Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Joshua 6:22

But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot’s house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye swore unto her.

22 25. The Rescue of Rahab

22. Go into the harlot’s house ] We are told that Rahab’s house was upon the town wall, and that she dwelt upon the wall. But though the walls of Jericho fell down flat, her house was preserved. They fell by faith, and she was saved by faith (Heb 11:30-31).

as ye sware unto her ] See above, Jos 2:14.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

The harlots house, together with the wall upon which it leaned, was left standing, either by a special favour of God to her, or for the reason alleged upon Jos 6:5.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

22, 23. Joshua had said . . . Gointo the harlot’s house, and bring out thence the woman, and all thatshe hathIt is evident that the town walls were not demolisheduniversally, at least all at once, for Rahab’s house was allowed tostand until her relatives were rescued according to promise.

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

But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country,…. Whom he had sent on that errand, Jos 2:1; and what follows he had said unto them before the people entered into the city, and perhaps before the walls of it fell; and indeed from Jos 6:16, it appears to have been said at the time he gave the people orders to shout:

go into the harlot’s house: he does not mention her name but they full well knew who he meant:

and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath; not so much her substance, as her father’s household, she had got together there, that they might be saved, as had been promised her:

as ye sware unto her; so that this order was partly on account of her kindness to them, Jos 6:17; and partly on account of the oath which they had taken, and which Joshua would have inviolably kept.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

22. But Joshua had said unto the two men, etc The good faith of Joshua in keeping promises, and his general integrity, are apparent in the anxious care here taken. But as the whole city had been placed under anathema, a question might be raised as to this exception of one family. No mortal man was at liberty to make any change on the decision of God. Still as it was only by the suggestion of the Spirit that Rahab had bargained for her impunity, I conclude that Joshua, in preserving her, did only what was considerate and prudent.

We may add, that the messengers were not yet under any contrary obligation, as the complete destruction of the city had not been declared. It is true, they had heard in general, that all those nations were to be destroyed, but they were still at liberty to make a compact with a single woman, who had voluntarily abandoned her countrymen. But we shall afterwards meet with a far easier solution, namely, that while the Israelites, by the divine command, exhorted all whom they attacked, to surrender, by holding out the hope of pardon, the blinded nations obstinately refused the peace thus offered, because God had decreed to destroy all of them. But while all, in general, were hardened to their destruction, it follows that Rahab was exempted by special privilege, and might escape in safety, while the others perished. Joshua, therefore, judged wisely, that a woman who had voluntarily gone over to the Church, was rescued thus early, not without the special grace of God. The case of the father and the whole family is, indeed, different, but seeing they all spontaneously abjure their former state, they confirm the stipulation which Rahab had made for their safety, by the promptitude of their obedience.

Moreover, let us learn from the example of Joshua, that we do not sufficiently attest our probity, by refraining from violating our promise intentionally and of set purpose, unless we also diligently exert ourselves to secure its performance. He not only allows Rahab to be delivered by her guests, but is careful to guard against her sustaining any injury in the first tumult; and to make the messengers more diligent in performing their office, he reminds them that they had promised with the intervention of an oath.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

The Sparing of Rahab Jos. 6:22-27

22 But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlots house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her.
23 And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and all that she had; and they brought out all her kindred, and left them without the camp of Israel.
24 And they burnt the city with fire, and all that was therein: only the silver, and the gold, and the vessels of brass and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the Lord.
25 And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her fathers household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.
26 And Joshua adjured them at that time, saying, Cursed be the man before the Lord, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho: he shall lay the foundation thereof in his firstborn, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it.
27 So the Lord was with Joshua; and his fame was noised throughout all the country.

11.

Why was Rahab left without the camp? Jos. 6:23

After the walls of Jericho fell down flat and the people went up into the city every man straight before him to take the city, Joshua sent the two men who had spied out the country to rescue Rahab. They had entered into a covenant with her promising to spare her if she would gather everything she had into her house and identify her house by displaying the cord of scarlet thread by which she had helped them to escape. These men thought Rahab had kept her part of the agreement. She had brought her father, mother, and brethren to her house. Everything she had was there. They brought all these people and their possessions out of the city before they burned the city with fire. Rahab was left outside the camp of Israel since she was not yet integrated into the community as a member of a particular tribe. Her mother, father, and brethren would also need to accept the laws of Israel before they could be taken into the community. Leaving them outside the camp was a precaution which they took out of the necessity of the case.

