JOSHUA 14 COMME TARYEDITED BY GLE PEASE

Division of the Land West of the Jordan

1 ow these are the areas the Israelites received as an inheritance in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, Joshua son of un and the heads of the tribal clans of Israel allotted to them.

CLARKE, "Eleazar the priest, etc. - Eleazar, as being the minister of God in sacred things is mentioned first. Joshua, as having the supreme command in all things civil, is mentioned next. And the Heads or Princes of the twelve tribes, who in all things acted under Joshua, are mentioned last. These heads or princes were twelve, Joshua and Eleazar included; and the reader may find their names in Num_34:19-28. It is worthy of remark that no prince was taken from the tribes of Reuben and Gad, because these had already received their inheritance on the other side of Jordan, and therefore could not be interested in this division.

GILL, "And these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan,.... Of which an exact account is given in the following chapters, particularly in the Jos_15:1,

which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for an inheritance unto them; namely, ten princes, one of each tribe, who, with Eleazar and Joshua, were appointed of the Lord by name to do this business, even seven years ago, before their entrance into the land of Canaan, Num_34:17.

HE RY 1-2, "The historian, having in the foregoing chapter given an account of the disposal of the countries on the other side Jordan, now comes to tell us what they did with the countries in the land of Canaan. They were not conquered to be left desert, a habitation for dragons, and a court for owls, Isa_34:13. No, the Israelites that had hitherto been closely encamped in a body, and the greatest part of them such as never knew any other way of living, must now disperse themselves to replenish these new

conquests. It is said of the earth, God created it not in vain; he formed it to be inhabited,Isa_45:18. Canaan would have been subdued in vain if it had not been inhabited. Yet every man might not go and settle where he pleased, but as there seems to have been in the days of Peleg an orderly and regular division of the habitable earth among the sons of Noah (Gen_10:25, Gen_10:32), so there was now such a division of the land of Canaan among the sons of Jacob. God had given Moses directions how this distribution should be made, and those directions are here punctually observed. See Num_26:53, etc.

I. The managers of this great affair were Joshua the chief magistrate, Eleazar the chief priest, and ten princes, one of each of the tribes that were now to have their inheritance, whom God himself had nominated (Num_34:17, etc.) some years before; and, it should seem, they were all now in being, and attended this service, that every tribe, having a representative of its own, might be satisfied that there was fair dealing, and might the more contentedly sit down by its lot.

JAMISO , "Jos_14:1-5. The nine tribes and a half to have their inheritance by lot.

these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan— This chapter forms the introduction to an account of the allocation of the land west of Jordan, or Canaan proper, to the nine tribes and a half. It was also made by lot in presence of a select number of superintendents, appointed according to divine directions given to Moses (see on Num_34:16). In everything pertaining to civil government, and even the division of the land, Joshua was the acknowledged chief. But in a matter to be determined by lot, a solemn appeal was made to God, and hence Eleazar, as high priest, is named before Joshua.

K&D 1-2, "Jos_14:1-5 form the heading and introduction to the account of the division of the land among the nine tribes and a half, which reaches to Josh 19, and is brought to a close by the concluding formula in Jos_19:51. The division of the land of Canaan according to the boundaries laid down in Num_34:2-12 was carried out, in accordance with the instructions in Num_34:16-29, by the high priest Eleazar, Joshua, and ten heads of fathers' houses of the nine tribes and a half, whose names are given in Num_34:18-28. “By the lot of their inheritance,” i.e., by casting lots for it: this is dependent upon the previous clause, “which they distributed for inheritance to them.” “As the Lord commanded through Moses” (Num_26:52-56; Num_33:54, and Num_34:13), “to the nine tribes and a half” (this is also dependent upon the clause “which they distributed for inheritance”).

CALVI , "1.And these are the countries, etc He now proceeds to the land of Canaan, from which nine tribes and a half were to obtain their lots. And he will immediately break off the thread of the narrative, as we shall see. Yet the transition is seasonably made from that region whose situation was different, to let the reader know that the discourse was to be concerning the land of Canaan, which was to be divided by lot. We have said that Joshua and Eleazar not only divided what the Israelites had already acquired, but trusting in the promise of God, confidently included whatever he had promised to his people, just as if they had been in actual possession of it. We shall see, indeed, that the division was not all at once made complete, but when the first lot turned up in favor of Judah, the turns of the others were left in hope.

Here a difficult question arises. How can it be said that the distribution of the land was made by Joshua, Eleazar, and the princes, if lots were cast? For the lot is not regulated by the opinion or the will or the authority of man. Should any one answer, that they took charge and prevented any fraud from being committed, the difficulty is not removed, nay, this evasion will be refuted from the context. It is to be known, therefore, that they were not selected simply to divide the land by lot, but also afterwards to enlarge or restrict the boundaries of the tribes by giving to each its due proportion. That this business could not be accomplished by a naked lot is very apparent. For while, according to human ideas, nothing is more fortuitous than the result of a lot, it was not known whether God might choose to place the half tribe of Manasseh where the tribe of Judah obtained its settlement, or whether Zebulun might not occupy the place of Ephraim. Therefore they were not at liberty at the outset to proceed farther than to divide the land into ten districts or provinces. In this way, however, the space belonging to each would remain indefinite. For had an option been given to each, some would have chosen to fix themselves in the center, others would have preferred a quiet locality, while others would have been guided in their choice by the fertility of the soil, or the climate and beauty of the scenery. But the lot placed the tribe of Judah, as it were, at the head, while it sent that of Zebulun away to the seashore, placed the tribe of Benjamin adjacent to that of Judah, and removed that of Ephraim to a greater distance. In short, the effect of the lot was that ten divisions fell out from Egypt towards Syria, and from the north quarter to the Mediterranean Sea, making some neighbors to the Egyptians, and giving to others maritime positions, to others hilly districts, to others intervening valleys.

