Комментарии к Библии

The book begins with the history, not of Joshua's life (many remarkable passages of that we had before in the books of Moses) but of his reign and government. In this chapter, I. God appoints him to the government in the stead of Moses, gives him an ample commission, full instructions, and great encouragements, Jos 1:1-9. II. He accepts the government, and addresses himself immediately to the business of it, giving orders to the officers of the people in general, Jos 1:10,11, and particularly to the two tribes and a half, Jos 1:12-15. III. The people agree to it, and take an oath of fealty to him, Jos 1:16-18. A reign which thus began with God could not but be honourable to the prince and comfortable to the subject. The last words of Moses are still verified, "Happy art thou, O Israel! Who is like unto thee, O people?" De 33:29.

Introduction to Joshua

1. This book like several others of the historical books of Scripture derives its name from its contents. It takes up the history of the chosen people at the death of Moses, and continues it in a systematic and orderly narrative, through the leadership and government of his successor. It records (almost exclusively) the acts of Joshua in fulfillment of the commission laid upon him from God by the hand of Moses (compare Deuteronomy 31:7-8), and terminates with Joshua's death and burial.

The contents group themselves into two divisions of nearly equal length. The conquest of the land is described in twelve chapters, and then in twelve other chapters the subsequent partition of it together with Joshua's last acts and words.

The victories of Joshua described in the former of these portions were accompanied by repeated and stupendous interferences of God. This miraculous element has led some commentators to treat the book as altogether unhistorical. But it must not be forgotten that the miracles of the Book of Joshua do not stand alone. They grow, as it were, naturally out of the divine interpositions on behalf of Israel in the days of Moses, and are but the close of a series of extraordinary providences began in Egypt, and described in Exodus and the books following. No less do they stand intimately associated with the future history and development of the Jewish Church and nation, and even with the wider and more remote issues of God's counsels as manifested, or to be manifested, in the Christian Church to the end of all things. Thus, the conquest of Canaan by Joshua has other and vastly grander significances than its mere dimensions as a fact in history seem at first sight to suggest.

It is not to be regarded simply as the invasion of a little district about as large as three average English counties by a tribe of nomads from the Arabian deserts. It was also the accomplishment by God of a purpose revealed of old; it was an essential element in the plan ordained by Him for the preservation among men of His Law, Will, and Word; it was designed to foreshadow in many important particulars His future dealings with mankind at large. But for the special help of God, the Israelites could not have effected the conquest at all, for they were hardly superior to the Canaanites in numbers, and were destitute of chariots and horses, and of all the more elaborate equipments for war, above all of the appliances requisite for reducing the cities (compare Numbers 13:28; Deuteronomy 1:28; Deuteronomy 9:1) in which Canaan abounded. God's promise was, however, pledged to their forefathers to give them this land; whatever then might be necessary to give effect to this promise it belonged to His faithfulness to accord; and the Book of Joshua consequently is an essential sequel to the Pentateuch as declaring the thorough fulfillment by God of the covenant made by Him through Moses with Israel, and thus as illustrating His inviolable faithfuless.

But important as the theocratical and theological characteristics of the Book of Joshua are, both in themselves and as (so to say) vindicating the miraculous elements of the narrative, we must nevertheless not lose sight of the internal evidences of common and historical fact which it presents.

The invasion of Canaan by Joshua was evidently a carefully and skillfully conducted enterprise. An army marching upon Canaan from the south would find its path intercepted by range after range of heights, each, in the days of Moses and Joshua, bristling with towns and fortresses. The progress of such an army could be but slow, and at every step would be met by better organized resistance from an increasing number of enemies. When Israel, after 40 years' expiation of the revolt at Kadesh, again arose at the command of God to resume the long deferred enterprise on Canaan, the host was conducted round the whole southeast corner of the land and directed upon its comparatively defenseless eastern flank above the Dead Sea. The whole of the strong military positions and fenced cities in the "south country" and the "hill country" of what was subsequently the territory of Judah were thus taken in reverse and rendered comparatively useless.

It is probable, too, that the southern Canaanites in particular were at this time greatly weakened by the invasions of Thotmes III, who had taken Gaza, apparently not many years previously, and no doubt had overrun the whole adjoining district (see the note at Joshua 13:3). No less able were the measures adopted by Joshua to execute the plan thus judiciously laid down. The passage of the Jordan, by the special help of God, at a time of year when his enemies no doubt deemed the river to be an almost insurmountable obstacle to his advance (see the note at Joshua 3:15): the seizing Gilgal, to serve as his foothold in the land: the capture and destruction of Jericho: the fall of Ai: these events enabled him to throw the forces of Israel like a wedge through the very midst of the land almost to the western sea, and in its most vulnerable part, between the fastnesses of Judah on the south and the mountain district of Ephraim on the north. The Amorites on Joshua's left, cut off from the Hittites on his right by his whole army interposing between the two, were overpowered before Gibeon. The whole south was reduced into at least temporary subjection before the larger multitudes of the north could be mustered. These in their turn shared the fate of their brethren in the south; Joshua broke their vast host to pieces on the shores of Lake Merom.

In these campaigns of Joshua it is impossible not to see the traces of strategical skill no less conspicuously than that presence of immediate and divine suggestion and succor which the narrative asserts.

2. The leading trait in the character of Joshua is courage - the courage of the warrior: this must have been already remarkable at the time of the Exodus Exo 17:9. Subsequently, Joshua appears as in constant attendance on Moses Exodus 24:13; Exodus 32:1; Exodus 33:11; he without doubt acquired on Sinai, and in the precincts of the sanctuary, that unswerving faithfulness of service and unshaken confidence in God which marked his after career. He was naturally selected as one of the twelve "rulers" sent by Moses Numbers 13:2 to explore the land before the invasion of it was undertaken; and the bold and truthful report brought back by him and Caleb Numbers 14:7-9, was no less characteristic than was his undaunted bearing before the incensed people Numbers 14:10. These qualities pointed him out as the fitting captain over the Lord's people, who should overthrow their enemies before them and put them in possession of the promised inheritance. Accordingly, at the express command of God, he was solemnly appointed to that office and duty by Moses before his death Numbers 27:16-23; Deuteronomy 31:23.

Joshua was not a prophet (Ecclesiasticus 46:1; compare Numbers 27:21), but a divinely-inspired leader. After the great and peculiar work of his life was accomplished, he no longer held the same exclusive place at the head of Israel as before. In making the arrangements for settling the people in their homes, and establishing the theocracy on the lines laid down in the law of Moses, he acted in conjunction with Eleazar, the high priest: and with the heads of the tribes (compare Joshua 14:1; Joshua 17:4; Joshua 21:1). This was but natural. The armies had done their work and were dispersed, or were ready to disperse, to their several inheritances; and the military authority of their general was consequently at an end. The latter years of his life were probably passed in retirement at Timnath-serah, whence, he would seem to have emerged in extreme old age to meet the princes and the people in the great gathering at Shechem Joshua 23-24, and to employ once more and finally his authority as the last survivor but one of a mighty generation, and as the hero of Israel's greatest triumphs, in order to engage his people more firmly and closely in their rightful allegiance to God.

