Joshua 5

Joshua 5:1

^jlND it came to pass, when all the kings of the Anwrites. These were the principal inhabitants, and the most valiant in all the country; as hath been formerly noted* Which were on the side of Jordan westward.] This seems to be added, to shew, that, besides the two kings of the Amorites, Sihon and Og, whom they had already subdued on the other side of Jordan, eastward, there were other kings of the same nation on that side of Jordan, M’here the Israelites now were. And it is not improbable, that these kings commanded the Hittites, Hivitcs,.and’Jebusites, as well as the Ainorites. And all the kings of the Canaanites, which were by th$ sea.] i. e. The Mediterranean,, where the people properly called Canaanites dwelt; though there were colonics of them spread in other places. The LXX. here call them fiaaiXtig rr\g <Poivkr)Q, the kings of Phcmicia: for upon that sea were the principal cities of the ancient Phoenicians, viz. Tyre and Sidon. JJut though the people that lived upon the sea-coast were peculiarly called by this name of Phoenicians, yet they were so powerful, that the whole country was called x^P a’ T ^ v <PoiyiKwv, the country of the Phoenicians; as the LXX. call the land of Canaan, ver. 12. of this chapter. Heard that the Lord had dried tip the waters of Jordan from before the children of Israel, until we were passed over.] This sounds like the language of Joshua, or of some other [chap, v. person then present, when this wonder was wrought; which astonished those that lived in the remotest parts of the country; who little thought of an invasion on that side (which, it is likely, made them not draw any forces that way), imagining the river, especially when it overflowed till-its banks, was a sufficient security unto them on that frontier. That their hearts melted; neither xvas there spirit in them any more, because of the children of Israel.] They quite lost their courage; which began to fail them before, as we read chap. ii. vcr. 11. Or, as the LXX. expound it, their understanding failed them; and they were in such a consternation, that none knew what to advise for their safety. In which the providence of God is much to be observed, that, by this means, tho Israelites were securely circumcised (as it here follows); whereas, if the people of Canaan had been courageous and watchful, they had taken them at a great advantage, if they had then fallen upon them; as appears by the story of the Shechcmites, Gen. xxxiv. 25. They had leisure also, without any disturbance, to celebrate the Passover, (ver. 10.) L Vcr. 2. At that time the Lord said unto Joshua.] The next day, which was the eleventh day of the first month; as our primate Usher and others judge most likely. Make thee sharp knives.] Or, as it is in the margin of our Bibles, knives of flints: which stones were plentiful, it is likely, in the mountains thereabouts. And, after they had fiiarched forty years in the wilderness, it is probable (as Theodoret notes) that they were not provided with such knives as we use, of iron. By the very words also of Joshua it appears he speaks of knives they were now to provide; and not of such as they had already. Nor is it strange such knives should be used, for they were common in the eastern countries, as may be gathered out of the Talmud, in the treatise of the Sabbath; where they say, in the killing of beasts, they use either a flint-stone (so they interpret the word tzur), or glass, or a quill. From whence Theodoric Hackspan concludes, that if sharp stones sufficed for the killing of beasts, there was no need of any other in circumcision. Who observes also, that the Jews say, they might circumcise with any instrument, made either of stone or glass, but not of a quill; because there was danger it might slit and hurt so tender a part. And at this day they do circumcise in the cast with knives made of stones, such as Zipporah, it is supposed, used in the circumcision of her son, (Exod. iv. 25.) See this question debated in Sixtiaus Amama’s Antibarbarus, lib. ii. p. 282. Justin Martyr thinks there was some mystery in the use of these knives. (Sec his dialogue with Trypho, p. 341, 342.) And circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.] This doth not signify that they who had been circumcised heretofore, were to be now circumcised again (from whence some have drawn an argument for the repeating of baptism, as St. Austin tells us), but that there had been such a general circumcision heretofore ordered, as there was to be now after a long omission of that rite. And it is probablo that it was at Mount Sinai, in the first month of the second year after they came out of Egypt. When they kept a Passover on the fourteenth day of that month, (Numb. ix. 1—3.) and before they kept it, circumcised all that had not been circumcised in Egypt, or since they came out of it. For no uncircumciscd person, nor any one who had a son, or a man-servant in his house uacircumcised, was rnpable to be admitted to it. We do not read, indeed, of the neglect of circumcision in Egypt, or in that year wherein they came out of it; but, considering tho great oppression they lay under in that country, and the several distresses they were in, after their deliverance, for three months, till they came to Sinai; and the absence of Moses a long time after they came thither’; it is very probable this rite was omitted, till God called upon them (as he did now) to celebrate the Passover; and then they were constrained to take care of it, because otherwise they could not have kept it. (Sec Sclden, lib. ii.’ dc Syncdr. cap. 2. n. 1.)

