1. Even to the border of Edom The latter part of this verse should be rendered, to the border of Edom the wilderness of Zin southward from the extremity of Teman. Teman was a district in the land of Edom, and lay, perhaps, not far southeast of the Dead Sea. Its position, however, is unknown. The sense of the whole verse is: Judah’s lot extended into the extreme south, bordering on Edom and the desert of Zin. The Edomites occupied the mountainous region directly south of the Dead Sea, and the wilderness of Zin was the desert tract extending westward from this, in which lay Kadesh. See on Num 20:1; Num 33:36.

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

Chapter 15 The Lot of the Tribe of Judah.

In this chapter we have details given of the boundaries of ‘the lot’ allocated by lot to the tribe of Judah. This is followed by the assignment of Hebron to Caleb, from where he drove out the Anakim, and the assignment of Debir, which was taken by Othniel his nephew, to whom, because of it, he gave his daughter in marriage. She then made a special request to her father, which was granted. This is followed by an account of several cities by name, which fell to the tribe of Judah. The further advances of Judah would be described in Judges 1.

If the gathering of the twelve tribes around the central sanctuary had not been firmly in place at this stage it would never have survived. At times, when faith was weak, it was only deeply inbuilt custom that held it together. Indeed Judah, with Simeon, went off on their own and were rarely seen working with the other tribes. And yet when the vital call came they were there, both in the affair of Gibeah and in the activities of Samuel. It was rooted in their history, so much so that the idea even survived the seemingly decisive split following the death of Solomon.

Jos 15:1-2

‘ And the lot for the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families, was to the border of Edom, even to the wilderness of Zin southward at the uttermost part of the south. And their south border was from the uttermost part of the Salt Sea, from the tongue that looked southward.’

The lot for the tribe of Judah is detailed in this chapter, giving first its boundaries and then its prospective cities. These were in the south of Canaan. This will be followed in the next chapter by the lot for the children of Joseph, which includes both Ephraim and Manasseh, in the central north. As the two major tribes their portions needed to be settled first in order to establish the nation in the land and because they were so numerous and needed space. The hill country had to be settled and secured before further extension could take place.

Perhaps at this stage we should very briefly consider the geography of Canaan. If we look at it from the south coming from Egypt the first land we come to after the desert is the Negeb, the semi-desert, dependent on oases, and with little rainfall which has to be carefully preserved and utilised. In good times, however it was irrigated by rainwater from the hills. Then as we move northward the land is divided roughly into four types going from west to east, sand dunes along the coast, especially in the south, then the coastal plain, a strip of fertile, comparatively flat ground which commences at the coast to the east of the sand dunes, and varies between three and twenty five miles in width), then as we go eastwards there is the Shephelah, the lowlands, the foothills gently undulating (five to fifteen miles wide) and sloping upwards towards the hill country, and then the hill country itself containing mountains above 950 metres ( 3000 feet) high. On the other side of these mountains continuing eastward is the Jordan Rift valley which contains the Jordan. This descends to well below sea level, with fertile sections in the north and desert in the south. The Sea of Chinnereth is 180 metres (600 feet) below sea level, the surface of the Dead Sea about 427 metres (1400 feet) below sea level.

The hill country (called ‘The Mountain’) goes from south to north split by ravines, and then turns westward to Carmel on the coast, split by ravines and valleys. Large parts of the whole territory were covered by forests. In the plain and the valleys chariots could operate which made conquest by Israel difficult, and cities were numerous. The hill country was relative sparsely populated with fewer cities, shortage of water and rougher land which was harder to cultivate. For this reason it was not so desirable and easier to conquer and control. The remainder of the land was heavily populated with large numbers of cities clustered together, apart from the forests.

The borders of Judah’s allotment were to reach to the border of Edom, that is the south side of the wilderness of Zin, where Kadesh was, taking in the Negeb. This was its furthest extent southwards. They are then described in more detail as commencing from the southern tongue of the Dead Sea, its southernmost bay, and going westward. The Dead Sea, or Salt Sea, is the lowest point on earth, well below sea level. It has no outlet and the water therefore disappears by evaporation in the hot sun leaving large residues of salt, which makes the water so buoyant that you can actually sit in the sea. No fish can live in it and no vegetation grows near it.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jos 15:13-19 The Inheritance of Caleb Jos 15:13-19 records the account of Caleb receiving his inheritance in the Promised Land. Part of this story (Jos 15:15-19) is repeated in Jdg 1:11-15.

Jos 15:13  And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the LORD to Joshua, even the city of Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron.

Jos 15:13 Comments – Caleb was of the tribe of Judah, and Joshua was of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:6; Num 13:8).

Num 13:6-8, “Of the tribe of Judah, Caleb the son of Jephunneh. Of the tribe of Issachar, Igal the son of Joseph. Of the tribe of Ephraim, Oshea the son of Nun.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Boundaries of Judah.

v. 1. This, then, was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families, as it was drawn from the urn or as it fell upon casting; even to the border of Edom, the land be longing to the Edomites, south of the Dead Sea, the Wilderness of Zin southward was the uttermost part of the south coast. The territory of Judah thus extended to the very edge of the great desert in which the people had spent so many weary years.

v. 2. And their south border was from the shore of the Salt Sea, the Dead Sea, from the bay that looketh southward, the swampy tongue or branch of the Dead Sea toward the southwest;

v. 3. and it went out to the south side to Maaleh-acrabbim, where the country rises to the foothills of the mountains which form the boundary of the wilderness, and passed along to Zin, either a city or a mountain in the Wilderness of Zin, and ascended up on the south side unto Kadesh-barnea, Num 34:3, and passed along to Hezron, turning to the west after passing Kadesh, and went up to Adar, and fetched a compass to Karkaa;

v. 4. from thence it passed toward Azmon, and went out unto the river of Egypt, Num 34:4-5; and the goings out of that coast were at the sea, the boundary followed this brook or river to the Mediterranean Sea; this shall be your south coast.

v. 5. And the east border was the Salt Sea, even unto the end, the mouth, of Jordan. And their border in the north quarter, on the north side, was from the bay of the sea at the uttermost part of Jordan, just where it entered the Dead Sea;

v. 6. and the border went up to Bethhogia, between Jericho and the Jordan, and passed along by the north, that is, northwardly, of Betharabah, not far from the northwest end of the Dead Sea; and the border went up to the stone of Bohan, the son of Reuben, toward the west or southwest;

v. 7. and the border went up toward Debir, in the neighborhood of Gilgal, from the Valley of Achor, where Achan was executed, Jos 7:26, and so northward, looking toward Gilgal, that is before the going up to Adummim, which is on the south side of the river, of a small watercourse coming down from the neighborhood of Jerusalem; and the border passed toward the waters of Enshemesh, the sun-spring, some two or three miles northeast of Jerusalem, and the goings out thereof were at Enrogel, the fullers’ spring on the south side of Jerusalem, at the junction of the Kidron and the Hinnom valleys;

v. 8. and the border went up, almost due west, by the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the south side of the Jebusite, just below the city of Jerusalem; the same is Jerusalem; and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the Valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the tend of the Valley of the Giants northward, a rocky ridge overlooking the fertile valleys;

v. 9. and the border was drawn, brought around, bent, from the top of the hill unto the fountain of the water of Nephtoah, one hour northwest of Jerusalem, and went out to the cities of Mount Ephron, a prominent ridge, and the border was drawn to Baalah, which is Kirjath-jearim, three hours northwest of Jerusalem;

v. 10. and the border compassed from Baalah westward unto Mount Seir, a small range of hills, and passed along unto the side of Mount Jearim, which is Chesalon, on the north side, toward the north, a wooded hill, now called Kesia, and went down, on the other side of the mountain, to Bethshemesh, and passed on to Timnah, later the home of Samson, Jdg 14:1-4;

v. 11. and the border went out unto the side of Ekron, the Philistine city, a small line of hills running parallel with the coast, and went out unto Jabneel, the small Philistine town of Jabneh; and the goings out of the border were at the sea.

v. 12. And the west border was to the Great Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, and the coast thereof, from Jabneh to the river of Egypt. This is the coast of the children of Judah round about according to their families. It was a large and rich territory, well suited for the governing tribe in Israel.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

THE LOT OF JUDAH.

Jos 15:1

The lot of the tribe of the children of Judah. The first twelve verses of this chapter define the boundaries of Judah. With it compare Num 34:3-5, which gives the southern border of the Israelitish territory, corresponding closely with this account of the southern border of Judah. The word tribe here is, as might be expected from the context and not . Even to the border of Edom. The literal translation, which makes the passage clearer, is, “the border of Edom, the wilderness of Zin towards the dry region () from the extreme limit of the south . The latter of these words, derived from “right hand,” being the position of the south when regarded from the point of view of a man looking eastward, denotes the southward direction (see above, Jos 12:2). The former word has reference to the physical conditions of the country, its heat and dryness. The LXX. does not attempt to translate the former word and has evidently for . The wilderness of Zin. Not to be confounded with the wilderness of Sin (Exo 16:1; cf. Num 34:11, 36). This wilderness was on the border of Edom (Num 20:1.; Num 27:14). Thence the border of Judah (which here includes the small portion afterwards allotted to Simeon) extended to the utmost limits of the south (see Jos 19:1, Jos 19:9). A wall of mountains extends southwestward from the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, and formed the natural boundary of Judaea.

Jos 15:2

The shore of the salt sea. Literally, the extremity, i.e; the south extremity. From the bay. Literally, tongue. The LXX. translates by , ridge. The whole southern portion of the sea is cut off from the rest by a peninsula near Kerak, the ancient Kit of Moab. It is called the Lisan. Whoever was the writer of the Book of Joshua, these details prove him to have had an accurate acquaintance with the geography of Palestine. He was no priestly inventor of fables attached to the temple at Jerusalem. Canon Tristram gives a vivid description of the neighbourhood in his ‘Land of Israel,’ Jos 15:1-63. The ridge of Jebel Usdumone large mass of rock salton the west of this “tongue” of water, the salt marsh of the Sebkha on the southwest, with its treeless waste”not a plant or a leaf could be seen save just under the hills”and its mirage like that of Sahara, the barren outline of the Lisan itself, to the eastward rising to an elevation of from five to six hundred feet, and the fertile oasis of the Ghor-es-Safieh at the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, give an unique character to this remarkable region.

Jos 15:3

And it went out to the south side to Maaleh-acrabbim. Or, perhaps, and it went to the southward of Maaleh-acrabbim, translated in Num 34:4, “the ascent of Acrabbim.” The literal meaning of Maaleh-acrabbim is Scorpion Rise (see Jdg 1:36). Keil thinks that it was a pass in the Mount Halak, or the Smooth Mountain, mentioned in Jos 11:17, Jos 12:7. “De Saulcy suggests the Wady Zouara, and testifies to the scorpions found under every pebble”. And Ainsworth, ‘Travels in Asia Minor,’ 2.354, says that some spots are almost uninhabitable in consequence. Knobel supposes it to be the pass es-Sufah on the road between Petra and Hebron. But the border of Judah seems to have gone in a southwesterly direction. To Zin. Rather, in the direction of Zin. On the south side unto Kadesh-barnea. Or, as above, southward of Kadesh-barnea. The exact position of Kadesh-Burnea has not been ascertained. It was between the wilderness of Zin and that of Paran (Num 13:26; Num 20:1). Dean Stanley identifies it with Petra, which was about 30 miles in a northeasterly direction from the Gulf of Akaba on the Red Sea, and close to Mount Her. A more recent traveller identifies it with Ain Gadis, about 60 miles to the westward of Petra, and he claims Winer, Kurz, Kalisch, and Knobel as supporters of his view. The latter founds his view on the discovery of Ain Gadis by Rowlands, and supports it by the authority of Ritter. Ritter, however, as his translator informs us, embodied the results of the investigations of Mr. Rowlands’ while his work was preparing for the press, and did not give the matter that full consideration which he was accustomed to do. The chief objection to it is that (see vex. 1) Ain Gadis can hardly be described as on “the border of Edom.” The general view is that it lay somewhat to the northeast of Hezron and to the northwest of Petra, at the foot of the range of mountains which form the southern boundary of Judesa. Here the spies brought their report to Moses (Jos 14:6, Jos 14:7; Num 13:26). Here Miriam was buried, and where Moses incurred the wrath of God from his mode of working the miracle which supplied the Israelites with water (Num, 20). It was “a city in the uttermost border” of Edom (Num 20:16), and it was some distance from Mount Hor, for we find it described as a journey (Num 20:22); and by passing from Kadesh to Mount Hor and thence by the way of the Red Sea, the Israelites “compassed the land of Edom” (Num 21:4), a fact which seems to prove that Petra and Kadesh-barnea were not the same place. Kadesh is supposed by M. Chabas to be the “Qodesh of the country of the Amaor,” or Amorites, in the monuments of Seti I. and Rameses II. It is depicted as “on a hillside with a stream on one side,” and is thus distinguished from Qodesh of the Kheta or Hittites, which is in a flat country beside a lake. Fetched a compass to Karkaa. Rather, was deflected in the direction of Karkaa. Nothing is known of the places here mentioned. Cf. Num 34:4, where Karkaa is not mentioned, but the deflection in the neighbourhood of Asmon is.

Jos 15:4

The river of Egypt (see above, Jos 13:3). “Westward, as far as Egypt, there is a sandy, salt, barren, unfruitful, and uninhabitable waste” (Knobel). The land, he adds, is better near Gaza, but near the sea it is still pure waste. And the goings out of that coast were at the sea. The word coast, derived through the French from the Latin costa, signifies, like it, a side. It is now used only of the border formed by the sea, but at an earlier period it had a wider signification. The Hebrew word is translated “border” in Jos 15:1. The meaning is that the boundary line of Judah ran as far as the sea. This shall be your south coast. Or, this shall be to you the southern boundary. The historian here quotes the directions given to Moses in Num 34:1-29; with the evident intention of pointing out that the south border of the children of Israel coincided with that of the tribe of Judah.

Jos 15:5

To the end of Jordan. The spot where it emptied itself into the Dead Sea. The bay of the sea at the uttermost part of Jordan. As in Jos 15:3, the word here translated bay is tongue in the original. What is meant is that the northern boundary started from the point where the Jordan entered the Dead Sea.

Jos 15:6

Beth-hogla (see Jos 18:19). It is still known as Ain Hadjla or Hajla, where, says Keil, a beautiful spring of fresh and clear water is to be found. The place lies about two miles from Jordan. Beth-hogla means “the house of the partridge.” “Leaving the probable site of the ancient Gilgal and advancing southward along the pilgrims’ route to the Jordan, an hour and a quarter brings us to the spring Kin Hajla, in a small and well-watered grove” (Ritter). He adds, “Robinson and Wilson both recognised in the name Hails the ancient Canaanitish city Beth-hogla.” Beth-arabah. Or “the house of the Arabah” or desert. Its site is not known (see Jos 15:61 and Jos 18:18, Jos 18:22). The Beth-arabah in Jos 15:61, however, must have been another place, since it was in the wilderness of Judaea, not far from the Dead Sea. The stone of Bohan the son of Reuben. All we know of this stone is that it was westward of Beth-arabah. The boundary of Benjamin in Jos 18:1-28, is mentioned in precisely reverse order, and since here the stone was on the ascent from Beth-araba, and there (Jos 18:17) it is described as on the descent from Geliloth, it must have been on the side of the declivity. Of Bohan nothing further is known. We must understand here, as in many other places of Scripture, descendant by “son” (cf. Jos 7:24).

Jos 15:7

Toward Debir. Not the Debir of Jos 10:1-43. The valley of Achor (see Jos 8:26). This is now the Wady Kelt. Gilgal. Keil says that this is not the Gilgal where the Israelites first encamped. It is called Geliloth, or “circles,” in Jos 18:17, where the same place is obviously meant as here. The question is one of some difficulty. If it be not the Gilgal mentioned in Jos 4:19, which is described as being eastward of Jericho, still less can it be Jiljiliah (see note on Jos 9:6) which was near Bethel, and therefore on the northern border of Benjamin. In that case the only supposition that will meet the facts in this case is that Gilgal, which signifies a wheel or circle, was the common name given to all the Israelitish encampments. But there seems no reason to doubt that the Gilgal of Jos 4:19 is meant. This is Ewald’s view in his ‘History of Israel,’ 2:245. Adummim, or “the red (places),” has been identified with Maledomim, i.e. Maaleh Adummim, or Talat el Dumm (Conder), on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. Jerome explains it as “ascensus ruforum sen rubentium propter sanguinem qui iltic erebro a latronibus funditur.” Every one will at once call to mind the narrative in St. Luk 10:1-42; which has no doubt suggested this explanation. But at one particular point in the route from Jerusalem to Jericho a “large mass of purplish rock” is found. It was called “terra ruffa,” “the red earth,” from the colour of the ground, and recent travellers state that it is called the “red field” still, from this cause. Conder tells us the name is derived from “the brick-red marks here found amid a district of red chalk. So Knobel speaks, on the authority of numberless travellers of “der rothen Farbe des dortigen gesteins.” And the Quarterly Paper just quoted mentions the “bright limestone and marl.” Which is on the south aide of the river. The Nahal, or summer torrent, in the original; “the Wady Kelt, south of Riha” (Knobel). The waters of En-shemesh, or the fountain of the sun, supposed to be Kin Hand, or the “Apostles’ well,” near Bethany. There is an Arak (cave) esh Shems, about two miles off. All these places have been identified on or near the pilgrims’ route to the Jordan. Enrogel (see Luk 18:17). It was close by Jerusalem, and was where Jonathan and Ahimaaz lingered to gain tidings for David, and where Adonijah repaired to hold the great feast when he endeavoured to obtain the kingdom. “Now Kin Um ed Deraj in the Kedron Valley” (Conder). Vandevelde supposes it to be Bir Eyub, Joab’s well, at the point where the Kedron Valley meets the Gai Hinnom. This seems most probable. The valley of the son of Hinnom. The word here for valley () signifies properly a deep cleft in the rock, through which no water flows. The valley of Hinnom has been generally taken to be the deep valley running from west to east, and lying to the west and south of Jerusalem, described by Tobler as forked at its northwestern end, bending to the southward about its middle, and joining the valley of Jehoshaphat at its eastern extremity. In the Quarterly Paper of the Palestine Exploration Fund for October, 1878, however, it is contended that the now partially filled up Tyropceon Valley, running through the city, is the valley or ravine of Hinnom. The manner in which this is demonstrated reminds the reader somewhat of a proposition in Euclid, and the question arises whether Euclid’s method be exactly applicable to a point of this kind. The arguments used are not without force, but no notice is taken of the peculiar position of the valley of Rephaim (see next note but one), which, we learn from the sacred historian, was so placed that its extremity coincided with the mountain which closed the ravine of Hinnom at its western side. If the Tyropoeon Valley answers to this description, it may be accepted as the true valley of Hinnom, but not otherwise. Mr. Birch incorrectly cites Gesenius in favour of his theory; and the most recent discoveries appear to have thrown discredit upon it. The most weighty argument in favour of his theory is that a comparison of Jos 15:63 with Jdg 1:3-8, leads to the supposition that Jerusalem was partly in Benjamin and partly in Judah (see, however, Neh 11:30). This valley, called sometimes Tophet, and sometimes, by a corruption of the Hebrew, Gehenna, whatever its situation may have been, is conspicuous in the after history of Israel. This deep and retired spot was the seat of all the worst abominations of the idol worship to which the Jews afterwards became addicted. Here Solomon reared high places for Moloch (1Ki 11:7). Here children were sacrificed at the hideous rites of that demon god (2Ki 16:3; 2Ch 28:3; Jer 7:31, Jer 7:32; Jer 19:2, Jer 19:4). It was defiled by Josiah (2Ki 23:10, 2Ki 23:13, 2Ki 23:14), and was looked upon in later times as an abomination (see Jer 19:13). There the carcases of animals were east to be burned, and hence it is used by our Lord (Mat 5:22) as the type of the utmost wrath of God. It is hardly possible to suppose that there is no allusion to Tophet and its fiery sacrifices in Isa 30:33, in spite of the different form of the word, to which some scholars, e.g; Gesenius, assign an Aryan rather than a Semitic origin, and in spite of the fact that the LXX. suspects no such allusion there. St. James alone, beside the writers of the Gospels, mentions it (Jos 3:6), “set on fire of hell,” or Gehenna.

Jos 15:8

The south side of the Jebusite. Literally, the shoulder of the Jebusite from (or on) the south. Thus Jerusalem lay to the north of the border, in the tribe of Benjamin. The same is Jerusalem. Formerly called Jebus, from the Jebusites who dwelt there (Jdg 19:11; 1Ch 11:4). The city lay on the borders of Judah and Benjamin (see note on Jos 10:1). The valley of the giants. Hebrew, Rephaim (see Jos 12:4). The word here translated valley is . In the former part it is (see note on last verse). The word here used signifies originally depth, and is applied to wide valleys embosomed among lofty hills. Such were the valley of Elah (1Sa 17:2, 1Sa 17:19); the King’s Dale (Gen 14:17; 2Sa 18:18); the valley of Siddim (Gen 14:3), of Jezreel (Jdg 6:33). “The word Emek shows that this was neither a winter torrent nor a narrow, dry ravine, and it is best identified with its traditional site, the shallow basin west of the watershed south of Jerusalem, now called el Bukei’a” (Conder). We read of this valley in 2Sa 5:18, 2Sa 5:22. From these passages we may gather a confirmation of the view above expressed, that the valley here meant is an open valley, since only in such a valley could the Philistine army take up a position. It gradually narrows towards the southwest. On the south it extends as far as Bethlehem. The range of mountains which lie to the west of the valley of Hinnom from the northern boundary of the plain or valley of Rephaim.

Jos 15:9

Was drawn. Or, extended. The fountain of the waters of Nephtoah. If these be identified with En Etam, as is done by the Rabbis (whom Conder follows), and if we suppose it to have supplied Jerusalem with water by the aqueduct which ran from a point southwest of Betlehem to Jerusalem, we must place it south of Bethlehem, and imagine that the border ran directly south here. Far more probable is the notion of Vandevelde, which places it northwest of Jerusalem, at Ain Lifta. Conder’s view is dominated by the situation he has assigned to Kirjath-jearim (see note on Jos 9:17). If the view there given in these notes is sound, the border now ran in a northwesterly direction from Jerusalem to within five miles of Gibeon (see also note on Jos 18:14). Kirjath-jearim. See Jos 9:17. To the authorities mentioned there in favour of Kuriet el Enab we may add Knobel, Ritter, and Tristram, in his last book, ‘Bible Lands.’ The view taken above corresponds to the minuteness of detail with which the boundary is given. To place Nephtoah south of Bethlehem and Kirjath-jearim at ‘Arma would make the boundary far less distinct.

Jos 15:10

Compassed. Or, deflected (see Jos 15:4). This is in accordance with the view taken above. The border line which had run northwest from Jerusalem now bent backwards in a southwesterly direction, and followed the ridge towards Chesalon (see note on Chesalon). Mount Seir. Not the dwelling place of Esau, afterwards the country of the Edomites (Gen 32:3; Gen 36:8), but a range running southwestward from Kirjath-jearim, part of which is still known as Sairah, or Saris, “auf welchem Saris und Mihsir liegen” (Kuobel). Since Kirjath-jearim means the “city of the forests,” and Seir means “hairy,” we may conjecture that the name was given to the ridge on account of its wooded character. This also is implied by “Mount Jearim.” The side of Mount Jearim. Literally, the shoulder (see above, Jos 15:8). Which is Chesalon. This is identified with Kesia, a point on the summit of the ridge stretching southwest from Kirjath-jearim. The fact that the border passed northward of Chesalon is a confirmation of the view taken above. We learn from Jos 19:41 (cf. Jos 19:33 of this chapter), that the border passed by Zorah and Eshtaol in the Shephelah, through a neighbourhood described in Conder’s Handbook as “an open corn country.” Beth-shemesh. The “house of the sun,” identified with the modern Ain (or fountain of) Shems. It is called Irshemesh in Jos 19:41. It was close to the border of the Philistines, and was the scene of the transactions recorded in 1Sa 6:1-21. The propinquity to the Philistines appears to have affected the principles of its inhabitants, and their conduct contrasts most unfavourably with that of the inhabitants of Kirjath-jearim. This was the more disgraceful, in that Beth-shemesh (Jos 21:16) was a priestly city, and being inhabited by those whose “lips should keep knowledge,” might have been expected to set a better example. It was required to furnish Solomon’s household with provisions (1Ki 4:9), it witnessed the defeat and capture of Amaziah (2Ki 14:11-13; 2Ch 25:21) by Joash, king of Israel. It fell into the hands of the Philistines at the time of the decay of the Jewish power under Ahaz (2Ch 28:18). The name, like Baal-Gad and Ashtaroth-Karnaim, is worthy of remark, as pointing to the character of the early Phoenician worship. Timnah. Sometimes called Timnath in Scripture (see Jdg 14:1-6), and Timnatha in Jos 19:43.

Jos 15:11

Ekron. This important Philistine city (see Jos 13:3) lay close to the northern border of Judah. As a matter of fact, however, the tribe of Judah never succeeded in permanently occupying this territory, which only fell under their yoke during the reigns of David and Solomon. The cities of the Philistines were, it is true, most of them captured (Jdg 1:18), but we soon find the Philistines once more in possession of them (see 1Sa 5:8-10). Northward. The border turned sharply northward until past Ekron, when it once more turned westward until it reached the sea.

Jos 15:12

And the coast thereof See Jos 13:23.

Jos 15:13

And unto Caleb. This passage, at least from Jos 15:15, is found with the slightest possible variation in Jdg 1:1-36. It has been argued from the variations that the one passage was not copied from the other, but that both were derived from a common document. No such conclusion, however, can be safely drawn from the text. For first, the present narrative deals exclusively with this portion of the history of Caleb. That in Judges, down to verse 12, deals more generally with the subject, including the exploits of Caleb, under the general history of the progress of Judah. But from the time that the history becomes that of Caleb in particular, the agreement between the two narratives is verbal, including the very unusual word , with one or two most insignificant exceptions. Thus we have for , we have for , and we have interpolated in Jdg 1:13, and Othniel (or Kenez) is spoken of as the younger brother of Caleb. But unless we hold that it was a sacred duty of the writer in Judges to reproduce every single word of the narrative in Joshua, there is nothing whatever that can support the conclusion that the writer in Judges was not copying the earlier narrative. The variations are such as would naturally happen where a writer was transferring, a narrative to his pages with a desire to give the exact sense of the original without tying himself to every particular word. Since the use of inverted commas has been introduced we can find multitudes of instances where a writer, when professing to quote another accurately, has introduced far more variations into his quotation than are to be found here, where the writer, though quoting the Book of Joshua, and quoting it correctly, does not say that he is doing so. No one doubts that Jeremiah in Jer 48:1-47. is quoting Isa 15:1-9; although the passages are not verbally coincident. We may safely regard this quotation of the Book of Joshua in that of Judges, as under all ordinary laws of criticism an evidence that the former book was in existence when the latter was written, just as the quotations of Deuteronomy in Joshua may naturally be taken as evidence that the Book of Deuteronomy was in existence when that of Joshua was composed. The son of Jephunneh. (see Jos 14:6). A part. Literally, a lot. Among. Rather, in the midst of. Our version is obscure here. Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron. (see Jos 14:6-15). Keil thinks that he was the tribe father, or chief (sheikh, as the Arabs would call him), of the children of Anak.