The courage which was the leading feature in the character of Joshua was very distinctly and directly built upon faith Joshua 1:5-6. Joshua obeyed God's call unhesitatingly and to the end, but it was because he trusted wholly in the promise which accompanied it. Hence, along with his soldierly qualities, were found others seldom present in the same man. He combined justice as a magistrate with gentleness as a man Joshua 7:19; spirit as a ruler, with temper and discretion in dealing with the arrogant and exacting Joshua 17:14; diligence and equity in disposing of the fruits of victory with a complete unselfishness as regarded himself Joshua 19:49-51. Perhaps conspicuous above all was his humility. From first to last his valor and his victories are referred to God as their giver. Of his own personal work in the achievements of his life there is in his last addresses scarcely one word.

3. The chronological dates presented in this book are few:

a. Comparing Joshua 4:19 and Joshua 5:6, if the date of the Exodus be assumed to be 1490 B.C., that of the invasion of Canaan will be 1450 B.C.

b. The duration of Joshua's wars with the Canaanites is spoken of loosely in Joshua 11:18 as "a long time." The words of Caleb (Joshua 14:7, Joshua 14:10 : compare Numbers 13:17) - who was thirty-eight years old when he passed through the Red Sea, and seventy-eight when he passed through Jordan - help us to assign a period of seven years (in round numbers) for the campaigns of Joshua.

c. The duration of Joshua's rule, and consequently the number of years covered by the record of this book, is far more uncertain. He died when he was 110 Joshua 24:29. If (compare Exodus 33:11) we suppose him to have been about the same age as Caleb, he will have been about 78 years old when he invaded Canaan, and have been at the head of Israel not much less than thirty-two years altogether after the death of Moses, surviving about twenty-five years after his retirement to Timnath-serah (compare Joshua 23:1). Josephus, however, states that Joshua's rule after the death of Moses lasted for twenty-five years, and that he had previously been forty years associated with him. This would fix Joshua's age at the time of the Exodus at forty-five. On the whole, nothing more precise seems attainable now than this: that Joshua governed Israel from twenty-five to thirty years after the death of Moses, and that about the like number of years contains the events recorded in the book which bears his name.

4. No sufficient evidence exists to enable us with certainty to name the author. That he was one of "the elders that overlived Joshua" Joshua 24:31 is probable, for the book appears to have been written by one coeval with the events recorded, and, indeed, an eye-witness of them. The spirit of the narrative in the former or historical portion of the book, and the graphic yet spontaneous rendering of details, which it everywhere presents, bespeak one who saw what he describes. And the topographical information which abounds in the latter portion of the book is of such a nature, and is presented in such a form, as strongly to suggest the use of written, and apparently contemporary documents. Some parts of this information are minute and accurate (e. g. Joshua 15), other statements are far less definite and complete. No doubt some of these imperfections are due to disorder in the text, or to clauses having dropped out of it, but others are mainly due to the fact that the writer's knowledge was itself imperfect. These very anomalies of the writer's most valuable description of Palestine, inconvenient as they often are, seem thus to be attributable to the early date of his information. His documents were written while Israel was still a stranger in the land of his inheritance, and in parts of it still a foreign invader.

The hand of a writer contemporaneous with the events is indicated in several expressions, e. g. in Joshua 5:6-7; Joshua 6:25; Joshua 10:2, a notice which plainly borrows its terms from the state of things in Canaan at the time of the invasion; and in the record of ancient Canaanite names of cities, though disused after the Israelites occupied them, Joshua 14:15; Joshua 15:9, Joshua 15:15, Joshua 15:49, Joshua 15:60.

The book cannot, in its present form at least, be ascribed to Joshua himself. The account of his death and that of Eleazar, with the few supplementary verses at the end of the book, might have been attached by another hand, as a conclusion to the historical work of Joshua, just as a like addition was made to the work of Moses. But there are up and down the book a number of historical notices, which point to a date clearly beyond the death of Joshua (compare Joshua 15:13-20 and Judges 1:1-15; Judges 15:63, and Judges 1:8; Judges 15:13-19 and Judges 18).

For these reasons the opinion of the rabbis and many moderns which names Joshua as himself the sole writer of this book, must apparently be abandoned. The evidence internal and external renders it likely that the book was composed partly from personal observation and inquiry, partly out of pre-existing and authentic documents, within a few years after the death of Joshua, and probably from materials furnished in part by Joshua himself.

5. The book of Joshua is a work complete in itself, with an organic unity and peculiar characteristics. This appears:

(1) From the definiteness of the writer's purpose, and the thoroughness with which he executes it. He proposes to narrate the conquest of Canaan, and to present that conquest as a proof of God's fidelity to his covenant. But the writer does not limit himself to the achievements of Joshua. Such additions to the main body of his story, which belongs to the lifetime and leadership of Joshua, as are contained in Joshua 13 and Joshua 15 are to be explained only by a reference to the writer's distinct and special aim.

(2) from the tokens of connection and method apparent throughout. Not only does the first part, which records the wars Joshua 1-12, evidently lead up to the second part Joshua 13-24, which describes the partition of the territory when subdued, but the contents of each part taken singly are given in proper and chronological order, each transaction growing out of the one preceding.

(3) from the style and phraseology. These are marked by distinctive features, whether the book be compared with the Pentateuch or with the other and later historical books. The difference of style, words, and treatment in the historical chapters, as contrasted with the topographical chapters is only what might be expected from the diverse nature of the subjects, and from the self-evident fact that in much of the latter part of his task the author was working from pre-existing documents.

Certain discrepancies alleged to exist in the book do not seriously impair its unity and independence. The difficulties, e. g. in the account of the capture of Ai Joshua 8 arise solely out of the numbers, and are far more probably due to a mistake in the numerals (see the note at Joshua 8:3), which is by no means of infrequent occurrence, than to the presence in the narrative of two or three different versions of the events which the final editor omitted to harmonize.

The contradiction said to exist between some passages which speak of the land as completely subdued by Joshua, and of the Canaanites as utterly extirpated (Joshua 11:16-17, Joshua 11:23; Joshua 12:7-8 etc.), and others which allude to "very much land," as still in possession of the native inhabitants (Joshua 13:1; Joshua 17:14 ff; Joshua 23:5, etc.), is to be explained partly by the theocratic view which the writer takes of his theme; a view which leads him to regard the conquest as complete when it was so "ex parte Dei," and when all was done that was needed to enable the Israelites to realize fully the promises (compare Joshua 21:43-45); partly also by the fact that territory was undoubtedly overrun by Joshua at the first onset, which was afterward recovered by the Canaanites, and only again and finally wrested from them at a subsequent, sometimes a long subsequent, date. That the early campaigns of Joshua were in the nature of sudden raids, overpowering for the moment, but not effectually subduing the country, has probably much truth in it.