This being understood, the office remaining for the rulers of the people was to trace out the boundaries on all sides in accordance with the rules of equity. It remained, therefore, for them to calculate how many thousand souls there were in every tribe, and to assign more or less space to each, according to the greatness or the smallness of their numbers. For in conformity to the divine command, a due proportion was to be observed, and a larger or narrower district was to be assigned, according as the census which was taken had ascertained the numbers to be. ( umbers 26:0) To the judgment of the princes was it in like manner left to shape the territories, regulating the length and breadth as circumstances might require. It is necessary also to bear in mind what is said in umbers 26:0, that the ten who are here called heads of families were appointed to execute this office, not by the suffrages of men, but by the voice of God. Thus each tribe had its own overseers to prevent either fraud or violence from being committed. Then it would have been impious to have any suspicion of those who had been nominated by God. Such is the manner in which Joshua may be said to have distributed the land, though it was portioned out by lot.

COFFMA , "This short chapter is actually an introduction to the next five chapters (Joshua 14:15-19), where is recorded the apportionment of the Land of Canaan among the Twelve Tribes of Israel. It is an introduction: (1) because it gives the names of the principal persons who conducted the casting of lots; and (2) because it deals with a matter that was required to be taken care of before the casting of lots take place, the granting of Caleb's claim to Hebron, based upon a prior promise

given by Moses. Woudstra also pointed out a third function of this introductory chapter; (3) "The introduction of this pericope was an example of what could have been done and should have been done with the whole land allotted to the tribes."[1] There can be no doubt that JOSHUA himself was responsible for this account being in the holy record at exactly the place where it appears. It does not appear here through the choice of some "Deuteronomic editor,"[2] as frequently alleged. Furthermore, as Plummer noted, "The author of Joshua had access to sources of information besides the Pentateuch,"[3] and the nature of that information is such that Joshua is most likely the author. Who but Joshua (besides Caleb) would have known of the oath that Moses swore? Plummer cited this as being not alone conclusive, but as being "inconsistent with the `Elhoist' and `Jehovist' theory."[4]

"And these are the inheritances which the children of Israel took in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers' houses of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed unto them."

The mention here of the dignitaries who presided at the allotment has been alleged by Morton and others to be an indication of three "different traditions" from as many "sources" brought together here by "a Priestly editor."[5] In our own view, we consider this to be among the MOST RIDICULOUS and unsupportable allegations to be encountered anywhere. There is only one basis for finding a "Priestly editor" here, and that is the mention of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, and the High Priest of Israel. Since, without any doubt, Eleazar was indeed present at this allocation of the land, that alone is sufficient reason for his being mentioned, and, as John Lilley put it, "If it is admitted that the tribes had a central shrine, and few would deny this, it would have been inconceivable for Joshua to have acted without the priest, or for any Israelite historian to represent him as having done so."[6] This truth eliminates all grounds for dragging some so-called "editor" into this passage.

Even J. R. Dummelow thought he saw the hand of "P" here, writing: "The mention of the priest here in association with the leader, to whom he is here given precedence, is one of the characteristics of the Priestly narrative."[7] The "precedence" which Dummelow mentioned, however, could have been due to one thing alone: Israel was at this point in the process of calling upon the God of heaven and earth to divide the land to the tribes by casting lots, and it is inconceivable that Israel would have done a thing like that without calling upon God for his blessing and guidance. That would have required both the presence and the "precedence" of Eleazar. We have repeatedly emphasized that there is actually no such thing as "a Priestly narrative (P)," except in the IMAGI ATIO of Bible critics. There has never been published a copy of that alleged narrative, for the simple reason that there has never been any agreement in what is in it! Until it is produced and made available for close study, our allegation that there is no such thing stands!

The dignitaries who conducted the casting of lots were Eleazar, Joshua, and the twelve princes. "These heads or princes were twelve in number, Joshua and Eleazar included ( umbers 34:19-29)."[8] We should also note that Caleb himself was also in this list of princes ( umbers 34:19). Plummer stated that:

"It is a strong evidence for the truth of this narrative that we read of no conflicts between the various tribes respecting the division of territory. In no one case was there any complaint of unfairness, or any attempt to disturb the territorial arrangement made at the time of the original settlement in Palestine."[9]

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:1 And these [are the countries] which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance to them.

Ver. 1. And these are the countries.] These that are expressed in this and the five following chapters.

Which Eleazar the priest.] Who was a type of Christ, by whom we have entrance into the heavenly Canaan, and the fourth from Levi; and so that prophecy was fulfilled, Genesis 15:16.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:1. And these are the countries — amely, those mentioned in the 15th, 16th, and following chapters, to the 20th; for this chapter is but a kind of preface to the division of the land; which was now conquered by Joshua, as that of Sihon and Og had been by Moses; and was to be divided by lot according to the command given by God to Moses, umbers 34:17-18, where the names of the twelve heads of tribes, or princes, as they are there called, are set down. Eleazar the priest and Joshua, &c. — They best understood the laws of God by which this division was to be regulated.

PETT, "Verse 1-2Chapter 14 Distribution of the Land - The Lot Allocated to Caleb.