Jos 15:14

The three sons of Anak. This also must not he pressed literally. Possibly these men were three chiefs of the Anakim. The children of Anak. descendants, thus supporting the view taken in the last note (see for the word Gen 14:14; Gen 17:12, where it is used of a slave born in the house).

Jos 15:15

Kirjath-sepher (see note on Jos 10:38).

Jos 15:16

And Caleb said (cf. 1Sa 17:25; 1Ch 11:6).

Jos 15:17

The brother of Caleb. The Hebrew does not inform us whether Othniel or Kenaz were Caleb’s brother. But the fact (see note on Jos 14:6) that Caleb was the son of Jephunneh leads to the idea that the latter is meant. Othniel was a valiant and capable commander, as we learn from Jdg 3:9.

Jos 15:18

As she came to him. Whether the bridal procession of the later Jews were already in existence or not, we have no evidence to show. A field. The narrative in Judges has “the field,” meaning the particular field mentioned in the passage. Lighted off. Or, sank down; spoken of gradual motion, as of the nail which, when smitten by Jael into Sisera’s temples, went down into the ground. So Knobel. Our translation renders it “fastened” there, which is hardly the meaning. This word has been a difficulty to translators. The LXX. renders , and the Vulgate still more strangely, “Suspiravit, ut sedebat in asino.” The LXX. seems to have read for . The Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic render as our version. What wouldest thou? Or, what is the matter? Literally, What to thee? Achsah’s conduct surprised Caleb. It was probably accompanied by an imploring gesture, and occurred before she had reached the house of Othniel, who no doubt had come to meet her; or possibly, according to the later Oriental custom, had escorted her the whole way. A blessing (see 2Ki 5:15; also Gen 33:11; 1Sa 25:27). The use of the word in the sense of “gift” comes from the fact that to bless is to bestow benefits upon the person blessed (see Deu 28:1-6, Deu 28:11, Deu 28:12).

Jos 15:19

A southland. Hebrew, the southland. The word Negeb signifies dry (see note on Negeb, Jos 10:40). It must be remembered that it became the word for south, because the south of Palestine was an arid tract. Therefore Achsah must be understood as saying, “Thou hast given me a dry country, give me also a reservoir of water.” The Vulgate translates Negeb twice over, “australem et arentem” (arentem only Jdg 1:15). The LXX. translates both Negeb and Gulloth as proper names. But in the parallel passage in Judges Negeb is translated “south,” and Gulloth appears as , as if from to remove. Nothing can more clearly show that the LXX. translation is the work of Springs of water. different hands. akin to our well and the German quelle, and derived from to roll, from the circular motion observable in springs, as also from the rolling of waves. The Chaldee renders the house of irrigation ( ). Knobel translates reservoirs. The upper springs and the lower springs (see note on Debir, Jos 10:38).

Jos 15:20

This is the inheritance. The territory of Judah is divided into four parts, in the summary which follows: the “south,” the “valley,” the “mountains,” and the “wilderness.” Tribe. Here (see note Jos 13:29).

Jos 15:21

Coast. Rather, border (see note Jos 15:4). Southward. The term here used (see above, Jos 15:19) for “south” is the one which has the signification of dryness. It is, however, occasionally used in a less strict sense, as in Jos 19:24. Though the south country was in the main an arid region, yet its intersection by numerous wadys, with their attendant streams, provided fertile spots at intervals, where the traveller might rest, cattle might be watered, and corn and other produce raised. The only places of any importance in Scripture history mentioned here are Beersheba (see Gen 21:31), and Hormah (see Num 14:45; Num 21:3; and cf. Jos 12:14; Jos 19:4; and Jdg 1:17). This last passage explains why the city is mentioned among the cities of Simeon as well as Judah, and is another instance of the remarkable accuracy of our author. Ziklag is famous as the residence of David (1Sa 27:6). It is noteworthy that t was given to him by Achish, king of Gath, in whose possession it therefore was at that time. It was burnt by the roving hands of Amalekites (1Sa 30:1).

Jos 15:22

Their villages (see note Jos 13:28).

Jos 15:22

Kinah. Knobel suggests that this was the city of the Kenites, a supposition which derives some support from Jdg 1:16 and 1Sa 15:6.

Jos 15:24

Telem. This is identified by Knobel with the Telaim mentioned in 1Sa 15:4. Conder, in his ‘Handbook,’ supports this view, but nothing more is known of the place.

Jos 15:29

Iim. The Alexandrian version of LXX. has here. If this be correct, the city was named after the Avim (see note on Jos 13:4). If we take the reading in the text we must interpret by ruins (see note on Ai, Jos 7:2).

Jos 15:32

Ain, Rimmon (see Jos 19:7; 1Ch 4:1-43 :82; Neh 11:29). More likely the name of one place Ain-Rimmon, the fountain of the god Rimmon. For Rimmon see 2Ki 5:18. The word signifying eye, or fountain, is written indifferently Ain or En in our version (see En-shemesh and En-rogel in this chapter). Bitumen is mentioned in Zec 14:10 as “south of Jerusalem.” Now Umm er-Rumamin (Conder).

Jos 15:32

Twenty-nine. There is another of the very common errors of numbers here. The actual number is thirty-six. The error is as old as the LXX. version.

Jos 15:33

The valley. (see note on Jos 9:1; Jos 10:40). This was the fertile part of Judah, and formed a part of the rich plain which has been described as extending northward as far as Carmel. It was “renowned for the beauty of its flowers” (Delitzsch). With the exception of Zorah and Eshtaol, border towns to the tribe of Dan (Jos 19:41; Jdg 13:25), famous in the history of Samson (see Judges 13-16), and mentioned in 2Ch 11:10; Neh 11:29, the cities remarkable in history have been noticed already. It is worthy of remark that the cities of the Philistines were included in this list. But the Philistines, save during the reigns of David and Solomon, retained their independence, and in earlier and later times alike even encroached upon the Jewish territory (see 1Sa 13:5; 2Ch 28:18; and note on 2Ch 28:11).

Jos 15:44

Mareshah. One of Rehoboam’s fortified cities (2Ch 11:8). Here Asa met Zerah the Ethiopian, or Cushite, and overthrew him (2Ch 14:9). Here lived the prophet who foretold the destruction of Jehoshaphat’s navy (2Ch 20:37. See also Mic 1:15). How Marash, close to Beit-Jibrin or Eleutheropolis (Tristram, Conder). If it be the same as Moresheth-Gath in Mic 1:14, this adds additional probability to the identification of Gath with Beit-Jibrin (see note on Jos 13:3).

Jos 15:45

Ekron, with her towns and her villages. Literally, her daughters and her farm hamlets (see note on Jos 13:28). These cities of the Philistines had, like Gibeon, daughter cities dependent on them, and must therefore have been, like Gibeon, “great cities as the royal cities” (Jos 10:2). They do not appear to have come under regal government till later times (cf. 1Sa 5:8, 1Sa 5:11, with 1Sa 27:2). “Around it (Gezer) and along the sides were distributed a series of small isolated centres of agglomeration This disposition to scatter itself, of which Gezer surely does not offer us the only specimen, explains in a striking manner the Biblical phrase, ‘the city and her daughters'”. This explanation, however, is doubtful (see Jos 9:17). According to Knobel, this passage cannot have been written by the Elohist, because he confines himself to the description of the cities the Israelites actually possessed. Why a lair writer, writing presumably when Israel’s fortunes were at a lower ebb, should have added a description of the territory Israel did not possess, he does not explain.

Jos 15:48

The mountains. Compare the expression, “the hill country of Judaea” ( , the same as here in the LXX), Luk 1:65. It extends northwards from near Debir to Jerusalem, attaining at Hebron a height of about 2,700 feet. The physical characteristics of the country are vividly described in Deu 8:7, Deu 8:8. Dean Stanley descants on the home-like character of the scenery and vegetation to an Englishman, and remarks on the contrast between the life, activity, and industry displayed there, as contrasted with the desolation of the greater part of Palestine. A later traveller, who would not, of course, be so struck with the resemblance to English scenery, speaks of the fertility of the ground as a matter of possibility, rather than of fact. The rocky soil, when broken up by the combined influences of heat, rain, and frost, is, like the soil of other rocky districts, extremely susceptible of cultivation when laid out in terraces. He remarks how the signs of ancient cultivation in this manner are to be seen on all sides, and laments the misrule which has converted the “land flowing with milk and honey” into a wilderness (see Bartlett, ‘Egypt and Palestine,’ Deu 19:1-21; and note on Jos 10:40). The time has not yet come for the Jews, now asserting their ancient greatness in statesmanship, literature, and art in every country in the civilised world, to return to their own land. Not till then, it is to be feared, will the prophecy in Isa 35:1-10. be fulfilled, and “the desert rejoice, and the wilderness blossom as the rose, while waters break out in the wilderness and streams in the desert, the parched ground becoming a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water.”

Jos 15:51

Giloh. Perhaps the city of Ahithophel.

Jos 15:55

Maon, Carmel, and Ziph. These, as Dean Stanley reminds us, still retain unaltered their old names. “That long line of hills was the beginning of the ‘hill country of Judaea,’ and when we began to ascend it the first answer to our inquiries after the route told us that it was ‘Carmel,’ on which Nabal fed his flocks, and close below its long ranges was the hill and ruins of Ziph,” close above the hill of Maon, Wilson also (‘Lands of the Bible,’ 1.380) makes the same remark. Maon is to be remembered as David’s hiding place from the enmity of Saul (1Sa 23:24-26), and as the home of Nabal (1Sa 25:2). Carmel (not the famous mountain of that name) meets us again in the history of Saul and of David (1Sa 15:12; 1Sa 25:2, 1Sa 25:5, 1Sa 25:7, 1Sa 25:40). The neighbourhood of Ziph was also one of David’s hiding places, and is described as a “wilderness” in which there was a “wood” in 1Sa 23:15, 1Sa 23:19; 1Sa 26:1, 1Sa 26:2. See also the prologue to Psa 54:1-7. Another Ziph is mentioned in Jos 15:24.

Jos 15:60

Kirjath Baal. Before these words the LXX. insert the names of eleven more cities, among which Tekoah and Bethlehem are included. For the former see 2Sa 14:2; 2Ch 11:6; 2Ch 20:20. The prophet Amos was one of its herdsmen (Amo 1:1). We learn from 1 Macc 9:33, etc; that it was near Jordan, and had a waste district in its vicinity. It has been identified with Teku’a, two hours south of Bethlehem. Of Bethlehem itself, the home of Ruth and David, the birthplace of Jesus Christ, it is unnecessary to speak. But the incidents related concerning Bethlehem in Jdg 17:1-13; Jdg 19:1-30. (which seem to indicate that the author of the book had special information about Bethlehem), as well as the narrative of the Book of Ruth, lead us to suppose that the verse inserted here by the LXX. is genuine, since Bethlehem was, in early times, a town of sufficient importance to be noticed in a list like this, and that its omission in the Hebrew text is due to the mistake of some transcriber.

Jos 15:61

The wilderness. ; This was the eastern part of the territory of Judah, bordering on the Dead Sea. Here David took refuge from the pursuit of Saul (Psa 63:1), here St. John the Baptist prepared the way of Christ. It is described by Tristram as “a wilderness, but no desert.” Herbage is to be found there, but no trees, no signs of the cultivation formerly bestowed upon the hill country (see above, Jos 15:48). And the fewness of the cities in early times is a proof that its character has not been altered by time. The hills, says Canon Tristram, are of a “peculiar desolate tameness,” and are intersected by the traces of winter watercourses, seaming the sides of the monotonous round-topped hills. Other writers describe this country in less favourable terms, denying it even the scanty herbage found there by Canon Tristram.

Jos 15:62

The city of Salt. Probably near the valley of Salt (2Sa 8:13; 2Ki 14:7; 1Ch 18:12), which must have been near the border of Edom, and in close proximity to the Dead Sea (see note on Jos 3:16). En-gedi. The “fountain of the kid.” Here David took refuge from Saul (1Sa 24:1). This place, now Ain Jidy, is situated in “a plain or slope about a mile and a half in extent from north to south”. Here the ruins of the ancient city of Hazezon Tamar, or “the felling of the palm trees” (Gen 14:7), are to be found, a city perhaps “the oldest in the world,” may still be seen. “The cluster of camphire” (or rather of henna, the plant with which Oriental women stained their nailsSo Jos 1:14) may still be found there, and its perennial torrent dashes still into the Dead Sea. In later times than those of the Old Testament the Essenes planted their headquarters here.

Jos 15:63

As for the Jebusites. This passage, compared with Jdg 1:8, Jdg 1:21, and 2Sa 5:6, implies that the people of Judah took and set on fire the lower city, but were compelled to leave the stronghold of Zion in the hands of the Jebusites (see note on Jos 10:1). Origen and Theodoret see in the Jebusites the type of the nominal members of Christ’s Church, who are not His disciples indeed. The former refers to Mat 13:25. Unto this day. A clear proof that this book was written before David became king.

HOMILETICS

Jos 15:1-63

The inheritance of Judah.

This chapter does not suggest much matter for homiletic treatment. The chief points to be noticed are

(1) the fulfilment of the prophecy of the pre-eminence of Judah uttered by Jacob (Gen 49:8-12), due no doubt originally to the pre-eminence of Judah for gentleness and justice above all his brethren except Joseph;

(2) the picture of filial and parental affection in the family of Caleb, as evinced by the manner in which Achsah made her request, and the readiness with which, being a reasonable one, it was granted;

(3) the valour of Othniel, fitting him for his future eminence as a deliverer and judge of Israel; and

(4) the want of faith, noticed more particularly elsewhere, which, while cities of such importance as are here enumerated had been given by God into the hand of Judah, this tribe did not appropriate to itself the promise, and the Philistine cities became the sorest thorns in their sides of all their surrounding enemies. We may add

(5) that Caleb’s behaviour to Achsah supplies us with an illustration of the text, “If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give good things to them that ask Him” (Mat 7:11).

HOMILIES BY J. WAITE

Jos 15:16-19

Fulness of blessing.

Achsah had something of her father’s spirit in herambitious, vigorous, resolute, quick to seize the present opportunity. Having so lately won his own suit Caleb could scarcely deny her her’s. Through the simple, Oriental form of this narrative we see the working of deep and universal principles of human life. Let us regard it as suggestive of that restless craving of our nature which can find satisfaction only in the realisation of the higher good.

I. NATURE‘S CRAVING. Achsah covets a prize that is as yet beyond her reach. “Give me a blessing. Thou hast given me a south (dry, barren) land; give me also springs of water.” How expressive is this of that yearning of the heart by virtue of which it cannot rest content with present possessions, but is ever reaching forth towards something more, a richer inheritance, a completer blessing, the perfect filling up of its capacity, the sense of absolute blessedness.

1. There is an appetite in the soul of man which is not only insatiable but often becomes more intense the more it is fed with finite gratifications. What is the meaning of life’s restless toil and endeavour, and the perpetual craving for some new form of excitement in the giddy round and dance of pleasure? It simply shows what power there is in earthly good to awaken hopes and longings that it cannot gratify, to quicken an appetite that it cannot appease. It is not enlargement of possession, the conquering of fair kingdoms either of knowledge, or wealth, or social distinction, or means of enjoyment, that can bring contentment to the soul. This will only feed its discontent unless other conditions are supplied. Man has that within him which spurns all his attempts to satisfy it thus. It is the mark of his essential greatness that he is conscious of a hunger which no earth-grown food can satisfy, a thirst which earthly streams cannot slake, “an aching void the world can never fill.” Study the facts of your own consciousness. The day dreams of your imagination and your heart have never been realised. Many a pleasant prospect has proved like the mirage of the desert. Many a fondly cherished purpose has been like a river that loses itself in the sand. Many a stay in which you trusted has been but as a reed that breaks and wounds the hand that leans upon it. The world has not satisfied you. Your fellow creatures have not satisfied you. You have least of all been satisfied from yourself. Amid the happiest arrangement of circumstances you dream of one that is better. Rich as your earthly inheritance may be, there are times when it seems dry and barren to you, and, like Achsah, you crave for something more,

2. When this appetite lifts itself up consciously to the higher level, fixes itself upon the spiritual good, it ,is the evidence of a new Divine life in the soul. We come here to an altogether peculiar and distinctive element of feeling. The mere experience of the unsatisfactoriness of all other kinds of good does not of itself prepare men to seek after the joys of faith. God said to His sense bound people in the prophetic age, “Thou art wearied in the greatness of thy way, yet saidst thou not. There is no hope” (Isa 57:10). Their vain carnal life disappointed them, but they did not repent of it. They were wearied in it, disgusted with it, and still they clung to it. They hoped on notwithstanding the blighting and withering of all their hopes. How true to human nature and human experience in every age! The carnal appetite will never resolve itself into the spiritual. They are essentially different things, and point to essentially different causes. The long series of life’s disappointments may be gathered up at last into one sad, deep sigh of conscious emptiness and weariness”All is vanity,” etc. But does it necessarily assume the form and tone of an upward yearning for “the things that are above”? Nay, there is no saving virtue in the mere groans of a discontented heart. One dare not place much confidence even in deathbed confessions of the vanity of the world. The attraction earthwards may have ceased, but perhaps there is no attraction heavenwards to take its place. The lights of earth may be growing dim, but there is no soul-captivating view of brightening lights that shine along the eternal shore; natural desire fails, but there is no longing for the pure satisfactions of a higher and a better sphere. So that it is a momentous revolution in the spiritual history of a man, happen when it will, when he first begins distinctly to reach forth towards the heavenly and Divine. He becomes a “new creature” when there is thus awakened within him the aspiration of a pure and holy life that he has never known before. The appetite of his being has taken a new direction, assumed an altogether new character. He hungers for the “bread of life,” and thirsts for the “river of the water of life””hungers after righteousness,” and “thirsts for the living God.”

II. ITS TRUE SATISFACTION. Achsah’s request is immediately granted. She receives from her father a completed “blessing”the richer land added to the poorer to supplement its deficiency.

1. God is ever ready to respond to every pure aspiration of our nature. He who “opens His hand and satisfies the wants of every living thing” will never disregard the cry of His suppliant children. Every true spiritual desire of which we are conscious contains in itself the pledge of its own fulfilment.

2. Christ is God’s answer to the soul’s deepest craving. In Him is the fulness of all satisfying good. “Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life” (Joh 4:14). In Him we find the rest of absolute contentment.

3. The joy of the higher, life that Christ gives deepens and purifies every natural joy. As the “upper springs” feed the “nether,” so when He has conferred on us the Diviner good we discern a richer meaning and worth in the inferior good.

“Our heart is at the secret source
Of every precious thing.”

All that is naturally fair and pleasant upon earth becomes invested with a new charm, and in that which before seemed barren and profitless there are opened to us unexpected fountains of delight.

“We thirst for springs of heavenly life,
And here all day they rise.”

W.

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY

Jos 15:16-19

The story of Achsah.

I. LOVE IS THE STRONGEST MOTIVE OF CONDUCT. AS Othniel was nephew to Caleb, and therefore must have known Achsah, it is probable that he accepted the challenge to seize Kirjath-sepher from motives of real affection for the daughter of Caleb. God has providentially arranged that human love should serve as a help for the performance of difficult tasks. Christianity appropriates and consecrates the emotion of love by directing it to Christ. Love is worthless when it will not encounter danger and attempt hard tasks. The highest human affection is shown not in mere pleasing emotions, but in sacrifice and toil

II. HUSBANDS AND WIVES SHOULD EXERCISE MUTUAL CONFIDENCE. Achsah first consults her husband and then proffers her request to her father. Though husbands and wives have separate spheres of duty, each should be interested in that of the other. There should be no secrets between them. They should learn to act as one in important questions. True sympathy will be shown in questions of conduct and choice, not merely in circumstances of trouble.

III. THE DESIRE OF EARTHLY CONVENIENCES IS NOT IN ITSELF WRONG. Achsah cannot be accused of covetousness. Her request was reasonable. If we do not put earth in the place of heaven, nor grasp for ourselves what is due to others, nor forget duty and generosity in greed and self seeking, the attempt to improve our condition in the world is natural and right.

IV. CHILDREN SHOULD COMBINE CONFIDENCE WITH SUBMISSION IN THEIR CONDUCT TO THEIR PARENTS. Achsah is an example of this combination. She shows confidence in making her request. She shows submission in alighting off her ass and asking the favour from her father as a “blessing.” Reverence and humility are always becoming, but slavish fear is a proof either of the tyrannous character of the parent, or of the mean nature of the child. Confidence joined to submission constitutes the right attitude of Christians in approaching their heavenly Father (Rom 8:15).

V. NO EARTHLY BLESSING IS PERFECT IN ITSELF. The southland is of little use without the springs of water. In every condition of life we feel the need of something more to give us satisfaction. Wealth generates the hunger for greater wealth. As the field is barren without the Waters of heaven, so any earthly inheritance is profitless to us unless there are added the showers of spiritual blessings (1Ti 4:8).W.F.A.

Jos 15:63

Invisible Jebusites.

The failure of the men of Judah to conquer the Jebusites is illustrative of the failures men too commonly encounter in the attempt to accomplish the aims of life.

I. NO MAN PERFECTLY SUCCEEDS IN THE TASK OF HIS LIFE. If a man is satisfied that he has accomplished all his aims, this is a proof that those aims were low. We are bound to aim at the highest though we never reach it. The most successful life is still a broken life. Like the rainbow with half the arch melted away, like the waterfall blown into mist before it reaches the ground, like the bird’s song cut short by the storm, life’s work ends ragged and unfinished. When failure arises from the magnitude of the task, we are free from blame if we have laboured our best at it. But it is usually aggravated by our indolence, cowardice, and culpable weakness. Only Christ has perfectly succeeded (Joh 17:4). We need a higher view of the requirements of duty, a deeper conviction of our own past failure, more trust in God’s power to help us, more consecration of soul and earnest, self-sacrificing effort.

II. NO CHRISTIAN WHILE IN THIS WORLD PERFECTLY SUCCEEDS IN EXPELLING HIS SINS. The Christian life is a warfare with sin. Though God pardons sin immediately on our repentance and faith in Christ, and gives us grace with which to conquer it, He requires us to fight against it. The war is not decided by one battle. It is a life-long conflict. He who claims to have completely conquered is deceiving himself (1Jn 1:8). This is a fact, but one to cause shame, for it is not a physical necessity. We ought to conquer all sin, and in Christ we have the means for this perfect victory.

III. THE CONQUEST OF THE WORLD FOR CHRIST IS SLOW. The Jebusites were not completely subdued till the days of David (2Sa 5:6, 2Sa 5:7). Christian mission work proceeds slowly. Strongholds of sin, of heathenism, of unbelief, of worldliness still seem invincible.

(1) This fact should not shake our faith in the truth of Christ, for it was predicted while ultimate triumph was promised (Mat 13:31, Mat 13:32).

(2) It should convince us of our own want of faithfulness. Christ has entrusted the extension of His gospel to His Church. It is to the shame of the Church that she is so remiss in carrying out her great mission.

IV, NO EARTHLY INHERITANCE IS WITHOUT ITS DISADVANTAGES. Canaan was not paradise. The land flowing with milk and honey also brought forth thorns and briars. Jerusalem, the future capital of the land, was the last place to be subdued. So we find something amiss in the very core of life. This is owing

(1) partly to our failure to make the best use of this world, and

(2) partly to the fact that God has given us natures too great for any earthly satisfaction. Therefore we must expect disappointment here. The perfect inheritance is reserved for the next world.W.F.A.

HOMILIES BY J. WAITE

Jos 15:63

Failure.

We have here the first hint of the incompleteness of Israel’s conquest of the land. The effects of this failure fully to carry out the Divine command in the extermination of the heathen were very manifest afterwards in the moral and social life of the people. “Their whole subsequent history, down to the captivity, was coloured by the wars, by the customs, by the contagion of Phoenician and Canaanite rites, to which, for good or evil, they were henceforth exposed” (Stanley). “They could not take Jerusalem.” The reason lay in themselves. The fault was their own They had not enough faith, and of the courage that springs from faith. If they had had more of the spirit of their great leader in them they would not thus have quailed before their foes, or left the work half finished. The historic fact finds its analogue in the moral and spiritual life of men.

It suggests

I. THE FEEBLENESS THAT IS THE RESULT OF FAITHLESSNESS. Want of power is in various ways coupled in Scripture with want of faith. There were times when Christ could not do mighty works among the people “because of their unbelief”. The disciples could not cure the lunatic child “because of their unbelief” (Mat 17:20). Peter could no longer walk on the water when he began to doubt (Mat 14:31). As the Jews “could not enter in” to the land of promise “because of their unbelief,” so may we fail to secure our inheritance in God’s everlasting rest (Heb 3:19; Heb 4:1-14). These examples suggest that faithlessness is weakness, inasmuch as

(1) it severs the soul from the Divine fountain of strength;

(2) it obscures the soul’s vision of those spiritual realities which are the inspiration of all high and holy endeavour;

(3) it robs the soul of all firm standing in the hope of the eternal future. That must be a source of fatal weakness to a man which thus disconnects him from the higher interests of his being and leaves him at the mercy of things “seen and temporal.” “All things are possible to him that believeth.” To him that believeth not, nothing, great or good, is possible in this world.

II. THE ILL EFFECTS OF SUCH MORAL FEEBLENESS. The results of Israel’s failure to exterminate the Canaanites are typical of conditions only too common in the moral life of men. The delay it involved in the settlement of the Statepolitically, ecclesiastically; the perpetual unrest; the national disgrace; the corruption of the national life by the contagion of idolatry; the reproach cast on the name of Jehovah among the nationsall these have their resemblance in the penalties of moral failure.

1. Personal dishonour. When a man has not the courage to face and combat the evils of his own heart and life, or that confront him in the world without, he generally falls into the shame of some kind of base compromise. He deals sophistically with his own conscience, suppresses the nobler impulses of his nature, belies the essential principles of his religious faith, disowns the bond of his allegiance to Christ. No greater dishonour possible to a man than this.

2. Spiritual degeneracy. As an enfeebled body is liable to the infection of disease, so moral laxity leaves men a prey to the destroyer. Corrupting influences readily take effect upon them. The gates are open, the sentinel is asleep, no wonder the foe enters and takes possession of the citadel. “From him that hath not shall be taken away,” etc. (Mat 13:12).

3. Exaggeration of opposing difficulties. The sense of moral weakness and falseness conjures up obstacles in the path of duty or endeavour that do not really exist. High moral excellence seems impossible to him who is content to grovel. The faithless heart always “sees a lion in the way.”

“The wise and active conquer difficulties
By daring to attempt them. Sloth and folly
Shiver and shrink at sight of toil and danger,
And make the impossibilities they fear.”