12.

What was the treasury of the house of the Lord? Jos. 6:24

The people of Israel were told to bring out their firstfruits, tithes, and offerings to the house of the Lord. This was the means of providing for the livelihood of the priests and Levites. When they had a special need for materials in the days of Moses, they brought such an abundance that Moses had to ask them to desist (Exo. 36:5-7). It was in this same spirit that the people set apart all the silver, the gold, and the vessels of brass and iron for the use of the priests and Levites at the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle is called the House of the Lord.

13.

How long did Rahab live among the Israelites? Jos. 6:25

Rahab lived among the people of Israel until the time of the writing of the book of Joshua. The statement that she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day can only be a reference to the fact that she was alive at the time of the writing of the book. Since Rahab is presented as an adult at the time when she hid the spies this verse must have been written within the adult lifetime of Rahab herself. Such a statement prevents our supposing that this book was written at a much later date. If the book was written by a contemporary of Rahab, there is no one in a better position than Joshua to do the writing himself. This is another indication of the fact that Joshua wrote this book.

14.

Why did Joshua announce a curse to prevent rebuilding Jericho? Jos. 6:26

Jericho had been filled with people who were the Lords enemies. Although their hearts melted in them, they were so hardhearted that they did not repent, The city itself was placed under the ban and was completely destroyed. To prevent a similar civilization from arising on the site, Joshua announced that the man who rebuilt the city would be cursed of God. Some feel that anyone who attempted to rebuild the city would celebrate the laying of the foundation by offering his firstborn son as a human sacrifice. He would then celebrate the completion of the project and the setting up of the gates of the city by offering his youngest son as a human sacrifice. It is better to view this as a prediction that God would smite the heirs of such an irreverent man until his heirs would be cut offthe firstborn as well as the youngest.

15.

Was the curse on Jericho ever executed? Jos. 6:26 b

It was not until Ahabs time that Hiel, the Bethelite, attempted to rebuild Jericho (1Ki. 16:34). The curse included the loss of all the sons of the man who tried to remake Jericho into a fortified city. The curse was to be upon one who would lay the foundation of a wall, build the wall, and set up the gates of the wall. As the Scripture says, he laid the foundation in Abiram his firstborn and set up the gates in his youngest son Segub. This was according to the word of the Lord.

16.

How did Joshuas fame become known? Jos. 6:27

God said to Joshua, I will be with thee: I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee (Jos. 1:5). God kept His promise. The Lord was with Joshua. He enabled Israel to cross the Jordan River on dry ground at Joshuas order. He caused the walls of Jericho to fall down when Joshua obeyed His commandments. Such great acts of power as these were to be talked about in all the cities of Canaan Reports of these events had caused the hearts of the people to melt. Rahab said the people had heard how the Lord had dried up the water of the Red Sea when the people of Israel came out of Egypt. They had heard about the conquests on the east side of the Jordan as Israel defeated Sihon, king of Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan. Travelers going from village to village would carry the news of the latest victories. The things which God was doing through His people were known by all the Canaanites. Joshuas name was on the lips of all the people. His victories had made him famous, and the people of the land were afraid of him.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

THE SALVATION OF RAHAB, Jos 6:22-25.

22. Joshua had said The indefinite past tense of the original is here very properly rendered by our pluperfect, had said. See Jos 6:17, where these instructions are given.

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

‘ And Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the country, “Go to the prostitute’s house and bring out from there the woman, and all that she has, as you swore to her.” ’

In the excitement of victory Joshua did not forget the oath sworn to Rahab. His sensitivity was revealed in sending to her the two men whom she knew, and his wisdom was revealed in giving her some protection at a time when she might have been very vulnerable. She was relatively safe in the house with its token on the window, but once outside it she would be a target for any overexcited soldier.

This suggests that, although it was on the wall, her house had been preserved, or at least not badly damaged, a further evidence of the hand of YHWH.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

EXPOSITION

RAHAB‘S DELIVERANCE. THE CURSE ON JERICHO.