This chapter commences the account of the distribution of land to the children of Israel in the land of Canaan itself. However, prior to that distribution it describes the claim of Caleb to Hebron, through a promise made to him by Moses forty five years earlier, after his report that the land to which he was sent as a spy was good; and the grant which Joshua made of it to him, with his blessing.

Joshua 14:1-2

‘And these are the inheritances which the children of Israel took in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed to them, by the lot of their inheritance, as YHWH commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes and for the half tribe.’In umbers 34:16-29 the names of those who would take part in the distribution of the land under Eleazar, the son of Aaron, and Joshua, the son of un, were given. There were ten ‘heads of the fathers’ (princes over the elders) for the nine and a half

tribes. Eleazar had precedence because as ‘the Priest’ he would be responsible for the use of the Urim and Thummim (compare umbers 27:21-22). (When Eleazar is mentioned first it is always because consultation has to take place ‘before YHWH’ -Joshua 14:1; Joshua 17:4; Joshua 19:51; Joshua 21:1). The word for ‘tribes’ is again the word signifying ‘jurisdiction over’.

The land was to be distributed by lot ( umbers 26:55), ‘the lot of their inheritance’. So their inheritances (Joshua 14:1) were divided to them by lot. This would probably be by the Urim and Thummim, but it may have been by sticks being tossed with each of their tribal names on them, or each territory on them. Unlike the division of Transjordan this division was looked on as directly the work and will of YHWH. But a great deal of hard work would already have gone into determining the lands to be divided, and how they were to be divided. The whole land had to be surveyed. The first surveys probably mainly took place during the course of Joshua’s campaigns.

“As YHWH commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes and for the half tribe.” See umbers 34:13; compare umbers 26:55; umbers 33:54. The two and a half tribes had already received their inheritance. ote the stress on the participation of YHWH.

WHEDO , "I TRODUCTIO TO THE WEST JORDA IC ALLOTME TS, Joshua 14:1-5.

1. These are the countries — Passing from the eastern side of the Jordan, our historian now traces the boundaries of the tribes on its western side, constituting the main area of the Holy Land. The directions of Moses ( umbers 26:53-56) were obeyed in the allotment. Yet God so overruled the lots as to fulfil the predictions of the prophecies of the dying Jacob. Genesis 49.

Eleazar the priest — The term High Priest had not yet been invented. Eleazar was the third son of Aaron, and came into the high-priesthood by the death of his two sacrilegious brothers, adab and Abihu. See notes on Exodus 6:23; Leviticus 10:1 : umbers 3:4; umbers 20:28. He aided Moses in the census of the people, ( umbers 26:3,) assisted at the inauguration of Joshua, and now is the proper person to superintend the sacred lots by which the conquered lands were divided. The original document describing the division we might naturally suppose to be prepared under his superintendence and preserved in the archives of the tabernacle. In the form in which the records here stand in the sacred volume they form a part of the law, and they were, we might suppose, preserved with the sacred records in the ark of the covenant. The persons who were to divide western Palestine among the nine tribes and the half tribe of Manasseh were designated by Jehovah before the death of Moses, and their names are given in umbers 34:17-28.

CO STABLE, "Verses 1-51. The rationale for the allotments14:1-5

Eleazar the high priest, Joshua , and the heads of the tribes took the leadership in dividing this portion of the land ( Joshua 14:1). These men determined the division of the land by casting lots ( Joshua 14:2; Joshua 18:6). Apparently the casting of lots established the general location of each tribe within Canaan, but the population of that tribe affected the size of each tribe"s inheritance (cf. umbers 26:52-56). [ ote: See L. Wood, map6 , p186.]

"The people of God are not called to act on their own initiative and desire, nor to set their own goals. God has set the goals and issues the commands which lead to their achievement." [ ote: Butler, p172.]

Verses 1-15C. The land west of the Jordan chs14-19

The account of the Israelites" settlement west of the Jordan received more attention by the writer since it was the primary area where Israel settled.

ELLICOTT, "DIVISIO OF THE TEBBITORY O THE WEST OF JORDA TO I E TRIBES A D A HALF

(Joshua 14-19, inclusive).

(1) And these are the countries which . . . Eleazar . . . and Joshua . . . distributed.—Here we enter upon the record of the third portion of Joshua’s great work. He had (1) to bring Israel over Jordan; (2) to conquer the land; (3) to divide it among the tribes.

Eleazar . . . and Joshua.— ot Joshua and Eleazar, observe. This is in strict accordance with the law of Moses, and the form of government which he was ordered to establish in Israel, to continue after his death. See umbers 27, where, in answer to Moses prayer for a shepherd in Israel, the Lord says, “Take thee Joshua (here a figure of the great “Shepherd, the stone of Israel”), and lay thine hand upon him; and ( umbers 27:21) he (Joshua) shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord; at his (Eleazar’s) word they shall go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he (Joshua) and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.” (Comp. also Deuteronomy 17:9 : “Thou shalt come unto the priests (at the place which the Lord shall choose), and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and enquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgment.”) In these passages we see delineated the nature of the government established in Israel by Moses, to continue until there was a king. The priest had the legislative authority, the executive power rested with the judge. Of these judges, Joshua stands first; those who followed, until Samuel, held the same relation to the priest. Joshua was also a prophet. Samuel (a prophet likewise) established a third power in the constitution, and made the supreme executive power continuous and hereditary, giving to Israel a form of government by prophet, priest, and king. For the present, however, Eleazar the priest and Joshua the son of un (the answer to Moses’ prayer for a shepherd) were the rulers.