4. Defective witness for God. Every such case of spiritual failure is a hindrance to the progress of the kingdom of heaven among men, thwarts so far the Divine purpose m the triumph of truth and righteousness. The hostile forces of the world laugh at a half-hearted service of Christ. The strongholds of iniquity can never fall before a church enfeebled by the spirit of unbelief.W.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Ver. 1. This then was the lot of the tribe ofJudah In one of the following chapters we see, that the first care of Joshua, Eleazar, and the princes appointed to divide the conquered country, was, to have a plan of the whole drawn out, and to divide it into nine parts and a half, as equally as possible, calculating the extent and goodness of the district. This done, they cast lots in the manner before described, Num 26:53-56.; and the lot first assigned a portion to the tribe of Judah; as it were, to confirm the pre-eminence which Jacob’s famous prediction had promised to him before all the rest.

By their families It should constantly be remembered, that the lot determined nothing more than the right of each tribe to such or such a portion of the general division into nine provinces and a half. It then remained with Joshua and the other commissioners, to give each family lands proportioned to its situation, without partiality or respect of persons. Thus the district in which each tribe was to be settled was marked out, as it were, by the hand of God; but the bounds of it were fixed by the general and the heads of the people, who, on an estimation of the value of the lands, and the necessity of the families, contracted or extended those bounds according to their discretion. See chap. Jos 19:9.

To the border of Edom; the wilderness of Zin southward The tribe of Judah was the most southwardly of all. Its limits took up the south side, from the arm or point of the Salt or Dead sea on the south, along Edom, or Idumea, passing by the mountains of Acrabbim, the desart of Zin, Kadesh-barnea, Hezron, Adar,Karkaa, Azmon, and the river of Egypt, and so on to the Mediterranean. See the three following verses, Num 1:5 and Wells’s Geogr. vol. 2: chap. 5.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

SECTION SECOND

Division of West Palestine among the Nine and a Half Tribes remaining. Appointment of the Cities of Refuge, and the Cities of the Levites

Joshua 15-21

1. Territory of the Tribe of Judah

Joshua 15

a. Its Boundaries

Jos 15:1-12

1This then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families; even to the border of Edom, the wilderness of Zin southward was the uttermost part of the south coast. 2And their south border was from the shore [end] of the salt sea, from the bay [Heb. tongue] that looketh southward: 3And it went out to the south side to [of] Maaleh [the ascent of] Acrabbim, and passed along to Zin, and ascended up on the south side unto [of] Kadesh-barnea, and passed along to 4Hezron, and went up to Adar, and fetched a compass to Karkaa: From thence it [and] passed toward Azmon, and went out unto the river [water-course] of Egypt; and the goings out of that [the] coast [border] were1 at the2 sea; this shall be your south coast [border].

5And the east border was the salt sea, even unto the end of the Jordan: and their [the] border in the north quarter was from the bay [tongue] of the sea, at the uttermost part [the end] of the Jordan: 6And the border went up to Beth-hogla, and passed along by the north of Beth-arabah; and the border went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben: 7And the border went up toward Debir from the valley of Achor, and so northward looking [and turned northward] toward Gilgal, that is before the going up to Adummim, which is on the south side of the river [water-course]: and the border passed toward the waters of En-shemesh [Sun-spring], and the goings out thereof were at En-rogel [Fullers-spring]: 8 And the border went up by [into] the valley of the son of Hinnom, unto the south side of the Jebusite; the same is Jerusalem: and the border went up to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of the giants [Rephaim] northward: 9And the border was drawn3 from the top of the hill [mountain] unto the fountain of the water of Nephtoah, and went out to the cities of mount Ephron; and the border was drawn to Baalah, which is Kirjath-jearim: 10And the border compassed [took a compass] from Baalah westward unto mount Seir, and passed along unto the side of mount Jearim (which is Chesalon) on the north side [Fay, more exactly: to the side northward of Har-jearim, that is Chesalon], and went down to Beth-shemesh, and passed on to Timnah: 11And the border went out unto the side of Ekron northward: and the border was drawn to Shicron, and passed along to mount Baalah, and went out unto Jabneel; and the goings out of the border were at the sea.

12And the west [prop. sea] border was to [or at] the great sea, and the coast thereof. This is the coast [border] of the children of Judah round about, according to their families.

b. Calebs Possession. His Daughter Achsah. Conclusion to Jos 15:1-12

Jos 15:13-20. Comp. Jos 14:6-15; Jdg 1:10-15

13And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the Lord [Jehovah] to Joshua, even the city of Arba [Kirjath-arba, Jos 14:15] the father of Anak, which city is Hebron. 14And Caleb drove thence the three sons of Anak, Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, the children [sons] of Anak. 15And he went up thence to the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before was Kirjath-sepher [Book-city, comp. Jos 15:49]. 16And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah 17my daughter to wife. And Othniel, the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife. 18And it came to pass, as she came unto him [came in], that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted 19off her [the] ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou? Who answered [And she said], Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me4 a south land [prop. a land of the south-country]; give me also springs of water: and he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs. 20This is the inheritance [possession] of the tribe of the children [sons] of Judah according to their families.

c. Catalogue of the Cities of the Tribe of Judah

Jos 15:21-63

. Cities in the South

Jos 15:21-32

21And the uttermost cities5 of the tribe of the children [sons] of Judah toward 22the coast [border] of Edom southward were Kabzeel, and Eder, and Jagur, And 23 24Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah, And Kedesh, and Hazor, and Ithnan, Ziph, and Telem, and Bealoth, 25And Hazor, Hadattah [Hazor-hadattah], and Kerioth, 26 27and Hezron [Kerioth-hezron] which is Hazor, Amam, and Shema, and Moladah, 28And Hazar-gaddah, and Heshmon, and Beth-palet, And Hazar-shual, and Beer-sheba, 29and Bizjoth-jah, Baalah, and Iim, and Azem, 30And Eltolad, and Chesil, 31and Hormah, And Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah, 32And Lebaoth, and Shilhim, and Ain, and Rimmon: all the cities are twenty and nine, with [and] their villages.

. Cities in the Lowland

Jos 15:33-47

33 34And in the valley [lowland], Eshtaol, and Zoreah, and Ashnah, And Zanoah, and En-gannim, Tappuah, and Enam, 35Jarmuth, and Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah, 36And Sharaim, Adithaim, and Gederah, and Gederothaim; fourteen cities with [and] their villages:

37Zenan, and Hadashah, and Migdalgad, 38And Dilean, and Mizpeh, and Jok, 39theel, Lachish, and Bozkath, and Eglon, 40And Cabbon, and Lahmam,6 and Kithlish, 41And Gederoth, Beth-dagon, and Naamah, and Makkedah; sixteen cities with [and] their villages:

42 43 44Libnah, and Ether, and Ashan, And Jiphtah, and Ashnah, and Nezib, And Keilah, and Achzib, and Mareshah; nine cities with [and] their villages:

45Ekron, with [and] her towns [Heb. daughters], and her villages: 46From Ekron even unto the sea [or, and westward], all that lay near [by the side of] 47Ashdod, with [and] their villages: Ashdod with [omit: with] her towns and her villages; Gaza, with her towns [daughters] and her villages, unto the river [water-course] of Egypt, and the great sea7 and the border thereof.

. Cities on the Mountain

Jos 15:48-60

48And in the mountains [prop. on the mountain], Shamir, and Jattir, and Socoh, 49And Dannah, and Kirjath-sannah, which is Debir, 50And Anab, and Eshtemoh, and Anim, 51And Goshen, and Holon, and Giloh; eleven cities with [and] their villages:

52 53Arab, and Dumah, and Eshean, And Janum,8 and Beth-tappuah, and Aphekah, 54And Humtah, and Kirjath-arba (which is Hebron) and Zior; nine cities with [and] their villages:

55Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Juttah, 56And Jezreel, and Jokdeam, and Zanoah, 57Cain, Gibeah, and Timnah; ten cities with [and] their villages. 58Halhul, Beth-zur, and Gedor, 59And Maarath, and Beth-anoth, and Eltekon; six cities with [and] their villages:9

60Kirjath-baal (which is Kirjath-jearim) and Rabbah; two cities with [and] their villages.

. Cities in the Wilderness

Jos 15:61-63

61In the wilderness, Beth-arabah, Middin, and Secacah, 62And Nibshan, and the city of Salt, and En-gedi; six cities with [and] their villages.

63As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children [sons] of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children [sons] of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The beginning of the account concerning the division of Palestine having been given in Jos 15:1-6 of the preceding chapter, we find the continuation of it in Jos 15:1 and onward. The enumeration of names which now follows, embracing five chapters in all, with only three interruptions (chaps. Jos 15:3-19; Jos 17:3-18; Jos 18:1-10) and those instructive, is extremely valuable for the geography of Palestine. It suggests a comparison with Homers catalogue of ships, Il. ii. 484 ff. For the cartographic presentation of the places named the maps of Kiepert, Van de Velde, and Menke may be consulted. [Osbornes Wall-map, also, and the maps accompanying Robinsons Researches]. In Joshua 15 we have given us the province of the tribe of Judah, (a) its bounds (Jos 15:1-12); (b) Calebs possession (Jos 15:13-19); (c) a list of the cities (Jos 15:20-63).

a. Jos 15:1-12. Its Boundaries, Jos 15:1. And there was the lot of the tribe of the sons of Judah, according to their families: toward ( not ) the border of Edom, (toward) the wilderness of Zin, southward, in ( as Gen 2:8; Gen 11:2) the extreme south;i.e. the territory of the tribe of Judah embraced the most southern part of the land, so that, as Keil rightly supposes, it touched Edom in the east and in the south had the wilderness of Zin as its border. The position of this wilderness is determined, from Num 20:1; Num 27:14; Num 33:36, by that of Kadesh-barnea concerning which we have already spoken, on Jos 14:6. According to this view, the wilderness of Zin also must be sought in the Arabah, and according to Num 13:26, should have formd the northern part of the wilderness of Paran. Cf. the Articles Zin and Paran in Winer, ii. 135 and 192 [and in the Dict. of the Bible].The general account of the position of the land of Judah is followed (Jos 15:2-12) by the more particular description of the boundaries; and first, the south border is drawn (Jos 15:2-4) so as to coincide in general with Num 34:3-5.

Jos 15:2. Its starting-point is the end of the Salt sea, more exactly still, the tongue which turns southward. This tongue is the south (more accurately southernmost) part of the Dead Sea, below the promontory which stretches far into the sea west of Kerah (Robinson, ii. 231234), and extending quite to the southern point at the so-called salt-mountain, and salt-morass from which the border of Judah began (Keil). The Salt-mountain (Kaschm Usdum), and salt-swamp are accurately given on Kieperts Map.

From this point the border runs in a tolerably direct course toward the south, as we learn from Jos 15:3 which says: It went out toward the south side of the ascent of Acrabbim. On Acrabbim comp. Jos 11:17. If the mountain Acrabbim is the same as the Bald mountain, mentioned Jos 11:17; Jos 12:7, as a south boundary, this height (Knobel: ascent) of Acrabbim would be a pass in this Bald mountain. Knobel who rejects the identity of the Bald and Acrabbim mountains, believes that the latter was the steep pass es-Sufah, S. W. of the Dead Sea, which view is indicated by Menke on his map, while Kieperts sketch supports our opinion. From this south-side of the hill of Acrabbim, the border goes over toward Zin, i.e. perhaps a definite place (Keil) or mountain (Knobel) in the wilderness of Zin and deriving its name therefrom. Thence it went up to the side of Kadesh-barnea, and passed along to Hezron,. and went out at the water-course of Egypt, and the goings out of the border were at the sea. In other words: The border went constantly southward to Kadesh-barnea (Num 34:3). South of Kadesh it turned toward the west, since it came out finally at the torrent of Egypt (comp. Jos 13:3) and at the sea. Hezron (Jos 15:25 with the addition that is Hazor) Adar, Karkaa, Azmon, are to us unknown places. The torrent of Egypt was spoken of Jos 13:3. The sea is evidently the Mediterranean sea. Ruins of considerable cities are still met with in these regions then allotted to the tribe of Judah (Robinson, i. 290, 318; ii. 591 f.).

Jos 15:4. This shall be your south border. The jussive is to be explained, as Masius and Keil observe, by reference to Num 32:2.

Next, in Jos 15:5 a, the east border is given: the salt sea in all its extent from south to north, to the end of the Jordan,i.e. to its embouchure at the Dead Sea.

Jos 15:5 b11. North Border. This went forth from the northern tongue of the sea at the mouth of the Jordan, and is given a second time, Jos 18:15-19, as the south line of Benjamin.

Jos 15:6. It went up toward Beth-hogla, a boundary point between Judah and Benjamin, belonging to the latter, perhaps the same as the threshing floor of Atad and Abel-mizraim (mourning of the Egyptians) Gen 1:10, between Jericho and the Jordan, discovered again by Robinson, ii. 268 in Ain Hadschla, (cf. von Raumer, p. 177). From Beth-Hogla it passed on northwardly to Beth-Arabah, which is ascribed now to Judah (Jos 15:61), now to Benjamin (Jos 18:22), and lay (Jos 15:61) in the wilderness at the north end of the Dead Sea; and went up to the stone of Bohan, the son of Reuben. This stone of Bohan must from the and , Jos 18:17, have lain nearer the mountain, that is, more to the west or southwest (Knobel). Keil seeks it on the same grounds nearer the mountain, and declines any more exact determination. Further conjectures see in Knobel, p. 415.

Jos 15:7. From the stone of Bohan it went up toward Debir which lay in the vicinity of Gilgal, to be distinguished evidently from the Canaanitish royal city conquered by Joshua near Hebron (Jos 10:29; Jos 10:38; Jos 12:13; Jos 15:15; Jos 15:49; Jos 21:5; 1 Chron. 7:58),from the valley of Achor, Jos 7:26. Now it turned northward toward Gilgal, that is before the going up to Adummim, which is on the south side of the water-course. Keil supposes this Gilgal not to be the place of encampment mentioned Jos 4:19, because here its position is determined with reference to another place than Jericho. This reason would have force only if the other place, the ascent of Adummim, could not be shown to have been in the same region. But so long ago as the time of Jerome, he observes that the ascent of Adummim (now Galaat el Demm) (Ritter, xv. 493 [Gages transl. iii. 10], Tobler, Denkwrdigkeiten, p. 698), lay on the road from Jerusalem: est autem confinium tribus Jud et Benjamini, descendentibus ab lia ubi et castellum militum situm est, ob auxilia viatorum. He has in mind, as we may suppose, since from the context Luk 10:30 flits before him, the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. But Gilgal lay near Jericho, according to Jos 4:19 being itself not a city but a larger circuit, whence, Jos 18:17, we read of . The watercourse is the Wady Kelt, south of Riha. Further particulars see in Knobel, pp. 416, 417. With this view von Raumer also agrees, comp. pp. 198 with 169.

The border now goes to the Sun-spring as in Jos 18:17. That is the present Ain el-Hodh, or Apostles Spring, three-quarters of an hour northeast of Jerusalem, the only spring on the road to Jericho. Seetzen, ii. p. 273, Tobler, Topographie, etc., ii. p. 398 ff. (Knobel). From the Sun-spring it went (see the side map to Map iii. in Menke) in a southwest direction (conversely Jos 18:7) to the Fullers Spring ( , Spies Spring would be , cf. Gen 13:9 ff.; Jos 6:22). This spring is mentioned again, 2Sa 17:17; 1Ki 1:9. It is the present deep and copious Well of Job (von Raumer, p. 307), or of Nehemiah, on the south side of Jerusalem, where the valleys of Kidron and Hinnom unite (Robinson, i. 354491; Tobler, ii. p. 50 ff.) (Knobel). Furrer (p. 57) says concerning it: Somewhat south of the gardens (p. 56) which spread themselves in the moderately broad valley formed by the junction of the ravines of Hinnom and Kidron together with the Tyropon, we come to an old well, called En Rogel in the O. T., at the present time, Jobs Well. Although it is more than one hundred feet deep [Robinson, one hundred and fifty feet], it overflows, upon a long continuance of rainy weather, which is regarded in Jerusalem as a joyful occurrence, indicating a good year. The over flow meanwhile lasts but a short time. I struck the water at a depth of twenty-eight feet The scenery about the fountain is very attractive. The hills rise high on the east and west. To the north one sees the spurs of Zion and Moriah, but little of the city walls. Southward the eye follows the course of the valley to its turn toward the southeast. There a declivity of the mountain with its olive trees and beautiful green fields formed a very pleasing back-ground.10

Jos 15:8. From En-rogel the border went up into the valley of the son of Hinnom, on the south side of the Jebusite, that is Jerusalem. The direction accordingly runs southwest on the south side of Jerusalem, where the valley mentioned lies. It is noted also, Jos 18:16; Neh 11:30, as a border between Judah and Benjamin. It was the place where, after Ahaz, the horrible sacrifice of children was offered (2Ki 23:10; 2Ch 28:3; 2Ch 33:6; Jer 7:31; Jer 19:2; Jer 19:6; Jer 32:35). The man from whom it derived its name is as little known as Bohan the son of Reuben (Jos 15:6). On account of the offerings to Moloch, the valley became a symbol of Hell, the name of which, (Chald. , in which is perceptibly audible) is thence derived, cf. Mat 5:22, . Hitzig and Bttcher (apud Winer, i. 492) dispute the common view that the valley was named after a person, Hinnom, and take as an appellative = moaning, wailing; certainly a very appropriate designation of the scene of the sacrifice of so many innocent victims. This hypothesis falls in well with Kethib, 2Ki 23:10, . for the complete expression , Jdg 19:11. Jerusalem is in the same connection, called also , Jdg 19:11; 1Ch 11:4 (Knobel). All in the time before David. So Bethel was earlier called Luz (Gen 28:19), Bethlehem Ephrath, Gen 35:16; Mic 5:1. Out of the valley of Hinnom the border now ascended to the top of the mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the end of the valley of giants northward. The mountain on which the border went up lies according to this statement west of the vale of Hinnom and at the north end of the vale of Rephaim. This vale of Rephaim is one which extends in a southwest direction from Jerusalem to Mar Elias, one hour long, a half hour wide, fertile (Isa 17:5), and still well cultivated, a valley-plain () not properly a vale ( ,) spacious enough to serve as a camp for an army (2Sa 5:18; 2Sa 5:22; 2Sa 23:13; 1Ch 11:5), named after the old gigantic race of Canaanites, the Rephaim, from whom sprang Og king of Bashan (Jos 12:4). It is bounded on the north by a slight rock-ridge, which constitutes the border of the valley of Hinnom, Winer, ii. 332; Robinson, i. 324; Tobler, ii. 401 ff.) That is the mountain which is here meant.

Jos 15:9. From the summit of this mountain, the line was drawn (, related to , to go around, from which , outline, form, shape of the body, 1Sa 28:14) to the fountain of the water of Nephtoah. This fountain of the water of Nephtoah, i.e. Liftah, one hour northwest of Jerusalem, irrigates a strip of smiling gardens, and its excellent water is carried also to Jerusalem (Dieterici, Reisebilder, ii. p. 221 f.; Tobler, ii. 258 ff. apud Knobel) Valentiner, p. 95, observes: Liftah numbers its fighting men by hundreds, and provides Jerusalem, among other things, with water from its copious fountain. From its position it is doubtless to be regarded as the fountain of Nephtoah, from which the dividing line between Judah and Benjamin ran on to the cities of Mount Ephron. This latter must not be confounded with Ephraim, which lay further north, Jos 15:9; Jos 18:15. From this fountain it ran as Valentiner, with reference to our passage, correctly states, up to the cities of Mount Ephron, and was drawn to Baalah, which is Kirjath-jearim This mount Ephron is not elsewhere mentioned. It was certainly between Liftah and Kureyet el-Enab, therefore probably the prominent ridge, on which stand the places Soba, Kartal, Kulonieh, etc., and near which the road from Jerusalem to Joppa runs, Robinson, ii. 328 ff. (Knobel). Baala, that is, Kirjath-jearim, one of the cities marked in Jos 9:17; Jos 18:25-26; Ezr 2:25; Neh 7:29, as belonging to Gibeon, now Kureyet el-Enab, three hours northwest of Jerusalem, see Jos 15:60, (Knobel). The border still followed constantly a northwest course.

Jos 15:10. Now, however, it took a compass (bent around, ) from Baala westward unto mount Seir. This mount Seir must not be mistaken for the Edomite mountain (Gen 32:3; Num 24:18; Deu 2:4-5; Deu 2:29; Jos 24:4); rather the mountain range is intended which runs in a southwest direction as far as the Wady Surar. The name has perhaps been preserved in Sairah, Robinson, ii. 363 (Winer, ii. 443). Cf. also Robinson, Later Bibl. Res., p. 155, who gives the height of the ridge as one thousand five hundred feet above the level of the sea.

Passed along to the side of mount Jearim (which is Chesalon) towards the north. Chesalon, probably, now Kesla (Robinson, ii. 363, more definitely, Later Bibl. Res. p. 154), was called also Har-jearim = mountain of forests, as Baala or Kirjath-jearim, = city of forests, or forest-town. The region appears therefore to have been earlier thickly covered with woods. Thence the border went down to Beth-shemesh, and passed on to Timnah. Beth-shemesh = house of the sun, here under this name as a border town of Judah; Jos 19:41, called Ir-shemesh and counted as a border town of Dan; according to Jos 21:9; Jos 21:16; 1 Chron. 7:59, a city of the priests, known especially from the narrative concerning the ark of the covenant, 1Sa 6:9-20. Robinson (3:1720) found, to the west of the village Ain Schems, on the plateau of a low swell or mound, between the Surar on the north and a smaller Wady on the south, the manifest traces of an ancient site. Here are the vestiges of a former extensive city consisting of many foundations, and the remains of ancient walls of hewn stone Both the name and the position of this spot seem to indicate the site of the ancient Beth-shemesh of the Old Testament, comp. Later Bibl. Res., p. 153; also, Furrer, p. 187211, especially 198201. Timnah, or Timnatha (Jos 19:43) belonging to Dan, now Tibneh, west of Beth-shemesh (Furrer, p. 200), the home of Samson (Jdg 14:1-4). In the vineyards of Timnah, without anything in his hand he killed the lion (Jdg 14:5-6).

Jos 15:11. Now the boundary, following a northwest course, went out unto the side of Ekron northward,i.e. to a point lying in the vicinity of Ekron north of this Philistine city. Then it was drawn to Shicron (Socreir, Sugheir; Knobel, p. 419), and passed along to mount Baala. This mount Baala is probably, as Keil and Knobel also suppose, the short line of hills running almost parallel with the coast, which Robinson observed west of Ekron (Akir), iii. 22, 23. From this mount Baala the border went out unto Jabneel, and then to the sea, where its goings out were. Jabneel or Jabneh (2Ch 26:6, ), destroyed by Uzziah, the Jamnia so often mentioned in the books of Maccabees (1Ma 4:15; 1Ma 5:58; 1Ma 10:69; 1Ma 15:40; 2Ma 12:9). After the destruction of Jerusalem, there was here a high school of the Jews and a Sanhedrim (Reland, p. 823, after the Talmud; apud von Raumer, p. 204). It is now Jebna, a large village on an insignificant hill west of Akir (Knobel, after Tobler, Dritte Wanderung, p. 20 f.; Wittmanns Reisen, ii. p. 7). Another Jabneel, which is mentioned Jos 19:33, lay on Lebanon.

Jos 15:12. Gives the West Border.The great sea,i.e., the Mediterranean. The borders thereof (), is to be explained as in Jos 13:23; Jos 13:27, cf. also Num 34:6.

b. Jos 15:13-20 (comp. Jos 14:6-15; Jdg 1:10-15). Calebs Possession. His daughter Achsah. Conclusion to a. Nothing is said here as in the episode, Jos 14:6-15, of any demand of Caleb, but simply Jos 15:13 that Joshua gave Hebron to Caleb, according to the command of God. On the other hand we have here, in almost literal agreement with the account in Jdg 1:10-15, the story of Achsah, whom Caleb gave as a reward for the conquest of Debir, which is not alluded to in Joshua 14.

Jos 15:13. It is stated that Joshua, according to the command of Jehovah ( , here and Jos 17:3, with which Gesenius compares Psa 5:1; Psa 80:1, , and also 1Sa 26:4, ), gave Caleb his portion () among the children of Judah. This command must have been communicated to Joshua then, as they were dividing the land (Knobel). A complete account of the facts is wanting, for Jos 14:9, which Keil would apply here, speaks not of a command of God to Joshua but of an oath of Moses to Caleb, cf. further the explanation of Jos 14:9. Hebron is here called Kirjath-arba as in Jos 15:54; Jos 20:7; Jos 21:11; Gen 23:2; Gen 35:27 (Knobel).

Jos 15:14-19. The history of Achsah, the daughter of Caleb, is introduced with the remark that Caleb drove out of Hebron the three sons of Anak, Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai, descendants () of Anak.

Jos 15:15. Thence he proceeded against the inhabitants of Debir. According to Jos 11:21, Joshua had conquered and devoted Debir. On the position of this city see on Jos 11:21. Debir before was Kirjath-sepher. Jos 15:49, the same city is called . On this diversity of names cf. Keil on Jos 10:38. The there quoted explanation of Bochart (Can. ii. 17) on : Id Phnicibus idem fuit quod Arabibus Sunna, lex, doctrina, jus canonicum, suits better to than if, as Gesenius supposes, =, ramus palm, and therefore = palm city.

Jos 15:16. Caleb, like Saul, 1Sa 17:25, promises his daughter Achsah as a wife to whomsoever would conquer the city, which was found difficult to take. = signifies properly foot-chains, cf. Isa 3:18.

Jos 15:17. And Othniel, son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it. So we translate,11 according to the view of the Masoretes, with Keil, Bunsen, and Winer (ii. 185) who appeal to Jdg 1:13; Jdg 3:9. Omitting the comma after Kenaz, and making the brother in apposition with Kenaz (Kenaz the brother) is grammatically allowable, but is not the most obvious, cf. Jdg 1:13 (Bunsen). Vulg. frater; LXX. . Othniel ( = lion of God) was, according to Jdg 3:9, the first Judge of Israel, who delivered his people from the tyranny of the Mesopotamian King Chushan-rishathaim. On the allowableness of his marriage, see Michaelis, Ehegesetze Mosis, 82, Laws of Moses, 117.

Jos 15:18. Achsah had not gone with the rest into the war, but had remained with her father probably in Hebron. As now she came to Debir to become Othniels wife, She moved him ( from or not used in Kal, perhaps to be excited, then in Hiphil, to incite; so here and Jdg 1:14; 2Ch 18:2; in particular, to tempt to something wrong, Deu 13:7; Isa 36:8; Jer 38:22, and often) to ask of her father a field (Jdg 1:14 more definitely the field which belonged to Debir), and lighted off ( from the rare cognate with , Jdg 1:14; Jdg 4:21 = to sink down, to go under; LXX: ; Vulg.: suspiravitque ut sedebat in asino. This translation of the LXX. followed by the Vulg., raises the conjecture that the LXX., instead of the unusual , read ) from the ass. Whether Othniel followed her is not said. She herself proceeded further, and on approaching her father she sprang from the ass and humbled herself before him (Knobel). So did Rebecca also at her first meeting with Isaac (Gen 24:64). Caleb perceived that she had something unusual to present to him, and asked: What is to thee?What wouldest thou? or what dost thou wish?

