Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 5:5
Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people [that were] born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, [them] they had not circumcised.
They; either their parents, or the rulers of Israel, whose omission hereof was not through neglect; for then God, who had ordered the neglecter of circumcision to be cut off, Gen 17:14, would not have left so gross a fault unpunished; but by Divine permission and indulgence; partly because they were now in a journey, in which case the passover also might be neglected, Num 9:10,13, and in that journey the passover was but once observed; and partly because there was not so great a necessity of this note of circumcision to distinguish them from other nations, whilst they dwelt alone and unmixed in the wilderness, as there was afterwards.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Now all the people that came out were circumcised,…. All that came out of Egypt, and males, were circumcised, whether under or above twenty years of age; for though it is possible all were circumcised before they came out of Egypt, which favours the opinion of Dr. Lightfoot, that they might be circumcised during the three nights’ darkness of the Egyptians, when they could take no advantage of it, as Levi and Simeon did of the Shechemites; and which seems more probable than that it should be on the night they came out of Egypt, when many must have been unfit for travelling, and seems preferable to that of their being circumcised at Mount Sinai, which was a year after their coming out of Egypt:
but all the people [that were] born in the wilderness by the way, as they came forth out of Egypt, [them] they had not circumcised; the reasons of which neglect; [See comments on Jos 5:2]. The phrase, “by the way”, seems to point at the true reason of it, at least to countenance the reason there given, which was on account of their journey; that is, their stay at any place being uncertain and precarious; so the Jews say z, because of the affliction or trouble of journeying, the Israelites did not circumcise their children. This is to be understood of all males only born in the wilderness, they only being the subjects of circumcision.
z Pirke Eliezer, ut supra. (c. 29.)
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
5. All the people that came out were circumcised That is, had been circumcised in infancy. Lev 12:3.
The people born in the wilderness they had not circumcised Various reasons have been assigned for the neglect in the wilderness of this rite, which was so scrupulously performed in Egypt. The fact that they were in an unsettled condition is not a sufficient reason, for they dwelt for months together in one place. The most satisfactory account of the matter is that, while under the sentence of the divine displeasure for forty years, the nation was temporarily rejected by its divine Head, and prohibited from impressing upon their sons the sign of the covenant. See note introductory to Jos 5:2.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jos 5:5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people [that were] born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, [them] they had not circumcised.
Ver. 5. Now all the people that came out were circumcised, ] i.e., As many as feared the Lord and believed Moses: for a great sort of them, by their long abode in Egypt, were much infected with idolatry and profaneness. Eze 20:7 ; Eze 23:3 ; Eze 23:9
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
they had not: Deu 12:8, Deu 12:9, Hos 6:6, Hos 6:7, Mat 12:7, Rom 2:26, 1Co 7:19, Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jos 5:5. The people born in the wilderness they had not circumcised What occasioned this omission is not said, nor is it easy to determine whether it arose from negligence, or from Gods dispensing, for a time, with his ordinance, on account of the unsettledness of their state, and their frequent removes while they were in the wilderness, it being necessary for children, after they were circumcised, and thereby made sore, to rest some time. This latter reason has generally been acquiesced in by commentators. But some have not judged it satisfactory, because sometimes the Israelites continued a year in a place, (Num 9:22,) if not much longer; and in their removes, their little children, though sore, might have been kept so warm, and carried so easy, as to receive no damage; and might certainly have been much better accommodated than the mothers in travail, or in lying-in. They have therefore thought that Gods not expressly and particularly enjoining them (for it does not appear that he did so enjoin them) to circumcise their children while they were in the wilderness, was a continued token of his displeasure against them for their unbelief and murmuring, and a token that they should never have the benefit of that promise of Canaan, whereof circumcision was the seal, Gen 17:8. But whatsoever the reason was, it seems this great ordinance was intermitted in Israel for almost forty years together; a plain indication that it was not of absolute necessity to mens eternal salvation, nor to be of perpetual obligation, but should, in the fulness of time, be abolished, as now it was for a long time suspended.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
5:5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people [that were] born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, [them] they had {d} not circumcised.
(d) For they looked daily to move at the Lord’s command, which they who were newly circumcised could not do without great danger.