“To lead them out and to bring them in” was what Moses asked that the shepherd of Israel might do. Joshua had led them out to victory; he was now to bring in each of the tribes into the home that the Lord had chosen for it in the promised land.

And the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel.—These men are all named in umbers 34:16-28 : one from every tribe, in addition to Eleazar and Joshua. The names were then given by God to Moses, as the narrative states in umbers 34:16-19. But is it not remarkable that before the land was conquered, in view of all the battles that were to be fought before it could be divided, the names of the men who were to divide it should be revealed? Man could not have arranged it so. The bow drawn at a venture, or one false step in the heat of battle, or the hurry of pursuit or flight, might have made a gap in the list. But it was not to be. “The Lord hath kept me alive,” says Caleb (the first man after Joshua on this list) in Joshua 14:10. But all the twelve commissioners might have said the same. We cannot forbear to ask the question—Is it conceivable that, were the narrative in umbers 34 anything but simple truth, it should contain such an unlikely statement as this? It will not do to say the names in the Book of umbers were added afterwards; the form of the language in which they are given forbids this, and, with the single exception of Caleb, we know nothing of these twelve commissioners except their names.

PI K, "Dividing the Land

"And these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance to them. By lot was their inheritance, as the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes and for the half tribe" (Josh. 14:1, 2). Joshua was now old and stricken in years, and before the time came when no man can work the Lord had bidden him engage in the most important task of superintending the apportioning of Israel’s heritage (Josh. 13:1, 6, 7). Invested with Divine authority to act as Israel’s head, manifestly enjoying the favor of the Lord, possessing the full confidence of the people as their tried and faithful leader, none other was so well suited to perform this particular work. But like all the other duties which he had discharged, this one called also for the exercise of faith, for Joshua was now required to assign the entire country of Canaan which lay on the western side of Jordan: not only those portions of it which Israel had already conquered and taken possession of, but also the extensive sections which were still occupied by the Canaanites. This called for the most implicit confidence in the Lord—that He would grant the tribes possession thereof.

The land of Canaan had already been conquered, so far as its standing armies had been completely routed, its principal strongholds destroyed, and its kings slain. Yet much of its actual territory was still in the hands of its original inhabitants, who remained to be dispossessed. It is important to distinguish between the work which

had been done by Joshua and that which still remained for Israel to do. He had overthrown the ruling, powers, captured their forts, and subdued the Canaanites to such an extent as had given Israel firm foothold in the country. But he had not exterminated the population in every portion of it, yea, powerful nations still dwelt in parts thereof, as is clear from Judges 2:20-23, and 3:1-4; so that much was still demanded from Israel. Therein we behold again the accuracy of the type. The antitypical Joshua has secured for His people an inalienable title to the heavenly Canaan, yet formidable foes have to be overcome and much hard fighting done by them before they enter into their eternal rest. The same is true of the present enjoyment thereof: faith and hope encounter much opposition ere there is an experiential participation of the goodly heritage which Christ has obtained for them.

The method appointed for the dividing of the land is deeply interesting and instructive. Two distinct principles were to operate, yet the giving place to the one appears to rule out the other. The first had been laid down by the Lord through Moses: "Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. To many thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to few thou shalt give the less inheritance: to every one shall his inheritance be given according to those that were numbered of him" ( um. 26:53, 54—repeated in umbers 33:54). There was the general rule which was to be followed in the dividing of Canaan and the quartering of the people: the size of the section allocated was to be determined by the numerical strength of the tribe to which it was given. Yet immediately after umbers 26:54, a second law was named: " otwithstanding the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit. According to the lot shall the possession thereof be divided between many and few." That is to say, the disposition of the inheritance was to be determined by the sovereign will of God, for the lot was regulated by Him and made known His pleasure.

Those two principles seem to be mutually incompatible, and we are not acquainted with any attempt to show the agreement of the one with the other. It is the age-old problem of the conjunction of the Divine and human elements: in this instance, the human by the dimensions of the several tribes; the Divine by God’s determining their respective portions. Yet, in the case now before us, no real difficulty is presented: the larger tribes would still obtain the biggest sections, but the "lot" specified the particular situation in Canaan which was to be theirs. either Joshua, Eleazar, nor the heads of the tribes were free to dispose of the land according to their own ideas or desires: the final locations were reserved to the providence of God, to whose imperial will all must acquiesce, howsoever contrary to their thoughts and wishes. Such an arrangement not only accorded unto God His proper place in the transaction, but it also precluded the exercise of any spirit of partiality or favoritism on the part of Israel’s leaders, and at the same time served effectually to close the mouths of the people from murmuring.

The more those two apparently conflicting principles be pondered, the more shall we admire the wisdom of Him who appointed the same. Obviously, it was most

equitable and advisable that the larger tribes should be accorded more extensive quarters than the lesser ones, for their requirements would be the greater. Yet, fallen human nature being what it is, it is equally evident that had Israel been left entirely unto themselves the weaker tribes would have been deprived of their rightful portions: for if not entirely denied a separate heritage, they would most probably have been obliged to submit unto having the least desirable sections of the land or would there have been any redress, for in such a case (numerical) might would be right. It was therefore necessary for there to be a Divine supervision: not only in fixing the exact boundaries of each allotment, but also in determining their several locations, so that the mountainous sections and the fertile valleys should be fairly distributed. This is one of many examples where we see how the Divine legislation protected the welfare of the weak, and how the Lord ever manifested a concern for the poor and needy.