Jos 15:19. And she said: Give me a blessing, , i.e., as in Gen 33:11, a gift, a present, as Gen 33:10, is used instead of it. This gift should consist in springs of water, since Caleb had given her toward the south country (, comp. Jos 10:40). It is to be noted, first, that here Debir is reckoned as belonging to the Negeb, while the city in Jos 15:49 is counted to the mountain; probably, as Knobel suggests, because the region was like the Negeb. Besides, the Negeb begins, at least, in that section. Secondly, occurs only here and Jdg 1:15, and is explained either water springs (Bunsen: Wasserstrudel, whirlpool or eddy), as Gesenius and Keil prefer, or, according to Bertheau and Knobel, who quote Zec 4:2-3; Ecc 12:6; 1Ki 7:41, water-holders, inclosed fountains, which , Son 4:12, should also mean. We venture not to decide, but certainly hold the translation water springs in a poetically colored passage, to be finer than the transfer of water-holders. Neither can we exactly approve Bunsens Wasserstrudel. Thirdly, we notice that Achsah names the springs instead of the fields which were watered by them, in order doubtless to express the direct antithesis to the : perhaps also from feminine shrewdness and cunning, that she might not directly bring out her proper wish. That gardens and fields in Palestine are even to the present day watered from springs and cisterns is well known, cf. what was said above on Jos 15:7, also Son 2:6; Robinson, i. 541; ii. 285; iii. 95.

And he gave her the upper springs and the lower springs. Caleb responds to the wish of his daughter, and gives her higher and lower springs, that is, higher and lower fields watered by springs. How large this possession was cannot be determined. Finally let us remark, in passing, that Handel, in his Oratorio of Joshua, brings forward Othniel and Achsah as chief personages.

Jos 15:20 Belongs as a conclusion to Jos 15:1-12. Its position shows that Jos 15:13-19 were inserted. So also Keil: the 20th verse contains the subscription or conclusion to the first division of our chapter, with which the description of the bounds of the inheritance of Judah closes.

c. List of the Cities of the Tribe of Judah. From Jos 15:21 on follow the names of the cities of the tribe of Judah, and a. the cities in the south country (Jos 15:21-32); . the cities in the lowland (Jos 15:33-47);. the cities on the mountain (Jos 15:48-60); . the cities in the wilderness (Jos 15:61-62). The whole is concluded with a notice (Jos 15:63) concerning the Jebusites.

a. Jos 15:21-32. Cities in the South Country. Jos 15:21, , at the extremity or end; , as in Jos 15:1. In the south-country, ; cf. Jos 10:40. The enumeration begins within the Negeb at the east, as Jos 15:2 ff. in giving the boundaries. First we have nine cities named and connected by the copula, which Luther in his translation omits, while the LXX. and Vulg. have it. Kabzeel or Jekabzeel (Neh 11:25 = which God gathers) was the birth-place of Benaiah one of Davids heroes, 2Sa 23:30. Eder, Jagur, not to be made out.

Jos 15:22. Kinah, Perhaps the place of the Kenites who settled in the territory of Arad, Num 10:32 (Knobel).

Dimona = Dibon, Neh 11:25. Probably the ruins ed-Dheib, northeast of Arad (Van de Velde, Mem. 252), Knobel.

Adah. = Sudeid (Rob. ii. 474). The country here is hilly and cut up by small ravines, but without steep declivities, and sparsely covered with a thin and now dried up growth of grass. (Rob. l. c.)

Jos 15:23. Kedesh, Hazor, Kadesh-barnea and Hezron (Jos 15:3), Ithnanunknown.

Jos 15:24. A second group of five cities follows, a pentapolis. Ziph, perhaps = Kuseifeh (Rob. ii. 191, 195), southwest of Arad. Another Ziph lies on the mountain, Jos 15:55.Telem we, after the example of Kimchi, with von Raumer (p. 222) and Knobel, regard = , where Saul mustered his army before he moved against the Amalekites (1Sa 15:4). The position, in the Negeb, suits this view. When Keil (Com. on Josh, in h. 1.) objects to this assumption that the words (oppression) and (young lambs), came from two quite different roots; it is a sufficient answer to say, with Gesenius, that one of the names may be altered (perhaps by corrupt pronunciation), which is easily possible with names of places. Supposing this, it is more probable that is derived from the longer than the reverse.

Bealoth = Bealoth-beer, Ramath-negeb, Ramoth-negeb (Jos 19:8), on the road toward Hebron, marked on Menkes map.

Jos 15:25. Hazor-hadata, = New Hazor, since =). Perhaps Hudhairah (Rob. App. p. 114).

Kerioth-hezron, which is Hazor. Against the Masoretes, but with the LXX. and Syr., we join and in one name, as Reland, Maurer, Keil, and Knobel have done. In favor of this the analogy of Kirjath-arba (Jos 15:13) and Kirjath-jearim (Jos 15:9) adduced by Maurer, is of decisive weight. Possibly the place Kuryatein north of Arad (Rob. ii. 472), (Knobel).

Jos 15:26. Third group, consisting again, like the first, of nine cities,Amam, unknown.

Shema, a place of the Simeonites; Jos 19:2 associated with Beer-shaba and Moladah; , probably the same name, as and are often interchanged.

Moladah, according to Jos 19:2 likewise a place belonging to Simeon, now Milh (Rob. ii. pp. 619, 621). Moladah was at a later period inhabited by the sons of Judah who returned from the exile (Neh 11:25-26). Probably identical with Malatha, an Idumean fortress (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 6, 2); often named in the Onom. (von Raumer, p. 214). It lies on the road to Hebron, northwest of Baalath-beer. Robinson found here two wells about forty feet in depth, and walled around with good mason-work, one of them seven and a half feet, and the other five feet in diameter. The water appeared to be not good, but the Arabs of the Tiyahah watered their animals here as did the Kudeirt at Beer-sheba (Rob. l. c. note). On the plain lying near the wells to the south, the stones of a ruined town, or large village, are scattered over a space of nearly half a mile square, all unhewn. These wells and ruins in all probability mark the site of Moladah of the O. T., the Malatha of the Greeks and Romans (Rob. ubi sup.). On the etymological difficulty in deriving Milh from Moladah or Malatha, cf. the foot-note, p. 621.

Jos 15:27. Hazor-gadah, Heshmon, Beth-palat, unknown.

Jos 15:28. Hazor-shual ( = Fox-yard; [Gesen. village of Jackals], cf. the Lex. under for other like compounds), a place of the Simeonites, Jos 19:3; 1Ch 4:28, inhabited, like Moladah and Shema, after the exile, by men of Judah, Neh 11:27. Possibly Thaly (Rob. iii. App. 114).

Beer-sheba, , i.e. well of seven, meaning the seven lambs which Abraham sacrificed when he made a covenant with Abimelech (Gen 21:28-32). So von Raumer, p. 176. Others, e.g. Ges., explain, with reference to Gen 26:30, by puteus jurisjurandi, well of the oath, making = . Hitzig again (ubi sup. p. 26) in another way; if the wilderness between Pelusium and Gaza extends for the distance of seven days journey, Beershaba (properly, Bir sib) signifies well of the seven day camel (which has borne the seven days thirst)in the Arabic; and Arabs carry (Gen 37:25) into Egypt, on the backs of camels, the costly productions of Gilead. Lange (Com. on Gen 21:28 ff.) would not press the antithesis between seven-well and oath-well. The form designates it as the seven wells, but the seven designates it as in fact the well of the oath. In this view is taken as = seven, but at the same time it commemorates that , to swear, means primarily to seven ones self to confirm by seven. Cf. Herod. iii. 8, according to whom seven things were chosen among the Arabians for the confirmation of an oath. Beer-sheba is very often mentioned in the history of the patriarchs (Gen 21:14; Gen 21:28-33; Gen 22:19; Gen 26:23; Gen 28:10; Gen 46:1). According to the passage before us it belonged to Judah; from Jos 19:2, 1Ch 4:28, it was ascribed also to Simeon. It is often named in the formula from Dan to Beersheba (Jdg 20:1; 2Sa 17:11; 2Ch 30:5). At present it is called Bir es-seba, on the north side of the Wady es-Seba, close on its banks, where two wells now bear this name (Robinson, i. 300303). These two wells lie at some distance from each other, are round and walled up in a very firm and permanent manner, and furnish clear and excellent water in great abundance. The ruins on some low hills north of the well probably indicate the existence there formerly of a small and straggling city (Robinson, ubi sup.). Euseb.: . Hieron.: vicus grandis.

Bizjothahundeterminable.

Jos 15:29. The names of 13 places are added, which lay to the west and southwest. Baala = Deir el-Belah (Robinson, iii. App. p. 118), some hours southwest of Gaza on the north border of the Negeb with a great forest of palm trees, and remnants of marble pillars (Ritter, 16. 41, 42 [Gages Trans. i.30, 31]). The considerable plantation of date-palms at this place is remarkable from the fact that here alone in Palestine the dates still ripen; here, therefore, we pass the north limit of date culture (Ritter l.c.).

Ijim, or , as we may judge from, in the LXX. Cod. Alex., is passed over in the enumeration of Simeonite cities Jos 19:1 ff. and may have been not of much importance (Knobel). The site cannot now be determined.

Ezem also belonging, like Baala, to the Simeonites (Jos 19:3) = Abdeh, a place of very considerable ruins on a ridge of rocks, and once strong, = firmness, strength (Knobel).

Jos 15:30. Eltolad, later given likewise to Simeon, Jos 19:4. In 1Ch 4:29 it is called merely Tholad (Keil). This also remains undiscovered.

Chesil, . According to Job 9:9; Job 38:31; Amo 5:8, is a constellation in the heavens, probably Orion. Since the place is named Jos 19:4; 1Ch 4:30; and , since further 1Sa 30:27, the same place is manifestly called , it must have been the seat of a sanctuary as Knobel rightly conjectures. May not, as the name indicates, that very constellation of Orion (Chesil) have been worshipped here, especially as Jerome reports (Vit. Hilar, ep. 25, ap. Robinson, i. p. 298) that the inhabitants had worshipped Venus and the Morning Star? True, the morning star is mentioned and not Orion, but Jerome hardly had so exact information. At all events, worship of the stars then existed, and that is the main thing. Probably Chesil is = Elusa, where in pre-Islamite times a sanctuary of Arabic tribes existed (comp. Tuch, Zeitschrift der deutsch-morgenl. Ges., iii. p. 194 f. ap. Knobel). Elusa lies five and a half hours south of Beer-sheba (comp. Robinson, i. pp. 296298). Horma or Zephat, now Sepata, two and a half hours southwest of Chalaza; see Num 14:45 (Knobel).

Jos 15:31. Ziklag, later belonging to Simeon, Jos 19:5; 1 Chr. 5:30. Familiar from the history of David (1Sa 27:6; 1Sa 30:1; 2Sa 1:1; 2Sa 4:10; 1Ch 13:1). Perhaps Tel el-Hasy, northeast of Gaza (von Raumer, p. 225), from which one has an extensive view, westward to the sea, in the east toward the mountains of Hebron, northward to mount Ephraim, and southward to the plains of Egypt (Ritter, xvi. 133 [Gage, iii. 246, 247]). Knobel seeks Ziklag to the southwest of Milh, where a place, Gasludh, lies on the road to Abdeh (Robinson, ii. 621), some hours east of Sepata. The etymology of Ziklag ( ,) is doubtful; perhaps, as Gesen. supposes, from , wilderness of destruction.

Madmanna = Minyay or Minnieh, south of Gaza (Robinson, iii. 287 f.), on the route of the pilgrims during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

Sansannaunknown. The name signifies palm-branch. Instead of Madmanna and Sansanna, elsewhere Beth-markaboth (Wagon-house, Knobel, Keil) and Hazar-suza or Susim (Horse-yard, Knobel; Horse-village, Keil) are mentioned (Jos 19:3) as cities of the Simeonites. Are they possibly stations of wagons and horses, as Knobel conjectures?

Jos 15:32. Lebaoth or Beth-lebaoth, belonging to the Simeonites, Jos 19:6; in 1Ch 4:31, the name of the place is Beth Birei. Perhaps Lebhem, eight hours south of Gaza.

Shilhim, called, Jos 19:6, Saruhen (), a place of the Simeonites, 1Ch 4:31 = el-Scheriat, about midway between Gaza and Beer-sheba; a scene of ruins (Van de Velde, Narrative, ii. p. 144, and Mem. p. 113, apud Knobel).

Ain, Rimmon, in Jos 19:7; 1Ch 4:32; Neh 11:29, treated as one place. Rimmon is discovered in the ruins Um er-Rumamim, about three hours north of Beer-sheba. Only about thirty minutes south of it is the well el-Khulweilifeh, with remains of buildings (Robinson, iii. 8), on the road from Hebron to Gaza. Compare, further, Knobel on this verse.

All the cities twenty-nine and their villages. There are not twenty-nine but thirty-six, namely, (1) group first, 9; (2) group second, 5; (3) group third, 9; (4) group fourth, 13 = 36. So indeed the Syriac reads. Since, however, all the other ancient versions have twenty-nine, the Syriac probably gives a critical correction. The matter is capable of the simple explanation that the original ancient list had only twenty-nine cities, but later, as even Keil concedes, a supplementary hand added still others without altering the sum total to correspond.

. Jos 15:33-47. Cities in the Lowland. Jos 15:33. In the lowland. See Jos 10:40. It only needs to be remarked here that the foot-hills () mentioned Jos 10:40; Jos 11:16 are here reckoned in with the lowland. They are designated also as the land of Goshen, as was explained, Jos 10:40, (Jos 11:16), and form the east border of the Shephelah of Judah. The places mentioned by the author are arranged in three groups. The first of these (Jos 15:33-36) lies in the northeast part of the lowland.

Eshtaol and Zorea mentioned in reverse order, Jos 19:41; Jdg 13:25; Jdg 16:31. Here ascribed to Judah, there to Dan. Eshtaol is the present Um-Eschteiyeh (Robinson, ii. 342). Zorea was Samsons home (Jdg 13:2), visited in modern times by Robinson (Later Bibl. Res. p. 153), Tobler (Dritte Wanderung, p. 150) and Furrer (p. 200). The prospect from the summit of Zorea is, according to Robinsons statement, beautiful and very extensive, especially toward Beth-shemesh. The well, the fields, the mountains, the women who bore water, all transported the travellers back into the earliest times, when in all probability the mother of Samson in the same manner came to the well, and laboriously carried her water-jar home. Between Zoreah and Eshtaol Samson was buried in his father Manoahs tomb (Jdg 16:31.)

Ashna, unknown. Knobel would read after of the LXX. Cod. Vat.

Jos 15:34. Sanoah, now Sanna, not far from Zorea (Robinson, ii. 343) to the southeast. The other, Zanoah, on the mountain, Jos 15:56, has not yet been discovered by modern explorers (Keil).

En-gannim, Tappuah, unknown. Enam, mentioned Gen 38:14; Gen 38:21; perhaps Beth-anan, Tobler, p. 137 (Knobel).

Jos 15:35. Jarmuth, a Canaanitish capital (Jos 12:11, comp. Jos 10:3-27). Since , as Knobel observes = ,, Jos 19:21, and therefore, judging from the meaning of these words, lay upon a height, the modern Jarmuk (Robinson, ii. 344), which stands on a hill, and exhibits cisterns and remains of buildings of high antiquity, may be regarded as ancient Jarmuth.

Adullam. Probably Deir Dubban, two hours north of Beit Jibrin, where are great and remarkable caves, fully described by Robinson (ii. 353 f.). He does not decide whether they are natural or artificial. The circumstance that they are very regularly hewn out leads us to conclude that they are of artificial origin, which, however, may well have been in part natural, since the mountain of Judah is cavernous. [Robinson seems to indicate no doubt at all of the purely artificial character of the caves, only questioning whether the pits through which they are entered are natural or artificial. Their object also was to him quite a puzzle.Tr.]

Socho, and Azeka, lay near Ephes-dammim (Damun), 1Sa 17:1. Azeka has been already mentioned (Jos 10:10 f.) Goliaths battle with David took place between Azeka and Socho (1Sa 17:1 ff.). Socho, now Shuweikeh, but not to be confounded with Socho on the mountain (Jos 15:48), which is also called Shuweikeh, lies about seventeen miles southwest of Jerusalem on the Wady Sumt, whose beautiful vale Robinson (ii. 349 f.) regards as the terebinth-vale (valley of Elah), celebrated for the combat between David and the giant (von Raumer, p. 222).

Jos 15:36. Sharaim, according to 1Sa 17:52, westward of Socho and Azeka = Tel Sakarieh and Kefr Sakarieh (Knobel). The dual form of the name indicates two villages out of which the ancient Sharaim may have already grown, and properly signifies two doors. Adithaim, unknown; a dual form again.

Gedera, with the article, properly, the wall. In Jos 12:13 the king of (walled place) is mentioned. Probably the same place. Whether Gederoth also (Jos 15:41) is the same, as Knobel would have it, is to me doubtful. Different towns might naturally be called simply walled places. We may compare frequent elements of modern names, Burg, Ville, House, etc. Another related name is , Jos 15:58.

Gederothaim is omitted by the LXX. If we follow them, as Winer (ii. 471) and Knobel do, we make out only fourteen cities according to the sum total given, otherwise fifteen, as above thirty-six instead of twenty-nine.

Jos 15:37-41. Second Group. It includes sixteen cities, lying south and west of the first, Jos 15:37. Zenan, probably indentical with Zaanan (Mic 1:11); perhaps Chirbet es-Senat.

Hadashah. The smallest place in Judah, with only fifty dwellings (Mischn. Erubin, pp. 5, 6), Knobel. Not identical with Adasa, north of Jerusalem. Von Raumer has entirely omitted the little place.

Migdal-gad = Tel Iedeideh, after which the Wady Iedeideh is named (Tobler, p. 124 f.)

Jos 15:38. Dilean, perhaps Beit Dula (Tobler, p. 150). Mizpeh. We have already found a land of Mizpeh on Hermon, Jos 11:3-8, where the name was explained and its frequent occurrence noticed. The most celebrated place of the name is yet to be mentioned, Jos 18:26. The one before us is possibly the present Tel es-Safieh (Robinson, ii. 363) on a low hill, but lying sufficiently above the surrounding country to be seen at the distance of some hours in every direction; called in the Middle Ages Alba specula or Alba custodia [Blanchegarde], a castle, in the vicinity of which some romantic adventures of Richard Cur de Lion are reported to have taken place. These are enumerated by Robinson (ubi sup. p. 366).

Joktheel, perhaps Keitulaneh (Robinson, iii. App. 126), where are ruins.

Jos 15:39. Lachish, according to Jos 10:3 ff.; Jos 12:11, a Canaanitish capital, later, like many of these cities, fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:9). Here Amaziah died (2Ki 14:19). Sennacherib besieged Lachish, and moved from hence to Libnah (Isa 36:2; Isa 37:8). Nebuchadnezzar also contended against the royal city of chariots (Mic 1:13), which had become a beginning of sin to the daughter of Zion, doubtless through temptation to idolatry (Jer 34:7). The position is questionable. Robinson (ii. p. 388) decided against Um Lakis, which suits as far as the name is concerned, partly because the trifling remains give no indication of a once fortified and strong city, and partly because the position does not agree with what is known of the ancient city. He is followed by Knobel, who thinks he has recognized Lachish in Zukkarijeh, two and a half hours southwest of Beit Jibrin. On the other hand von Raumer, Keil, and Van de Velde on his map, unite upon Um Lakis as the ancient city, mainly on the ground that Eglon, mentioned here in the same verse, and confidently recognized by Robinson (ii. 392) in Ajalan, was again, according to his own statement (ubi sup. 389) only three quarters of an hour distant from Um Lakis. We likewise adopt this latter view. Eglon has been already named Jos 10:1 ff. Jos 10:36.Bozkath, perhaps Tubukah (Robinson, ii. pp. 388, 648), spelled Tubaka by Van de Velde and Knobel.

Jos 15:40. Cabbon = Kubeibeh, two and a-half hours east of Ajlon (Eglon), upon a stony barren height. So Knobel supposes, and the name certainly sounds like; but Robinson observes very moderately that there seemed to be nothing to mark it particularly as an ancient site (p. 394).

Lachmas, LXX.: ; Vulg.: Leheman; hence Luther: Lehmam. The LXX. support the reading , the Vulg. goes back to the other reading, . The correctness of the latter is favored by the circumstance that Tobler (Dritte Wanderung, p. 129) has actually found south of Beit Jibrin, a place of ruins, el-Lahem.

Kithlish, undetermined. To compare Tell Kilkis or Chilchis, not far from Kubeibeh, as Knobel does, would be somewhat rash, since in this case (1) a transposition of the , (2) a change of into must be assumed, which is not so easy to suppose as the more frequent interchange of and .

Jos 15:41. Gederoth, comp. Jos 15:36.Bethdagon and Naamah and Makkedah,a tripolis. Beth-dagon to be distinguished from the border-town of Asher mentioned Jos 19:27, now Beth-Dejan between Joppa (Jaffa) and Lydda (Lod, Ludd), on a knoll to the left of the road (Furrer, p. 10), but according to Tobler (Nazareth nebst Anhang der vierten Wanderung, p. 306), on the right. The name indicates the Philistine worship of Dagon. Naamah cannot be made out. Makkedah, already spoken of more than once (Jos 10:10; Jos 10:16 ff.) in the account of the battle of Gibeon, also Jos 12:16, was a royal city of the Canaanites, according to the Onom., three hours east of Eleutheropolis (assuming that this statement of the Onom. does not rest, as Keil, on Jos 10:10, supposes, on an error, and mean west instead of east). This would be, and so Knobel takes it, about the region of Terkumieh, or, if east be understood as = southeast, of Morak. Both places lie at the foot of the mountain of Judah.Sixteen cities and their villages. In this instance there are actually sixteen.

Jos 15:42-44. Third Group, further south, embracing nine places. Libnah, conquered by Joshua (Jos 10:29-30), a Canaanite capital (Jos 12:15), later a city of the Levites (Jos 21:13; 1Ch 6:57), according to the Onom., Libna in regione Eleutheropolitana. Robinson (ii. p. 389) could find no trace of it. Knobel conjectures that it may be the ruins Hora-Hawara (Robinson, iii. App. 115), discovered by Seetzen (3:31), because the Arab, hawara, like , signifies white, and therefore this is the Arab. translation of the Hebrew name (comp. similar examples, Jos 15:28-36). But we cannot accept this acute hypothesis. For, although in the Negeb, where Tel Hora stands on Van de Veldes Map, on the road leading north from Beer-sheba, the Arabic designation of the cities may have been introduced early (p. 425), so that the names were formally translated, still we have not yet, at least among the cities of Judah, found a single example of this kind. Nay, what specially concerns the case before us, the Arabic geographers in the Middle Ages, as Knobel himself informs us, are still acquainted with a Libna [spelled Lobna] in Palestine, e.g. Maraszid, iii. p. 5, Jakut, Moscht, p. 379.

Ether and Ashan; afterwards belonging to Simeon, Jos 19:7; 1Ch 4:32. Prabobly to be sought in the south, toward the Negeb.

Jos 15:43. Jiphta and Ashnah and Nezib, undeterminable.

Jos 15:44. Kegila, according to the Onom., eight miles from Eleutheropolis toward Hebron; rescued by David from the hand of the Philistines (1Sa 23:5), but ungratefully treacherous toward him (1Sa 23:12). On Kieperts Map, Jedna [Rob., iii. App. 117] or Idhna, about southwest of Terkumieh, in accordance with the statement of the Onom. Knobel maintains, on the contrary, that , Ceila, or, of the Onom. now Kila (Tobler, p. 151), belongs here, and finds Kegila rather in the ruins called Khugaleh ([Jughaleh?] Robinson, iii. App. 115), in the south of the Jebel el-Chalil (Robinson writes el-Khulil). The similarity of the name speaks for this position in the plain, which suits also with , 1Sa 23:4.

Achzib, or , is also mentioned Mic 1:14; Gen 38:5, in the plain. Perhaps Kesaba, Kussabeh (Robinson, ii. 391), a place with springs, and with ruins in the vicinity.

Maresha, likewise fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:8). The scene of Asas victory (2Ch 14:9-13), home of an otherwise unknown prophet Eliezer (2Ch 20:37), afterward Marissa ( , Joseph. Ant.Jos 14:5; Jos 14:3; Joshua 13, 9), mentioned in the contests of the Maccabees (1Ma 5:65-68), restored by Gabinius, destroyed by the Parthians. Robinson supposes (Jos 2:4) that Eleutheropolis (Betogabris, Beit Jibrin), arose after this destruction of Maresha, and was built out of its materials. Its foundation walls he thinks he found one and a half hours south of Beit Jibrin. With this Tobler agrees (pp. 129, 142 f.), who mentions a place of ruins, Marasch, twenty-four minutes from Beit Jibrin, marked also on Van de Veldes Map as the ancient Maresha. Knobel seeks it four hours south of Beit Jibrin, where lies a place Mirsim (Robinson, iii. App. p. 117). Improbable. Maresha is, at all events, distinct from Moresheth-gath, the home of the prophet Micah (comp. von Raumer, p. 215, Rob. ii. 4).Nine cities and their villages. The number is correct again, as at Jos 15:41.

Jos 15:45-47. Fourth Group. This includes the Philistine cities, Ekron, which Jos 19:40 is ascribed to Dan, Ashdod and Gaza, and their daughters, and their villages. But according to Jos 15:11 the border of Judah runs north of Ekron, toward the sea, and so includes the Philistine cities. Of daughters i.e. subject cities, no mention has been made in the preceding lists, while here the statement of number at the close of the several groups is wanting. The section is, accordingly, a manifest addition from some other source, as Ewald (Gesch. ii. p. 258), Bertheau (Komm. Zum Buche d. Richt. p. 28), Knobel (p. 419), with perfect right maintain. Zealously to deny this, as Keil does (Com. on Josh. in loc.) we regard as perfectly unnecessary, especially as Keil himself (Jos 15:32) cannot help assuming a supplementary hand. If a supplement is anywhere possible, then certainly also a later addition, since both come substantially to the same result. Besides, it is also very striking, as Keil himself says (l. c.), that Gath and Ashkelon are here wanting, whereas in Jos 13:3, they are mentioned, and that too, as cities which had their own princes, and so cannot be reckoned among the daughters of the rest. Verses 4547, therefore, make the impression not only of an addition, but still more definitely that of a fragmentary addition. For the rest we refer to the explanation already given Jos 13:3 of the position of the several places, which, after wars renewed through centuries, were first conquered by the Israelites in the age of the Maccabees. Comp. Knobels excursus [?] on this passage.

. Jos 15:48-60. Cities on the Mountain, Jos 15:48-51. First Group, wholly in the south, embracing eleven cities.On the mountain. See Jos 10:40.Shamir, perhaps Um Schaumereh (Robinson, iii. App. p. 115).Jattir, a priests city (Jos 21:14; 1Ch 6:57), probably Attir (Rob. ii. 194, 625).Socho, different from Socho in the lowland (Jos 15:35), but like that now called Suweikeh (Robinson, ii. 195), about ten miles S. S. W. from Hebron (von Raumer, p. 222).