Jos 6:22

Had said. Here we have an instance of the use of the perfect as a pluperfect. We can hardly suppose, as Keil observes, that Joshua gave these orders in the midst of the turmoil and confusion attendant on the sack of the city (see above, Jos 1:11; Jos 2:1). Go into the harlot’s house. The preservation of Rahab’s house must have been a part of the miracle, since it was upon the city wall (cf. Heb 11:30, Heb 11:31).

Jos 6:23

Brought out. Therefore the medieval legends concerning Rahab’s house must be classed among superstitious fables. Rahab and her family and relations were saved, but her house shared the destruction which befel the rest of the city. Origen cites in reference to the deliverance of Rahab the harlot, 1Co 6:11, and Tit 3:3 (cf. also Eph 2:1-8; Eph 5:8; Col 3:7). Without the camp of Israel. Not in the camp of Israel outside the city, as some have rendered. The Hebrew distinctly connects the word with the camp. They were as yet, as Gentiles, unclean (cf. Num 5:2; Num 31:19).

Jos 6:25

Unto this day. This may either be interpreted of herself, or, according to s common Hebrew idiom, of her family (cf. Jos 17:14-18; Jos 24:17). For a fuller discussion of the bearing of this passage on the date of the Book of Joshua, see Introduction. There is no mention of Rahab’s marriage in the Old Testament. Lightfoot (‘Hebrew and Talmudicai Exercitations?’ Mat 1:5) mentions a tradition that she married Joshua! Dr. W. H. Mill, in his treatise on the genealogies of our Lord, defends the tradition St. Matthew has followed by showing that Salmon’s age at the time gives immense probability to the statement. Some (see the Bishop of Bath and Wells’ article in Smith’s ‘ Dictionary of the Bible’) suppose that Salmon was one of the spies.

Jos 6:26

And Joshua adjured them. Caused them to swear, i.e; bound them by an oath, as the Hiphil implies here. This was the strict meaning of “adjure” at the time our version was made (cf. Mat 26:63). But it had also the less definite meaning which it now has, of solemnly warning a person to do something or to leave it undone. The object of this solemn adjuration (see above) was to preserve Jericho as a spot devoted to God for ever; and for this reason a curse was pronounced upon any one who should attempt to found a city upon the devoted spot (cf. Deu 13:16, “It shall not be rebuilt.”) This curse actually fell on the reckless Hiel (1Ki 16:34; cf. Josephus, ‘Antiq.,’ 1Ki 16:1.8), and he saw the laying of its foundations marked by the death of his eldest son, while the death of his youngest followed its completion. It does not seem that it was forbidden to build habitations on the spot, far Jericho is frequently mentioned in the New Testament, and the house of Zacchaeus (Luk 19:5) was there. What seems to have been forbidden was the erection of a fortified city there. The mention of Jericho in Jos 18:21 does not imply that it was an inhabited city, but simply that the site of Jericho fell within the border of the tribe of Benjamin. For Jerusalem is also mentioned, and we know that it did not become theirs until the time of David. Whether the “city of palm trees” (Jdg 3:13) is Jericho, may be questioned. But in 2Sa 10:5 and in 2Ki 2:5 express mention is made of Jericho, the last time as the site of the school of the prophets. Some commentators have endeavoured to restrict the sense of the word used here to the building of fortifications. But this is unduly to restrict its meaning, for it is constantly used also of houses and altars (see Gen 2:22; Gen 8:20; 1Ki 8:27). But the mention of gates clearly implies a fortified city. Commentators cite as parallel instances the curse of Agamemnon on Troy, of Croesus on Sidene, and of Scipio upon Carthage, and it is observed that when Augustus rebuilt Carthage he carefully avoided the old site. In his first born. is often used of the price paid for a thing, as in Gen 29:18; Isa 7:23. And in his youngest son. The commentators have remarked on the rhythmical parallelism here, and Keil and others have supposed the passage to be an extract from an old Hebrew songbook, such as that of Jasher (Jos 10:13). But this parallelism is not only a characteristic of poetry, but of all solemn and impassioned utterances in the language. (See, for instance, 2Sa 18:32; 1Ki 17:14; 1Ki 21:19). Masius, Munsterus, and others interpret the passage that the eldest son died when the foundation was laid; all the rest, but the youngest, in the interim; the youngest when the gates were set up.

