Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 22:32
And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes, returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad, out of the land of Gilead, unto the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel, and brought them word again.
And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes,…. Being fully satisfied with the relation of things that had been given them, and having taken their leave of the assembly:
returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad; the Greek version adds, “and from the half tribe of Manasseh”; which, though not in the Hebrew text, is undoubtedly meant:
out of the land of Gilead: which, though only a part of the country these tribes inhabited, is put for the whole, and it is not improbable that the assembly might be held in it:
unto the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel; the rest of the children of Israel who dwelt in the land of Canaan, properly so called:
and brought them word again; reported the whole affair, related all that had passed, and acquainted them with the intention and design of their brethren erecting the altar, and what had been the issue of their embassy to them.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
They then returned to Canaan and informed the congregation. And the thing pleased them, so that they praised the Lord, sc., for having kept their brethren on the other side from rebellion, and they thought no more of going to war against them, or laying waste the land of the tribes on the east of the Jordan.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
‘ And Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes, returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad, out of the land of Gilead, to the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel and brought them word again.’
Phinehas and the princes now returned to the waiting children of Israel, who were no doubt on a war footing, with the good news. Phinehas’ official title is repeated as a result of its use in the previous verse.
“From the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad.” The lack of mention of the half tribe of Manasseh is at first surprising, yet the fact that it happens again twice more is against any idea that it dropped out accidentally. The probable explanation is that the meeting had taken place in Reuben/Gaddite territory, and that the representatives of Manasseh had already returned home. This would explain the use here. Then we can only assume that this then carried on into the next verses because they were still prominent in the mind.
It also suggests that the main feelings had been against these two tribes, with the influence of the western Manassites speaking on behalf of their eastern brothers and excluding them from suspicion. The latter would, however, have wanted a part in the discussions. (It is, however, quite common in Scripture for a part to be taken as representing the whole. Compare how ‘Moab’ represents three tribes or nations (Jdg 3:28-30 with Jdg 3:13), and how Midian/the Midianites (Jdg 8:28; Jdg 6:1-2; Jdg 7:16) represents three tribes or nations (Jos 6:3). But it is more unusual here).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The return of the embassy in peace, must have been highly grateful to all Israel. When ministers return with an account of their success, in their acting as ambassadors for Jesus, what holy joy doth it occasion even in heaven itself? Luk 15:10 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED TEXT): Jos 22:32-34
32Then Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest and the leaders returned from the sons of Reuben and from the sons of Gad, from the land of Gilead to the land of Canaan, to the sons of Israel, and brought back word to them. 33The word pleased the sons of Israel, and the sons of Israel blessed God; and they did not speak of going up against them in war to destroy the land in which the sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad were living. 34The sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad called the altar Witness; For, they said, it is a witness between us that the LORD is God.
Jos 22:34 called the altar Witness In the New American Standard Bible, the term witness is in italics, which means that it is not in the ancient Masoretic or Hebrew text. This term does not appear in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, or the Vulgate, the Latin translation of the Old Testament. It is simply supplied for an English reader to understand what the altar was called (following the Syriac translation). It really refers to the term mentioned in Jos 22:27.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought-provoking, not definitive.
1. How was it decided which tribes would inherit land on the eastern side of the Jordan?
2. What is the significance of Jos 22:5?
3. What is the significance of Joshua’s blessing?
4. What happened at Peor? What happened on account of Achan?
5. What is the significance of Jos 22:22?
6. Why did the eastern tribes build an altar on their side of the Jordan?
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
and brought: Jos 22:12-14, Pro 25:13
Reciprocal: Exo 6:25 – Phinehas