Side by side with Joshua 14:1, 2, should be placed Leviticus 25:23-28: "The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is Mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with Me. And in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land. If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away some of his possession, and if any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold. And if the man have none to redeem it, and himself be able to redeem it; then let him count the years of the sale thereof, and restore the over-plus unto the man to whom he sold it; that it may return unto his possession. But if he be not able to restore it to him, then that which is sold shall remain in the hand of him that hath bought it until the year of jubilee: and in the jubilee it shall go out, and he shall return unto his possession." That was the Divine law respecting the real estate of the Hebrews and the transferring of the same: a law by which the rights of rich and poor alike were fully and equitably safeguarded. In cases of need, property might be sold conditionally, but not absolutely so that the same should never again return to its original owner.

The above passages set forth a remarkable and unique law of property, displaying a wisdom wherein righteousness and mercy were blessedly intermingled, encouraging as it did individual enterprise, and yet also curbing greed. That disposition and arrangement was the very reverse of "State ownership," for the land was portioned out to the twelve tribes, and within the territory of each tribe the land was divided among its families. If hardship and poverty required a family to mortgage or sell its property, thereby an opportunity was offered unto the thrifty and ambitious to enlarge their holdings. But in the jubilee year that property reverted to its seller, and thus the cupidity of "capitalists" was restrained, and thereby were they prevented from taking undue advantage of the distress of others by a permanent acquirement of their estates. Thus the Bible not only teaches the right of the individual to own his own house (cf. John 19:27) and possess real estate (Acts 4:34), but, by clear and necessary implication, condemns State ownership, which is a manifest violation of the rights and liberties of the individual. How many-sided and far-reaching is the teaching of Holy Writ!

"The Israelites had acquired the land by conquest, but they were not allowed to

seize upon what they could, nor to have it all in common, nor to share it out by consent or arbitration; but, with solemn appeal to God Himself, to divide by lot; for Canaan was His land, and Israel were His people. This was likewise the readiest way of satisfying all parties, and preventing discontent and discord" (Thomas Scott). Yet it should be pointed out that the basic law that operated here has also obtained all through human history. The Lord God is the Proprietor as well as the Governor of both heaven and earth, the sovereign Disposer of all the affairs of the children of men. He is the One who controls the courses of empires and determines the lives of dynasties, and has also decided the limits of each person’s territory. That principle is clearly enunciated in Deuteronomy 32:8, "When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." And none of those nations ever has or will exceed those "bounds" which the Almighty originally prescribed.

As truly as the Divine "lot" assigned the particular parts of Palestine which the different tribes of Israel should possess, so has God predestined the precise portions of the earth which each nation shall occupy. "When He gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass His commandment" (Prov. 8:29), He gave a similar edict unto the nations. And military leaders impelled by the lust of conquest, and aggressive dictators aspiring to world dominion, have discovered that, like the restless sea (which is the scriptural symbol of the nations: Daniel 7:2, and cf. Revelation 17:15), God has set a bound which they "could not pass," "and though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; though they roar, yet can they not pass over it" (Jer. 5:22, and cf. Job 38:11). Men like apoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler might be dissatisfied with the allotments of providence, chafe against the restraints it had placed upon their greed, rage and roar against their neighbors, and attempt to acquire their Divinely given portions, but vain were their efforts. Thus will any present or future aspirant yet find out.

Deuteronomy 32:8, informs us that God had before His mind the children of Israel when He divided to the nations their inheritance, for, as the apostle told his saints, "all things are for your sakes" (2 Cor. 4:5). Thus there was a partial reference to the seven nations whose place and portion were assigned them in Canaan, so that the Hebrews found it in a high state of cultivation, provided with towns and houses, all prepared for their use! In like manner, the favored land in which the writer and the reader live, with all its natural and national advantages, and the temporal provisions we enjoy therein, is as much the special appointment and gift of God as Canaan was to Israel, and as truly demands our gratitude. God has the sole disposing of this life and the interests thereof, as truly as He has of the life to come. o man has a foot of land more than God has laid out for him in His all-wise providence: so whatever of this world’s goods he obtains let him bear in mind, "thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for it is He that giveth thee power to get wealth" (Deut. 8:18). This world is not governed by blind chance, but by Divine wisdom. However possessions come to us, they are from God as the first cause.

God "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the

earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation" (Acts 17:26) As Toplady remarked thereon, "The very places which people inhabit are here positively averred to be determined and fore-appointed by God. And it is very right it should be so, else some places would be overstocked with inhabitants, and others deserted Whereas by God’s having fore-appointed the bounds of our habitations, we are properly sifted over the face of the earth, so as to answer all the social and higher purposes of Divine wisdom." God has appointed where each person shall reside: the particular country in which he should be born, and the very city, town, village, and house in which we shall dwell, and how long he shall remain there; for our times are in His hand (Ps. 31:15). A striking illustration of that is seen in connection with both the birthplace and the subsequent abode of the Savior. It was ordained that He should be born at Bethlehem, and though circumstances appeared to prevent. God set in motion a Roman census throughout the whole of its empire, requiring Joseph and Mary to journey unto Bethlehem, (Luke 2:1-6). Later, they resided at the appointed azareth (Matthew 2:23).