HOMILETICS

Jos 6:22-27

Salvation: its Cause and Effects

1. The first lesson we learn from this portion of the narrative is salvation by faith. Had Rahab not believed in God, she would not have saved the sides; and had she not saved the spies, she would not have been saved herself. We have St. James’s authority (Jos 2:1-24 :25) for citing this passage as an illustration of the connection between faith and works.

I. WORKS “DO SPRING NECESSARILY OUT OF A LIVELY FAITH.” Had Rahab not believed as she did, she would not have acted as she did. Her works were the direct result of her belief. On the other hand, had she not acted as she did, she would have proved that, whatever her profession to the spies might have been, she did not really believe what she pretended to believe about the power of Jehovah, and the ultimate success of Israel. Here we may discern a clue to the labyrinth of the controversy about the efficacy of faith and works respectively in the scheme of salvation. For

(a) a man who believes is naturally inclined to act upon what he believes. If he believes that he is saved through Christ, he will act as if he were saved through Christ. And

(b) it becomes important to ask, From what is he saved through Christ? And the Scripture tells us that he is not saved merely from the punishment of sin, but from sin itself. The scheme of salvation through Christ involves a belief in a “full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world.” But it also leads us on from that reconciliation with God to the idea of an indwelling in Christ through His Spirit, which shall enable us to “put off,” to “slay,” to “crucify” the “flesh” or “old man,” and to rise up to a renewed life of sanctity and holiness. A man who believes this must begin to do it. He must, as a matter of course, gird himself up to a conflict with all within him which is not subdued to God’s will, as revealed in Christ. If he does not undertake this conflict, it is because he does not believe that he is redeemed through Christ, and that that redemption leads on to sanctification by a necessary law, that of union with Christ. Thus we learn

(c) that all whose life is avowedly and systematically inconsistent with their Christian profession, who do not try to root out all evil and to practise all kinds of good, or who set up another standard before them in their actions than that set up in God’s Word, are not real believers in Christ, let their profession be what it may.

II. THERE IS NO SALVATION FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT MANIFEST THEIR FAITH BY THEIR WORKS. Had Rahab not shown her faith in God by delivering the spies, there could not have been any escape for her. Whatever her private belief might have been, she would have been involved in the general destruction that overtook the whole city. And thus St. Paul and St. James alike insist upon the necessity of our Christian conduct being the manifestation of our inward belief. If it be asked how our faith should be manifested, it may be replied that there must be

(a) an abiding sense of God’s goodness as displayed in the forgiveness of sins, and

(b) an earnest striving after likeness to Christ in every action of life.

And this last will stir us up to deeds of active loving kindness like that of Rahab, who, as we have seen forgot herself and the dangers that beset her in the anxious desire to befriend first the messengers of God, and next those who were near and dear to herself. If we do not these things we are none of Christ’s, and, despite our loud profession that we have always belonged to Him, He will have no other greeting for us at the last than, “Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity.”

III. SALVATION IS BY CHRIST‘S BLOOD ALONE. Had Rahab not hung the scarlet cord in the window, she would have perished as surely, though she had saved the spies, as if she had done nothing. So our good deeds avail nothing without faith in God’s mercy through Christ. They are but the deeds of the Pharisees, unless coupled with the deepest sense of our own unworthiness. We must own that when we have done all, we are unprofitable servants. “Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Thus no trace of self satisfaction must mingle with our obedience, or all will be worthless. This was the fatal mistake of the Pharisees, and this was the reason of the anger of the Lord against them. The deepest humility, combined with the most absolute reliance upon the atoning merits of the Saviour, are among the first requisites of the regenerate life. This thought alone will preserve to the greatest saint that indispensable grace of humility which is the salt that prevents his religious profession from corruption. This alone will maintain those relations with the Author of our salvation which are necessary to keep His life present within us. If we are numbered among God s saints, if we are raised to high places in Israel, if we are the means of salvation to others, it is all due to the scarlet cord in the window.