Joshua 5:3

And Joshua made him sharp knives, and ciratmcised the children of Israel. Ordered every one that wanted it to be circumcised; and, it is probable, not only all those that came over Jordan, but such of the Reubenites, Gadites, and Manassites, as were left on the other side, were circumcised also, and all in one day, that they might be in a condition to eat the passover; nor need it seem strange that it was dispatched in such a short time, for they might employ as many hands as they pleased in this work, there being no necessity that a priest or a Levite should do it, but it might be performed by their fathers or mothers, or any other person. At the hill of the foreskins.] In the Hebrew, at Gibeah Naardboth; which some take to be the name of the place where they were circumcised; but then that place was so called from the foreskins that were there thrown; which were so many, that being laid upon a heap and covered with earth, they made a little hillock, as the Jews conceive/ (See Pirkc Eliezcr, cap. 29.)

Joshua 5:4

And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise. The reason of this order, and of the execution of it, is here given. All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males) even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.] That is, all that were then twenty years old, for such only were reputed men of war, and were guilty of the sedition mentioned in Numb. xiv. for which they were doomed to perish in the wilderness.

Joshua 5:5

Now all the people that came out were circumcised. Not only those that died for their rebellion, but all the restunder twenty years old, were generally circumcised, except some infants, who (as I said upon ver. 2.) might have been neglected during their heavy oppression there. But all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.] Never sincie they removed from Mount Sinai, where it is likely there was a general circumcision, as there was now to bo before their celebrating the Passover, which had not been kept since that time. Vcr. G. For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, &c] These words seem to give the reason why they were not circumcised, because they were in a wandering condition, while they remained in the wilderness, and did not know when the cloud would “remove from the tabernacle to lead them to another place; which if it had done when children were newly circumcised, their lives might have been endangered by motion, while they were sore. This, a great many fc^f V4 f L*m f Wf f Vf ^Sw^^f \ CHAP. V.] UPON JOSHUA. think, made Moses dispense with circumcision by God’s: direction. We do not find him, indeed, consulting God about it; but he was satisfied that God approved of this reason for the omission of it. R. Jose, as Mr. Sclden’ observes, gives this account of the whole business: " The Israelites kept but one Passover all the time they were in the wilderness; the reason was, in that year (which was the next to that wherein they came out of Egypt) their tents were pitched in a place where they might safely circumcise the males that had been lately born, lest the neglect of it should hinder the legitimate eating of the passover. But in all the time following, wherein they wandered in the desert, they did. not circumcise their children, because of their incommodious journeys, and the danger of circumcision by the way;” so that they could keep no more Passovers till they came to Canaan. This is a far better reason, than what many of them give, who say circumcision was omitted, because the north wind never blew all the time they were in the wilderness; and wounds are very dangerous when it doth not blow. Whence their medical maxim mentioned in the Talmud: " In cloudy days, and when the east wind blows, weneither circumcise nor open a vein." (Sec Buxtorf. Synagog. Judaica, cap. 4.) But if this matter be well considered, wc cannot rest satisfied with the foregoing reason; for all the time they were in the wilderness, children were born, and women lay in; and there was greater danger by their motion, while they were in labour, and when they were newly brought to bed, than there was in their children’s being circumcised, who were sore but for a few days; whereas the others were not fit to go abroad, or to travel, in a great many. For which, and for several other reasons, Fortunatus Scacchus thinks this was not the cause why they were not circumcised during their travels in the wilderness; but the true reason was, that they did not look upon the precept of circumcision as obliging them, till they came to settle in the land of Canaan: for in the covenant which Moses made with them at Mount Sinai, there is nothing said about circumcision, unto which they were bound by the covenant made with Abraham, (as our Saviour observes, John vii. 21.) and that runs thus:’-’ I will give unto thee, and unto thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, &c. Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seedafter thee, &c. Every man-child shall be circumcised," Gen. xvii. 8—10. (See Sacror. Elacochrysm. Myrothec. 2. cap. 54.)