The distribution of Canaan was by lot. To ascertain precisely what it consisted of and how the mind of God was made known therein, Scripture has to be carefully compared with Scripture, and even then we cannot be quite certain of the exact method followed. The first time (which is always of most importance) the lot is mentioned is in Leviticus 16:8, "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat": i.e. to determine which of them should be used for the God-ward side of the atonement (propitiation) and which the man-ward (the removal of sins). Thus the first occurrence of "the lot" associates it with Israel’s high priest, and shows that it was employed in determining the will of God. So too "Eleazar the priest" is expressly mentioned both in umbers 34:17, and Joshua 14:1, in connection with the transaction we are here considering. Likewise, when the claim was made by the daughters of Zelophehad to a portion of Canaan their case was determined before Eleazar the priest, Joshua, and the princes of the tribes (Josh. 17:3-6), because the use of the lot was there involved, as the word "fell," or more literally "came forth" (v. 5), indicates.

Personally we incline strongly to the view taken by the author of The Companion Bible (unprocurable today) that God’s will in "the lot" was obtained by means of the mysterious "Urim and Thummim," which were probably two precious stones, for there was no commandment given to "make" them, and which were "put in the breastplate" of the high priest, (Ex. 28:30). Apparently they were "put" in a bag in "the ephod" or robe of the high priest, which bag was formed by doubling a part of the garment—note "doubled" in Exodus 28:16, and "inward" (v. 26). In Proverbs 16:33, we are told, "The lot is cast into the lap [Hebrew "bosom," which is put for the clothing covering it—cf. Exodus 4:6, 7]; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord." Thus "the lot" was for the purpose of giving a judgment or infallible decision, and the breastplate is designated "the breastplate of judgment" (Ex. 28:15), because by it God’s judgment or verdict was given when the same was needed—compare 1 Samuel 28:6, where the Lord refused to oblige the apostate Saul.

Thus it seems that when the lot was needed the high priest placed his hand in the bag or pocket behind his breastplate, and drew forth either the Urim or the Thummim, the one signifying Yes, and the other o, for in Joshua 18:11, we are told that the lot "came up," in Joshua 19:1, that it "came forth," and in Joshua 19:17, that it "came out." Joshua 19:51, informs us that this important transaction took place at the entrance to the house of God: "These are the inheritances, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, divided for an inheritance by lot in Shiloh before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." This casts light upon a number of passages treating of incidents in the later history of Israel. Thus, when they were uncertain as to whether or not they should go up against Benjamin again, they came to the house of God and inquired of the Lord, and it was Phinehas the high priest who obtained answer for them (Judg. 20:26-28). In Ezra 2:61-63, no verdict could be given unless the high priest were present, with his breastplate of judgment, with "the lot," Urim and Thummim, which would give Jehovah’s decision—guilty or innocent.

It is to be duly noted that, in addition to Eleazar the priest and Joshua himself, "the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel" (Josh. 14:1) were also present when the official distribution of the land was made. This was in obedience to the Divine injunction given through Moses that "one prince of every tribe" ( um. 34:18) should be taken to serve as commissioners on this occasion. They were entrusted with the oversight, to be witnesses that everything had been conducted fairly and properly in the distribution of the land according to the size of the tribes and in the casting of the lot. Thus would they protect the rights of the tribes, preclude all suspicion that any partiality had been shown, and be qualified authoritatively to determine any controversy which might later arise. "Public affairs should be so managed, as not only to give their right to all, but, if possible, to give satisfaction to all that they have right done them" (Matthew Henry). It is very striking to note that God not only selected those commissioners during the lifetime of Moses, but actually named them all ( um. 34:19-29), which thereby guaranteed their preservation from death during the long interval, either from natural causes or from the fighting in Canaan.

BI 1-5, "By lot was their inheritance.

The tribes apportioned

As the whole inheritance was the gift of God, so each one’s share was assigned to him by His appointment. Not even Joshua himself in a display of the greatest wisdom and impartiality could have yielded satisfaction in a matter where so many, and all of one family, were concerned. Only the authority of the Father, who had entailed upon them as His redeemed children this common patrimony, could decide the portion of each tribe and of each family. This may yield great satisfaction to the heirs of promise, who are looking for a share in the heavenly inheritance. There, whatever degree of station, difference of capacity, or diversity of possession may exist, no one but will find his inheritance all he could desire and enjoy, and for ever beyond the possibility of becoming a cause of dissatisfaction to himself or of envy to others. To animate the hopes

of the believer, and quicken his desires after it, an outline is presented in the descriptions of heavenly promise. Oh, for a realising faith, that elevation and meekness which characterise the high-born sons of God, and which by present hopes wean the heart from earthly bliss and sublimate its affections to highest joys. The portion of inheritance that fell to the members of this great family was, agreeably to previous instructions in the wilderness, determined by lot; and was to be viewed not as the result of chance, but as the wise and gracious appointment of their heavenly Father. No one but had reason to be satisfied with his portion, and to consider it assigned him with the indisputable exactness of last will and testament. What a sweet thought to the true spiritual Church of God, the heirs of grace and glory, both with respect to their present condition and their future inheritance! He who did not overlook one tribe or family in the earthly Canaan, but provided for them as few or many, now, though the lot is differently determined, as minutely fixes the bounds of His people’s habitations, and manages all their affairs. Nor less exact will appear the eternal consummation of His goodness, in the final results of providence, and completion of His covenant purpose. (W. Seaton.)