2. A second lesson taught by this part of the narrative is that salvation works results in those who are saved.

I. RAHAB‘S FAITH WAS THE CAUSE OF THE SALVATION OF OTHERS. Had she not believed in God, her relatives would have shared the fate of Jericho. So in all other cases. Faith is an expansive principle. It is not content with doing good to its possessor; it stirs him up to benefit others. Jesus sent forth those who believed in Him to “preach the gospel to every creature.” And all faithful Christians are their successors. They must needs “show forth the praises of him who called them out of darkness into his own marvellous light.” They must strive to benefit others

(a) by trying to proclaim the gospel to the heathen abroad, or the worse than heathen at home;

(b) by intercessory prayer for all good works; and

(c) by active works of love to all who are in any way within their reach.

II. RAHAB, ONCE SAVED, WAS EXALTED TO GREAT HONOUR. She became a “mother in Israel,” and espoused one of its princes. She attained in ages far remote the immortal honour of being mentioned as one of the progenitors of the King of kings. Thus we learn

(a) that the “cup of cold water” does not lose its reward. Every kind action done for the love of God and Christ shall be repaid a thousandfold. We are also taught

(b) that no amount of previous sin shall be weighed in the balance against us when we have truly repented. Rahab’s sin was thought no more of when she was saved from the slaughter of Jericho. And so God’s forgiveness is full and free, through Christ, when its condition, true repentance, is attained. Though He may see fit to leave us to the discipline of the natural consequences of our sin awhile, it is for our good. He does not cast our past sins in our teeth when we have returned to Him. lie will not listen to our request to be as the least and lowest of His hired servants. He puts the best robe upon us, and rings on our fingers, in token of His joy at our return. When our heart is once more whole with Him, we are as truly His dear children as if we had never left Him, and may sun ourselves as fearlessly as they in the light of His mercy. Lastly

(c), though we may not exactly go so far as to say “the greater the sinner, the greater the saint,” we may at least say that there is no reason why a great, sinner may not become a great saint. We ought not to be deterred by our past sins, grievous and (but for God’s mercy) unpardonable as they are, from pressing forward to the utmost heights of holiness that are within our reach. We are taught to forget those things that are behind, and reach forth unto the things that are before. The records of God’s Church are full of such histories. From Mary Magdalene, and after her St. Augustine, to our own day the examples of men steeped to the lips in sin, who have repented and advanced to great heights of holiness, are before us to teach the sinner not to despair, but to trust in His loving kindness who hath raised “the poor out of the mire, that he may set him with the princes, even with the princes of his people.”

3. The third lesson this narrative contains is the exceeding sinfulness of sin. Jericho was a sinful city, and therefore it was a devoted city. God had plainly stated (Deu 9:5) that the Israelites were the ministers of His vengeance against sin; that for no virtue of their own, but for the appalling crimes which had called down vengeance from on high upon the Phoenician nations, they had been selected to drive them out. Many interesting questions arise here, some regarding the idea of God, some regarding the true nature of sin, indicated to us in this passage.

I. IS GOD UNRIGHTEOUS THAT TAKETH VENGEANCE? As this question is fully discussed in the Introduction to this Book, a few hints will be all that is necessary here. We may observe

(a) that whatever difficulties attach to the command given to Joshua. apply equally to every idea of God that we can form. He, the All wise and All good, has at least permitted these chastisements upon men for their sin. We might go further. We might say that lie has enjoined them. God has clearly made it a law of our humanity that nations wallowing in the indulgence of sensual passion, permitting themselves to enjoy unchecked the pleasures of injustice, oppression, rapine, cruelty, have in the end been punished by being made the victims of similar cruelty. The Almighty Disposer of events has allowed man again and again to inflict cruelties as severe upon other nations, for their sins, as Joshua did upon the Canaanites. Thus whatever objections (see Butler’s ‘Analogy’ here) may be raised to the possibility of God giving such a commission to His servant as that narrated in this Book, apply with equal force to the facts of history. Either, therefore, there is no God at all, or He is not good, or He can, consistently with truth and justice, incite man to exercise His vengeance upon those who have sinned. We may further observe

(b) that physical suffering does not seem so terrible a thing in God’s eyes as it does in ours. Famines, wars, pestilences, accidents, shipwrecks, with all their attendant horrors and miseries, have happened, and will still continue to happen. And God seems not to heed. But is it not because He sees the whole, while we see but a part of His doings? Were this the only world, we must come to the conclusion that God is not goodness, but cruelty; not justice, but the most gross and aggravated injustice. “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” But granted flint there is another world, in which all that goes amiss here will be set right, and these difficulties disappear. The sorrows of this life will seem but a momentary pang as we live through the ages of eternity. And in that good land we shall smile at the doubts of God’s perfections which have caused us such uneasiness here. Again