Dannah, passed over by von Raumer. Perhaps, in Knobels judgment, we are to read = = Zannte, the last inhabited place on the southwest part of the mountain, five hours south of Hebron (Robinson [Zanuta], ii. 626, iii. App. 116).Kirjath-Sannah, that is Debir. Concerning this, see on Jos 10:38, and also Jos 15:15 here.

Jos 15:50. Anab, a home of Anakim (Jos 11:21), still existing under the old name east of Thabarieh, (Seetzen, iii. 6, Robinson, ii. 195) (Knobel). It has, according to Robinson, a small tower.

Eshtemoh, situated very high, according to Schubert, 2225 feet above the sea. A city of the priests, Jos 21:14; now Semua, a considerable village, which Robinson saw (ii. 196) from Thabarieh. Around it (ii. 626) are broad valleys, not susceptible of much tillage, but full of flocks and herds all in fine order. The travellers halted among the olive trees in the moist southern valley. At several places in the village they saw remains of walls built of large stones, beveled around the edges, but left rough between, some of which were more than ten feet long. Eshtemoh, or Eshtemoa (), appears from the extent of these walls to have been, as Robinson judges, a spacious town. It once received from David a part (1Sa 30:28) of the booty from the Amalekites.

Anim, probably the present Ghuwein (von Raumer, p. 171, Knobel), south of Semua. So Wilson (i. 354 ap. von Raum. against Robinson, who regards Ghuwein as Ain, ver 32).

Jos 15:51. Goshen, not determined.Holon, a priests city (Jos 21:15; 1Ch 6:58 [Hilen]), not yet discovered.Giloh, birthplace of Ahithophel (2Sa 15:12), where the traitor against David hanged himself (2Sa 17:23).Eleven cities. The number is correct.

Jos 15:52-54. Second Group, north of the first, west of the third group. See Menkes Map.

Jos 15:52. Arab, omitted by von Raumer; perhaps, as Knobel thinks, Husn el Ghurab near Semua (Robinson, i. 312). This is very questionable, since Robinson only heard from the Arabs of a ruin el-Ghurab, but did not see it.

Dumah,, LXX.: , stated in the Onom. to have been seventeen miles from Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrin), now Daumeh, a ruined village, not far from Hebron in the Wady Dilbeh (Robinson, i. 314). In Isa 21:11 Dumah is the proper name of an Ishmaelite tribe in Arabia, with which comp. Gen 25:14.

Eshean (), elsewhere not mentioned. Since the Cod. Vat. of the LXX. has , we might read with Knobel, after 1Ch 2:43 f., and compare the place of ruins Simir (Robinson, iii. App. p. 114), south of Daumeh. Von Raumer has passed over this place also, as being unrecognizable. Keil likewise.

Jos 15:53. Janum. On the reading comp. the foot-note on the text. Not discovered.

Beth-tappua not to be confounded (a) with Tappuah in the lowland (Jos 15:34), (b) with the En Tappuah mentioned Jos 17:7, which was assigned to Manasseh. The name of both towns refers to fruit culture, since (from , to emit odors) signifies apple (Son 7:9; Pro 25:11), or apple-tree12 (Son 2:3; Son 8:5). Robinson found apples and pears in the neighborhood of Gophna, now Jifna [Jufna], (Robinson, iii. 7780), four and one half hours north of Jerusalem. Comp. also von Raumer, p. 100. Beth-tappuah would thus be = apple-house. The name has been preserved in Taffuh, a place about two hours west of Hebron. It still lies (Robinson, ii. 428) in the midst of olive-groves and vineyards with marks of industry on every side. This circumstance favors our interpretation of the name, since where olive trees and vines flourish apple trees can and could be produced. Knobel, on the contrary, explains , from and , by extent, breadth, surface, and adduces, in support of this interpretation of the name, the fact that both our Beth-tappuah and En-tappuah (Jos 17:7) lay in a plain. To sustain our view, which von Raumer also gives (p. 181), we may adduce the analogy of Bethphage , Chald. for the Heb. (Son 2:13), = Fig-house.

Apheka not the same as Aphek (Jos 12:18; Jos 13:4), which lay in the plain not far from Jezreel (1Sa 29:1; 1Ki 20:26; 1Ki 20:30), where Saul was slain by the Philistines, Benhadad the Syrian by the Israelites; but on Mount Judah, near Hebron, probably between Hebron and Tuffah (Keil). Against the opinion of von Raumer (p. 172) that the battle of 1Sa 4:1 may have taken place here, comp. Thenius on that passage. Aphek on the mountain of Judah has not yet been discovered. The frequent occurrence of the name or (Jdg 1:31), or here, is explained, as in the case of , ,, from the meaning of the word which signifies strength, and then Fort, Burg (see Gesen.). It is derived from , to be strong.

Jos 15:54. Humtah, not yet found. The name () appears to be related to , Lev 11:30, LXX. , Vulg. lacerta, probably a species of lizard (Gesen.). Lizards are mentioned by Seetzen (pp. 446448) ap. von Raumer (p. 105). There are such still in Palestine [Tristram, pp. 495, 536], and a place might be named after this creature just as well as after the fox or jackal (Hazor-shual, Jos 15:28).

Kirjath Arba, that is, Hebron. See Jos 15:13. Comp. besides, the more particular account of this city on Jos 10:36.

Zior. The name is perhaps retained, as Knobel suggests, in that of the ridge Tughra near Hebron (see Rosenm. Zeitschr. der D. M. G. xi. p. 56). There are nine of the cities as stated.

Jos 15:55-57. Third Group. East and northeast of the first, (Knobel: northward; but see Menkes Map) and southeast (Knobel: east) of the second.

Maon, now Main, without doubt the Maon of Nabal (Robinson, 2. 194; 1Sa 25:2). It stood on the summit of a conical rock (Robinson, p. 193), which is crowned with ruins of no great extent. David kept himself in the wilderness of Maon (1Sa 23:24 ff; 1Sa 25:2).

Carmel, a name familiar in the history of Saul (1Sa 15:12), of David (1Sa 25:2; 1Sa 25:5; 1Sa 25:7; 1Sa 25:40; 1Sa 27:3), of Uzziah (2Ch 26:10); in Roman times a castle (Robinson, p. 198) with a garrison. It appears in the history of King Amalrich in the Middle Ages, a. d. 1172 (Robinson, p. 199). Now called Kurmul, with vast ruins from antiquity and the Middle Ages.

Ziph. When its inhabitants proved treacherous toward David (1Sa 23:19; 1Sa 26:1; Psa 54:2), he removed (1Sa 23:14-15; 1Sa 23:19 ff.) from the wilderness of this name to the wilderness of Maon. Rehoboam fortified the city, whose ruins, according to Robinson (ii. 191), lie on a low hill or ridge between two small Wadies which commence here and run toward the Dead Sea. Now called Zif, about one and three fourth hours southeast of Hebron (von Raumer, p. 222). Not to be confounded with Ziph, Jos 15:24.

Juttah (), according to Jos 21:16, a priest-city, now Jutta (Robinson, I. c.), having the appearance of a large, modern Mohammedan town (p. 628). It was, probably, according to the conjecture first proposed by Reland (Palst. p. 870), adopted by Bachiene, Rosenmller (and also by Robinson), the abode of the priest Zachariah, the (Luk 1:39). Reland supposes (Robinson, ii. 628, note) that . has been changed by error of the text, or softer pronunciation (comp. von Raumer, p. 208, Anm. p. 222).

Jos 15:56. Jezreel (, whom or what, God plants), different from the Jezreel in the plain of Esdraelon (Jos 17:16), and mentioned elsewhere only as the home of Ahinoam, the second wife of David (not reckoning Michal whom Saul, 1Sa 25:44, gave to Shalti). Not to be identified. Jokdeam and Zanoah, likewise undiscovered, and not elsewhere named.

Jos 15:57. Cain ( with the art. prop. the lance), perhaps Jukin (Robinson, 2. 190), as Knobel proposes (p. 437), a Mohammedan Makni (station, grave), where they say Lot stopped after his flight from Sodom (Robinson, l. c.).

Gibeah ( = hill), a very common name of place (Jos 18:28, Gibeah in the tribe of Benjamin, Gibeah of Saul, 1Sa 11:4; 1Sa 13:2; 1Sa 15:2, and often, besides Gibeah in the tribe of Ephraim, Jos 24:33). It shares with the topographical names (Jos 18:24; Jos 21:17), and (Jos 10:2; Jos 11:19), and also that of the judgment hall, , Joh 19:13, the derivation from the same root (to be high, to be arched) and signification. Robinson (Jos 2:14) believes that in the village of Jeba (Jebah) in the Wady el-Musurr, southwest of Bethlehem, he had with little doubt discovered again Gibeah of Benjamin. This Gibeah is also, in his view, probably the Gabatha of Eusebius and Jerome, twelve Roman miles from Eleutheropolis. Von Raumer agrees with him, while Keil and Knobel differ, on the grounds that this place lies without the district of this division of cities, and that the similarity of name proves nothing, since this, as just now shown, very often recurs elsewhere. Indeed, Robinson himself (3. 151), as Keil points out, found another village, Jebak, north of Shechem! For these reasons we also side with the two latter interpreters. Perhaps our Gibeah is (although we cannot assert this, with the certainty which Knobel expresses), one of the viculi called Gabaa and Gabatha, contra orientalem plagam Darom, in the Onom.s. v. Gabathon.

Timnah, to be carefully distinguished from Timnah between Beth-shemesh and Ekron (Jos 15:10; Jos 19:43; Judges 14; Jdg 15:1-6), but certainly identical (so von Raumer, p. 224, and Knobel, p. 437, against Keil, in loc.) with Timnah (Gen 38:12-14), to which Judah went up to his sheep-shearers. Not yet discovered. On Mount Ephraim lay ( ), Jos 19:50; Jos 24:30. The name (from ) signifies portion assigned, Gesen. There are ten cities as stated.

Jos 15:58-59. Fourth Group. This lies north of the second and third. Halhul, still called Halhul or Hulhul, in a well cultivated region, and chief city of a district. Beautiful fields and vineyards are seen there (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res., p. 281), and also many cows and goats. Noticeable is Robinsons remark: The identity of no ancient site is more undisputed, though it seems not to have been recognized before our former journey (l. c. comp. Bibl. Res. 1. 319). The place lies north of Hebron on the way to Jerusalem (comp. also Valentiner, Das heilige Land, p. 38).

Beth-zur, now Beit-Sur (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 276 f.), whose principal relic is a ruined tower, of which only one side is left. The place appears to have been small but very strong, according to Josephus (Ant. xiii. 5, 6), the strongest fortress in all Juda. It is frequently mentioned in the First Book of Maccabees (1Ma 4:29; 1Ma 4:61; 1Ma 6:7; 1Ma 6:26; 1Ma 6:31 f., 1Ma 6:49 f.; 1Ma 9:52, etc.), seldom in the O. T. (2Ch 11:7; Neh 3:16). Here, according to an old tradition found in the Onom., Philip (Act 8:26-40) baptized the Eunuch (von Raumer, p. 182.)

Gedor, referred to, 1Ch 12:7, as the home of Joelah and Zebadiah, two followers of David; now Jedur, on the brow of a high mountain ridge (Robinson, ii. 338), about northwest of the road between Hebron and Jerusalem; a small ruin marked by one tree (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 276 f.).

Verse 59. Maarath, unknown. Beth-anoth (, house of answers, of Echo, Gesen.), distinct from in the tribe of Naphtali, Jos 19:38; Jdg 1:33, now Beit Ainun, with ruins which Wolcott visited in 1842. Robinson (Later Bibl. Res. p. 280 f.) saw it from Er Rameh. Elthekon not discovered.

Fifth Group. According to the addition of the LXX. which Jerome also has, on Mic 5:2. Certainly, says Knobel rightly, this is no invention of the LXX. but a translation of the original text, which therefore lay more complete before them. Otherwise a large piece of the mountain of Judah with numerous places would be passed over, which, considering the completeness of the author elsewhere, has not the slightest probability. The gap in the Masoretic text originated with a transcriber who having read the , Jos 15:59, supposed he had read the at the end of this division. To this view Keil also assents, while he refers to the naive opinion of Jerome, that the words had probably been rejected by the Jews from malice (malitia), ne Christus de tribu Juda ortus videretur, against which Clericus, quite rightly objected, Non video cur a Judis propterea erasa essent, cum sit alias in V. T. sat frequens mentio Bethlehemi Davidis patri. Menke also follows this view on his map, while Maurer on the other hand, and Bunsen, declare against the addition. The formersince the LXX. in this book have allowed themselves many additions as well as omissions and arbitrary changesthinks most probably eos totum hoc comma ex loco quocunque alio, proprio Marte huc transtulisse. The possibility of such a proceeding need not be denied; but here, as Keil and Knobel rightly urge, our Masoretic text presents a manifest hiatus which is excellently filled up by the addition of the LXX. Bunsen says: The forms of many of these names are decidedly not Hebrew; besides, except Tecoah and Bethlehem, not one of the cities is elsewhere mentioned in the O. T. We have, therefore, here an old Aramaic gloss, which some MSS. afterwards received into the text. Reply: The first reason proposed by Bunsen is an assertion without proof; and the second has no weight, because very many of the cities mentioned in this chapter are named nowhere else in the O. T., e.g. Jos 15:56, Jokdeam and Zanoah; Jos 15:54, Humtah; Jos 15:53, Jamun; Jos 15:43, Nezib, etc. We, therefore, regard the addition of the LXX. as a highly valuable complement to the Masoretic text, serving to fill up the catalogue of the cities. In an English translation it would read: Tekoa and Ephrata (that is Bethlehem), and Phagor and Aitam (Aitan), and Kulon and Tatami (Tatam), and Soresh (Thobesh), and Karem and Gallim, and Baither (Theter), and Manocho; eleven cities and their villages.

Tekoah (), two hours south of Bethlehem, the home of the prophet Amos (Jos 1:1), who is said to have been buried here; fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch 11:6), and elsewhere mentioned in the O. T., e.g.2Sa 14:2; Jer 6:1; Neh 3:5; Neh 3:27; now Tekuah (Robinson, 2. 182184 [Tristram, p. 406]), on a hill covered with ruins; which agrees with Jer 6:1. Concerning the neighboring Frankenberg (Frank Mountain), which the Franks are reported to have held for forty years after the loss of Jerusalem, comp. von Raumers Excursus, p. 223.

Ephratah (i.e. Bethlehem). Both names are applied, Rth 4:11; Mic 5:1, unquestionably to the city now before us, Bethlehem-Judah (Jdg 17:7; Jdg 17:9; Jdg 19:1-2; 1Sa 17:12; Rth 1:1-2). It was different from the Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulun (Jos 19:15); but whether this Bethlehem-Ephratah can be meant Gen 35:16; Gen 35:19. is doubtful, comp. Langes Com. on Gen. p. 569. The name = house of bread, bread-house (Winer, 1. 172) is clear; also, or , is without difficulty derived from , with which the related may be compared. In this view would be = the fruitful, a name, as Lange remarks (ubi sup.), which corresponds with the added name Bethlehem. Besides the place is, as may be seen from Ruth, Joshua 2. and from the descriptions of modern travellers, really fruitful. Thus Furrer relates: The nearer we approached Bethlehem, the better cultivated we found the fields. . But surprisingly lovely was to us the sight of the Wady Charubeh, the valley above which, high in the south, lies the little town of Bethlehem, two thousand seven hundred and four feet above the sea. There olive and fig trees were growing in rich abundance. Vineyards spread themselves out on the northwestern slope, whose watch-towers gently reminded us of long past times. Bethlehem is now called Beit-Lahm, that is, house of flesh, and is inhabited, since 1834, almost exclusively by Christians, of whom Tobler thinks, there may be three thousand. The remaining three hundred inhabitants are Mohammedans. There are no Jews there. The historical importance of Bethlehem as Davids city (Rth 4:11; 1Sa 16:4; 1Sa 17:12; 1Sa 17:15; 1Sa 20:6; 1Sa 20:28; Mic 5:1), and as the birthplace of Christ (Mat 2:1 ff.; Luk 2:4; Luk 2:15) is well known. Further particulars concerning the place see in Seetzen, 2:37 ff.; Robinson, 2. 157163; Tobler, Topographie von Jerusalem, ii. 464; and Bethlehem in Palstina, p. 2 ff.; Furrer, Wanderung en durch Palstina, p. 167 ff.; Valentiner, Das heil. Land, p. 28 ff.; von Raumer, p. 313 ff.; Ritter, Erdkunde, xvi. p. 284 ff. [Gages transl. 3:33950].

Phagor, now Faghur between Hebron and Bethlehem, west of the road (Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 275, Tobler, Dritte Wanderung, p. 91 ff.).

Aitam () mentioned 2Ch 11:6, among the cities fortified by Rehoboam, immediately after Bethlehem. The name is still preserved in the Wady and Ain Attar between Bethlehem and Faghur, in Tobler, ubi sup. p. 88 ff. (Knobel). Once, in Solomons time, a pleasant place with gardens, and perhaps also with a pleasure palace of the king (Furrer, p. 177, Anm. 1).

Kulon, now Kulonieh or Kalonieh, lying high above the pilgrim road to Jerusalem (Furrer, p. 141). The moderately extensive ruins of ancient Kulon which Hitzig, Sepp, Van Osterzee (Langes Comm. on Luke, Jos 24:13), Furrer, and apparently also Tobler (Nazareth in Palst. u. s. w. pp. 316, 319), understand to be the Emmaus of the N. T. lie near the bottom of the valley whose loveliness is very beautifully described by Furrer. A copious spring, he says, concealed under an overarching rock, by a double outlet irrigated gardens, in which numerous almond trees with pink blossoms gleamed through the dark green foliage of the orange-trees. Up the surrounding slopes, vineyards and rows of olive trees rose by a succession of terraces. The prospect extends not far in any direction; but its seclusion heightens the charm of the happy, pleasant vale (p. 142). The distance from Jerusalem is about one and a half hours.

Tatami, or Tatam, is not identified, nor Gallim; for the Gallim named, Isa 10:30; 1Sa 25:44, lay north of Jerusalem in Benjamin (Knobel).

Sores, now Saris, on a proud hill (Furrer, p. 139), up which terraces of olive-trees ascend, four hours west of Jerusalem (comp. also Robinson, Later Bibl. Res. p. 154 ff.).

Karem, now Ain Karem, three quarters of an hour west of Jerusalem (Furrer, p. 210), with a splendid cloister, whose garden walls are overhung by tall cypress-trees, in the midst of a landscape which surprises the traveller by its loveliness and beauty (Robinson, 2. 141157, Later Bibl. Res. p. 271 f., Tobler, Topog. 2. 344 ff).

Beither, now Better, southwest of Jerusalem (Furrer, p. 191), situated high up on a mountain side above fine green terraces, surrounded with olive and fig trees; mentioned, Son 2:17, where the are best explained as mountains of Bether. signifies part, piece, Gen 15:10; Jer 34:18-19. Cognate is , prob. mountain defile, 2Sa 2:29. , is what we technically call terrain coup (a country cut up, broken country). Of this character is the country about Bether (Furrer, p. 192).

Manocho, according to Knobels highly probable conjecture = , 1Ch 8:6, to which place Benjamites were carried from Geba.

Jos 15:60. Sixth Group, northwest of the fifth, embracing only two cities. Kirjath-jearim, Jos 15:9. As was there remarked, this place was = to Kureyet el-Enab, three hours northwest of Jerusalem. The old city of the woods has become in modern times the city of wine, as Robinson (ii. 335) interprets the ancient and the present name. People from Kirjath-jearim once brought up the ark from Beth-shemesh (1Sa 6:21; 1Sa 7:1-2). Of the vineyards some still exist, according to Valentiner, p. 19, on the east side of the place. Rabba, not to be identified.

. Jos 15:61-62. Cities in the Wilderness. The wilderness of Judah bordered in the east on the Dead Sea, in the south on the Negeb, on the territory of the third, fourth, and fifth groups of cities (westward) on Mount Judah (see Menkes map, iii.), in the north on the border line of the tribe of Judah as given Jos 15:6-7. This whole region is with good reason designated as a wilderness (), since, with the exception of En-gedi and certain spots where springs occur, it is a wild, barren, frightful (Furrer, p. 149) solitude. Thus the neighborhood of the Cloister of Mar Saba, e.g. wears the appearance of terrible desolation and loneliness. In vain the eye searches far and near for some green thing to cover the weather-worn chalk rock of the gullied mountain. In summer the intolerable heat blazes upon the naked rocks, and the winter rains rush down from the heights to no profit (Furrer, p. 161). The roads through this wilderness, on which the starry heavens look down at night with wondrous beauty (Furrer, u. s.), lead frequently to steep precipices; sometimes so abruptly down the rocks that it needs all the sagacity and practice of the animals not to fall (Furrer, p. 149). In this solitude David once spent his time (1Sa 23:24; Psa 63:1; Psa 54:2), here John the Baptist preached (Mat 3:1) here Christ was tempted (Mat 4:1; Mar 2:12-13; Luk 4:1). Comp. further, Knobel, p. 440; Robinson, ii. 187, 202 ff., 474 ff.; von Schubert, iii. pp. 94, 96, 102 ff.; Seetzen, ii. p. 220 ff.; von Raumer, p. 47.

Jos 15:61-62. Beth-arabah, Jos 15:6. Probably Kaffr Hajla (Knobel). Middin, Secacah, Nibshan, not mentioned elsewhere, unknown.

The city, of Salt (Ir-hamelah, ), LXX.: . Vulg.: civitas salis. Luther: Salzstadt [Salt city]. Probably near the valley of Salt where the Edomites suffered several defeats (Knobel), and so, tolerably far south, comp. 2Sa 8:13; Psa 60:2; 2Ki 14:7; 1Ch 18:12; 2Ch 25:11; and so Robinson, ii. 483.

En-gedi (, Goat-fountain), now Ain Jidy, on the west side of the Dead Sea, with a rich, warm (81 F., Robinson, ii. 210), sweet spring of water (Furrer, p. 159), which once refreshed palms and balsam-shrubs. The Canticles sing (Jos 1:14) of a cluster of the Hennah13 from the vineyards of En-gedi. Here flourishes the giant Asclepias, which bears the fruit so famous under the name of Apples of Sodom (Furrer, p. 159). The vegetation is tropical. By the fountain are the remains of various edifices apparently ancient, although the spot where the old city stood appears to have been further down (Robinson, ii. 216). Here David tarried, 1Sa 24:2. Whether Hazezon-Tamar (Gen 14:7; comp. 2Ch 20:2) was the same place as En-gedi, is doubtful; von Raumer (p. 188) and Keil are in favor of the supposition, Knobel (on this verse) is against it.

Jos 15:63. A passing statement that the children of Judah were not able to drive out the Jebusites. The same verse is repeated, Jdg 1:21, with the difference only that, instead of the children of Judah, the children of Benjamin are named, to whom, according to Jos 18:28, the place was allotted. See more on Jos 18:28. On the importance of this verse for determining the date of the composition of our book, see the Introd. 2.

Footnotes:

[1]The Kethib , although we cannot allowably express it as a sing in the translation, is to be retained in the text rather than the needless Keri . Comp. Jos 11:2. Ewalds Lehrg. 306, a.

[2][Jos 15:1.This verse would read more exactly as follows: And there was the lot for the tribe of the sons of Judah according to their families: toward the border of Edom, the wilderness of Zin southward, in the extreme south.Tr.]

[3][Ver.9.Gesenius inclines to the meaning stretched extended, for in the Kal and Piel; and so De Wette, Fay, and others translate; but as Frst and Winer (Simonis) approve in these conjugations the definition mark off, defisire, which all admit to be the sense of the Piel, there seems to be no necessity for changing the English version.Tr.]

[4][Jos 15:19.. Since the suf. cannot well be taken as a dat. but only as an acc., many have understood adverbially, into a land, etc. So Fay, following Knobel: Nach dem Mittagslande hast du mich gegeben. So also the LXX.: ; but the Vulgate more simply regards this as a case where the verb of giving governs two accusatives; terram australem et torrentem dedisti mihi. Gesen. Lex. s. v. p. 703, 1. Witt this agree De Wette, Maurer, Keil, Zunz.Tr.]

[5][Ver 21.And the cities were, in [or from] the extremity of the tribe of the sons of Judah, toward the border of Edom, in the south-country: Kabzeel, etc.Tr.]

[6]Numerous Codd. and Editions read (Lahmas) instead of .

[7]So according to the Keri , while the Kethib would have it written . On the reading of the Kethib, comp. Jos 15:12.

[8]So the Keri the Kethib reads , hence Bunsen: Janim. We stand by the reading of the Masoretes with the LXX. (), Vulg. (Janum), Luther, and De Wette.

[9]Between verses 59 and 60 the LXX. have (A B E X) the addition: ( ) , ( in Cod. Vat.) ( in cod. Vat.) ( in Cod. Vat.) ( in Cod. Vat.) . .) See further on this in the Exegetical notes.

[10][A full account of this spring (called there Well of the Messengers) is given in Gages Ritter, iv. 145148.Tr.]

[11][Punctuation in English can but imperfectly serve the purpose here of the nominative ending as distinct from that of the genitive, in German, to indicate that brother is in apposition with Othniel, thus making the latter Calebs brother.Tr.]

[12][Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 609 f.) strenuously maintains that the Apricot is the apple of Scripture.Tr.]

[13][Dict. of the Bible, art. Camphire.Tr.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The division of the land is again prosecuted in this Chapter. Judah’s lot is marked out, Caleb’s part in Judah’s portion is also again mentioned. The marriage of his daughter and her portion; and the cities named which were assigned to Judah.