Thus then, the Book of Joshua, though based upon pre-existing materials of various kinds, and sometimes incorporating them, appears to be a separate and complete work produced as a whole from one original hand. Its relation to the Pentateuch is that of an independent treatise by a distinct author, who resumes a theme of which the first great and important portion had been finished by a predecessor. The Pentateuch is not to be looked upon as principally a historical work. It is the statute book of the theocracy, and contains only such historical matter as illustrates the origin and import of God's covenant with Israel. Joshua records how the temporal promises of that covenant were accomplished; and describes how the basis was laid for the future development of the nation, under the special superintendence of God, by its settlement in Canaan. Thus, regarded, this book is no more an appendage to the Pentateuch than the books of Judges and Samuel are an appendage to it.

There is, assuredly, an intimate connection among these writings throughout, a connection which is expressly indicated by the connective conjunctions used in the beginning of each book (see the note at Judges 1:1). This is due to the fact that the several authors were moved to write by one and the same Spirit, and that their one purpose in successive ages was to record the dealings of God with their nation. Hence, they have selected whatever declares or illustrates the divine call of Israel; God's methods in educating that people for its functions in His world; the preparations made through the chequered history of Israel for future issues bearing on the salvation of all mankind. We find at one time periods of considerable length, and events of great importance to secular history cursorily alluded to, while other occurrences, often of a biographical character, are dwelt upon with anxious minuteness, because of their theocratic bearings. Accordingly, the name "Earlier prophets," given to this and the following books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings by the Jewish Church which has handed them down to us as canonical, is appropriate. They were written by inspired men, and treat their subject from the prophetical point of view.

The Book of Joshua is repeatedly cited or referred to in the New Testament: compare Acts 7:45; Hebrews 3:5; Hebrews 4:8; Hebrews 11:30-31; James 2:25.

6. The land of Canaan was given as a free gift by God to the Israelites - they took possession of it because He bade them do so - and He no less bade them annihilate the Canaanite nations without mercy?

The question then occurs in unbroken force, all palliative explanations being disallowed: Is this merciless treatment of the Canaanites consistent with the attributes of the Deity, especially as those attributes are illustrated for us in the New Testament?

The destruction of the Canaanites is always presented in Scripture as a judgment of God sent on them because of their wickedness. They had not only fallen into total apostasy from God, but into forms of idolatry of the most degrading kind. Their false religion cannot be regarded as a mere error of judgment; cruelty the most atrocious, and unnatural crimes the most defiling were part and parcel of its observances. Moreover, they had proved themselves to be incorrigible. They had had not only the general warning of the deluge, as had other nations of the earth, but the special one of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah in the very midst of them. They had had also the example and instruction of Abraham and the patriarchs living for ages among them. Even after the miraculous providence of God had brought the Israelites out of Egypt and across the Jordan, and even when the sword was as it were hanging over their necks, it was but in one or two isolated cases that signs of repentance and recollection of God were manifested (compare Joshua 2:1; Joshua 9:24). God had forborne for ages in vain (compare Genesis 15:16); in the days of Joshua the time for mercy had passed, and that of judgment had come. It is impossible to acknowledge God as the moral Governor of the earth, and not to admit that it may be right or even necessary for Him to remove such nations. The fact, therefore, that God is described as having not only permitted, but even enjoined and caused the extirpation of the Canaanite nations, depraved as they were, is not inconsistent with His moral attributes. People, as was long ago pointed out by Dr. Butler ('Anal.' ii. 3), have no right to either life or property, but what arises solely from the grant of God. When this grant is revoked they cease to have any right at all in either. And in the case before us the forfeiture decreed by God was merited, and the execution of it was therefore righteous.

God chose to inflict His righteous judgment by the hands of the Israelites, and expressly commissioned them to be His executioners. If it be objected that this is to represent God as sanctioning cruelty, the answer is obvious: it is no sanction of cruelty to direct a lawful sentence to be carried out by human agents (compare Numbers 31:3). Nor would obedience to God's command in this matter make the Israelites brutal and bloodthirsty. The behavior of the Israelites, on many occasions, proves that they shrank from a terrible duty of this sort when laid on them by God, and did it only so far as they were compelled to do it. .

The slaughter of the Canaanites served various important purposes besides the mere removal of them from the face of the earth. To make and keep the Jewish people as much as possible isolated, was a marked and vital principle of the Old Testament dispensation. No more effectual means could have been adopted for inspiring God's people with an abhorrence for Canaanite sins, to which they were not a little prone, than to make them the ministers of divine vengeance for those sins.

They learned by experiment that God would certainly root out those who fell away in apostasy from Him. They were warned also that if they fell into the sins of the Canaanites they would themselves be the victims of those same judgments of which they had been the reluctant executioners (compare e. g. Deuteronomy 28:25). And the whole was so ordered as to exhibit a type, fearful no doubt yet salutary, of what must be the fate of the impenitent and obdurate in the upshot of God's righteous government.

Joshua 1:1-9 serves as an introduction to the history of the war, and pointedly call attention to the leading thought of the whole book - that the invasion and subjugation of Canaan were undertaken by the Israelites at God's direct command and completed in His never-failing strength.

Preface to the Book of Joshua

Joshua, the son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, was first called Oshea or Hoshea, הושע, Numbers 13:16, which signifies saved, a savior, or salvation; but afterwards Moses, guided no doubt by a prophetic spirit, changed his name into יהוש Yehoshua or Joshua, which signifies he shall save, or the salvation of Jehovah; referring, no doubt, to his being God's instrument in saving the people from the hands of their enemies, and leading them from victory to victory over the different Canaanitish nations, till he put them in possession of the promised land. On the change and meaning of the name, see the note on Numbers 13:16. By the Septuagint he is called Ιησους Ναυη, Jesus Naue, or Jesus son of Nave: and in the New Testament he is expressly called Ιησους, Jesus; see Acts 7:45; Hebrews 4:8. Joshua was denominated the servant of Moses, as he seems to have acted sometimes as his secretary, sometimes as his aid-du-camp, and sometimes as the general of the army. He was early appointed to be the successor of Moses, see Exodus 17:14; and under the instruction of this great master he was fully qualified for the important office. He was a great and pious man, and God honored him in a most extraordinary manner, as the sequel of the history amply proves. From the preceding books it appears that he became attached to Moses shortly after the exodus from Egypt; that he was held by him in the highest esteem; had the command of the army confided to him in the war with the Amalekites; and accompanied his master to the Mount, when he went up to receive the Law from God. These were the highest honors he could possibly receive during the life-time of Moses.

Commentators and critics are divided in opinion whether the book that goes under his name was actually compiled by him.