(c) we may note that history now shows that the Hittites were once a great and flourishing people. Yet until lately they had been so entirely forgotten that their very names were unknown. Why this complete obliteration, as it were, from the map of humanity? Why, but because they had sinned against the Lord, and He must destroy them? Israel was not the only instrument of His vengeance. Far to the northward of the Holy Land, where their empire flourished on the banks of the Orontes and in Asia Minor, He sent the Egyptians and Assyrians against them, till their name was blotted out from among the nations of the earth. And so will it be till time shall be no more. The nation which holds not God in remembrance shall be cut away from His hand.

II. TOUCH NOT THE UNCLEAN THING. This lesson will be yet farther enforced in the next chapter. Yet here we may note that the Christian is to have no dealings whatever with ungodliness and its treasures. The good things of this life, save as things to be used for God, are to be steadfastly renounced. The desire of possessing them is not to be a motive for action. They who serve God for filthy lucre’s sake are unsparingly condemned under the gospel. It is, of course, a difficult task to decide how far innocent pleasures may be enjoyed, or rewards, honours, wealth, accepted, when God seems to have put them in our way. All the cities were not devoted to God, but Jericho only. Yet it may safely be said that in these days of a widely diffused profession of Christianity, the verdict of Christian society on these points is too lenient a one. The love of money and of the good things of this life is too free]y admitted as a motive for action. The deliberate preference of a life of poverty and self-denial is too often looked down upon with disdain, though it is recommended to us by the example of Christ. Nay, it may even be doubted how far St. Paul’s rule of excommunication of the covetous man (1Co 5:11) is carried out by the Christian Church, even when money has been made or honours attained by unfair means. The man who, as director of a public company, gives his sanction, by carelessness or weakness, to acts which, as a private individual, he would not have committedthe man who by bribery obtains a position among the law makers of this great empirethe man who amasses a vast fortune by indirect meansis he courted or condemned by the collective Christian conscience in these days? It may be doubted whether, among all the advances we have unquestionably made of late in Christian principle, the spirit of Achan, rather than Joshua, does not predominate among us still.

III. WHAT GOD HAS PROMISED WILL SURELY COME TO PASS. The ungodly often cry, “Tush, God hath forgotten; he hideth his face and he will never see it.” But it comes to pass just the same. The wicked Hiel laughed Joshua’s prophecy to scorn. Yet it came true. And so do many thoughtless persons now laugh to scorn the declarations of God’s Word. They ridicule the idea of chastisement for national sins; they will not hear of days of humiliation for national misfortunes; they tell us all things are ordered by invariable law. But God punished nations of old for their sins, and He does so still. Nor does He act otherwise with individuals. He has declared that sin brings punishment in its train; but men sin wantonly, and hope to escape its necessary consequences. But either in this world or the next these consequences arrive. What God has said will surely come to pass. And then man wishes in vain that he had never offended Him. As in Hiel’s ease, so now, God fulfils to the very letter the predictions He has uttered. Let us be wise in time, and so avoid the misfortunes which a presumptuous contempt of God’s Word is sure to bring on us.

HOMILIES BY R. GLOVER

Jos 6:22-24

A city of destruction.

If any city ever was such a “City of Destruction” as Bunyan fancied, it was Jericho. Itself and all within it were devoted to destruction, only Rahab, like another Noah, with her family escaping. It is an awful fact to contemplate the destruction of a whole city. No escape, and little warning! Old and young, one day in possession of wealth, ease, comfort, and the next day captured and destroyed. The judicial principles on which God acts and on which He here commands the destruction of Jericho, are beyond us, but some of the lessons are clear and useful. Study these:

