them, forgetful of priestly severity, are unwilling to fulfill what is written: “rebuke the sinner before all, that the rest may have fear,” and again: “take away the evil from among your own selves,” nor, kindled with zeal for God, do they imitate the Apostle who says that “such a man is to be handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved.” Nor do they strive to fulfill that evangelical precept that, if they see one sinning, they should first meet him privately, afterward also with “two or three witnesses”; and if he shall have despised this and after the church’s correction shall not have been amended, they should hold him, expelled from the church, “as a heathen and a publican.” And while they spare one, they contrive the ruin of the whole church. What kind of goodness is this, what kind of mercy is it, to spare one and to bring all into danger? For the people is defiled by one sinner. Just as by one diseased sheep the whole flock is infected, so also, when one man either fornicates or commits any other kind of crime, the whole populace is defiled. And therefore let us watch over one another, and let the conduct of each one be known, especially to the priests and ministers. Nor let them think they are speaking rightly when they say: what does this concern me, if another does evil? This is to say, as the head says to the feet: what does it pertain to me, if my feet ache, if they are in a bad state? it is no concern of mine, so long as the head continues in health; or as if the eye should say to the hand: I do not need your work, what does it pertain to me if you ache, if you are wounded? shall I, the eye, be troubled by the sickness of the hand? Such, then, is what those do who preside over the churches, not considering that we who believe are all “one body,” having one God, who binds us together in unity and holds us fast, namely Christ, of whose body you, who preside over the church, are the eye — for this very purpose, surely, that you may look around upon all things, survey all things, and even foresee things to come. You are a shepherd; you see the little sheep of the Lord, unaware of the danger, being carried to the precipices and hanging over the crags: do you not run to meet them? do you not call them back? do you not at least restrain them with your voice and deter them with the shout of rebuke? Are you so forgetful of the Lord’s sacrament that, whereas he, “having left the ninety-nine in the heavens” for the sake of one little sheep “that had gone astray,” descended to the earth and, having found it, “carried it back upon his shoulders” to heaven, we in no way at all follow the example of the master shepherd in caring for the little sheep? We do not say these things in order that anyone should be cut off for a slight fault; but if perhaps someone, having been admonished and rebuked for his offense once and again and a third time, has shown no amendment, let us use the discipline of the physician. If we have anointed with oil, if we have soothed with plasters, if we have softened with a poultice, and yet the hardness of the swelling does not yield to the medicines, the only remaining remedy is to cut it away. For so the Lord also says: “if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and cast it away from you.” Does the hand of our body ever “cause us to stumble,” or is it about this hand of the body that the Gospel says: “cut it off, and cast it away from you”? But this is what it means: that I, who seem to you to be the right hand and am named a presbyter and seem to preach the word of God, if I do anything against ecclesiastical discipline and the rule of the Gospel, so that I cause a stumbling-block to you, to the church, then the whole church, conspiring together in one consent, should cut me off as its right hand and cast me away from itself. For “it is expedient for you,” the church, without me, your hand — who by doing evil “have caused a stumbling-block” — to enter into the kingdom of heaven, rather than with me “to go into hell.” We have said these things for this reason, because we see it related in the holy Scriptures that on account of one man sinning “the children of Israel were made accursed,” so that they were conquered by their enemies. — HOMILIES ON Joshua 7.6

Prudentius: And Jericho had seen in her own ruin Our hand’s control, when conquering Achan fell. Renowned for bloodshed, proud of leveling walls, He fell a victim to the enemy’s gold When from the dust he gleaned the stuff accursed And snatched the mournful plunder from the ruins. His tribe did not avail, nor his descent From Judah, founder of the race of Christ And patriarch blessed in his noble scion. Let those who imitate his race accept A similar form of death and punishment. — THE SPIRITUAL COMBAT 536.46

Salvian the Presbyter: You say these were the disgraceful acts of a few men and what was not done by all could not injure all. Indeed, I have said above quite often that the crime of one man was the destruction of many among the people of God, just as the people were ruined by Achan’s theft, just as pestilence arose from Saul’s jealousy, just as death came from the counting of the people by the holy David. The church of God is as the eye. As a speck of dirt, even though small, which falls into the eye blinds the sight completely, in the same way, if some, even though they are a few in the body of the church, commit filthy acts, they block almost all the light of the splendor of the church. — THE GOVERNANCE OF GOD 7.19