2 Their inheritances were assigned by lot to the nine and a half tribes, as the Lord had commanded through Moses.

BAR ES, "By lot -We are not told in what manner the lot was cast. Perhaps two urns were employed, one containing a description of the several districts to be allotted, the other the names of the tribes; and the portion of each tribe would then be determined by a simultaneous drawing from the two urns. Or a drawing might be made by some appointed person, or by a delegate of each tribe from one urn containing the description of the ten inheritances. The lot only determined in a general way the position in the country of the particular tribe concerned, whether north or south, etc.; the dimensions of each territory being left to be adjusted subsequently, according to the numbers and wants of the tribe to be provided for. Since the predilections and habits of two tribes and a half were consulted in the apportionment to them of the trans-Jordanic territory Num_32:1 there is no objection to the supposition that something of the same kind may have taken place, subject to the divine approval, in the distribution of the lands to the nine and a half other tribes; and the lot would thus be appealed to as finally deciding the matter and foreclosing jealousies and disputes.

It is apparent that the casting of the ten lots did not take place simultaneously. The tribe of Judah had precedence, whether by express appointment or because its lot “came

up” first, does not appear. It was, as it seems, only after this tribe had settled upon its domains, that further lots were drawn for Ephraim and the half tribe of Manasseh. After this a pause, perhaps of some duration, appears to have occurred; the camp was moved from Gilgal to Shiloh; and the further casting of lots for the other seven tribes was proceeded with at the instigation of Joshua (see Jos_18:10).

CLARKE, "By lot was their inheritance - Concerning the meaning and use of the lot, see the note on Num_26:55; and concerning the manner of casting lots in the case of the scapegoat, see the note on Lev_16:8, Lev_16:9. On this subject Dr. Dodd has selected some good observations from Calmet and Masius, which I here borrow: “Though God had sufficiently pointed out by the predictions of Jacob when dying, and those of Moses, what portions he designed for each tribe, we readily discern an admirable proof of his wisdom in the orders he gave to decide them by lot. By this means the false interpretations which might have been given to the words of Jacob and Moses were prevented; and by striking at the root of whatever might occasion jealousies and disputes among the tribes, he evidently secured the honesty of those who were to be appointed to distribute to them the conquered countries in the land of Canaan. Besides, the success of this method gave a fresh proof of the Divinity of the Jewish religion, and the truth of its oracles. Each tribe finding itself placed by lot exactly in the spot which Jacob and Moses had foretold, it was evident that Providence had equally directed both those predictions and that lot. The event justified the truth of the promises. The more singular it was, the more clearly we discern the finger of God in it. The portion, says Masius, fell to each tribe just as Jacob had declared two hundred and fifty years before in the last moments of his life, and Moses, immediately before his death; for to the tribe of Judah fell a country abounding in vineyards and pastures; to Zebulun and Issachar, seacoasts; in that of Asher was plenty of oil, wheat, and metals; that of Benjamin, near to the temple, was, in a manner, between the shoulders of the Deity; Ephraim and Manasseh were distinguished with a territory blessed in a peculiar manner by Heaven; the land of Naphtali extended from the west to the south of the tribe of Judah. Since therefore the lot so well corresponded to these predictions, would it not be insolence and stupidity in the highest degree, not to acknowledge the inspiration of God in the word of Jacob and Moses, the direction of his hand in the lot, and his providence in the event?” How the lot was cast in this case cannot be particularly determined. It is probable,

1. That the land was geographically divided into ten portions.

2. That each portion was called by a particular name.

3. That the name of each portion was written on a separate slip of parchment, wood, etc.

4. That the names of the claimants were also written on so many slips.

5. The names of the portions, and of the tribes, were put into separate vessels.

6. Joshua, for example, put his hand into the vessel containing the names of the tribes, and took out one slip; while Eleazar took out one from the other vessel, in which the names of the portions were put.

7. The name drawn, and the portion drawn, being read, it was immediately discerned what the district was which God had designed for such a tribe. This appears to be the most easy way to determine such a business.

GILL, "By lot was their inheritance,.... Every tribe had its part and portion assigned to it, by the casting of lots; which was done to prevent any future quarrels, animosities and strifes among the tribes, the disposition being of the Lord; and to show the exact agreement between the lot and the divine predictions by Jacob and Moses; and to make it appear that the division of the land was not owing to the private combination of the above men, and their private settlement of it; but to the providence of God, the directors of the lot; their chief business was to see that the lot was executed in a faithful manner, and that every tribe had its allotment according to it. In this Canaan was a type of the heavenly inheritance, which the saints obtain by lot, in and through Christ, the antitypical Joshua, Eph_1:11,

as the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses, Num_26:55,

for the nine tribes, and for the half tribe; see Jos_13:7; the reason why this number of them is particularly mentioned follows.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:2 By lot [was] their inheritance, as the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes, and [for] the half tribe.

Ver. 2. By lot was their inheritance.] To prevent all murmurings and discontents, since it was the Lord that cut them out their several conditions; who, as he is Lord of all, and may do with his own as he pleaseth, so he is the only wise God, who doth all things well -

“ Pondere, mensura, numero facit omnia. ”

See Proverbs 16:33; Proverbs 18:18. {See Trapp on "Proverbs 16:33"} {See Trapp on "Proverbs 18:18"}

COFFMA , "Verse 2"By the lot of their inheritance, as Jehovah commanded by Moses, for the nine tribes, and the half-tribe. For Moses had given the inheritance of the two tribes and the half-tribe beyond the Jordan: but unto the Levites he gave no inheritance among them. For the children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim: and they gave no portion unto the Levites in the land, save cities to dwell in, with the suburbs thereof for their cattle and for their substance. As Jehovah commanded Moses, so the children of Israel did; and they divided the land."