Joshua 5:7

And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised. Now that they were come to their rest in the land of promise. For they were vncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.’] For the reason abovementioned: to which this may be added, that several great men (such as Theodoret and St. Jerome among the ancients) think that circumcision, being a note of distinction between the Israelites and other people, there was no need of it in the wilderness, when (as Cedrenus speaks) they were iravrbg aXXJycvouc Kt^uygiaiiivoi, separated from all strangers by the wilderness itself. Others think, that the mixed multitude of Egyptians, who, moved by the miracles they had seen done in their country, went out of.it with the Israelites, and joined themselves to them, were the cause of this omission; for they could not presently incorporate with them by receiving circumcision; and therefore it was suspended, that these Egyptians might not look upon themselves as quite a different people: but longer than till they came to Canaan they would not have it discontinued, when all, Egyptians as well as Israelites, received it, that they might not be upbraided as a people of a different original.’ And as the omission of it in the desert made the proselytes who came out of Egypt equal with the Israelites, while they stayed there; so, as a most learned friend of mine (Dr. Alix). suggests to me, it shewed, that there was no absolute necessity of this rite, and that it could not be of eternal obligation.

Joshua 5:8

And it came to pass, when they had done circumcising all the people, that they abode in their places in the camp. Lay still without motion (which would have hindered the healing of the sore), and had not the least disturbance given them by the people of Canaan. Till they were whole.] Which they were against the Passover; for, reckoning the eleventh day for" one, there were four days between their circumcision and the Passover, which was’ not kept till the fourteenth day at even, when the pain was pretty well over, for it was smartest on the third day. (See upon Gen. xxxiv. 25.)