Augustine of Hippo: The text says that Akar, of the tribe of Judah, stole something from the anathema of the city of Jericho against the commandment of the Lord and that for this sin three thousand men, who had been sent to Ay, turned their backs on the enemies and they killed some thirty-six of them, and while the people were terribly terrified, Joshua prostrated himself with the elders before the Lord, and the Lord answered that this had happened because the people had sinned. God also threatened him saying that he would not be with them again if they did not remove the anathema out of their midst. And he also says that he who had done this was discovered and given to death not only he, but he with all his family. Regarding this, it is often asked how it is lawful to take revenge with justice against one for the sins of another, especially considering that the Lord said in the law that parents would not be punished for the sins of their children, nor would they be punished. children for the sins of the parents (Cf Deuteronomy 24,16). Or was it commanded when men judge, namely, that no one be punished for another, but the judgments of God are not like those of men, he who knows, by his high and invisible counsel, until what should it also extend men’s temporary pain and healthy fear? In the administration of the universe nothing cruel happens to mortals when they die, since they have to die. In those who fear these things, the law sanctions that not only each one take his precautions in the town, but that they pay attention to each other and that some are caring members of others as members of one body and one man (Cf 1Co 12,12.25). But we must not think that one can be condemned by another even with the penalties that apply after death. This penalty applies only to things that will come to an end, even if they did not end in this way. At the same time, it also reveals the close relationship that exists in the society of the people with the totality of the individuals, so that each individual is not valued in himself, but they are valued as the parts in a whole. Thus, because of the sin of only one and the death of a few, the entire town received the warning that what the whole body had admitted in a certain way was being investigated. At the same time, the great evil that would follow if the whole assembly had sinned was also indicated, when not even one could be judged so that through it all the rest could be safe. But if Akar, found and imprisoned by someone, had been taken to be judged by Joshua as the defendant of that crime, we should not think at all that the judge man was to punish for him or with him anyone else who was not guilty by have been associated with their action. For the judge was not allowed to exceed the imperative of the law that has been given to men, so that, based on their judgment, commanded or allowed man against man, do not think that one can be punished for the sin of another . God, on the other hand, judges with a much more mysterious justice, he who can liberate or punish even after death, something that man can not do (Cf St 4,12). Thus, the visible afflictions or the deaths of men, since not only can they harm, but take advantage of those to whom they are inferred, the Lord, in the mystery of his providence, knows how and to whom he can give them justice, even when it seems who takes revenge for one another’s sins. On the other hand, invisible punishments, which only harm and can not take advantage of, no one has to endure for the sins of others, since God is the judge, just as no one has to endure, except by his own fault, the visible penalties when the judge is the man. This is what God has commanded man, who is judge in the things that pertains to the human judgment to punish, because in his judgment he arrives to where he does not have pretensions to arrive the human power. — QUESTIONS ON JOSHUA, Q. 8 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Joshua 7:12

Augustine of Hippo: For we find that some sins are also a punishment for other sins … as in the flight of the Israelites from the face of the enemy out of the city of Ai because fear was instilled into their hearts so that they fled. And this was done to punish their sin and to punish it as it deserved to be punished, which is why the Lord said to Joshua, the son of Nun, “The children of Israel shall not be able to stand before their enemies.” What is the meaning of “shall not be able to stand”? Why did they not use their free will to stand rather than take flight because their wills were thrown into confusion by fear? Was it not for the simple reason that God, as Master of people’s wills, can in his anger instill fear into the hearts of whomsoever he pleases? Was it not of their own free choice that the enemies of the Israelites fought against God’s own people when they had Joshua, son of Nun, as their leader? And yet the Scripture tells us that “it was by the will of the Lord that their hearts should be strengthened that they should fight against Israel … and should be destroyed.” — ON GRACE AND FREE WILL 20.41