Jos 15:1

I cannot pursue the subject of the dividing Canaan, without calling upon the Reader to remark with me, how exactly the division took place according to the prophecy of Jacob and the appointment as before settled by Moses. Gen 49:1 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Distribution

Joshua 15-19

LOOKING at these chapters is like looking at infinite rocks. Most stony are these verses. The eye is affrighted by these Hebrew and other polysyllables. The land is being allotted and distributed. Why then dwell upon a picture whose chief feature seems to be its inhospitableness? Because the picture is full of suggestion, and full of abiding and useful truth. One tribe is ordered to the right hand, another to the left; one north, another south; one into the valley, another to the mountains; one to places where fountains spring, another is commanded to go to the wood country and cut down trees and clear a space for itself make a civilisation. This is but an analogy of higher distributions. Is there not a great law of distribution in all human life? We have but to open our eyes and look upon it. We cannot alter it. We may here and there modify it a little, or pass laws concerning it, or make it a subject of scientific inquiry: but there is the law, and there is no lasting escape from its operation. Nor need there be in order to prove the goodness of God and the riches of his mercy. The whole globe is allotted. Every continent has its own people, every island its own socialism. Wherever man can be placed he is set down there by a law which he cannot control a marvellous, but gracious predestination. We feel it to be so. Who does not know a foreigner the moment he sees him? We say within ourselves, if not in articulate speech, This man is a long way from home. Who said so? By what right do we determine his relation to the globe? We cannot tell, but we do it. Instantaneously we see that the man has come from over seas thousands of miles away; his colour, his dress, his aspect something about him says, I do not belong to this part of the land, I am a foreigner here: have regard for me upon that ground; I speak your language imperfectly: do not impose upon me because of my ignorance, but guide me, protect me, and show me hospitality whilst I linger within your borders. Who made the difference? What is the meaning of the difference? Why are some men put in tropical climates, and others are set among the eternal ice? And why this spirit of contentment more or less evident in every land? Because, whilst we would regard the man as a foreigner, we must remember that, were we visiting his country, he would regard us, even us great and glorious and all but infallible Englishmen as foreign! It is sad to think of! It is sometimes intolerable. But even an Englishman may happen to know the mystery of the misfortune of being a foreigner in some parts of the world an idea almost impossible to drive into the English mind, for an Englishman, whilst hating all boasting on the part of other people, spends his time in boasting about himself. But there is the law the unwritten law the imperious and unchangeable law. The bounds of our habitation are fixed. We are tethered to certain localities; we have a fatherland, whether it be here or there; we have an appointed place, where our dead are buried, where our battles are fought, where our progress is developed: hence the spirit of patriotism that marvellous spirit that burns within us when the country is the question. We feel, therefore, in perusing silently these wondrous chapters in Joshua that distribution is perfectly familiar to us: we see it in every part of the globe; we see it in men, in animals, in plants. There is no monotony in the divine allotment; it burns with colour; and in so far as it accepts the law, it throbs with music, with lofty, grateful song.

So it is with talent and faculty. The kingdom of heaven is as a man who took his journey into a far country, and distributed to his servants various talents to one five, to another two, to another one, to every man according to his several ability. There is the fact. Why enter into pedantic discussions about the parable, and the allotment, and the outworking of the little drama? Here in our own circle and within our own consciousness we have the parable itself in every detail and syllable. We may covet one another’s allotment, but we cannot cross the hedge, or steal the talent that we envy. Who would not play upon the musician’s harp? Who would not wear a poet’s mantle? Who would not dream great dreams, the very beauty of which creates a language of its own, purifying all common terms and making refined gold of them, and jewels precious as rubies? Who would not be a great merchantman, knowing things, as it were, without study? Where other men toil towards conclusions, the greater mind moves to them with natural ease and dignity, seizes them and applies them to wealth-producing purposes. Who would not be the heroic soul that never goes out but when the wind blows from the north, and then in great gusts and thunder-blasts? the man who would not sail over a smooth sea, but wait till the wind seizes the infinite deep and torments it into agony? Who would not be so brave as to wait till the war is at the thickest, and then plunge into the very midst of it, and ask only for the privilege of fighting the strongest man? But we cannot interfere with the operation of the law. Some men cannot sing: there is no poetry in their being; they never dream; they never see heaven opened and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God; they never rise to that high ecstasy which treats miracles as trifles, as occurrences that transpired millions of miles beneath them. Others are without courage, except the courage of subtle impertinence, which suggests that everything must be attempered to their timidity, and nothing must be done that can affright their souls. Did they but know they were mean and small and worthless, they might be forgiven, but they do not, and therefore they keep society at prayer, for nothing but the profoundest prayer can enable us to tolerate their presence. Why is not every man as able as his brother? Why is one man eloquent, and another speechless? Why is one man gifted with the power of acquisitiveness in intellectual directions, and another unable to learn his first lesson? If we imagine that all these things can be rectified, in the sense of making all men equal, we shall toil at abortive reforms, and have nothing at the end but empty hands and disappointed hearts. The question is, What can be done? What is the divine will? Or, if we shrink from theological or biblical terms, still we need not surrender our reason: we might stand back and make a philosophy of that of which we decline to make a theology: the conclusion is the same; the fact abides.

The same law applies to distribution in heaven. All the beings, white-robed, unstained, beautiful with purity, do not stand upon an equal plane in the celestial country. There are angels and archangels; cherubim and seraphim; beings all fire, beings all vision, typical of wisdom all but immeasurable; quick-flying angels speeding with messages from the throne, and brooding spirits hovering over our life, appointed to watch little children: in heaven their angels do always behold the face of Christ’s Father. In heaven there is variety of mental stature, spiritual service, a great distribution of faculty and force and ministry. And this is essential, from our point of view, to a complete and beautiful heaven. We must give up the idea of monotony. If we still think of heaven as a place of harps and harping and songs, we are quite right, the meaning being that all true life blossoms up into song: we could not complete any pillar of logic or of fact without putting upon the top of it the lilywork of music and gladness and victory. We have painted heavens the colour of which wears off, monotonous heavens that become burdensome, small heavens picked out for ourselves and our friends. We must burn these heavens, and let them pass away with a small noise, for such heavens could never make a great one. The true heaven is one of glorified earth, glorified facts as we know them; heaven of variety and position, locality, service. We know now what it is. We do not need to die to be in heaven, or to know it and speak about it familiarly: the kingdom of heaven is within, in the deepest, truest, most living sense. There are father-spirits, and mother-angels, and little people children playing. The child that does not play ought to be looked after, and the case should be inquired into with awful solemnity. Children must play everywhere at church and in heaven. A glorious paradise that, by reason of its variety, personality, faculty, and colour, and engagement! In it there is room for you, for me, for greatest, smallest, richest, poorest: “in my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you.”

Remember that every man begins with gifts. This is the very law of these chapters of allotment. The people have something to begin with. No man made his first dowry; it was in him, or handed to him; he did nothing towards the first germ, the plasm of his fortune and his destiny. This is often forgotten in estimating human position and human progress. Every man has a faculty given to him a first thing a nest-egg a wonderful beginning! God gives us the light, the air, the land, the sea. We did not kindle the sun; we do not loose the winds from their tabernacles; and no man ever made one inch of land, or added one pebble to the earth’s surface. In this particular we are very limited and very small. Think! the man who built the greatest cathedral that ever domed itself out towards the skies never added an atom to the sum-total of the earth. He worked with stones that were laid up for him, banked for him in the treasure-house of the earth. So when the Lord goes into a far country he leaves with every man something which the man did not make five talents, two talents, one talent, whatever it may be; that germ or starting-point or protoplasm was given. So we begin with grace, privilege. We are trustees to start with. With all this ability and wonderful inventiveness we have never invented a new pebble, in the sense of adding to the earth’s stones something that was not in the earth and hidden there by its Maker. If we leave that central or primal thought, we get into detail that vexes us, then we begin to manipulate and rearrange and redistribute; but it all comes at last to this fact, that every man has something to start with, a wealth that cannot be communicated, a property his alone; and that must be inquired into at the final audit.

Some possessions come as rewards:

“And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife” ( Jos 15:16 ).

Compromises are sometimes inevitable. This is made clear by the sixty-third verse of the fifteenth chapter:

“As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.” ( Jos 15:63 )

Prayer

Almighty God, in whom can we put our trust but in the Living One? Death is written upon all other securities. Thou remainest evermore the same, and in thy righteousness is no change. We hasten therefore unto thee as men hasten to the rock in which they can be protected against the tempest and the storm. Thou art indeed a refuge from the tempest. Thou dost hide thy people in thy pavilion from the strife of tongues; thou dost call them into the chamber in the rock until the storm be overpast. Enable us to take refuge in the Son of God, to find our home and our heaven in his protection; and thus shall our life be spent wisely, and our strength shall go out from us to return again abundantly enriched and honoured. We would live in thy fear, we would work in thy love, we would be comforted with thy consolations and none other. Heal our diseases; direct our steps; keep us in the time of strife, and give us solidity of confidence in the day of distress. We bless thee for all thy care, so patient, so tender, so minute, covering all things, and attending to each as if it were a solitary concern. This is thy greatness, thou Infinite One, that nothing is too little for thy notice. We put ourselves into thy hands. We would have no will of our own; we would listen for thy voice morning, noon, and night, and answer it with the readiness of love We own our sins. We will not count them, for no number can set them forth; nor will we speak of them, for we cannot state them as they are in thy sight; but we will look towards the Cross of Christ; we will fix our attention upon the Son of God as he expires in agony. When sin torments us most, we will remember what Jesus, Son of man, Son of God, did in Gethsemane and on the Cross, and therein shall we find perpetual comfort. Enable thy servants to work better than they have ever done. Enable all to whom the ministry of suffering is entrusted to suffer patiently, unmurmuringly, and hopefully; yea, may they so suffer as to awaken the wonder of those who look on, because of gentleness, meekness, and patience. When we read thy Book, first read it to us, utter the music in our souls; then shall we see thy meaning, and answer it instantly and lovingly. Remain with us; yea, tarry with us, lingeringly, as if thou couldst not leave us: and in that lingering we shall see a pledge of eternal fellowship. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

The Distribution of the Land

Joshua 15-19

WE have taken our first survey of the distribution of the land, and noticed several particulars of some consequence to ourselves; other particulars are now to be noticed. The inquiry will be, How far the distribution and the particulars associated with it are true to human nature as we know it. In answering this inquiry we shall soon see whether the Bible is an old book, in the sense of being obsolete and pointless, so far as the conditions and requirements of this day are concerned. The case is a very simple one. The land is to be divided among a given number of people. How they took the distribution or accepted the circumstances is an important inquiry.

We soon come upon a line that might have been written yesterday. It was not enough to have a great general distribution, but there must be some particular and singular allotment, to one person at least. She had a petition to offer; she offered it, and the supplication was answered. She asked through another a request from her father. Her father had received his portion, even Hebron and the region round about, and his daughter Achsah would have a little gift all her own. She would say, “Give me a blessing.” That is vague. Not only would she have a benediction, but a portion quite a little one, but still a portion, belonging, as it were, to herself a jewel for her own neck, a ring for her own finger. Who does not like to have something particularly his own? It is well to have some general stake in the country, but to have a little private piece of land one little bubbling, singing, fountain; a corner quite one’s own is not that the very joy of proprietorship? No doubt there is a general sense of wealth, so general indeed as to be of little particular service under the occasional pressure of necessity: but when the child has six inches of garden-land all its own at the back-door, there is, after all, a landlordly feeling in the young heart that finds frequent expression. Caleb’s daughter would have” a field:” “she lighted off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou?” She answered, “Give me a blessing.” That she could have in a moment, but said she, Give me more, “give me also springs of water in addition to the south land.” “And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs” ( Jos 15:18-19 ). To whom did she pray? To her father. Have we not a Father to whom we can pray for springs of water? Yes, we have such a Father, and from him we can have the upper springs and the nether springs. The river of God is full of water. It cannot be drained off. It sets a-going all the fountains of creation, and is more at the end than at the beginning the very fulness of God; a contradiction in words, but a grand reality in experience. The sun lights every lamp, and not a beam the less is his infinite glory. We therefore may have a special portion, a little all our own; yea, a double portion of the Spirit may be ours. Do not let us be content with the general blessing of the Church. That, indeed, is an infinite comfort. But that general blessing is a pledge of particular donations on the part of the Father of lights. Here we can pray without covetousness; here we can be ambitious without selfishness; here we can have great desires, and be enlarged in our generosity by their very operation in the heart. Let each say to the Father, Give me a field; give me a faculty; give me some dear, sweet consciousness of thy nearness and lovingness something that nobody else can have just as I have it; whisper one word to me that no one in all the universe but myself can hear, and that whisper shall be to me an inspiration, a comfort, a security, a pledge; not that others may not enjoy the same in their own way, but I want something mine own. To that prayer who can measure the reply, if spoken in faith and love and noble unselfishness?

Now another voice is heard. Joshua was not going the right way about the work, in the estimation of some people:

“And the children of Joseph spake unto Joshua, saying, Why hast thou given me but one lot and one portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the Lord hath blessed me hitherto?” ( Jos 17:14 ).

“And Joshua answered them, If thou be a great people, then get thee up to the wood country, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee” ( Jos 17:15 ).

Joshua, continuing the high satiric strain, said:

“Thou art a great people, and hast great power: thou shalt not have one lot only: but the mountain shall be thine; for it is a wood, and thou shalt cut it down: and the outgoings of it shall be thine: for thou shalt drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots, and though they be strong” ( Jos 17:17-18 ).

We come now to another set of circumstances. It appears that when all was done up to this point, a good deal still remained to be accomplished. We read of this in chapter Jos 18:2-7 :

“And there remained among the children of Israel seven tribes, which had not yet received their inheritance” ( Jos 18:2 ).

And has Joshua nothing in all this the great man himself, so quiet, so gentle? Caleb asked for his portion right boldly, but he asked as a heroic man should ask for difficulties. At eighty-five he wanted to prove that he was as young as he was at forty. Joshua might have taken that opportunity of saying, Caleb, I was with you in that matter of the espial of the land; if you want your portion now, I may as well have mine at the same time. Nothing of the kind. Joshua waited until the very last. So we read:

“When they had made an end of dividing the land for inheritance by their coasts, the children of Israel gave an inheritance to Joshua the son of Nun among them: according to the word of the Lord they gave him the city which he asked, even Timnath-serah in mount Ephraim: and he built the city, and dwelt therein” ( Jos 19:49-50 ).

A very tender word is found in regard to some of the tribes. “Gad, and Reuben, and half the tribe of Manasseh, have received their inheritance beyond Jordan.” Sweet words! ” beyond Jordan.” By a very legitimate accommodation these words may be applied to many a Christian. Some Christians have but little portion this side of the river; their lot is a small one; their riches could all be hidden in one hand; yet how bright they are! as radiant as a summer dawn, as songful as a wood in spring-time, when all the birds are swelling their feathery throats with song. Why? Because the refrain of their hymn is “beyond Jordan.” The crown is on the other side of the river; the city lies beyond the stream; the great inheritance is at the other end of the valley of the shadow of death: they are “begotten again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away.” So their citizenship being in heaven, they have learned in whatsoever state they are, therewith to be content. Blessed are they who are rich in faith; yea, blessed with sevenfold blessing they who can say that their souls are already in heaven, and the consciousness of the heavenly possession creates contempt for the vanities of time.

Looking at the whole matter practically, let us not forget that the land was given to be cultivated. This is not a mere matter of enjoyment. When Palestine was seized, it had to be brought under agricultural treatment, and men were to enjoy the fruit of their labour even in the Land of Promise. There was fighting to be done, there were trees to be cut down; the centre of the country was a great forest, and the foresters must go into it and bring down the timber and root out the old roots, and make flowers and fruits grow in the old forests of Palestine. Life is given to us to cultivate. We are not called upon to do merely the work if so it may be termed of appreciation and enjoyment; we are called to battle, to cultivation, to toil, to service, to disappointment, and to some fruition of our hope and love.

Nor must we forget that variety did not excite discontent. The lots were not all equal. Judah had twenty-nine cities and the villages thereof; Benjamin, fourteen cities with the villages; Joshua had Timnath-serah, in Mount Ephraim. So it is possible for us now to have variety of lot, and yet a sweet content of heart. The kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called together his servants, and gave to one five talents, to another two, to another one representing talent and opportunity and capacity. The Lord must distribute as he pleases. The great lesson for us to learn is, that it is possible for us to have little, and yet not to want more; to be called to a great opportunity, and yet not to boast over those whose limitation is so obvious. This sweet content, this hallowed peace, can only be enjoyed in proportion as we abide in Christ, like living branches in a living vine. This miracle is not a trick of the human hand; it is the miracle of the Holy Ghost.

Selected Note

Eccentric Boundaries of the Tribes (Joshua 15-19). Thomson, in “The Land and the Book,” writes: “The reason why the boundaries of the different tribes were so eccentric originally, and are now so difficult to follow, was that the ‘lots’ were not meted out according to geographical lines; but lands of certain cities lying more or less contiguous were assigned to each tribe. These cities were the capitals of small principalities or districts, just as Tibnin, and Hunin, and Bint-Jebail are now. The territory of one might extend far to the east of the city, that of the next to the west. It is now absolutely impossible to draw lines around the separate ‘lots’ with any degree of certainty. Their general positions with relation to each other, however, can be ascertained with sufficient exactness for all important purposes in the study of Biblical geography.”

Prayer

O thou who art the refuge of men, let us flee unto thee, assured that the door of thy mercy will not be closed against us. We have sung for a lifetime of Jesus as the refuge of the soul. We have found him to be a covert from the storm. We would abide in him, let come what may, strong in his strength, confident in the immutableness of his love. This is our daily thought and this our nightly rest: a very song in our mouth; a perpetual joy, like a singing angel hovering over the life, We turn and think of Christ, and behold our thought makes us glad. We muse about the Son of God in holy wonder, and as we muse the fire burns, and by its glow we know he is near who is the light of heaven. We would dwell upon the thought of his life; we would count his words as men count jewels; we would number them, and set them in order, and preserve them with all the eagerness of unutterable love, accounting each one necessary to the perfectness of the whole. Whilst we thus treasure thy Word, and find in it our true wealth, thou wilt not forsake us; thou wilt make us stronger, younger, happier, as we proceed in this faithful and delightful service. Reveal thy word to us day by day a new light, a new beauty, a new possibility; may it be unto our eyes as the dawn of heaven, and unto our ears as the music of the skies. According to our necessity may thy word present itself to us now a staff to lean upon, now a sword with which to fight, now a light that shall be as a lamp unto our feet, and now an unspeakable comfort, making even sorrow itself welcome, because sorrow brings the Saviour nearer. Thy word abideth for ever; thy word is patient like thyself, waiting for its opportunity, standing at the door of the attention and knocking and waiting until we be ready to hear what it has to say. It has waited for us many a year. When we hear it, we know it to be thy word, because there is an answering spirit in our own hearts which says, This is none other than God’s word a very speech from the heart of the universe. We thank thee for all thy mercies. Though thou hast set us in a time of depression, yet do we see that the stars are all in their places. It is indeed night-time with many, by reason of difficulty, poverty, distress, and hardship; yet not one star has gone out, and the heavens look brighter sometimes than they ever did. Thou hast not forsaken thy people, nor left in desolation those that trust in thee. This is their confidence and their song; yea, it has become their boast and their sure refuge in time of difficulty. Even now thy mercies are more than we can number: even when winter has set in and all the flowers have hidden themselves, thy mercies are full and thy compassion is near and thy kindness is lovingkindness. Even in the midnight of the year we can sing praises unto our God and shake down the prison of our distress. Help us in all things to see thy hand, and to say, All is well. Enable us to prove our faith by the nobleness and clearness of our testimony. May we be enabled to say, Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him, and though the night be dark and dreary, it is but short at most, and the morning is already dawning on the higher hills. We commend one another to thy loving care; they are well kept whom thou dost keep; in their hearts shall be no unrest, but one continual radiant Sabbath-day; no lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast go up thereon, it shall not be found there; all holy thoughts shall dwell there, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away, like birds of the night, afraid of the sunshine, terrified by the day. We are found again at the Cross. We wait at the altar of the atonement wrought by him who is thy Son, our Saviour. His blood is our prayer, bis sacrifice our plea. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXII

CONQUEST OF THE NORTHERN TRIBES; ALLOTMENT OF TERRITORY; ESTABLISHMENT OF A CENTRAL PLACE OF WORSHIP.

Joshua 11-21

This section commences with Joshua II and closes with Jos 21 . That is to say, we must cover in this discussion eleven chapters,, and the matter is of such a nature that one cannot make an oration on it, nor can one give a very interesting discussion on it. It would be perfect folly for me to take up the chapters verse by verse, when all you have to do is to look on your map in the Biblical Atlas and glance at any commentary and get the meaning and locality of each town mentioned. All of the matters that require comment will be commented on in these eleven chapters.

The first theme is the conquest of the tribes in the northern part of the Holy Land, just as the preceding chapter considered the central and southern part of the land. You know I told you that Joshua, by entering the country at Jericho and then capturing Ai, occupied a strategical position, the mountains on the right hand and the left hand and they forced a passway by which he could go in any direction. We found that all the southern part of the country, after the capture at Jericho and Ai, was practically brought about by one decisive battle, the battle of Beth-horon, where the Almighty thundered and sent his hailstones and where the sun stood still. Now, the northern conquest was brought about by one decisive battle, all of the details that it is necessary for me to give are these: When the northern tribes learned of the subjugation of the southern tribes they saw that it was a life and death matter.

From this viewpoint they would be conquered in detail. As Benjamin Franklin said in a speech at the Continental Congress, “Gentlemen, we cannot evade this issue; we must either hang together or hang separately, every one of us if we don’t unite will be hanged.” Now, that was in the minds of those northern kings. We have had the account of Adonizedek, the king of Jebus. Hazor was a well-known place in the history of the countries. We will have it up again in the book of Judges. It was not very far from Caesarea Philippi, where Peter made his great confession in the time of our Lord.

I will not enumerate the tribes and the names of the several kings that were brought into this second league It not only included the central and northern tribes, but they sent an invitation to the remnant of the tribes that had been conquered. The place of rendezvous, or assemblage, for all of these armies of these several kings was Lake Merom. You will recall that in describing the Jordan, rising in the mountains, after running a while, it spreads out into Lake Merom, and lower down it spreads into the Sea of Galilee. Well, now around that Merom Lake the ground is level, very favorable for calvary and war chariots. For the first time the war chariot was introduced. The war chariot was more, in general, the shape of a dray than anything else two wheels, steps behind that one could go down, and one chieftain and two or three captains stood up and drove two or three horses, and they always drove the horses abreast, no matter how many. The men who drove were very skillful but unless they were very lucky they would fall to the ground. In the time of Cyrus the Great, he built one with blades that went out from the sides, so that it not only crippled those he ran over but the scythes on each side would mow them down.

Joshua learned of this combination of tribes and, under the direction of the Almighty, he smote them before they could organize. He was a Stonewall Jackson kind of a man and struck quick and hard. He pressed and pursued them and led his army up the valley of the Jordan by swift marches and instantly attacked the enemy when he got upon the ground and before they were prepared. Their defeat was the most overwhelming in history. All of the leaders were captured and slain; they dispersed in three directions specified in the text, and he pursued them in all three directions. He gave them no time to rally, and when they had been thoroughly discomfited, he took the towns. That battle was practically the end of the war of conquest. We may say the whole thing was decided in this battle; there were some details of conquest later, but this is Joshua’s part of it. I must call attention specifically to this fact, overlooked by many commentaries, that the general statement of the conquest is given in the book of Joshua and the details of some of these general statements are given more elaborately, indeed the last great item, the migration of Dan, in the book of Judges. All that happened before Joshua died. Therefore the book of Judges and the book of Joshua overlap as to time. And for this reason, that as soon as Joshua got through with his conquest, and the distribution of territory, he retired from leadership, living years afterward. The instant the war was over, Joshua surrendered the general leadership.

Just here I wish to answer another question. While the record notes that Joshua conquered all the land that Jehovah had originally promised to those people, yet the book of Joshua also states that there remained certain portions of the land that had not been conquered. The backbone of the opposition was broken by these two battles and by the cities that he captured after these battles, but the enemy would come back and occupy their old position and some of the walled towns were not taken.

I once heard the question asked a Sunday school, Why did God permit the remnants that you will find described later on in this section, the parts not subjugated, to remain? Nobody in the Sunday school could answer. Now, you will find the answer to the question in Num 33:55 ; Jos 23:13 ; Jdg 2:3 . Moses says, “If you do not utterly destroy these people leaving none, then God will permit those remnants that you spare to become thorns in your side, and whenever you are weak they will rise against you; whenever you are disobedient to God they will triumph over you.” It is stated here that the number of the kings of the separate tribes overcome by Joshua was thirty-one Part of this section says that Joshua waged war a long time with these kings. While this battle was fought and became decisive of the general results, the going out and capturing the different towns, completing the different details, required a long time.

Now we come to the next theme of our lesson, viz.: The distribution of the land, or allotment of specific parts of the territory to the tribes. We have already found in the books of Moses just how the eastern side of the Jordan was conquered and the allotment made to Reuben just above Moab, and to Gad just above Reuben and to the half-tribe of Manasseh way up in Gilead. This is on the east side of the Jordan, and the Biblical Atlas will show you at the first glance where they are. So that is the first distribution: Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh.

The next distribution takes place under the commandment of God. Joshua is old, well stricken in years and wants the land divided while he lives because he knows it will be divided right, and this, too, is the land allotted to Judah and the land allotted to Joseph, or Ephraim, and the half tribe of Manasseh. So we have two and one-half tribes receiving their portion on the west side of the Jordan. That leaves seven tribes who have not yet received their land. In giving Judah his part three interesting events occurred, all of which were in connection with Caleb. Caleb is one of the original twelve men sent out by Moses to spy out the land, and because of his fidelity God promised that he should have Hebron, Abraham’s old home, which is not far from the Dead Sea. It has always been a noted place and is yet. Before this division took place, Caleb presented himself and asked for the fulfilment of the promise by Moses, that his particular part should be Hebron and when that was done, Caleb’s daughter, Achsah, steps forward and asks of her father springs of water, and he gave her the upper and nether springs.

The third fact is related at length in Judges, but it occurs at this time. Caleb having the certain portion, Kiriathsepher, the enemy of Hebron, he said that whoever should go over into that city first and capture it, he should have his daughter for a wife, and a very brave fellow, a nephew of Caleb, determined to try it and he took that city and got the girl. Now, that was a deed of daring, and like it was in the Middle Ages where a knight went forth and sought adventures that would entitle him to be his lady’s husband. All young fellows feel that they would surmount any difficulty to win a girl. I have felt that way. I felt that way when I was seven years old and about a certain young lady. There isn’t anything too dangerous or too great a sacrifice for a man to make in a case of that kind.

I told you when Judah received his part that Joseph’s tribe received theirs. Now we come to an interesting episode; the tribe of Joseph, and particularly the tribe of Ephraim, was always a tough proposition. You will find that all the way through the Old Testament and even when you come to the New Testament. Ephraim came up and when the allotment was made he said, “We are not satisfied.” Did you ever hear of people who were not satisfied about a division of land? Joshua said, “What is the trouble?” “Well, they said, “we are a big tribe, many men of war, and we are cooped up too much. We cannot go far west for there are the mountains, and then all around are woods.” Now, what did Joshua say to them? He said, “Well, you are indeed a big tribe and you have many men of war; now go up and cut down those woods and expand'” He determined to rest some responsibility upon the tribes after the allotment had been made. It is a fine piece of sarcasm. So Ephraim had to take to the woods.

Now before any other division takes place a very notable event occurred affecting the future history of the nation, and that was the establishment of a central place of worship, finding a home for the tabernacle. The tabernacle was established at Shiloh, and this brings us to another general question. How long did that tabernacle stay at Shiloh? How long did the ark stay, and when it left there, where did it go, and where was the ark finally brought? Trace the history of the ark from Shiloh to where it was set up in the tent, and then I want you to tell what became of the tent and tell how long it stayed there and what became of it. What became of the tabernacle? Some of the most interesting things in history and song are found in the answer to those questions.