I. THERE IS A PENALTY FOR SIN. There is nothing wanton in God’s ways. Israel was God’s chosen, and the nations of Canaan His rejected, because morally the former, with all its faults, infinitely surpassed the latter. You get glimpses of the evil of the primitive races with their religious in the story of Baal-Peor; in the vice and atrocity which perpetually mark every relapse of Israel into idolatry; in the nameless defilements of modern heathenism. Dr. Arnold, no narrow theologian, defends the destruction of the Canaanites as a great gain to the welfare of humanity. It is these cruelties and abominations of heathenism which required and explain the destruction of the Canaanites. For God punishes sin. There is no truth more undeniable, and none the knowledge of which is more widely spread. We suffer for every fault we commit. As root and fruit, so wrong and wretchedness, go together. However subtle the fault, God’s providence operates in penalties still more subtle. The eating of any forbidden fruit always has its two penaltiesloss of power, and loss of some sort of Eden. Sins of sinners have their penalties. And God’s people receive “double for all their sins”a heavier stroke for the less excusable transgression. It is not because God is wrathful that He punishes, but because He is gracious. God is love, and therefore will not let us harm ourselves or others. His infinite love impels Him to “stamp out” evil by penalty. It is blasphemy to think God can sit still and see, with indifferent eye, the poison of sin working its mischief in the world. For love is neither in God nor man a merely sentimental thing. It is wise, it is strong, it is stern. “Love is inexorable,” says one of our greatest teachers (George Macdonald). So God’s love makes Him “a consuming fire.” He pardons sin, when His grace working penitence has got it out of us, but punishes it until we deplore and loathe it. The creed of Jericho was probably a very free and easy one. But as God’s facts do not accommodate themselves to our creeds, it is better to adjust our creed to God’s facts. Your sins will not pass unpunished. Blessed be God’s name, He loves us too well for that. There will be an element of correction in all penalty, until correction becomes impossible; and then, in mercy at once to ourselves and others, God steps in to prevent the further accumulation of guilt by us, and the further infliction of mischief on others. The city of sin is a city of destruction, and your sin will receive the penalty due to it, however secure you may feel in yore’ power to evade it.

II. PENALTY IS OFTEN LONG DEFERRED, AND IS THEN SUDDENLY INFLICTED. Jericho had, I suppose, stood long. The destruction of the cities of the plain had not extended to it. It is possible that, alike from the calamities of war as well as those of nature it had been free. And its prosperity and wealth, its abounding trade with East and West, suggested that there was really no reason to be afraid of God’s judgments. Yet suddenly, like a thunderbolt out of a clear sky, destruction fell on them. There is often delay in inflicting a punishment. God prolongs opportunity. “This year also” He spares the barren fig tree, reluctant to destroy what might produce fruit. He is not willing that any should perish, lie is “slow to anger.” His long suffering is salvation. He lengthens “the days of tranquillity” that we may at last repent. But when all delay is abused, and the postponement of doom only awakes presumption, at last the stroke comes,” suddenly and without remedy.” The flood came suddenly, and so did the destruction of Sodom, so did that of Jezebel and Nabal, and Belshazzar, and Herod, and Judas, and that of multitudes that cannot be numbered. Do not mistake postponement of penalty for pardon of sin. Of all our unrepented sin that has not yet been smitten, the punishment is only suspended. We cannot dig so deep but God will find us, nor strengthen our defence so stoutly as to defy His power. Be wise and use the days of reprieve for repentance. “Seek the Lord while he may be found,” as we are here taught there is a penalty for every sin, and that, long suspended, it yet at last falls suddenly. So observe also lastly

III. THEY WHO WOULD AVOID DESTRUCTION MUST BECOME FOLLOWERS OF THE GOD OF ISRAEL. Only one woman with her relatives seems to have done this. We do not read of any persons fleeing from the city of doom, or making any provision for capitulation or escape. The enervation of luxury and immorality is on them. They alternately sink in despair or are puffed up in the confidence of their walls. But one person, rising in repentance from the guilt of a long neglect, sees the glory of God and chooses Him as her hope and Master. When she cannot save the city with her, she saves herself, and, expecting the wonderful works of God, enlists in His service. Repent thou, and take Jesus Christ as thy Lord, ending with serious change of thought and action all the evil of your life. And then the infinite love which weeps when it can only smite will pardon the sin that you forsake, and give you “a place amongst the children,” and the great salvation which you long to enjoy.G.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Jos 6:22 But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot’s house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her.

Ver. 22. As ye sware unto her. ] Romanis promittere promptum est: promissis autem, quanquam iuramento firmatis, minime stare, said Mirchanes, the Persian general in Procopius. a But Joshua was none such.

a Lib. i., De Bell Persic.

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