It is argued by those who deny Joshua to be the author, that there are both names and transactions in it which did not exist till considerably after Joshua's time. The account we have, Joshua 4:9, of the twelve stones set up by Joshua in the midst of Jordan remaining to the present day, seems to prove that the book, at least this verse, was not written till after Joshua's time; the same may be said of the account of Ai, that Joshua made it a heap for ever, even a desolation to the present day, Joshua 8:28, which is a proof, however, that the book was not written after the time of the kings, as Ai subsisted after the return from the captivity; see Ezra 2:28 : The men of Beth-el and Ai, two hundred twenty and three. It is supposed also, that the relation of the marriage of Achsah, daughter of Caleb, with Othniel the son of Kenaz, necessarily belongs to the time of the Judges; Joshua 15:16-19; as also the account of the capture of Leshem by the Danites Joshua 19:47, compared with Judges 18:7, Judges 18:29.

"What is related, Joshua 15:63, concerning the Jebusites dwelling with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day, must certainly have been written before the time of David; for he took the strong hold of Zion, and expelled the Jebusites; see 2 Samuel 5:7-9. Also, what is said, Joshua 16:10, They drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer, but they dwelt among the Ephraimites unto this day, must have been written before the time of Solomon, for in his time Pharaoh, king of Egypt, had taken Gezer, burnt it with fire, slain the Canaanites that dwelt in it, and given it a present to his daughter, the wife of Solomon, 1 Kings 9:16. The country of Cabul, mentioned Joshua 19:27, had not this name till the time of Solomon, as appears from 1 Kings 9:13; and the city called Joktheel, Joshua 15:38, had not this name till the reign of Joash, as appears from 2 Kings 14:7, it having been previously called Selah. The like may be said of Tyre, Joshua 19:29; and of Galilee Joshua 20:7; Joshua 21:32."

These are the principal objections which are made against the book as being the work of Joshua. Some of these difficulties might be so removed as to render it still probable that Joshua was the author of the whole book, as some think to be intimated Joshua 24:26; And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of the Lord; (but this probably refers to nothing more than the words of the covenant which was then made, and which is included in Joshua 24:2-24); but there are other difficulties that cannot be removed on the above supposition and therefore it has been generally supposed that the book was written by some inspired person after the time of Joshua; and positively before many kings had reigned in Israel. The book has been attributed to Samuel, though some give this honor to Ezra.

After all, I cannot help considering the book in the main as the composition of Joshua himself. It is certain that Moses kept an accurate register of all the events that took place during his administration in the wilderness, at least from the giving of the law to the time of his death. And in that wilderness he wrote the book of Genesis, as well as the others that bear his name. Now, it is not likely that Joshua, the constant servant and companion of Moses, could see all this - be convinced, as he must be, of its utility - and not adopt the same practice; especially as at the death of Moses he came into the same office. I therefore take it for granted, that the Book of Joshua is as truly his work, as the Commentaries of Caesar are his; and all the real difficulties mentioned above may be rationally and satisfactorily accounted for on the ground, that in transcribing this book in after ages, especially between the times of Joshua and the Kings, some few changes were made, and a very few slight additions, which referred chiefly to the insertion of names by which cities were then known instead of those by which they had been anciently denominated. This book therefore I conceive to be not the work of Ezra, nor of Samuel, nor of any other person of those times; nor can I allow that "it is called the Book of Joshua, because he is the chief subject of it, as the heroic poem of Virgil is called the Aeneis, because of the prince whose travels and actions it relates;" but I conceive it to be called the Book of Joshua,

1. Because Joshua wrote it.

2. Because it is the relation of his own conduct in the conquest, division, and settlement of the promised land.

3. Because it contains a multitude of particulars that only himself, or a constant eye-witness, could possibly relate.

4. Because it was evidently designed to be a continuation of the Book of Deuteronomy, and is so connected with it, in narrative, as to prove that it must have been immediately commenced on the termination of the other.

5. I might add to this, that with the exception of a few individuals, the whole of the ancient Jewish and Christian Churches have uniformly acknowledged Joshua to be its author.

The Book of Joshua is one of the most important writings in the old covenant, and should never be separated from the Pentateuch, of which it is at once both the continuation and completion. Between this Book and the five Books of Moses, there is the same analogy as between the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. The Pentateuch contains a history of the Acts of the great Jewish legislator, and the Laws on which the Jewish Church should be established. The Book of Joshua gives an account of the establishment of that Church in the Land of Canaan, according to the oft-repeated promises and declarations of God. The Gospels give an account of the transactions of Jesus Christ, the great Christian legislator, and of those Laws on which his Church should be established, and by which it should be governed. The Acts of the Apostles gives an account of the actual establishment of that Church, according to the predictions and promises of its great founder. Thus, then, the Pentateuch bears as pointed a relation to the Gospels as the Book of Joshua does to the Acts of the Apostles. And we might, with great appearance of probability, carry this analogy yet farther, and show that the writings of several of the Prophets bear as strict a relation to the Apostolical Epistles, as the Books of Ezekiel and Daniel do to the Apocalypse. On this very ground of analogy Christ obviously founded the Christian Church; hence he had his twelve disciples, from whom the Christian Church was to spring, as the Jewish Church or twelve tribes sprang from the twelve sons of Jacob. He had his seventy or seventy-two disciples, in reference to the seventy-two elders, six chosen out of each of the twelve tribes, who were united with Moses and Aaron in the administration of justice, etc., among the people. Christ united in his person the characters both of Moses and Aaron, or legislator and high priest; hence he ever considers himself, and is considered by his apostles and followers, the same in the Christian Church that Moses and Aaron were in the Jewish. As a rite of initiation into his Church, he instituted baptism in the place of circumcision, both being types of the purification of the heart and holiness of life; and as a rite of establishment and confirmation, the holy eucharist in place of the paschal lamb, both being intended to commemorate the atonement made to God for the sins of the people. The analogies are so abundant, and indeed universal, that time would fail to enumerate them. On this very principle it would be a matter of high utility to read these Old Testament and the New Testament books together, as they reflect a strong and mutual light on each other, bear the most decided testimony to the words and truth of prophecy, and show the ample fulfillment of all the ancient and gracious designs of God. This appears particularly evident in the five Books of Moses and the Book of Joshua compared and collated with the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles; and the analogy will be the more complete as to the number of those books, though that is a matter of minor consideration, when we consider Joshua, as we ought, a continuation of the Book of Deuteronomy, though written by a different hand, which two books should be rated only as one history. Of Judges and Ruth it may be said they are a sort of supplement to the Book of Joshua.

Whoever goes immediately from the reading of the Pentateuch to the reading of the Gospels, and from the reading of Joshua to that of the Acts, will carry with him advantages which on no other plan he will be able to command. Even a commentator himself will derive advantages from this plan, which he will seek in vain from any other. To see the wisdom and goodness of God in the ritual of Moses, we must have an eye continually on the incarnation and death of Christ, to which it refers. And to have a proper view of the great atonement made by the sacrifice of our Lord, we must have a constant reference to the Mosaic law, where this is shadowed forth. Without this reference the law of Moses is a system of expensive and burdensome ceremonies, destitute of adequate meaning; and without this entering in of the law that the offense might abound, to show the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the frailty of man, and the holiness of God; the Gospel of Christ, including the account of his incarnation, preaching, miracles, passion, death, burial, ascension, and intercession, would not appear to have a sufficient necessity to explain and justify it. By the Law is the knowledge of sin, and by the Gospel its cure. Either, taken separately, will not answer the purpose for which God gave these astonishing revelations of his justice and his grace.

Moses being dead, God commissions Joshua to bring the people into the promised land, Joshua 1:1, Joshua 1:2. The extent of the land to be possessed, Joshua 1:3, Joshua 1:4. Joshua is assured of victory over all his enemies, and is exhorted to courage and activity, Joshua 1:5, Joshua 1:6; and to be careful to act, in all things, according to the law of Moses, in which he us to meditate day and night, Joshua 1:7, Joshua 1:8. He is again exhorted to courage, with the promise of continued support, Joshua 1:9. Joshua commands the officers to prepare the people for their passage over Jordan, Joshua 1:10, Joshua 1:11. The Reubenites, Gadites, and half tribe of Manasseh, are put in mind of their engagement to pass over with their brethren, Joshua 1:12-15. They promise the strictest obedience, and pray for the prosperity of their leader, Joshua 1:16-18.

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 1 Kings 16:34; and even before the times of David, as is clear from Joshua 15:63, compared with 2 Samuel 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, Psalm 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 Hebrews 11:30; and the promise made to Joshua is quoted, and applied to every believer, Hebrews 13:5; and the Apostle James refers to the case of Rahab, her character and conduct in it, James 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, Acts 7:45, Hebrews 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 54ed 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.

(a) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 14. 2.((b) Ganz. Tzemach David, par. 1. fol. 7. 2.((c) Seder Olam Rabba, c. 12. p. 33. Juchasin, fol. 10. 1.((d) Apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 30. (e) Tertullian, Lactantius, Eusebius, Augustin. apud Hottinger. Thesaur. Philolog. l . 2. c. 1. sect. 2. p. 960. so Ben Gersom in Jude 11. 26. & Abulpharag. Hist. Dynast. p. 25. (f) Elmacinus apud Hottinger. p. 524. (g) Ad Calcem Exercitat. Antimorin.

INTRODUCTION TO Joshua 1

Moses being dead, the Lord directs and encourages Joshua to take the command of the children of Israel, and go over Jordan with them, and take possession of the land of Canaan, and divide it to them; giving him gracious promises and strong assurances of his presence, and some good advice with respect to his conduct, Joshua 1:1; upon which Joshua orders the people to be ready in three days to go along with him, Joshua 1:10; and particularly addresses the Reubenites and Gadites, and half tribe of Manasseh, and puts them in mind of what Moses had ordered, and they had promised, to go along with their brethren, and assist them in conquering the land, Joshua 1:12; which they readily agreed to do, and promised obedience to him in all things, Joshua 1:16.

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA.

Joshua.

BY

THE REV. C. H. WALLER, M. A.

INTRODUCTION

TO

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA.

The Authorship of the Book of Joshua.—The sentence in Joshua 24:26 is the only direct statement in the Bible relating to the authorship of this book. “Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God.” Do “these words” refer merely to the transaction immediately preceding, viz., the covenant made with Israel at Shechem, or have they any wider application? In order to discuss this question fairly, it is necessary to consider parallel passages, and thus to open in some measure the larger question of the authorship of all the historical books. The signature of Moses at the close of the Book of Deuteronomy is as distinct and explicit as that of any ancient author. “Thucydides of Athens wrote the history of the war between the Athenians and the Peloponnesians, how they warred with one another.” So he opens his narrative, and no one disputes the fact. Not less distinct is the assertion in Deuteronomy 31:9 : “Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of Israel.” Again (Deuteronomy 31:24), “When Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the law,” &c. The chapter that follows (Deuteronomy 32) is also said to have been written by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:22): “Moses wrote this song the same day.” But Deuteronomy 33, 34, the latter containing the record of Moses’ death, are manifestly not covered by Moses’ signature. The next signature that we meet with is that of Joshua (Joshua 24:26 ): “Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God.” The following verses contain the account of Joshua’s death, and events subsequent to it. These verses are not covered by Joshua’s signature, and are not the work of his hand.

The next note of authorship which we meet with in the Old Testament is found in 1Samuel 10:25 : “Samuel told the people the manner [i.e., the constitution] of the kingdom, and wrote it in the [not a] book, and laid it up before the Lord.” From the very first mention of the Bible, it appears as “the book.” Exodus 17:14 : “The Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua.”

The signature of Samuel does not stand, like those of Moses and Joshua, at the end of a specified portion of history. And this leads us in the next place to observe that the historical books of the Old Testament are not presented as separate works, but rather as chapters in what is regarded as a single book from the very first. Taking them as they stand in our English Bible, they form two volumes: the first including all from Genesis to the end of 2 Kings; the second from Chronicles to Esther, inclusive. Every book in each of these volumes is connected with its predecessor by the copulative conjunction “And.”[13] (In our English Bible it is sometimes a “Now,” or “Then,” but the Hebrew conjunction is the same throughout, a simple “And.”) No one writes “And” as the first word of a distinct and separate work. Such a commencement implies that what follows is intended as a continuation of what is already begun.

[13] The Book of Deuteronomy, like that of Nehemiah, has its first title prefixed to the “And.” But this is no exception. (See Notes on Deuteronomy 1:1.)

Thus it appears that all the historical books of the Old Testament to the end of 2 Kings, are written as a continuation of the work of Moses. Joshua, Samuel, and the rest wrote their portions “in the book of the law of God,” and as it were upon the blank pages which Moses had not filled.

A new beginning is made in 1 Chronicles—“Adam Seth, Enos”—and this work is a compendium of the history of God’s people from Adam to Cyrus. The end of 2 Chronicles is repeated at the commencement of Ezra. Nehemiah begins in a somewhat peculiar way: “The words of Nehemiah, the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass.” Manifestly the first sentence is a title and signature in one. The real beginning is “And.” Esther also begins with “And.” This, the last portion of the Old Testament history, also contains the significant clause, “And it was written in the book,” which appears to be a reference to the sacred volume (Esther 9:32).

Thus the signature of Joshua in Joshua 24:26 is seen to be one of four sentences in Old Testament history, referring to the authorship of the Bible. There is another series of passages in the Chronicles alluding to the sacred literature of the kingdom of Judah, from David to Zedekiah, and giving the succession of prophetic writers. But the books in this series have distinct titles, and were not in all cases entirely incorporated into the book. This is manifest from their titles, which can hardly be names of portions of Old Testament history. The well-known formula, “The rest of the acts of so-and-so,” more literally a “remainder” (Anglicè, “remains”) of so-and-so, does not refer to Scripture at all, except in one or two instances. How far, then, can the Old Testament be said to give any distinct account of the authorship of the historical books? We see that, with one or two exceptions, nothing is asserted which could fix with certainty the authorship of a given portion to a particular man. Moses has certainly signed his name at Deuteronomy 32 And it is no less certain (despite the critics) that the Pentateuch is an organic whole. The inference, then, that the Pentateuch up to the end of Deuteronomy 32 is the work of Moses is unquestionably so strong that we seem justified in accepting it as a literary fact. Whether Moses was the first writer of the whole, or compiled portions of it out of documents already existing, is a matter which we here leave to be discussed in its proper place, only observing that the relative length and connection of the several portions of Genesis show that the book cannot be a mere compilation. The Book of Nehemiah is introduced, as we have seen, by a title and a signature. But the only other historical book which has been presented to us with a signature is the book before us, viz., Joshua.

Is the signature intended to fix with absolute certainty the authorship of the entire book in its present shape?

One very simple consideration suffices to answer this question provisionally, and brings us a step further on the road. The Book of Joshua, in its present shape, records Joshua’s death; and the Book of Deuteronomy records the death of Moses. Thus these books, as delivered to us, show traces of the hand of an editor, no less than an author. Some prophet’s hand must have penned the closing record of the Book of Deuteronomy, before proceeding to write the story of Joshua’s conquest in the Book of the Law of God. Another hand, after Joshua laid down the pen, must have traced the story of his death, and before proceeding to the connected narrative of the Judges, must have collected (in part from Joshua itself) the particulars which form the very careful and thoughtful introduction to that book, contained in Joshua 1, 2; Joshua 3:1-6.

In the Book of Joshua, no less than in the Pentateuch as it now stands, we recognise the hand of an author and of an editor. Where does the work of the one end, and the work of the other begin? The discussion of this question might easily introduce the whole subject of the modern literary criticism of the Old Testament. And there are men bold enough to account for every verse in Old Testament history, and acute enough to imagine, describe, and distinguish any number of editors and authors that their view of the requirements of the text may seem to demand.

But our task is much more modest. We shall be satisfied with pointing out, for the present—(1) that the Old Testament itself does recognise the existence of these two human agencies in its formation; in the present instance, by giving us the signature of Joshua near the close of his work, and by adding the account of his death afterwards in the same book, before making a fresh beginning. And (2) that the general reply of the sacred writers to those who would inquire particularly as to who is responsible for every separate statement in the pages of Old Testament history, is to the same effect as that of the three Hebrew heroes to Nebuchadnezzar, “We are not careful to answer thee in this matter.” But the reason of this apparent indifference must not be misunderstood. Partly it arises from the existence of a long succession of prophetic authors, from Moses to Malachi, who were authorised to declare to the Jewish nation the will of Jehovah, and through whom, in every question demanding revelation, it was possible to appeal to the authority of Israel’s God. Not until that “goodly fellowship of the prophets” had passed away, did it become absolutely necessary to separate that which had received the stamp of Divine authority, from what was mere human composition.

But were the prophets authorised to alter as well as to edit the works of their predecessors? A sentence from Deuteronomy and a sentence from Joshua, placed side by side, will indicate the kind of understanding there was between them. “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it” (Deuteronomy 4:2). Yet “Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God.” Clearly Joshua, who obeyed the Book of the Law more strictly than any of his successors, was not the man to alter anything that Moses had enacted. Yet it never seems to have occurred to him that he was transgressing the orders of Moses by adding his own contribution to the Book of the Law of God.

The view of the Bible itself as to the province of the prophetical editor is not inconsistent with additions to the work of a Moses or a Joshua, even under the title of the books which bear their name. Is it possible to go a step further and ascertain (from the Bible itself, as distinct from critical speculations about it) whether additions were made not only at the end, but also in the body of the text? One such addition seems to have been made in the text of Joshua, viz., the mention of the Danite colony at Laish, Joshua 19:47. For the settlement of this colony is distinctly and inextricably connected with the establishment of idolatry (Judges 18:30-31), and it is expressly stated that the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua. The men who remonstrated with the two and a half tribes after the fashion described in Joshua 22 would never have tolerated what is described in the story of Laish. It does not seem possible to ascribe Joshua 19:47 to the hand of Joshua himself. It stands quite naturally at the end of the list of Danite cities, an addition to the inheritance assigned to Dan by Joshua, a town which the tribe acquired for itself.

But if we admit a single addition to the text of Joshua by the hand of a later editor, is it possible to limit the operation of the principle thus conceded?

It is necessary to look this question fairly in the face. It seems to have been too often supposed, on the one side, that if anything were allowed to stand part of a book of the Old Testament, which did not come from the original hand, the authority of the Bible would be impaired. And, on the other hand, modern literary critics feel at liberty to assign any portion of the Old Testament to any period whatever, according to their own (momentary) view of the text.

Between these two extremes, it must be surely possible to find a middle alternative. Why should we not suppose that the prophetic editors of the earlier books acted as any faithful and conscientious man among ourselves would act? To add any subsequent particulars which could give completeness to the narrative, insert a note which would clear up an obscure phrase, or a later name which would identify an ancient city; to mark[14] divisions, parting the Book of Joshua from Deuteronomy on one side and Judges on the other—all this might be done without in any way interfering with the substance of the book, or effacing the individuality of the author. More than this it is not reasonable to ascribe to the prophetic editor. With these exceptions, there is nothing in the Book of Joshua which may not have been the work of Joshua himself.

[14] It is not generally known to readers of the English Bible that the divisions between 1 and 2 Samuel , 1 and 2 Kings , , 1 and 2 Chronicles, which are found even in Hebrew Bibles, are the work of Christian hands. “The Christians divided Samuel and Kings into two books respectively.” “They also divided Chronicles into two books.” (Elias Levita in “Exposition of the Massorah.” Dr. Ginsburg. 1867. p. 29.)

The conclusion to which we come presents us with this phenomenon. The writing of Joshua in the Old Testament very possibly ranges from the beginning of Deuteronomy 33 to a certain point in Joshua 24, say Joshua 24:26. The Book of Joshua has different limits. The moral is, that the sacred writers were not careful to tell us exactly who the authors of the separate portions of the Old Testament were. The reason would seem to be this—that the books, in their quality of Scripture, do not rest solely, or principally, upon the authority of the individual authors, but upon the collective authority of the prophets, and of Him whose servants they were.