I here propound another question. Which tribe had no inheritance, no section of the country allotted to it, and why? This tribe that had no particular section allotted to it was scattered over the whole nation and that leads to the next question that you are to answer. Where do you find the prophecy in the Pentateuch, in which book, and where, that this tribe and another one, Simeon, should be scattered over Israel? Where does Moses prophesy just what comes to pass? If not Moses, then somebody else, and you are to find out who did and when and where. The next general remark that I have to make is that this section tells us that Dan was shut up in a pretty tight place. Three strong tribes, Judah, Benjamin and Ephraim held them on one side and the Philistines on the other side, but Dan didn’t come to Joshua. Perhaps he thought it but took the question into his own hands. I suppose that he was afraid that as Joshua told Ephraim to go to the woods, he would tell Dan to capture those Philistine cities, and so Dan sent out some spies and found a good place to settle, and the story of the emigration of Dan is told at great length in the book of Judges. Some of it is told in the book of Joshua; that he took Laish and called it Dan and that became its name. So we say, “from Dan to Beersheba.” We will see all about how Dan improved it when we get to the book of Judges. I am showing you that it occurred, but when you get to the book of Judges you will have a detailed account of it.

The next thought in these eleven chapters is that Joshua, having ended his wars, obeyed God with singular fidelity. (I don’t believe I explained that after they came to Shiloh where he set the ark, the other tribes received their portion by lots. Now your map will show you where Shiloh was and Ephraim and Dan and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and all the others. All you have to do is to look on your map and see their location.) He, having finished the wars, asked a small inheritance for himself, a little bit of a place. How that does shine in comparison with the other great conquerors! When they come to the division, they take the lion’s share. Joshua took a very modest little place in his own tribe. His retiring from public life devolved the work upon the tribes themselves, and to their own judgment. He remained in seclusion until he comes out to be considered in the next section.

This leaves for consideration only two other thoughts in the distribution of the territory, and I shall embody these thoughts in questions for you to answer. Look at the six cities of refuge established, three east of the Jordan and three west of the Jordan. You can find them on a good map, and as you look at them on the map, you are struck with the wisdom of their locality when you consider the purpose of these cities of refuge. And now what was the intent of these cities of refuge? A thousand preachers have preached sermons on the cities of refuge Spurgeon has one remarkable sermon. The allusions to them are very frequent, so that every one of you ought to have in your heart and on your brain a clear conception of what is meant by the cities of refuge. I am going to give you a brief answer, but you can work this answer out and make it bigger.

Under the Mosaic law there was no sheriff in cases of homicide, the killing of a man. In our cities the police go after the murderer, and the sheriff in the country, but under the Mosaic law the next of kin was made the “avenger of blood.” If I, living at that day, had been slain, without raising a question as to how it was done, my brother, J. M. Carroll, or my son, B. H. Carroll, Jr., under the law would be the sheriff, and his injunction would be to start as soon as he heard of the killing and to kill the killer on sight. Well, for us in that kind of a sheriff-law this difficulty would arise: Suppose in the assumed case Just now that, while I had been killed, it had been accidental; that we were all out hunting and a man with me accidentally discharged his gun and it killed me. Or suppose that, as Moses described it, two men were chopping and one went to make a big lick with an axe and the axe flew off and hit the other one and killed him, yet that law says that life was a sacred thing. Now, as there are several cases of manslaughter, of innocent men with no purpose to kill them, so there must be a distinction made between accidental homicide and willful murder.

The object of the cities of refuge, distributed as you see over the country, was to provide a place where one who had killed another, not intending to commit murder, might find a place of shelter until the matter could be investigated, and so, just as soon as a man killed another, he turned and commenced running. The avenger of blood, as soon as he heard of it, went after him and it was a race for life and death, to see which could get there first. Therefore the roads were kept in splendid condition, no rocks were left that the man fleeing for his life should stumble and be slain. The rabbis say they would not allow a straw to be left on the road lest they should stumble and fall.

Now, I close with just this question. I told you that one tribe had no inheritance, no lot of land all together and they had to go somewhere. So for that tribe certain cities with their suburbs were set apart. Now, on your map look for the cities of this tribe that had no inheritance.

QUESTIONS

1. Describe the strategical position of Jericho and Ai.

2. By what battle was the south country practically conquered?

3. What decisive battle brought about the northern conquest? Describe it. With whom is Joshua as a general compared?

4. What the connection between the book of Joshua and the book of Judges?

5. How do you harmonize the statements that Joshua conquered all the land that Jehovah had promised them and that there remained certain portions of the land that had not been conquered?

6. Why did God permit the remnants not subjugated to remain in the land? Where in the Pentateuch do you find the answer?

7. Explain the expression, “Joshua waged war a long time with these kings.”

8. Locate the tribes on the east of the Jordan.

9. What the second distribution, and to whom?

10. What 3 interesting events in connection with giving Judah his portion?

11. What complaint was made by Ephraim, and Joshua’s reply?

12. Where was the central place of worship located? How long did the ark stay there? When it left where did it go? Where finally brought? How long did the tent, or tabernacle, stay there? What finally became of it?

13. What tribe had no inheritance & why? Where do you find the prophecy in the Pentateuch that this tribe & Simeon should be scattered over Israel?

14. How does Joshua’s spirit compare with the spirit of the other great conquerors?

15. How did Dan get out of his straits?

16. Name and locate the cities of refuge. What the intent of these cities?

17. Locate the cities of the tribe that had no inheritance.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Jos 15:1 [This] then was the lot of the tribe of the children of Judah by their families; [even] to the border of Edom the wilderness of Zin southward [was] the uttermost part of the south coast.

Ver. 1. This then was the lot of the tribe, &c. ] The lot came forth, up, or out Jos 19:1 ; Jos 19:10 ; Jos 19:17 of the bosom, lap, Pro 16:33 pot, or some other vessel in use for that purpose; for the manner of this lottery is not expressed: but that it was solemnly done with fasting and prayer premised, is probable; Jdg 20:26 Act 1:24 and that it was ordered by a divine providence, is certain. Pro 16:33 And hence it was that Judah’s lot came out first, and fell out in the best part of the land: to show that God had a purpose to exalt that tribe above the rest.

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

NASB (UPDATED TEXT): Jos 15:1-12

1Now the lot for the tribe of the sons of Judah according to their families reached the border of Edom, southward to the wilderness of Zin at the extreme south. 2Their south border was from the lower end of the Salt Sea, from the bay that turns to the south. 3Then it proceeded southward to the ascent of Akrabbim and continued to Zin, then went up by the south of Kadesh-barnea and continued to Hezron, and went up to Addar and turned about to Karka. 4It continued to Azmon and proceeded to the brook of Egypt, and the border ended at the sea. This shall be your south border. 5The east border was the Salt Sea, as far as the mouth of the Jordan. And the border of the north side was from the bay of the sea at the mouth of the Jordan. 6Then the border went up to Beth-hoglah, and continued on the north of Beth-arabah, and the border went up to the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben. 7The border went up to Debir from the valley of Achor, and turned northward toward Gilgal which is opposite the ascent of Adummim, which is on the south of the valley; and the border continued to the waters of En-shemesh and it ended at En-rogel. 8Then the border went up the valley of Ben-hinnom to the slope of the Jebusite on the south (that is, Jerusalem); and the border went up to the top of the mountain which is before the valley of Hinnom to the west, which is at the end of the valley of Rephaim toward the north. 9From the top of the mountain the border curved to the spring of the waters of Nephtoah and proceeded to the cities of Mount Ephron, then the border curved to Baalah (that is, Kiriath-jearim). 10The border turned about from Baalah westward to Mount Seir, and continued to the slope of Mount Jearim on the north (that is, Chesalon), and went down to Beth-shemesh and continued through Timnah. 11The border proceeded to the side of Ekron northward. Then the border curved to Shikkeron and continued to Mount Baalah and proceeded to Jabneel, and the border ended at the sea. 12The west border was at the Great Sea, even its coastline. This is the border around the sons of Judah according to their families.

Jos 15:1 Now the lot for the tribe of the sons of Judah according to their families The tribe of Simeon was incorporated very early into the tribe of Judah and lost all of its identity (cf. Jos 19:1-9).

Edom This refers to the nation east of the Jordan which came from the descendants of Esau. The basic meaning is red (BDB 10).

The term south (BDB 616) is Teman, which is the same term as the name of one of Edom’s major cities.

Wilderness of Zin This should not be confused with the Wilderness of Sin, which is located in the southern part of the Sinai peninsula. This wilderness is in the northern part of the Sinai peninsula in which Kadesh-barnea is located (cf. Num 34:2-5). See Special Topic: The Wildernesses of the Exodus .

Jos 15:3 Akrabbim This is the name for scorpions (BDB 785). The boundaries of the Promised Land are given in Numbers 34 (cf. Num 34:4). This pass was part of the unconquered Amorite territory in Jdg 1:36.

Jos 15:4 the brook of Egypt The term brook (BDB 636) is wadi, which denotes a river bed or channel which is dry part of the year.

Water (i.e., rivers, wadis, lakes, streams, oceans) were often used as boundaries. This one is the most southern boundary of the Promised Land and Egypt (here the southern boundary of Judah, cf. Num 34:5).

Other natural barriers or topological distinctives, like valleys, mountain ranges, plains, were also used as boundary markers.

Jos 15:6 the stone of Bohan the son of Reuben We know nothing about this young man or why a memorial stone was raised for him. It is surely possible that this was a boundary marker and not a memorial (cf. Jos 18:17).

Jos 15:7 Gilgal This does not refer to the first Israeli campsite (cf. Jos 4:19). It is possible that it should be translated Gelioth (cf. Jos 18:17), because this location is also related to En-shemesh.

En-shemesh and En-rogel These were two springs (BDB 745) which seem to be located on the road from Jericho to Jerusalem.

Jos 15:8 the valley of Ben-hinnom . . . the valley of Hinnom This is the place where the fertility fire god, Molech, was worshiped. It was just outside the city of Jerusalem (Jebus, cf. Jos 15:63) to the south. This is the place which later the Jews turned into a garbage dump and which Jesus used as His metaphor to describe Hell (Gehenna).

SPECIAL TOPIC: Where Are the Dead?

Rephaim See notes at Jos 11:21.

Jos 15:9 Baalah This seems to be the feminine form for the term baal, and it may mean mistress. It was the older name of Kiriath-jearim.

Jos 15:10 Mount Seir This means rough, hairy, or shaggy (BDB 973). There are several different sites by this name. This does not refer to Mt. Seir in Edom, but a hill close to Jerusalem.

Beth-shemesh This means house of the sun (BDB 112, cf. 1Sa 6:9; 1Sa 6:12-13; 1Sa 6:15; 1Sa 6:19-20; 1Ki 4:9; 2Ki 14:13). Many believe that this refers to sun worship. There are several cities by this name.

Timnah This was a town which was later associated with the exploits of Samson.

Jos 15:11 Ekron This was one of the five main Philistine walled cities (cf. Jos 15:45-47). Apparently Judah never fully captured it or any of the main cities on the plain where chariot forces were used. See NIDOTTE, vol. 4, pp. 568-569.

Jos 15:12 the Great Sea This refers to the Mediterranean Ocean.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

the lot. See note on Jos 14:1.

children = sons.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 15

So in chapter fifteen he describes the portion that was given from Judah, and he tells the borders of the land that was given to Judah, going over at one point, clear to the Mediterranean, the area of Hebron, and the area basically south of Jerusalem. Then it tells of the various villages and the cities, and all that were in the land that was given to Judah.

In verse sixty-two one of the interesting cities is Engedi, which is down by the Dead Sea. It is still existing there today. It is one of my favorite places to visit. They have fantastic dates in Engedi, and they also have a beautiful waterfall, Fern Grotto, just an absolutely gorgeous area. We got some beautiful pictures of Engedi, and we are hoping to get our film edited pretty soon, sort of a travel log of Israel, and let you see some of that beautiful, beautiful country. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

In the settlement of the nine and a half tribes, Judah was the first dealt with as being the imperial and kingly tribe. The position allocated to it was the fighting front. It was touched by enemies on three sides; on the east, Moab; on the west, the Philistines; on the south, Edom. Away to the southwest were the Amalekites.

The tribe whose standard was that of the kingly line, and from which that line presently was to spring, was to have its fiber toughened by the sternest discipline–constant watchfulness against the foe and long-continued fighting.

Necessarily, the proximity of these enemies had its peril in another and more insidious source. And, alas, it was in this source that Judah eventually found the elements of her breakup. The fighting line remained loyal longer than the rest, but subsequently even Judah became contaminated with the abominations of the heathen.

God’s hosts are never overcome in fair and open fighting with His foes. Friendship with the enemies of God is the enmity against God which brings about corruption and defeat.

Caleb appears once again in this narrative, this time as the man of generosity, readily giving to his daughter at her request the field containing the nether and the upper springs. It is ever remarkable how much that man can give who has found his all in God.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

We come now to a portion of the book of Joshua which, while it would richly repay careful and minute examination, we must pass over cursorily because of the nature of these messages. In chapters 15 to 19 we have the account of the division of the land west of the Jordan among the nine and one-half tribes that had not chosen to remain in the country of Bashan and the land of Gilead on the east side of the river, as had the two and one-half tribes, who found there such fine accommodation for pasturing their great herds of cattle. They preferred to settle down in the countries taken from Og, king of Bashan, and Sihon, king of the Am-orites, and Moses gave them that permission, as we have seen, providing their warriors went into the land to help their brethren against the Canaanites.

The tribe of Judah had the first portion. Their inheritance was in the high country, adjacent to, and south and west of Jerusalem. Judah was the royal tribe and was honored of God in a very special way, but the other tribes also had their portion in different parts of the land, each one having its own particular values, but divided by the casting of lots. In the book of Proverbs we read, The lot is cast into the lap; the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. He directed Joshua to use this method, doubtless in order to avoid what might have seemed like partiality in giving the tribes their inheritances. That there are great spiritual lessons to be learned from these records there can be no question. Others have gone into this in a way we do not attempt here, notably, Gods honored servant, F. W. Grant, who in his enlightening notes on these passages in the Numerical Bible has shown that the Hebrew names of the cities, towns, and districts all have remarkable significance, and when translated help us to understand more fully something of the richness and preciousness of our inheritance in the heavenly places in Christ. We need to remember that all these things were written for our learning and are types of what God has given us to enjoy in this present age of grace.

It is pathetic, however, to note that tribe after tribe failed to make a full end of their enemies and so were obliged to permit these Canaanites to dwell among the Israelites. All this was but a compromise and compromise with evil never pays. In days to come, these foes who had been spared when they should have been exterminated, either became a snare to the people of God by leading them off into idolatry, or else wrought great havoc by their warlike behavior, attacking and often destroying cities and farms of the Israelites who had permitted them to remain unmolested among them. God had warned Israel of this beforehand, telling them that those who were not destroyed would be thorns in their sides and would cause them untold trouble.

Concerning Judah we read in chapter 15:63:

As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.

Then in chapter 16:10, we learn that the children of Joseph

drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute.

Of Manasseh, the children of the elder son of Joseph, we are told that they

could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities; but the Canaanites would dwell in that land. Yet it came to pass, when the children of Israel were waxen strong, that they put the Canaanites to tribute; but did not utterly drive them out.

In spite of their failure, we find these children of Joseph grumbling because they had only one lot and one portion to inherit; whereas they declared they were a great people! Joshuas answer was fitting indeed:

If thou be a great people, then get thee up to the wood country, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the giants, if mount Ephraim be too narrow for thee.

Still these children of Joseph were not satisfied, but they replied:

The hill is not enough for us: and all the Canaanites that dwell in the land of the valley have chariots of iron, both they who are of Bethshean and her towns, and they who are of the valley of Jezreel.

To this Joshua answered somewhat ironically perhaps:

Thou art a great people, and hast great power: thou shalt not have one lot only: But the mountain shall be thine; for it is a wood, and thou shalt cut it down: and the outgoings of it shall be thine: for thou shalt drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots, and though they be strong.

We may well learn from the failures of Israel to beware lest we ourselves fail to judge every evil thing that Satan would use to hinder our enjoyment of the things of Christ. We are called to deal unsparingly with every unholy thought and every sinful tendency, cleansing ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. It is only thus that we can appreciate truly and enjoy, in the way God would have us, the great privileges and manifold blessings He has bestowed upon us. Sin unjudged results in weakness and loss of communion, which can only be restored as we face the sin in the presence of God, confessing and forsaking it, and thus obtaining mercy and the assurance that all is forgiven.

But now let us turn back and consider briefly an incident that shines out brightly in the midst of all these long lists of Hebrew names, which to many of us seem unintelligible. We have already considered the energy of faith as seen in Caleb, the wholehearted. He comes before us again in the thirteenth verse of chapter 15, where we read:

And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the Lord to Joshua, even the city of Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron. And Caleb drove thence the three sons of Anak, Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak. And he went up thence to the inhabitants of Debir: and the name of Debir before was Kirjath-sepher.

Kirjath-sepher means the city of the book. It was probably so named because an ancient library was located there. Its name was changed later to Debir, which means the oracle or the word, and suggests that Word of God through which He speaks directly to His people. Calebs energy set a splendid example to younger men and this comes out clearly in what follows. We are told in verse 16:

And Caleb said, He that smiteth Kirjath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife.

Achsah means anklet, and, as others have suggested, speaks f the decorated foot, reminding us of the word in the prophecy of Isaiah, How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace. In Ephesians 6 the soldier of Christ is commanded to have his feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace. Surely, no lovelier decoration could be found for any foot than this.

In response to Calebs challenge, we are told that Othniel, his nephew, took Kirjath-sepher, and thus the city of the book, or the word, became his inheritance. In accordance with his promise, Caleb gave him Achsah to be his wife. Thus the cousins were united. Achsah suggested to her husband that he ask of her father a field, a petition which Caleb readily granted, but the young woman realized that a field without water was practically worthless; so she herself approached her father in an attitude of supplication. In response to his inquiry, What wouldest thou? she replied,

Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water.

We are told that Caleb gave her the upper springs and the nether springs. This is all very suggestive. A believer may have rich treasure indeed in the fact that the oracles of God are committed to him, but he can only enjoy to the full this blessed gift of God when the Holy Spirit is given in power to open up the truth to him. In this dispensation of grace the Spirit dwells in every believer. He is likened by our Lord Jesus to a fountain of living water springing up in the heart. It is as we appreciate and value the work of the Holy Spirit that we enjoy the refreshing influences which flow from His acknowledged presence. May the faith of Othniel and of Achsah be duplicated in us, who through grace have been blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ. May we be so yielded to the indwelling Holy Spirit that He will make very real to us the precious things of Christ, and thus give us to enjoy our inheritance to the full. The Spirit and the Word are linked together, both in connection with the new birth and in later Christian experience. The Spirit-filled believer is one in whom the Word of Christ dwells richly. May this be true of all who read these lines!

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

3. The Portion of Judah

CHAPTER 15

1. The south-border of Judahs portion (Jos 15:1-4)

2. The eastern and northern border (Jos 15:5-11)

3. The western border (Jos 15:12)

4. Calebs conquest (Jos 15:13-19)

5. Inheritance according to families (Jos 15:20-63)

This is a chapter which contains many names; nearly one hundred and fifty are recorded. With the help of a good concordance, or dictionary of Hebrew names, the English meaning may be ascertained. However, many of these names may be derived from different roots and have therefore a different meaning, while the meaning of others is rather obscure. For the reason already stated we cannot follow the possible meaning and application of these names. The lesson, however, is that the Lord distributed the inheritance to His people and placed them as it pleased Him. He knew their faithfulness and their ability, and accordingly they received their portion. And we, too, as members of His body, receive our portion and inheritance from Himself, dividing to every man severally as He will (1Co 12:11).

Calebs conquest is of additional interest. In the previous chapter we learned of his faith and how he honored the Lord. He acknowledged that the Lord had kept him alive; by His mercy he had been spared (Jos 14:10). He claimed His portion, and in humility of faith he expected success and victory. He gets Hebron, which means communion. The application in spiritual lines is interesting. Faith longs for Hebron, for communion. But the giants, the Anakim, are there, to keep away from real communion with God. They must be dispossessed. Caleb drove out the three sons of Anak. Their names are Sheshai, which means my fine linen, reminding us of our own righteousness (Shesh is the Hebrew word used for the fine linen in the tabernacle. In this way we get Sheshai, my fine linen); Ahiman, the meaning of this word is who is my brother? which may be applied to pride of desent; Talmai, the third son of Anak, means abounding in furrows, the pride of achievement. Pride in different forms is the hindrance to real communion with God. Pride has to be dethroned in the heart and in the life of His people. Only as we follow the Lord wholly, as Caleb did, shall we conquer and enjoy our Hebron in the Lord Jesus Christ. And he also had Debir (Oracle–the voice speaking); Kirjath-sepher means city of the book. Thus Hebron, communion, is closely linked with the written Word and the voice which speaks there. And in Achsah, Calebs daughter, we have another side of faith represented. When Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou? she answered, Give me a blessing, for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water. And he gave her the upper springs and the nether springs. It is faith which asks much and receives much.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 2561, bc 1443, An, Ex, Is, 48

This then was the lot: The geography of the sacred writings presents many difficulties, occasioned by the changes which Canaan has undergone, especially for the last 2,000 years. Many of the ancient towns and villages have had their names so totally changed that their former appellations are no longer discernible; several lie buried under their own ruins, and others have been so long destroyed that not a vestige of them remains. On these accounts it is very difficult to ascertain the precise situation of many places mentioned in these chapters; but this cannot in any measure affect the truth of the narrative. Jos 14:2, Num 26:55, Num 26:56

even to the: Num 33:36, Num 33:37, Num 34:3-5, Eze 47:19

Reciprocal: Num 13:21 – from the wilderness of Zin Num 20:1 – Kadesh Num 33:54 – give the less inheritance Num 34:17 – are the names Jos 18:5 – Judah shall Jos 18:8 – that I may here Jos 18:11 – between the children Jos 18:19 – this was the Eze 48:7 – Judah

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Before the distribution of the land had gone too far, it was appropriate for Caleb to come to Joshua and remind him of the promise God had made ( Num 14:21-24 ; Deu 1:35-36 ). Caleb says he was forty years old when he helped spy out the land. The powerful influence of faithless leaders can be seen in their ability to make the hearts of the people to melt. In contrast, the man who “wholly followed the Lord” was rewarded ( Heb 11:6 ; Heb 6:10 ).

We know Israel wandered thirty-eight more years in the wilderness before she came again to the promised land, so Caleb’s report of forty-five years passing tells us the conquest of Canaan had taken seven years to that time ( Deu 2:14-15 ).

Great men of God, like Caleb, rely upon God to give them the strength to complete their task (compare 1Sa 17:37 ; 1Sa 17:45-47 ; 2Ti 4:16-18 ). Notice, Caleb knew he had lived to be eighty-five because of God’s blessing ( Jos 14:10 ). He even yet knew that he could only accomplish conquest if the Lord was with him ( Jos 14:12 ; Jas 4:13-15 ; Rom 8:31 ; Php 4:13 ; Heb 13:5-6 ). Caleb had told the children of Israel that they could conquer the land and, with the help of God, he and his son-in-law, Othniel, did just that despite the fact that they faced the strongest of the giants who lived in Canaan ( Jos 14:13-15 ; Jos 15:13-19 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Jos 15:1. This then was the lot For the general understanding of this business of casting lots, it must be observed, 1st, That it was transacted with great seriousness and solemnity, in Gods presence, with prayer and appeal to him for the decision of the matter. 2d, That although an exact survey of this land was not taken till afterward, Jos 18:4-5; yet there was, and must needs be, a general description of it, and a division thereof into nine parts and a half; which, as far as they could guess, were equal either in quantity or quality. 3d, That the lot did not at this time so unchangeably determine the portion of each tribe that it could neither be increased nor diminished, as is manifest; because, after Judahs lot was fixed, Simeons lot was taken out of it, Jos 19:9. 4th, That the lot determined only in general what part of the land belonged to each tribe, but left the particulars to be determined by Joshua and Eleazar. For the manner of this, it is probably conceived, that there were two urns, into one of which were put the names of all the tribes, each in a distinct paper, and into the other the names of each portion described; then Eleazar, or some other person, drew out first the name of one of the tribes out of one urn, and then the name of one portion out of the other, and that portion was appropriated to that tribe. And with respect to these urns, in the bottom of which the papers lay, these lots are often said to come up, or come forth.

Of Judah Whose lot came out first by Gods disposition, as a note of his pre-eminency above his brethren. To the border of Edom Which lay south-east from Judahs portion. Judah and Joseph were the two sons of Jacob on whom Reubens forfeited birthright devolved. Judah had the dominion entailed upon him, and Joseph the double portion. Therefore these two tribes are first appointed; and on them the other seven attended. By their families The lot, it appears, determined only the right of each tribe to such or such a portion of the general division of the country. Joshua, Eleazar, and the rest of the commissioners, when they had thus given each tribe its province, by lot, did afterward (and it is probable by lot likewise) subdivide those larger portions, and assign to each family its inheritance, and then to each household; which would be better done by this supreme authority, and in a way less apt to give disgust, than if it had been left to the inferior magistrates of each tribe to make that distribution.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Jos 15:1. This then was the lot of Judah. After the arduous toils of war, Joshua entered on an administration of affairs little less difficult than the conquest itself. The country was now rather hastily divided into ten lots, keeping in view the covenant made with those who had already received inheritance on the left bank of the Jordan, and reserving the right to vary the proportion of land to the population of the tribe. The elders proceeded to the important duties of the day in the following manner. The name or number of each district was put into one urn, and the name of each tribe was put into another. The lot was thus cast into the lap, but the disposal thereof was of the Lord. The decision being thus conformable to the peoples choice, Judah was drawn the first, for God designed him to have the preminence, and the elders gave him towns in proportion to this number. The lot of Joseph was next drawn; but the play of human passions on a subject so interesting as a permanent lot for the whole tribe became so strong, and the difficulties and objections were so great, that Joshua and the elders could not proceed to draw the lots of the remaining tribes, till a more accurate survey had been made of the country, and of the towns. Ah, how restless are the passions of men, and how unwilling is the human heart to trust the Lord with its lot in life!Those who would wish fully to study this subject may compare the following passages with each other. Joshua 13 : 1Ch 5:24.Joshua 16:17. 1Ch 7:14; 1Ch 7:30.Jos 18:11; Jos 18:28. 1Ch 7:6; 1Ch 7:13.Jos 19:17; Jos 19:23. 1Ch 7:1; 1Ch 7:6.Jos 19:24; Jos 19:31. 1Ch 7:30; 1Ch 7:40.Jos 19:32; Jos 19:39. 1Ch 7:13.Joshua 21 : 1 Chronicles 6.

Jos 15:8. The son of Hinnom. Some write this name Gehennom, and Gehennam, from the compound gi, a valley; and Hinnon, a name. See on Isa 30:33. Mat 5:22. He is supposed in former times to have been owner of the valley. It was an inviting shady retreat near Jerusalem, where the Israelites set up their idol Moloch, and burnt their children in his arms. 2Ki 23:10. Jer 7:32. But being polluted with idolatry, it ultimately became a place for the filth and bones of Jerusalem.