Joshua 7:15

Augustine of Hippo: We can rightly ask why Joshua ordered the people to stone the individual who was surprised at having broken the anathema, when the Lord had commanded that, if it were discovered, he should be handed over to the fire. Or perhaps it was fitting that he should die, like Joshua, who was closer to the Lord, could he understand the words of the Lord who commanded him? No other, in fact, could understand them more easily. Therefore, we must ask why the Lord calls fire to stoning before thinking that Joshua did something different from what the Lord sent him. Because there could not be another wiser to understand the words of the Lord or anyone more obedient than him to fulfill them. Therefore, the Scripture testifies in Deuteronomy that, under the name of fire, the punishment could be indicated, when it is said to the children of Israel: “And I brought you out of the iron furnace of Egypt.” Here, evidently, the Scripture wanted to mean a hard tribulation. Two reasons occur to me - not because they fit the two, but only one of them - to say why Akar was not burned with all his things by a visible fire. If the Lord judged that his sin was of such a nature that, atoned for by that torment, he would not punish it eternally, the penalty would very appropriately be called fire by his own atonement and purification. No one would be led to think this if a fire visible in its own right had burned him. Everyone would rather stop to think about what they clearly saw done and no one else would ask another reason. Now, since it is reasonably said that the stoning was also a fire, because of the words of God and the performance of Joshua, it is elegantly recognized that man was purified by that punishment, so that he would not perish later because of that sin In the same way, in Leviticus, the utensils that are purged by fire are also meant (Cf Leviticus 13,52) But if the sin was of such a nature that such a man was worthy of gehenna, because of that sin, even after this life, Joshua would have wanted to stone him precisely to warn that in what the Lord had said: he will be delivered to the fire (Joshua 7,15), you had to understand not what they did, but what the Lord was going to do. Well, if the Lord had said: You will give it to the fire with all its things, there would be no possibility for this sense. But as the sentence is set so that it seems that God foretold what would happen to the guilty rather than sending what men should do to him, that is why Joshua, who understood the divine words as a great prophet and prophetically realized this very thing, He could not do better than to make him die by stoning instead of burning, so that in those flames the words of the Lord would not be fulfilled, that he wished that it be understood that he had said them for another reason. And no problem should arise from the fact that God had predicted that not only the person, but all his things had to be given to fire. For the Lord said thus: He will be delivered to the fire with all his things. In all his things his works can be understood, that, according to God, they should be burned with him, not as the Apostle says about certain works burned by fire, that he, on the other hand, will be saved (1 Corinthians 3,15), if the sin of this man should be understood in the sense that he was punished even with eternal fire. The people, by punishing the guilty, also covered their children and their daughters with stones, with the cattle and with all the things they had. But Joshua did not do this moved by a human judgment, but by the prophetic spirit, or by having understood the words: with all his things, so that he did not even consider the stoning to be exempt from the children, by also applying the punishment instead of the fire, or because he wanted to signify his works, that God after the death of the culprit had to burn with him, not only by means of the other things that he had, but also by his children. But not for that reason we must think that also their children, after death, were punished with the torment of the fire of hell for the sin of their father, of whom they were innocent. Because this death, which awaits us all, even if it comes from the first sin, because we were born, and therefore we necessarily have to die, (Cf Rm 5,12) can be useful for some if it accelerates. That is why the following is read about a person: He was taken so that evil did not change his intelligence (Sab 4,11). Therefore, it is something that only those who have no iniquity know the reason for the judgment of God or for the mercy that was applied to both the sons of this man and those thirty-six warriors, all of whom are alien to the sin of that man. Man (Cf Rm 9,14) But it is clear that it was also convenient for the people to investigate with panic what had happened and the others feared so much more to imitate the action of the former the greater the fear of human frailty, and that such a great and just hatred of the people it also gave in those who thought that for the hope of the propagation of the lineage he would let die for his sin, consumed with him his own descendants. — QUESTIONS ON JOSHUA, Q. 9 (tr. J. Litteral, draft)

Joshua 7:20

Ambrose of Milan: But human habits have so long applied themselves to this admiration of money that no one is thought worthy of honor unless he is rich. This is no new habit. No, this vice (and that makes the matter worse) grew long years ago in human hearts. When the city of Jericho fell at the sound of the priests’ trumpets and Joshua the son of Nun gained the victory, he knew that the valor of the people was weakened through love of money and desire for gold. For when Achan had taken a garment of gold and two hundred shekels of silver and a golden ingot from the spoils of the ruined city, he was brought before the Lord and could not deny the theft but admitted it. — On the Duties of the Clergy 2.26.129

Joshua 7:21

Origen of Alexandria: But let us also see what his very sin was: “he stole,” it says, “a tongue of gold, and placed it in his tent.” I do not think that in that theft of a little gold there was such force of sin that it could stain so innumerable a church of the Lord. But let us see whether perhaps, in the inner understanding, the bitterness of this sin is so great and so grave. There is much beauty in words, and much loveliness in the discourses of the philosophers or the rhetoricians, who are all from the city of Jericho, that is, men of this world. If, then, you find among the philosophers perverse doctrines adorned with the assertions of brilliant speech, this is “the tongue of gold.” But see that the splendor of the work does not deceive you, that the beauty of golden speech does not carry you away; remember that Jesus commanded all the gold that should be found in Jericho to be “accursed.” If you read a poet weaving gods and goddesses in measured verses and in resplendent song, do not be delighted by the sweetness of eloquence: for it is a tongue of gold; if you take it up and place it in your tent, if you bring into your heart the things that are asserted by them, you will defile the whole church of the Lord. This the wretched Valentinus did, and Basilides; this Marcion also did. These men stole “tongues of gold” from Jericho and attempted to introduce into the churches the not-upright sects of the philosophers and to defile the whole church of the Lord. But let us follow the preceding example of the fathers; let us examine more diligently, lest anyone should have a Jerichoan “tongue” hidden in his tent, and let us cast away the evil from our very selves, because, even if we hold back, God will convict him, so that he himself will spontaneously confess and say: “I stole a tongue of gold and pure bracelets.” Do you see of what sort was the theft he stole? He steals “a tongue” and “pure bracelets.” Now “pure bracelets” are works in which nothing divine is mixed, but the whole is carried out according to man. Indeed, in our disputations too it is customary to say that we do not call Christ a mere man, but confess him God and man. But that which is stolen from Jericho is said to be “pure,” that is, without God — which, for the one stealing it, was surely the cause of sin. And therefore let us perceive nothing pure and human concerning Christ, but let us confess him God and man alike, because the “wisdom” of God is also called “manifold,” so that through these things we may deserve to take a share in “the wisdom of God,” which is “Christ” Jesus our Lord, “to whom is glory and dominion unto the ages of ages. Amen.” — HOMILIES ON Joshua 7.7

Joshua 7:25

Basil of Caesarea: Accordingly, I find, in taking up the Holy Scripture, that in the Old and New Testament contumacy toward God is clearly condemned, not in consideration of the number or heinousness of transgressions but in terms of a single violation of any precept whatsoever, and, further, that the judgment of God covers all forms of disobedience. In the Old Testament, I read of the frightful end of Achan and the account of the man who gathered wood on the sabbath day. Neither of these men was guilty of any other offense against God, nor had they wronged a man in any way, small or great; but the one, merely for his first gathering of wood, paid the inescapable penalty and did not have an opportunity to make amends, for, by the command of God, he was forthwith stoned by all his people. The other, only because he had pilfered some part of the sacrificial offerings, even though these had not yet been brought into the synagogue nor had been received by those who perform this function, was the cause not only of his own destruction but of that also of his wife and children and of his house and personal possessions besides. Moreover, the evil consequences of his sin would presently have spread like fire over his nation—and this, too, although the people did not know what had occurred and had not excused the sinner—unless his people, sensing the anger of God from the destruction of the men who were slain, had promptly been struck with fear, and unless Joshua, son of Nun, sprinkling himself with dust, had prostrated himself together with the ancients, and unless the culprit, discovered thus by lot, had paid the penalty mentioned above.Perhaps someone will raise the objection that these men might plausibly be suspected of other sins for which they were overtaken by these punishments, yet the Holy Scripture made mention of these sins alone as very serious and worthy of death. — PREFACE ON THE JUDGMENT OF GOD

Jerome: Achan sinned, and the entire nation transgressed. And the Lord said to Joshua, “The children of Israel will not be able to stand before their enemies but shall flee from their adversaries, because there is a curse in their midst. And I shall no more be with you, unless the anathema is destroyed out of you.” And when they made search for the guilty person and the lot discovered him hiding, Achan, and his sons and daughters, and his asses and sheep are killed; his tent and all his possessions are destroyed by fire. Granted, that he himself committed a sin. What sin did his children commit, his oxen, his asses, his sheep? Reprehend God, why one man committed a sin and a number of people were put to death; why even he is stoned to death and all his possessions are destroyed by the avenging flame? Let us also quote the other testimony: “There was not a city,” he says, “that the Lord did not deliver to the children of Israel, except the Hivites who dwell in Gibeon; they took all by fight, because it was the sentence of the Lord that their hearts should be hardened and they should fight against Israel and be killed, and that they should not deserve any clemency and should be destroyed, as the Lord commanded Moses.” If it was done by the will of God that they should neither make peace with Israel nor obtain peace from Israel, let us say with the apostle: “Why then does he find fault? For who can resist his will?” — Against the Pelagians 1.37

Jerome: What compulsion commands him [Paul] to do what he dislikes? And why must he not do what he wishes but what he dislikes and does not wish? He will answer you thus: “No, but, O man, who are you that replies against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, ‘Why have you made me this way?’ Has not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel to honor and another to dishonor?” Bring a yet graver charge against God and ask him why, when Esau and Jacob were still in the womb, he said, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” Accuse him of injustice because, when Achan the son of Carmi stole part of the spoil of Jericho, he butchered so many thousands for the fault of one. — LETTER 133.9