The Style of the Book of Joshua is very much what we should expect from the place it occupies and its claim to be a continuation of the narrative of the Exodus. Moses wrote the journeyings of the Children of Israel “according to their goings out” (Numbers 33:2). Joshua wrote, in the book begun by Moses, the story of their “coming in.” In the narrative of Joshua there is much that reminds us of the latter part of the Book of Numbers; while the hortatory portions recall the manner of the Book of Deuteronomy, though falling so far short of it as to be perfectly distinct. It would be interesting to know how far Joshua had himself been employed by Moses in the capacity of a scribe or secretary. In one passage (Joshua 15:4), if the Hebrew may be trusted (the LXX. differs slightly), the very language of the lawgiver seems to have been unconsciously adopted. But in all arguments from style to authorship in the Old Testament, it is necessary to remember the very great difficulty in the way of distinguishing different writers, arising from the employment of one uniform system of vocalisation and punctuation by the Massorites, who have clothed the original language of the whole book.

One phrase which occurs frequently in Joshua may be called characteristic. It appears for the first time in the narrative of Joshua 4:9, respecting the twelve stones set up in Jordan: “they are there unto this day.” So it is said of Rahab (Joshua 6:25), “she dwelleth in Israel unto this day.” The phrase itself is not unknown in the Pentateuch, and is common in the later historical books. But it strikes us in the Book of Joshua by its constant recurrence in connection with local monuments and memorials. It can scarcely be appealed to as an argument for the date of the book or as a token of the hand of an editor. “These many days unto this day” is used of things lying wholly within Joshua’s experience in Joshua 22:3. And in Matthew 28:15, it is impossible not to feel that the employment of the very same phrase is a proof of the early origin of the gospel. The phrase is one that may be used of things comparatively recent, but gains in force as the years roll on. What a truly wonderful confirmation of the Scripture narrative it is, to be able to turn to an Ordnance Survey of Palestine, and say of names and boundaries described in the Book of Joshua, “There they are unto this day !”

THE TIME OCCUPIED BY THE NARRATIVE IN JOSHUA is not long. The language of Caleb after the conquest of Canaan, at the commencement of the division of the territory (Joshua 14:10), shows that the conquest was completed in five-and-forty years from the sending of the twelve spies from Kadesh-barnea. Deducting thirty-eight years for the remainder of the Exodus, we have seven years for the great campaigns of Joshua, not an insufficient period when we remember what is elsewhere associated with the phrase “seven years’ war.” Joshua died at the age of 110, and if he was of the same age with Caleb, this would leave five-and-twenty years for the remainder of the book.

AMONG RECENT COMMENTARIES ON JOSHUA there are three which are very complete in different ways. Bishop Wordsworth’s is most full and interesting upon the spiritual teaching of the book. Canon Espin, in the Speaker’s Commentary, has dealt very fully with its historical bearings. And Dr. Maclear, in the Cambridge Bible for Schools, although his materials are collected from very various sources, and those not always equally reliable, is nearly perfect in his attention to geographical detail.

On Joshua as a Type of Christ.—That Joshua is set before us in the Old Testament as a type of Christ is unquestionable. But, since all sound typical interpretation must rest upon strict historical analogy, it becomes necessary to define precisely those relations of Joshua to God’s people, and to the work of their salvation, which will bear comparison with the work of Him for whom the name of Joshua was designed.

Joshua then may be regarded as a type of Christ—

(1) In relation to Moses.

(2) In relation to the written Word of God.

(3) In relation to Israel, and in the details of the work that he did for Israel.

(4) In his own personal character.

(1) IN RELATION TO MOSES.—Moses brought Israel out of Egypt: Joshua was ordered to bring them into the promised land. On the whole, it may be said that the Mosaic legislation was designed to bring Israel out from among the nations, and separate them from all mankind. But it was the work of our Lord to bring them into a position above all nations in their relation to God. They have hitherto refused this position, turning their backs upon the true Joshua, as they did upon Moses when he first offered them deliverance. They must, however, be set above all nations when Christ comes again. But Joshua’s principal relation to Moses is—

(2) HIS RELATION TO THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD.—The first mention of Joshua is in Exodus 17. In that chapter, both he and the Book of the Law are brought before us abruptly and without any introduction for the first time. “Moses said unto Joshua, choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek.” “The Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” Thus the book is made for Joshua, and Joshua is appointed to be the servant of the book. It is evident that the relation between the two is the principal thing to be noted in that passage, not the fulfilment of the sentence on Amalek. In fact, Joshua did not execute that sentence, although it was written for his sake.

It is clear that Moses knew he would be the conqueror of Canaan from the first, because it was when he sent him from Kadesh-barnea to search the land that he gave him the name of Jehoshua (Jehovah Saviour, instead of Oshea or Hoshea, which was his earlier name). For this mission of Joshua and the other spies was intended as a first step to the conquest of the country. And it is in this conquest, in obedience to the law of Moses, that Joshua is a type of the Lord Jesus.

But what is the counterpart of the conquest of Canaan in the work of our Lord? And what is JOSHUA’S WORK—

(3) IN RELATION TO ISRAEL?—The Epistle to the Hebrews suggests that it is the introduction of the people of God into the rest which God gives them. Now the Jews as a nation have not yet entered into the rest offered by Christ. For them, therefore, the work of Joshua is unfulfilled by Him. The accomplishment of the type in that sense is future. Joshua went into Canaan by himself forty years before he brought in Israel. And the Jewish nation has hitherto refused to follow the true Joshua into the rest of God. But the Israel of God has followed Him, and thus in His relation to the Church of the redeemed our Lord has fulfilled the things foreshadowed in Joshua, though not in relation to the nation of the Jews.

But what portion of the work of Christ for us answers to the conquest of Canaan by Joshua?

Two different views of this are possible, and in fact necessary, if we look at the story in its true historical aspect. Joshua stands at the end of one dispensation and the beginning of another. In relation to the previous history of Israel, the work of Joshua is an end. In relation to their later history, it is only a beginning. It is an end of the pilgrim life which they led in Canaan and Egypt and in the wilderness, having no fixed possession, but travelling from place to place, and halting wherever they were bidden. It is the beginning of their life as a nation, occupying a territory of their own, and maintaining in that territory the laws of Jehovah their God.

Now if we regard the Christian life as a pilgrimage, the counterpart of Israel’s sojourn in Canaan, Egypt, and the wilderness, it is evident that the entrance into Canaan is the end of this life, and a passage to a better world. In this view, the comparison between the crossing of Jordan and death is sufficiently familiar.

But inasmuch as Christ gives His people rest when they begin to live in Him, and calls them to enter on a good fight of faith; and since the Christian life may be compared to the life of Israel as a nation in the promised land, we obtain a second view of the work of Joshua in relation to Christ. It answers to the establishment of the believer in Christ in a position where he may fight and conquer, expelling the enemies of Christ from his own heart, or subduing them in it.

In this view, the work of Joshua is introductory and preliminary to a period of warfare, which will end in complete victory, and in the establishment of David’s throne.