Jos 15:15. Kirjath-sepher, or book-city; a seat of letters, and so called because of the academy established there, and because the books or records were there preserved.

Jos 15:16. Achsah my daughter to wife. In these boons of martial heroism, it seems to be allowed that the lady was consulted by her father: yet we have no proof that Saul consulted his daughter in the case of David and Goliath. Othniel, of course, married his first cousin: Jos 15:17. Jdg 1:13.

Jos 15:19. Give me a blessing; an inheritance, or possession. Caleb, it appears, from the compliance with his daughters request, had a very large lot of country. The term field, is here to be understood of a considerable space of land.

REFLECTIONS.

A variety of remarks cannot but strike the mind in this chapter. We see that the God who inspired Jacob and Moses to bless the tribes in all the ecstasy of the prophetic spirit, here disposed of the twelve lots according to his word. This would greatly confirm the faith of the Israelites, and tend to make them happy and contented with their lot. Just so, after the exercise of prudence and industry, if we rely on the care of heaven, our lot, whether it be a cottage or a villa, whether it be that of a servant or master, shall in like manner be happy, and the best that could have happened. And we should be the more reconciled to a humble lot in life, if we consider that the several stations we are now called to fill, are so many preparatory steps to the rest of everlasting joy which waits the good man when the conflicts of life shall be past.

The lot falling out in harmony with prophecy, would not only induce the Israelites to be content with it, but also to preserve the inheritance of their fathers as Gods sacred gift. Hence Naboth chose rather to incur the kings displeasure, than to change his fathers inheritance for a better. Let us never sacrifice our hopes and our portion in the Lord for the hopes of this world.

The lots so divinely fixed induced the tribes to keep apart; and by so doing, the genealogy to Jesus Christ was kept the more distinct, and the prophecies of his person and kingdom became the more strikingly accomplished. In the faith of Caleb, in the marriage of his daughter, in the courage of Othniel, afterwards judge of Israel, we see fine examples of wisdom and virtue: and we see how the blessings of providence are entailed on the righteous, in their faithful seed unto thousands of generations. Viewing this history of divine goodness, who would not trust under JEHOVAHS wings, and seek his portion in Israels God.

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

Jos 15:1-5 reads rather confusedly. The statement is made that the following is the inheritance of Israela late writer, wishing to be more exact, says the 9 tribes, and then proceeds to point out how the number 9 was obtained.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

THE BORDERS OF JUDAH

(vs.1-12)

Judah occupied the largest territory of the tribes, though later we read that Simeon’s possession was within Judah’s territory (ch.19:1). The boundary on the south of Judah is first considered. This was next to the land of Edom, beginning at the Dear Sea and reaching to the Mediterranean Sea (vs.2a). Edom (the same name as Adam, pictures man in the flesh, and God’s land is to be decidedly separated from this. Fleshly ambition is the world’s principle of action, but Judah (meaning “praise”) is to be the opposite of this, giving God, not self, the first place.

We return in verse 5 to consider the east border, which was the Dead Sea, the border continuing north to the mouth of the River Jordan where it emptied into the Dead Sea. Though the east is the direction of the sun rising, reminding us of the coming of the Lord, which will mean great blessing for believers, yet when John the Baptist speaks of the Lord’s coming, he tells us, “His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Thus the Dead Sea (really a large lake) speaks of the lake of fire. The Jordan, the river of death, runs into the Dead Sea, where no life is found. How many there are who, with no repentance or faith, drift with the current of death into the awesome death of eternal punishment (Mat 25:46) — the second death of Rev 20:14! Judah’s border separates her from the Dead Sea, but the reminder was always there of the judgment that is escaped only by faith in the living God.

The northern border began at the mouth of the Jordan (v.5). and the description of this is much more detailed than we have found with the other borders. This border adjoins Israelite territory, as the other borders do not. Thus there is a careful marking off of the territory of Judah (“praise”) from the other tribes. Ephraim’s border is discussed after Judah, but it does no adjoin Judah, and later Benjamin is seen to have its territory between Judah and Ephraim (ch.18:11), and Dan also, farther west than Benjamin (ch.19:40-46). But the many details given as to Judah’s border surely indicate that praise must be kept distinct from all other virtuous aspects of the Christian’s life, and there are many occasions for praise also. Again, the meanings of the names would certainly furnish us with good spiritual food if we interpret them aright. If the reader desires more help in such interpretation, the Numerical Bible by F.W.Grant is highly recommended.

Judah’s northern border then began at the north end of the Dead Sea and went generally westward till ending at “the Great Sea,” that is, the Mediterranean, which seacoast served as the western border of Judah (v.12). The great Sea is typical of the Gentile nations (Rev 17:15), 50 often in a state of upheaval and unrest, seeking to encroach upon the land, but held in check by the power of God, who has said, “This far you may come, but no farther, and here your proud waves must stop!” (Job 38:11), Thus, Judah’s western border tells us that, though the world may threaten to swamp the testimony of the people of God, yet God is greater than the world, and will preserve His people.

THE FAITH OF CALEB AGAIN EMPHASIZED

(vs.13-19)

Chapter 14:6-11 has reported the boldness of the faith of Caleb in claiming what had been promised him. Now he is again given by God a place of prominence, for God delights to honor that faith that honors Him. God gives a similar honor to Joshua (ch.19:49-51). Thus the faithfulness of Caleb and Joshua (in contrast to the other ten spies) was well rewarded. Caleb was given a share in the land of Judah (v.13), which seems to indicate that he did not have this right by natural birth, so that he must have been a Gentile brought into Israel as a proselyte.

Verse 14 tells us that in conquering Kirjath Arba (or Hebron) Caleb drove our Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai, the sons of Anak. Giants meant no more to Caleb than did weak men, for God was with him. He therefore took possession of Hebron, typically possessing the communion with God to which every believer is entitled, but which many do not enjoy.

Having taken Hebron, Caleb went up to Kirjath Sepher (“city of the book”), but its name changed to Debir, which means “oracle.” For if we are once enjoying communion with God, we shall then be concerned about speaking for Him. However, Caleb gives opportunity to others to capture this city, promising his daughter to the man who took Debir (vs.15-16). Surely this tells us that if we are in communion with God, we shall be glad to encourage others in God’s service. Nor does Caleb speak in vain, for his nephew, Othniel, responded to the challenge. Othniel means “lion of God,” speaking of the courage to act for God, so that it appears he did not delay to accomplish this victory over Debir (v.17). He did not only gain Debir, the oracle, picturing the honor of speaking for God, but also the daughter of Caleb, Achsah, meaning “anklet,” whose faith is very soon after emphasized beautifully, so that she must have been an excellent wife for Othniel. Achsah persuaded Othniel to ask her father for a field, just as believers should desire a workable inheritance. She had the exercise of asking before receiving, for God often waits for us to have concern enough to ask. Caleb responded positively to this request, giving her a land in the south. But the south was a warm, dry land, good land but requiring moisture if it was to yield produce. Therefore Achsah asked for springs of water also, and Caleb gave her both the upper and lower springs. If we have the simple concern to ask of God in faith, not doubting, we shall find Him indeed a liberal giver, as Jam 1:5-6 assures us. The upper springs speak of the refreshment of enjoying our inheritance in heavenly places, and the lower springs furnish us with grace to walk through the world in devoted obedience to God. How good if we are well balanced enough that we do not neglect either.

THE CITIES OF JUDAH

(vs.20-63)

The list of all the cities of Judah is intended to hold true spiritual instruction, as F.W.Grant shows in his Numerical Bible in considering this chapter, for both the numbers and the meaning of the names furnish the clues for understanding its spiritual significance. But we pass over this except to mention that Judah could not drive out the Jebusites from Jerusalem (v.63). This was the chief city, the city God had purposed to place His name, but it has been over all the centuries claimed by both the Jews and their enemies. David conquered Jerusalem from the Jebusites (2Sa 5:6-7), so that it is called “the City of David” and the kings of Judah reigned there for many years, but since the time of the kings it has suffered through constant contention from Israel’s enemies, and will do so until the Lord Jesus finally subdues the whole world under His authority. Then indeed Jerusalem, called Zion, will be “the city of our God, in His holy mountain. Beautiful in elevation, the joy of the whole earth, is Mount Zion on the sides of the north, the city of the great King” (Psa 48:1-2).

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

3. Judah’s inheritance ch. 15

The tribe of Judah probably received first consideration in the text, because it was this tribe that had received Jacob’s special patriarchal blessing. It was also the largest tribe.

Ancient Near Easterners used natural landmarks (rivers, mountains, deserts, towns, etc.) to construct borders as well as artificial boundaries that they made by drawing lines between sites. Virtually all nations have used these methods, and they are still common today.

Judah was the southernmost tribe west of the Jordan. Caleb’s family and the Simeonites lived within Judah’s territory. Simeon was the smallest tribe except Levi, and lost its territorial identity within Judah shortly after the conquest (cf. Gen 49:5-7). For this reason some maps of the tribal allotments do not include Simeon.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Judah’s boundaries and Caleb and Othniel’s inheritances 15:1-20

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The writer recorded the boundaries of the whole tribal territory first. The description proceeds counterclockwise from south (Jos 15:2-4) to east (Jos 15:5) to north (Jos 15:5-11) to west (Jos 15:12).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE INHERITANCE OF JUDAH.

Jos 15:1-63.

JUDAH was the imperial tribe, and it was fitting that he should be planted in a conspicuous territory. Even if the republic had not been destined to give place to the monarchy, some pre-eminence was due to the tribe which had inherited the patriarchal blessing, and from which He was to come in whom all the families of the earth were to be blessed. Judah and the sons of Joseph seem to have obtained their settlements not only before the other tribes, but in a different manner. They did not obtain them by lot, but apparently by their own choice and by early possession. Judah was not planted in the heart of the country. That position was gained by Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, while Judah obtained the southern section. In this position his influence was not so commanding at first as it would have been had he occupied the centre. The portion taken possession of by Judah had belonged to the first batch of kings that Joshua subdued, – the kings that came up to take vengeance on the Gibeonites. What was first assigned to Judah was too large, and the tribe of Simeon got accommodation within his lot (Jos 19:9). Dan also obtained several cities that had first been given to Judah (comp. Jos 15:21-62 and Jos 19:40-46). In point of fact, Judah ere long swallowed up a great part of Simeon and Dan, and Benjamin was so hemmed in between him and Ephraim that, while Jerusalem was situated within the limits of Benjamin, it was, for all practical purposes, a city of Judah.

We do not encumber our exposition with a discussion of the extraordinary theory of Wellhausen, to the effect that Judah and Simeon, with Levi, were the first to cross the Jordan and attack the Canaanites; that Simeon and Levi were all but annihilated; that Joshua, who belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, did little more than settle that tribe; and that there was hardly such a thing as united action by the tribes, most of them having acted and fought at their own hand. This theory rests professedly on the ground that Jdg 1:1-36 is a more true and trustworthy account of the settlement than the narrative of Joshua. It is a strange proof of the greater truthfulness of Judges that, according to this theory, its very first statement should be a lie – “It came to pass after the death of Joshua!”’ The narrative of Judges naturally follows that of Joshua because it is plain that while Joshua secured for his people standing ground in the country, he did not secure undisturbed possession. Joshua set them an example of faith and courage which, if followed up by them, would have secured undisturbed possession; but with few exceptions they preferred to tolerate the Canaanites at their side, instead of making a vigorous effort to dispossess them wholly.

The territory of Judah was not pre-eminently fruitful; it was not equal in this respect to that of Ephraim and Manasseh. It had some fertile tracts, but a considerable part of it was mountainous and barren. It was of four descriptions – the hill country, the valley or low country, the south, and the wilderness. ”The hill country,” says Dean Stanley, “is the part of Palestine which best exemplifies its characteristic scenery; the rounded hills, the broad valleys, the scanty vegetation, the villages and fortresses sometimes standing, more frequently in ruins, on the hill tops; the wells in every valley, the vestiges of terraces whether for corn or wine.” Here the lion of the tribe of Judah entrenched himself, to guard the southern frontier of the Chosen Land, with Simeon, Dan, and Benjamin nestled around him. Well might he be so named in this wild country, more than half a wilderness, the lair of savage beasts, of which the traces gradually disappear as we advance into the interior. Fixed there, and never dislodged, except by the ruin of the whole nation, “he lay down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up?” Many parts of Judah were adapted for the growth of corn: witness Bethlehem, “the house of bread.” But the cultivation of the vine was pre-eminently the feature of the tribe. “Here more than elsewhere in Palestine are to be seen on the sides of the hills the vineyards, marked by their watch-towers and walls, seated on their ancient terraces, the earliest and latest symbol of Judah. The elevation of the hills and table-lands of Judah is the true climate of the vine. He ‘bound his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes.’ It was from the Judsean valley of Eshcol, ‘the torrent of the cluster,’ that the spies cut down the gigantic cluster of grapes. A vineyard on a “hill of olives'” with the ‘fence,’ and ‘the stones gathered out,’ and the tower in ‘the midst of it,’ is the natural figure which both in the prophetical and evangelical records represents the kingdom of Judah. The ‘vine’ was the emblem of the nation on the coins of the Maccabees, and in the colossal cluster of golden grapes which overhung the porch of the second Temple; and the grapes of Judah still mark the tombstones of the Hebrew race in the oldest of their European cemeteries at Prague.*

*Stanley’s “Sinai and Palestine.”

The chapter now before us has a particularly barren look; but if we examine it with care we shall find it not deficient in elements of interest.

1. First, we have an elaborate delineation of the boundaries of the territory allotted to Judah. It is not difficult to follow the boundary line in the main, though some of the names cannot be identified now. The southern border began at the wilderness of Zin, where the host had been encamped more than forty years before, when the twelve spies returned with their report of the land. The line moved in a south-westerly course till it reached “the river of Egypt ” and the sea shore. What this “river of Egypt” was is far from clear. Naturally one thinks of the Nile, the only stream that seems to be entitled to such an appellation. On the other hand, the term translated “river” is commonly though not always, applied to brooks or shallow torrents, and hence it has been thought to denote a brook, now called El Arish, about midway in the desert between Gaza and the Pelusiac mouth of the Nile. While we incline to the former view, we own that practically the question is of little consequence; the only difference being that if the boundary reached to the Nile, it included a larger share of the desert than if it had a more northerly limit. The Dead Sea was the chief part of the eastern frontier. The northern boundary began near Gilgal, and stretched westwards to the Mediterranean by a line that passed just south of Jerusalem.

The position of Judah was peculiar, in respect of the enemies by whom he was surrounded. On his eastern frontier, close to the Dead Sea, he was in contact with Moab, and on the south with Edom, the descendants of Esau. On the south-west were the Amalekites of the desert; and on the west the Phillistines, and preeminent among them, until Caleb subdued them, the sons of Anak, the giants. On his extreme north, but within the tribe of Benjamin, was the great fortress of the Jebusites. It was no bed of roses that was thus prepared for the lion of the tribe of Judah. If he should rule at all, he must rule in the midst of his enemies. Hemmed in by fierce foes on every side, he needed to show his prowess if he was to prevail against them. It was the necessity of contending with these and other enemies that developed the military genius of David (1Sa 17:50; 1Sa 18:5; 1Sa 18:17; 1Sa 18:27; 1Sa 27:8), and made him the fitting type of the heavenly warrior who goes forth “conquering and to conquer.” The vigilance that was needed to keep these enemies at bay was one means of preserving the vigour and independence of the tribe. Living thus in the very heart of foes, Judah was the better fitted to symbolize the Church of Christ, as she is usually found when faithful to her high calling. “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves.” “We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” As long as the Church is militant, it cannot be otherwise; and it little becomes her either to complain on the one hand, or be despondent on the other, however strong and bitter the opposition or even the persecution of her foes.

2. Next, a little episode comes into our narrative (Jos 15:13-19), in connection with a special allocation of territory within the tribe. The incident of Caleb is rehearsed, as an introduction to the narrative that follows, Caleb, on the strength of his promise to drive out the Anakim, had got Hebron for his inheritance, and a portion of the country around. Near to Hebron, but on a site now unknown, stood Debir, or Kirjath- sepher, apparently a stronghold of the Anakim. We do not know the circumstances that induced Caleb to put this place up, as it were, to public competition. Whoever should capture it was promised his daughter Achsah in marriage. Othniel, who is called his younger brother, which may perhaps mean his brother’s son, took the place, and, according to the bargain, got Achsah for his wife. The capture of Debir is recorded twice, here and in Jdg 1:14-15, and in the latter case with the addition of an incident that followed the marriage, as if in both cases it had been copied from an older record. Achsah was evidently a woman who could look well after her interests. She was not satisfied with the portion of land that fell to Othniel. There was a certain field besides, on which she had set her affection, and which she induced her husband to ask of Caleb. This he appears to have obtained. Then she herself turned supplicant, and having gone to Caleb and lighted down from off her ass, and Caleb having said to her, “What wouldest thou?” she said unto her father, “Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water.” [“And she said, Give me a blessing (margin, present); for thou hast set me in the land of the south; give me also springs of water,” R.V.] Her request was granted: – ”he gave her the upper springs and the nether springs.”

Founding on the expression, “having lighted off her ass,” some have thought that she feigned to fall off, and that her father coming to help her in the compassionate spirit one shows in a case of accident, she took the opportunity to ask and obtain this gift. The explanation is far-fetched if not foolish. Her dismounting is explained by the universal custom when one met a person of superior rank. Comp. Gen 24:64. See Kitto’s ” Pictorial Commentary.”

The incident, though picturesque, is somewhat strange, and we naturally ask, why should it have a place in the dry narrative of the settlement? Possibly for the very reason that what concerns the settlement was very dry, and that an incident like this gave it something of living interest. Those who lived at the time must have had a special interest in the matter, for in Jdg 1:14 it is said that Achsah moved Othniel to ask of her father the field {Heb.} implying that it was a particular field, well known to the public. The moral interest of the narrative is the light it throws on the generosity of Caleb. His son-in-law asked of him a field, a field apparently of special value; he got it: his daughter asked springs of water, and she too gained her request. We contrast Caleb with Saul, as we afterwards read of him. In no such fashion was David treated by his father-in-law, after his brilliant victories over the Philistines. So far was he from acquiring field or fountain, that he did not even acquire his wife: – ”It came to pass at the time when Merab, Saul’s daughter, should have been given to David, that she was given unto Adriel the Meholathite to wife” (1Sa 18:19). Caleb had another spirit with him. He had the heart of a father, he had a genuine interest in his daughter and son-in-law, and desired to see them comfortable and happy. Kindly and large-hearted, he at once transferred to them valuable possessions that a greedier man would have kept for himself. Evidently he was one of those godlike men that enjoy giving, that have more pleasure in making others happy than in multiplying their own store. “The liberal man deviseth liberal things, and by liberal things shall he stand.” ”There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, and it tendeth to poverty.”

It is no great wonder that an incident which reveals the flowing generosity of a godlike heart, should sometimes be turned to account as a symbol of the liberality of God. All human generosity is but a drop from the ocean of the Divine bounty, a faint shadow of the inexhaustible substance. “If ye that are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your Father in heaven give good things to them that ask Him?” If in the earthly father’s bosom there be that interest in the welfare of his children which is eager to help them where help is needed and it is in his power to give it, how much more in the bosom of the Father in heaven? Why should any be backward to apply to Him – to say to Him, like Achsah, ”Give me a blessing”? It pleases Him to see His children reposing trust in Him, believing in His infinite love. All that He asks of us is to come to Him through Jesus Christ, acknowledging our unworthiness, and pleading the merit of His sacrifice and intercession, as our only ground of acceptance in His sight. After His revelation of His grace in Christ our requests cannot be restricted to mere temporal things; when we ask a blessing it must be one of higher scope and quality. Yet such is His bounty that nothing can be withheld that is really for our good. “No good thing will the Lord withhold from them that walk uprightly.” “Prove me now herewith, saith the Lord; if I will not open to you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.”

3. We leave this picturesque incident to re-enter the wilderness of unfamiliar names. We find a list of no fewer than a hundred and fifteen cities which lay within the confines of the tribe of Judah (Jos 15:21-32). They fall into four divisions. First, twenty-nine cities belonged to “the south ” – the “Negeb” of the Hebrews, the part of the country which bordered on the desert, and to some degree partook of its character. Cities they are called, but few of them were more than villages, and hardly any were important enough to leave their mark on the history. There are two, however, having memorable associations with men of mark, the one carrying us back to a glorious past, the other forward to a disgraceful future. Strange association – Abraham and Judas Iscariot! With Beersheba the name of Abraham is imperishably associated, as well as the name of Isaac. And to this day the very name Beersheba seems to emit a holy fragrance. With Kerioth (Jos 15:25) we connect the traitor Judas – the Iscariot of the New Testament being equivalent to Ish-Kerioth, a man of Kerioth, of the Old. Our heart fills with a sense of nausea as we recall the association. The traitor was doubly connected with the tribe of Judah, – by his name and by his birthplace. What mockery of a noble name! ”Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise.” What contrast could be greater than that between the Judah who surrendered himself to slavery to set his brother free, and the Judah who sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver! What extremes of character may we find under the same name, and often in the same family! Strange that so few are drawn by the example of the noble, and so many follow the course of the vile!

The next division, ”the valley,” the lowland, or Shephelah, embraced three subdivisions – the northeastern Shephelah with her fourteen towns (Jos 15:33-36), the middle, with sixteen (Jos 15:37-41), and the southern, with nine (Jos 15:42-44); to which are added three of the cities of the Phillistines, – Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza (Jos 15:45-47). Many of the places in this list became famous in the history. Eshtaol and Zorah were of note in the history of Samson, but in his time they were Danite settlements. Jarmuth, Lachish, Eglon, and Makkedah had been conspicuous in Joshua’s great battle of Bethhoron. Adullam and Keilah figured afterwards in David’s outlaw history, and Ashdod and Ekron were two of the Philistine cities to which the ark was taken after the battle of Ebenezer and Aphek (1Sa 4:1; 1Sa 5:1; 1Sa 5:10). In later years Lachish and Libnah were among the places attacked by Sennacherib, King of Assyria, in his great raid upon the country (Isa 37:8).

The third great group of cities were those of “the mountain,” or highlands. These were mostly in the central part of the territory, on the plateau or ridge that runs along it, rising up from the valley of the Dead Sea on the east, and the Shephelah, or “valley,” on the west. Here there were four groups of cities: eleven on the south-west (Jos 15:48-51), nine farther north (Jos 15:52-54), ten to the east (Jos 15:55-57), and six to the north (Jos 15:58-59), along with Kirjath-baal and Rabbah in the same neighbourhood. This group included Hebron, of which we hear so much; also Carmel, Maon, and Ziph, conspicuous in the outlaw life of David. It is remarkable that there is no mention of Bethlehem, which lay in ”the mountain”: it probably had not yet attained to the rank of a town. But its very omission may be regarded as a proof of the contemporaneous date of the book; for soon after Bethlehem was a well-known place (Ruth Ch. 1, Ch. 4), and if the Book of Joshua had been written at the late date sometimes assigned to it, that city could not have failed to have a place in the enumeration.

A fourth group of cities were in “the wilderness” or Migdar. This was a wild rocky region extending between the Dead Sea and the mountains of Hebron. “It is a plateau of white chalk, terminated on the east by cliffs which rise vertically from the Dead Sea shore to a height of about two thousand feet. The scenery is barren and wild beyond all description. The chalky ridges are scored by innumerable torrents, and their narrow crests are separated by broad, flat valleys. Peaks and knolls of fantastic forms rise suddenly from the swelling downs, and magnificent precipices of rugged limestone stand up like fortress walls above the sea. Not a tree nor a spring is visible in the waste; and only the desert partridge and the ibex are found ranging the solitude.”* This district was in large measure the scene of David’s wanderings, and well might he call it a dry and thirsty land where there is no water ” (Psa 63:1). It was also the scene of the preaching of John the Baptist, at least at the beginning (Mat 3:1); for when the administration of baptism became common, it was necessary for him to remove to a better watered region (Joh 3:23). There is some reason to believe that it was also the scene of our Lord’s temptation (Mat 4:1), the more especially because one of the Evangelists has said that ” He was there with the wild beasts ” (Mar 1:12).

*Conder’s ” Handbook to the Bible,” pp. 213, 214.

Only six cities are enumerated as “in the wilderness” (Jos 15:61-62), so that its population must have been very small. And of those mentioned some are wholly unknown. The most interesting of the six is Engedi, which derived its name from a celebrated fountain, meaning “fountain of the kid.” It is noted as one of the hiding-places of David; Saul pursued him to it, and it was there that David spared his life when he found him in a cave (1Sa 24:1-22). Solomon extols its vineyards and its camphire (Son 1:14) [henna-flowers, R.V.], Josephus its balsam (Ant., 9:1, 2), and Pliny its palms (v. 17). In ancient times it was the site of a town, and in the fourth century, in Jerome’s time, there was still a considerable village; now, however, there is no trace of anything of the kind. Sir Walter Scott, in the ”Talisman,” makes it the abode of a Christian hermit – Theodoric of Engaddi. It is situated near the middle of the western shore of the Dead Sea. A rich plain, half a mile square, slopes gently from the base of the mountains to the sea; and about a mile up the western acclivity, four hundred feet above the plain, is the fountain of Ain Jiddy, from which the place gets its name.

Such, then, was the distribution of the cities of Judah over the four sections of the territory, the south, the Shephelah, the highlands, and the wilderness. It was an ample and varied domain, and after Caleb expelled the Anakim, there seems to have been little or no opposition to the occupation of the whole by the tribe. But ”the crook in the lot” was not wanting. The great Jebusite fortress, Jerusalem, was on the very edge of the northern boundary of Judah. Nominally, as we have said, Jerusalem was in the territory of Benjamin, but really it was a city of Judah. For it is said (Jos 15:63), “As for the Jebusites, the children of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.”* For some reason Joshua had omitted to take possession of this stronghold after the battle of Bethhoron. The stream of pursuit had gone westward, and the opportunity of taking Jerusalem when the king had been slain and his army cut to pieces, was lost. And just as in modern history, when the opportunity of taking Sebastopol was lost after the battle of the Alma, and a long, harassing and most disastrous siege had to be resorted to, so it was with Jerusalem; the Jebusites, recovering their spirits after the defeat, were able to hold it, and to defy the tribe of Judah, and all the tribes, for many a long year. While the fortress was held by the Jebusites, Jew and Jebusite dwelt together in the city, leading no doubt a comfortless life, neither the one nor the other feeling truly at home.

*A proof that Joshua was written before the time of David.

The moral is not far to seek. There is a crisis in some men’s lives, when they come under the power of religion, and feel the obligation to live to God. If they had decision and courage enough at this crisis to break off all sinful habits and connections, to renounce all unchristian ways of life, to declare with Joshua, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord,” – they would no doubt experience a sharp opposition, but it would pass over, and peace would come. But often they hesitate, and shrink, and cower; they cannot endure opposition and ridicule; they retain religion enough to appease their consciences, but not to give them satisfaction and joy. It is another case of the men of Judah dwelling with the Jebusites, and with the same result; they are not happy, they are not at rest; they bring little or no honour to their Master, and they have little influence on the world for good.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary