Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 9:6

And they went to Joshua unto the camp at Gilgal, and said unto him, and to the men of Israel, We be come from a far country: now therefore make ye a league with us.

6. unto the camp at Gilgal ] Where was this Gilgal? (i) According to some it was the Gilgal, of which we have already heard (Jos 5:10), in the Jordan valley, whither Joshua had returned after his successful expedition against Ai, in order thence to undertake fresh enterprises, and where the women, children, and property were left under a sufficient guard, while he was absent with the host (ii) Others think it is impossible to suppose that Joshua marched back from Shechem to the banks of Jordan (Jos 9:6, Jos 10:6-7; Jos 10:9), and, again, that he did so a second time, after the battles in the north to make the final apportionment of the land among the people, and that the spot is that alluded to in Deu 11:30, as being situated “beside the oaks of Moreh,” i.e. near the site of Abraham’s first altar (Gen 12:6-7). If this is so, it would correspond with the modern Jilgiliah, a few miles from Bethel.

a far country ] Far beyond the boundaries of Palestine.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Camp at Gilgal – While Joshua was engaged in more distant enterprises, the women, children, and property of the Israelites were left with a sufficient guard at this place, where they had been established immediately after crossing the Jordan Jos 5:9.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 6. Make ye a league with us.] kirethu lanu berith, cut, or divide, the covenant sacrifice with us. From this it appears that heathenism at this time had its sacrifices, and covenants were ratified by sacrificing to and invoking the objects of their adoration.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Gilgal; the place of their head-quarters. To the men of Israel, to wit, those who used to meet in council with Joshua, to whom it belonged to make leagues, as it here follows, even the princes of the congregation; not the common people, as appears both from Jos 9:15,18,19,21, and from common usage of all ambassadors, who generally deliver their message to and treat with princes, not people. And the Hebrew word iseh, here used, sometimes notes men of eminency and dignity.

Now therefore, because we are not of this people, whom, as we are informed, you are obliged utterly to destroy; that which appeared sufficiently, by the Israelites practice in destroying the Amorites beyond Jordan, and the people of Jericho and At, without any allowance for sex or age; and by common rumour, and the report of the Israelites and other persons who dwelt among them, or had converse with them, as Rahab and all her kindred; and by the nature of the thing, because they were to possess that whole land, and were not to mix themselves with the people of it.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

6-14. they went to Joshua unto thecamp at GilgalArrived at the Israelitish headquarters, thestrangers obtained an interview with Joshua and the elders, to whomthey opened their business.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And they went to Joshua, unto the camp at Gilgal,…. From whence it appears, that after Jericho and Ai were destroyed, the army of Israel returned to their encampment at Gilgal, Jos 5:10; and here they were when the Gibeonites applied to them:

and said unto him, and to the men of Israel; not to the whole body of the people, but either to the seventy elders, the great council, who were with Joshua, or the princes of the congregation, after mentioned, who are said to swear to them; and so some render the words, “to the chief men of Israel” l; the word “Ish” here used sometimes denotes an eminent person or persons, see Isa 2:9;

we be come from a far country; this lie they told, that they might not be thought to be inhabitants of Canaan, and be destroyed as those of Jericho and Ai were; and as the rest of the inhabitants would be, of which they had intelligence, as the design of the Israelites, and what their orders were; according to Jerom m, Gibeon was but four miles from Bethel, unless he means Gibeah; however, it could not be at a much greater distance; and as Gilgal was a mile and a quarter from Jericho, where the Gibeonites now were, and Ai but three miles from Jericho, and Bethel a mile from thence, and Gibeon four miles from Bethel, they were come but little more than nine miles. Bunting n makes it twelve miles from Gilgal to Gibeon:

now therefore make yea league with us; offensive and defensive, to help and assist each other against a common enemy.

l “primoribus viris Israelis”, Junius Tremellius so Piscator. m De loc. Heb. fol. 92. A. n Travels, p. 96.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Having made these preparations, they went to the Israelitish camp at Gilgal (Jiljilia), introduced themselves to the men of Israel ( , in a collective sense, the plural being but little used, and only occurring in Pro 8:4; Isa 53:3, and Psa 141:4) as having come from a distant land, and asked them to make a league with them. But the Israelites hesitated, and said to the Hivites, i.e., the Gibeonites who were Hivites, that they might perhaps be living in the midst of them (the Israelites), i.e., in the land of Canaan, which the Israelites already looked upon as their own; and if so, how could they make a league with them? This hesitation on their part was founded upon the express command of God, that they were not to make any league with the tribes of Canaan (Exo 23:32; Exo 34:12; Num 33:55; Deu 7:2, etc.). In reply to this the Gibeonites simply said, “ We are thy servants ” (Jos 9:8), i.e., we are at thy service, which, according to the obsequious language common in the East, was nothing more than a phrase intended to secure the favour of Joshua, and by no means implied a readiness on their part to submit to the Israelites and pay them tribute, as Rosenmller, Knobel, and others suppose; for, as Grotius correctly observes, what they wished for was “a friendly alliance, by which both their territory and also full liberty would be secured to themselves.” The Keri (Jos 9:7) is nothing more than a critical conjecture, occasioned not so much by the singular , which is frequently construed in the historical writings as a collective noun with a plural verb, as by the singular suffix attached to , which is to be explained on the ground that only one of the Israelites (viz., Joshua) was speaking as the mouthpiece of all the rest. The plural is used, because Joshua spoke in the name of the people.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

6. And they went to Joshua, etc. I have said that in strict law, a covenant of this description was null and void. For when they obtain their prayer, what is stipulated but just that they should be kept safe, provided they come from a distant and remote region of the globe? And the oftener they reiterate the same falsehood, the more do they annul a compact elicited by fraud, since its true meaning only amounts to this, that the Israelites will offer no molestation to a foreign people, living at a remote distance. This is shown to be more especially the meaning, from the fact, that the Israelites expressly exclude all the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. They could not, therefore, gain anything by the fraud. Nor are they more assisted by making a fallacious pretext of the name of God, and thus throwing a kind of mist over the mind of Joshua. They pretend that they had come in the name of God; as if they were professing to give glory to God, even the God of Israel; inasmuch as there is a tacit rejection of the superstitions to which they had been accustomed. For if it is true, that they had come, moved by the faith of the miracles which had been performed in Egypt, they concede supreme power to the God of Israel, though to them a God unknown.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

[6.

The camp at Gilgal In the absence of any hint that this was altogether a different place from the Gilgal near Jericho, where Joshua first pitched his camp, it seems rather arbitrary and unnecessary, with Keil and Van de Velde, to maintain that this Gilgal must be identified with the modern Jiljilia, in the mountains of Ephraim. If, after the capture of Ai, or after the memorial service at Mount Ebal, Joshua had pitched his camp in a new spot, and especially at another place bearing the name Gilgal, it is inexplicably strange that no mention is anywhere made of a fact so noticeable and important. Further, the expressions in Jos 10:7; Jos 10:9 Joshua ascended and went up from Gilgal most naturally indicate the ascent from the Jordan valley to the interior of Palestine, (see note on Jos 8:10,) and show that the writer still had in mind the Gilgal near Jericho; for to understand the expressions in a military sense is hardly admissible. Keil’s only weighty argument is, that it would have been folly in Joshua, after having penetrated into the heart of the country, to go back again to the eastern border, and leave the Canaanites at liberty to move at pleasure through the conquered territory. But this whole argument rests on the assumption that Joshua would, of course, endeavour to keep the conquered Canaanites in subjection by the presence of his camp and army in the centre of the land, or else by establishing garrisons in the conquered districts a thing which we have no evidence was ever done during the wars of the conquest. Keil’s argument is therefore altogether insufficient, and rests solely on a critic’s assumption of what Joshua ought to have done. ]

From a far country They had heard that all the Canaanites had been doomed to extermination. See Jos 9:24. To avoid such a fate they represented that they dwelt beyond the limits of Canaan. By this means they hoped to negotiate a treaty of peace, and even an alliance with the invincible invader. That such a treaty with nations beyond the limits of Canaan was lawful, see Deu 20:10-11.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Ver. 6. And they went to Joshuaand said, &c. Some interpreters are of opinion, that the deputies from the Gibeonites addressed themselves to the first they met in the camp of Gilgal; but it seems more conformable to the text to suppose, that they did not signify their business to any but Joshua, in the presence of the chief men of Israel; i.e. to the heads of the tribes, who formed his council. ‘Tis true, we read in the Hebrew, to Joshua,and to the men of Israel; but the original expression often signifies in Scripture, men of note, people of distinction; and we need only look at verses 15. 18, 19. 21 to perceive that it should be so understood in this place.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Jos 9:6 And they went to Joshua unto the camp at Gilgal, and said unto him, and to the men of Israel, We be come from a far country: now therefore make ye a league with us.

Ver. 6. We be come from a far country. ] And therefore you may safely make a league with us. Deu 20:11 Here was fair tale, but not a word of truth, Nusquam tuta fides.

“ Sit licit in partes circumspectissimus omnes,

Nemo tamen vulpes nemo cavere potest. ”

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)