(4) IN JOSHUA’S OWN PERSONAL CHARACTER.—The chief points seem to be zealous and faithful discharge of duty, and abnegation of self. The absence of personal ambition and vanity is clear. Deeds and not words make up the greater part of his history. Among the twelve spies Caleb is more prominent than Joshua. When Joshua is jealous it is for Moses’ honour, not for his own. He is again and again urged to “be strong and of good courage,” as though naturally inclined to shrink from responsibility. He takes his own inheritance last, after all the tribes. His family receives no high position. None of his descendants are even named, but “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” He appears to have grown old comparatively early, a fact which very possibly indicates the laborious character of his life. Yet he must have been a man of strong personal influence. Israel served the Lord all his days.

Analysis of the Book.—The contents of the Book of Joshua can be arranged thus:—

(1) THE PASSAGE OF JORDAN (Joshua 1:1 to Joshua 5:12), including—

Joshua’s commission to lead Israel over Jordan, in obedience to the law (Joshua 1:1-9).

Joshua’s first orders to the people (Joshua 1:10-18).

The spies sent to Jericho, and received by Rahab (Joshua 2).

Passage of Jordan (Joshua 3:1 to Joshua 4:19).

Encampment in Gilgal; Circumcision and Passover; Manna ceases (Joshua 4:20 to Joshua 5:12).

(2) THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN (Joshua 5:13 to the end of Joshua 12).

Appearance of the Captain of the Lord’s Host, with the drawn sword. The order to attack Jericho (Joshua 5:13 to Joshua 6:5).

Jericho taken (Joshua 6:6-27).

Achan’s trespass discovered in the failure to take Ai (Joshua 7).

Ai taken (Joshua 8:1-29).

The law set up in the heart of the country (Joshua 8:30-35).

The Gibeonites come in and make peace (Joshua 9) Gibeon attacked by the southern confederacy, which is crushed by Joshua. The south of Palestine conquered (Joshua 10).

Jabin king of Hazor and the northern confederacy conquered (Joshua 11).

Summary of the conquest (Joshua 12).

(3) THE DIVISION OF THE TERRITORY (Joshua 13-22 inclusive).

Boundaries of the territory to be divided (Joshua 13:1-14).

(a)On the east of Jordan. Territory of Reuben (Joshua 13:15-23), Gad (Joshua 13:24-28), half Manasseh (Joshua 13:29-31).

(b)On the west of Jordan (Joshua 14:1-5). Judah (Joshua 14:6 to end of Joshua 15), Joseph (Joshua 16:1-4), including Ephraim (Joshua 16:5-10), and Manasseh (Joshua 17:1-12).

The other seven tribes (Joshua 18:1-10), including Benjamin (Joshua 18:11-28), Simeon (Joshua 19:1-9), Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-16), Issachar (Joshua 19:17-23), Asher (Joshua 19:24-31), Naphtali (Joshua 19:32-39), Dan (Joshua 19:40-48), Joshua’s inheritance (Joshua 19:49-50).

The cities of refuge (Joshua 20) and the other Levitical cities (Joshua 21).

The two and a half tribes dismissed to their inheritance, and their altar Ed (Joshua 22).

(4) JOSHUA’S LAST CHARGE AND DEATH (Joshua 23, 24).

(a)His charge to the rulers at Shechem (Joshua 23)

(b)His charge to the people (Joshua 24:1-25). His signature (Joshua 24:26). Death (Joshua 24:29-30). Conclusion. Burial of Joseph’s bones. Death of Eleazar (Joshua 24:31-33).

It is observable that in the record of the conquest we have the capture of two cities described in detail, viz., Jericho and Ai—one in the territory of Benjamin, and one in mount Ephraim. We have also two great battles—one in the south, another in the north—each opening a campaign. It seems likely that no third campaign was needed, from the absence of any strongholds in the centre of the country, where the cities are far fewer than they are in the south and north, and along the sea-side.

It seems clear, upon the whole, that Israel entered the land of Canaan at the weakest part, where there was least possibility of resistance; that they divided their adversaries, and struck fatal blows alternately on either hand; the resistance of the Canaanites being in great measure paralysed by the unusual mode of attack.

Jos 1:1-18.

THE LORD APPOINTS JOSHUA TO SUCCEED MOSES.

1. Now after the death of Moses--Joshua, having been already appointed and designated leader of Israel

(Nu 27:18-23),

in all probability assumed the reins of government immediately "after the death of Moses."

the servant of the Lord--This was the official title of Moses as invested with a special mission to make known the will of God; and it conferred great honor and authority.

the Lord spake unto Joshua--probably during the period of public mourning, and either by a direct revelation to the mind of Joshua, or by means of Urim and Thummim

(Nu 27:21).

This first communication gave a pledge that the divine instructions which, according to the provisions of the theocracy, had been imparted to Moses, would be continued to the new leader, though God might not perhaps speak to him "mouth to mouth"

(Nu 12:8).

Joshua--The original name, Oshea,

(Nu 13:8),

which had been, according to Eastern usage, changed like those of Abram and Sarai

(Ge 17:5-15)

into Jehoshua or Joshua (that is, "God's salvation") was significant of the services he was to render, and typified those of a greater Saviour

(Heb 4:8).

Moses' minister--that is, his official attendant, who, from being constantly employed in important services and early initiated into the principles of the government, would be well trained for undertaking the leadership of Israel.

Now ... - Hebrew: "and, ..." The statement following is thus connected with some previous one, which is assumed to be known to the reader. So Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, etc., are by the same means linked on to the books preceding them. The connection here is the closer, since the Book of Deuteronomy concludes, and the book of Joshua opens, by referring to the death of Moses.

Moses, the servant of the Lord - On the epithet, see the marginal reference "b."

Moses' minister - It is impossible altogether to pass by the typical application of this verse. Moses, representing the law, is dead; Joshua, or, as that name is written in Greek, Jesus, is now bidden by God to do what Moses could not - lead the people into the promised land. Joshua was "Moses' minister," just as Christ was "made under the Law;" but it was Joshua, not Moses, who worked out the accomplishment of the blessings which the Law promised. On the name Joshua, see Exodus 17:9 note, and Numbers 13:16.

Saying - No doubt directly, by an immediate revelation, but not as God spake to Moses, "mouth to mouth" Numbers 12:8. Though upon Joshua's appointment to be Moses' successor (Numbers 27:18 ff), it had been directed that "counsel should be asked" for him through the medium of Eleazar "after the judgment of Urim," yet this was evidently a resource provided to meet cases of doubt and difficulty. Here there was no such case; but the appointed leader, knowing well the purpose of God, needed to be stirred up to instant execution of it; and the people too might require the encouragement of a renewed divine command to set out at once upon the great enterprise before them (compare Joshua 1:13).

Now after the death of Moses - ויהי vayehi, and it was or happened after the death of Moses. Even the first words in this book show it to be a continuation of the preceding, and intimately connected with the narrative in the last chapter in Deuteronomy, of which I suppose Joshua to have been the author, and that chapter to have originally made the commencement of this book, Deuteronomy 34:1-12 (note). The time referred to here must have been at the conclusion of the thirty days in which they mourned for Moses.