Joshua 5:9

And the Lord said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. It is commonly thought, that by the reproach of Egypt is’ meant nothing else but uncircumcision, with which the Israelites always reproached other people, particularly the Egyptians, among whom they had long dwelt, and with whom they were best acquainted. But our learned Dr. Spencer thinks the reproach of Egypt is the slavery to which they had been there long subject, but now were fully declared a free people by receiving the mark of the seed of Abraham, and made heirs of the promised land. This he very often repeats, lib. i. de Leg. Hebr. Ritual, cap. 4. p. 44. 51. 55. And no doubt Joshua now chose, immediately upon their entrance into the land of Canaan, to cause them to be circumcised, not only as a token they peculiarly belonged to him, but to oblige them to be careful to* observe all the laws of God; many of which could not, and others were not observed in the wilderness, but were now to be regularly practised, because they held the land of Canaan by this tenure. To this purpose also Theodoret discourses, in his questions upon this book; They were made now lords of the promised land, who were lately slaves in Egypt; for they could not be the legitimate children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and heirs of the promises made to them, till they wero circumcised. Ralbag hath another notion of it; That the Egyptians seeing the Israelites wander so long as they did in the wilderness, reproached and flouted them, as if they were brought thither to be destroyed, and not to possess the land of Canaan; from which reproaches God now delivered them, when he assured them, by enjoining their circumcision, that they should shortly enjoy that country which God promised; but which no uncircumcised person might inherit: but the first is the plainest and most unconstrained sense. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.] This was the first original of the name, which this place had ever after; for Galal, in Hebrew, from whence this word comes, signifies to remove, take away, or devolve. And so here the LXX. translate the word gallothi (I have rolled away) by ctyclXov, and “the Vulgar Microsoft® [chap. V, Latin by abstali (I have taken away); which makes it strange that Joscphus should say (lib. v. Antiq. cap. 1.) that this word Gilgal signifies liberty, whom Theodoret follows; as if this place was so called, because now they found themselves perfectly freed from the Egyptians, and from all the troubles they endured in the wilderness. Unto this day.] These words are alleged by some against Joshua’s being the author of this book; to which an answer hath been given, iv. 9. Vcr. 10. And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal.’] Continued their camp there, as they were enjoined, vcr. 8. And kept the Passover J] Which was tho second Passover that had been kept since its first institution, the first being observed the second year after their coming out of Egypt at Mount Sinai; after which it had been omitted thirtynine years, because many of the people were uncircumciscd. On the fourteenth day of the month at even.) According to the command of God, (Exod. xii. 6.) In the plains of Jericho.’] Where the tabernacle was in the inidst of their camp, unto which they brought their lamb, for it could be sacrificed no where else, (Dcut. xvi. 2.) And therefore hither the Reubenites, and Gaditcs, and Manassites, on the other side Jordan, came to offer this sacrifice; which was easier for them, than it was in aftertimes to go up to Jerusalem. Vcr. 11. And they did eat the old corn of the land.] Which the people of the country had left in their barns when they fled into Jericho, and other strong holds. * The morrow after the Passover.] There is a great dispute among the Jews, whether this were the fifteenth day of the month, which was properly the next day after the Passover, or, as others take it, the sixteenth day, w f hich was the solemn sabbath kept on the first day of unleavened bread, (Lev. xxiii. 10, 11.) when they were to wave the sheaf of the first-fruits before the. Lord. The former are in the right. - • ■ Unleavened cakes.] That is, they kept the feast of unleavened bread, which was distinct from the Passover, a& I observed, Exod. xii. 15, &c. And parched corn on the selfsame day.] This was new corn, which was growing that year they entered into Canaan, of which it was not lawful to eat, till they had offered the sheaf beforementioned, (Lev. xxiii. 14.) and therefore it is made an argument by some, that it was the sixteenth day of this month when this corn was parched.

Joshua 5:12

And the manna ceased on themorrovo after they had eaten of the old corn of the land: neither had the children of Israel mannaany more. Because they had no need of it (as Kimchi and others interpret it), being supplied by the store of old corn which they found in the land of Canaan, and by what’ was growing upon the ground. But they did eat of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year.’] After they had offered the sheaf beforementioned, (Lev. xxiii. 11.) So that manna ceased on the sixteenth or seventeenth day of the first month, having continued ■with them forty years, wanting about a month. So R. Bechai truly interprets these words, (Exod. xvi. 35.) not to signify forty years complete, but near forty years; for it began to fall on the fifteenth day of the second month, and ceasedon the sixteenth or seventeenth day of the first month of the fortieth jcar after they came out of Egypt; and therefore, to shew that they were not to expound those words, They did eat manna forty years, in a strict and precise sense, Moses immediately adds, until they came to a land inhabited; — they did eat manna until they came to the borders of the land of Canaan; which was exactly fulfilled, Gilgal being on the borders of the land, where it now ceased; but it continued till that time, though they came to a land inhabited, when they conquered the kingdoms of Sihon and Og. Vcr. 13. And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho.] After he had performed these solemn rites of circumcision and the Passover, Joshua went to take a view of Jericho, and to observe, as generals arc wont to do, the approaches to it. That he lifted up his eyes and looked.*] These words signify a sudden apparition of a person to him; for so this phrase is used, when something new and unexpected presents itself, as one is intent upon something else, (Gen. xviii. 1. Dan. x. 5.) And, behold, there stood a man before him.] Whom he took to be a man. With his sword drawn in his hand over against him.] He seemed to be a soldier, or rather a great commander, and stood directly opposite to him. And Joshua went unto him.] Such was his undaunted courage, with which God had inspired him. And said, unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?] He demands of him,- whether he came to help the Israelites, or the people of Canaan; for whom (it appears by the answer) Joshua suspected he came to fight.

Joshua 5:14

And he said Nay.* i. e. I am not on the side of your adversaries. But as captain (or prince) of the host of the Lord am I now come.] By the host of the Lord is here meant the whole body of the people of Israel, whom the Lord himself led forth out of Egypt, as his army, (see Exod. xii. 41.) and now appeared in this manner, that he might shew he would still conduct them, as their chief commander and leader, by whom they should be victorious over their enemies: for though many take this to have been a created angel (Michael, suppose, the chief of therji), yet it is evident that Joshua did not think him so to be, for he fell down and worshipped him, as we read in the words following. And Joshua fell on his face to tlte earth.] With the profoundest reverence. And did worship.] Which he durst not have, given (for God. alone is to be adored), nor would an angel have received, without such a check as an angel gave St. John, (Rev. xxii. 10.) if he had not taken him to be the Divine Word that was come to fight for them. So the Chaldce paraphrase upon Josh. x. 42. ** It was the Word of the Lord that fought foT them,” according to God’s promise, i. 9. 17. This a most learned friend of mine (Dr. AHx) shews was the judgment of the ancient Jewish church, (see his late book on that argument, p. 234.) and it is most certain was the judgment of the ancient Christians, particularly of Justin Martyr, Eusebius, and Theodoret. (See Valesius in his Annotations upon Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, lib. i. cap. 2. p. 7.) And therefore our great primate of Ireland fears not to say in his Annals, " Jesus Dominus noster, princeps militia 11, patris sui, Jcsu typico ad Jcrichuntcm gladio stricto apparens, promittitse popu-’’ K4 I t, Ifcv V* CHAP. VI.] UPON JOSHUA., lum defensurum;" that is, Jesus our Lord, the Prince of l \ his Father’s host, appearing to him who was a type of him at Jericho, with a drawn sword, promised to be the defender of the people: where he seems by the captain of the Lord’s host to understand our Lord, who commands angels themselves; for they are sometimes called the host of heaven. (1 Kings xxii. 19. Luke ii. 13.) And it may very well be thought the meaninghere. And said unto him, Wliat saith my Lord unto his servant?) Joshua was possessed of such a deep sense of the greatness of this person, that he humbly desires to receive his commands, and he would obey them.

Joshua 5:15

And the Captain of the Lord’s host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot, for the place where thou standest is holy J. This is the fullest evidence that can be given of the Divinity of this person that appeared to him; who was so far from reproving him for doing him too much honour, that he commanded him to do much more; for that w r hich he here requires, is the highest acknowledgment of a Divine presence that was used among the eastern nations, as the same Dr. Alix observes. And considering that these are the very same words which were spoken to Moses, Exod. iii. 2, 3. we learn the reason why God commanded, this to Joshua; which was, for the strengthening of his faith, that as now he was placed in Moses’s stead, so God would be with him, as he had been with Moses. And thus Joh. a Coch discourses very reasonably upon the Gemara of the Sanhedrin, cap. 6. n. 3. " This angel, who suffered himself to be worshipped, and by whose presence the place where he appeared was sanctified, so that Joshua was commanded to put off his shoes, no doubt was He whom all the angels in heaven worship." And Joshua did so.] Put off his shoes, in token of reverence to that place; which was holy, while that Divine presence remained there, though not after it was gone: and it continued there for some space of time, to give Joshua advice, and to encourage him to hope for his protection and assistance; as appears from ver. 2. of the next chapter.