The preliminary fact of their being only nine and one-half tribes to inherit west of the Jordan is here explained in Joshua 14:2, due to Moses' having already awarded two and one-half tribes their inheritance on the east of Jordan. Also, we have the explanation of how it came about that after one of the twelve sons of Jacob, namely, Levi and his tribe were not to receive a landed inheritance at all (Jehovah was their portion), there still remained twelve tribes. The explanation is in Joshua 14:4, where

it is stated that Joseph had two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim. The account of how that came about is in Genesis 48. Through the device of adopting Manasseh and Ephraim, two of the sons of Joseph, Jacob made them in every way equal to all of his other sons. That action by Jacob was also accompanied by the disinheritance of Reuben his firstborn, because of his incest with Bilhah (Genesis 35:22). That meant that the double portion which was the usual right of the firstborn went to Joseph instead of Reuben, and that the right of primogeniture descended upon Judah instead of Reuben. The "rulership" of Israel thus rested upon Judah (Genesis 49:10).

Many of the old commentators (Masius, Calnet, Dodd, Clarke, etc.) have stressed the wisdom of God as attested by the casting of lots for the inheritance of each tribe. "The portion fell to each tribe exactly as Jacob had prophesied centuries earlier in Genesis 49. Providence equally directed both Jacob's predictions and the casting of lots."[10] Again, to paraphrase Clarke's words: seeing that the lot and the prophesies so well corresponded, would it not be insolence and stupidity not to acknowledge the inspiration of God in the words of Jacob and of Moses, and also in the guidance of the casting lots for the tribal inheritances?

The flat declaration in Joshua 14:5 that, "So the children of Israel did" does not mean that they did so on that very day. "A considerable time was requisite for survey and measurement."[11] The lots were first cast at Gilgal, and later at Shiloh. The larger tribes received their portion first.

Woudstra pointed out that, "Since the account of this division does not actually begin until Joshua 15, it is clear that what follows in this chapter (Joshua 14:6-15) is meant to be a further introduction to Joshua 15-19."[12]

COKE, "Ver. 2. By lot was their inheritance, as the Lord commanded, &c.—Though God had sufficiently pointed out by the predictions of Jacob, when dying, and those of Moses, what portions he designed for each tribe, we readily discern an admirable proof of the Divine wisdom, in the orders he gave to decide them by lot. By this means were prevented the false interpretations which might have been given to the words of Jacob and Moses; and, by striking at the root of whatever might occasion jealousies and disputes among the tribes, he evidently secured the honesty of those who were to be appointed to distribute to them the conquered countries in the land of Canaan. Besides, the success of this method became a fresh proof of the divinity of the Israelites' religion, and the truth of its oracles. Each tribe finding itself placed by lot exactly in the spot which Jacob and Moses had foretold, it was evident that Providence had equally directed both those predictions and that lot. The event justified the truth of the promises. The more singular it was, the more clearly do we discern the finger of God in it. o one has set these reflections in a fairer light than Masius. "The portion," says he, "fell to each tribe just as Jacob had declared two hundred and fifty years before, in the last moments of his life, and Moses immediately before his death; for, to the tribe of Judah fell a country abounding in vineyards and pastures; to Zebulun and Issachar, sea-ports; in that of Asher was plenty of oil, wheat, and metals; that of Benjamin, near to the temple,

was in a manner between the shoulders of the city. Ephraim and Manasseh were distinguished with a territory blest in a peculiar manner by heaven. The land of aphtati extended from the west to the south of the tribe of Judah. Since, therefore, the lots so well corresponded to these predictions, would it not be insolence and stupidity in the highest degree, not to acknowledge the inspiration of God in the words of Jacob and Moses, the direction of his hand in the lot, and his providence in the event?" See Masius on the place.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:2. By lot was their inheritance, as the Lord commanded —“Though God had sufficiently pointed out,” says Dr. Dodd, “by the predictions of Jacob, when dying, and those of Moses, what portions he designed for each tribe; we readily discern an admirable proof of his wisdom, in the orders he gave to decide them by lot. By this means were prevented the false interpretations which might have been given to the words of Jacob and Moses; and by striking at the root of whatever might occasion jealousies and disputes among the tribes, he evidently secured the honesty of those who were to be appointed to distribute to them the conquered countries in the land of Canaan. Besides, the success of this method became a fresh proof of the divinity of the Israelites’ religion, and the truth of its oracles. Each tribe, finding itself placed by lot exactly in the spot which Jacob and Moses had foretold, it was evident that providence had equally directed both those predictions and that lot. The event justified the truth of the promises. The more singular it was, the more clearly do we discern the finger of God in it. o one has set these reflections in a fairer light than Masius. ‘The portion,’ says he, ‘fell to each tribe just as Jacob had declared two hundred and fifty years before, in the last moments of his life, and Moses, immediately before his death; for to the tribe of Judah fell a country abounding in vineyards and pastures; to Zebulun and Issachar, seaports; in that of Asher was plenty of oil, wheat, and metals; that of Benjamin, near the temple, was in a manner between the shoulders of the Deity; Ephraim and Manasseh were distinguished with a territory blessed in a peculiar manner by Heaven. The land of Simeon extended from the west to the south of the tribe of Judah. Since, therefore, the lot corresponded so well to these predictions, would it not be insolence and stupidity in the highest degree, not to acknowledge the inspiration of God in the words of Jacob and Moses, the direction of his hand in the lot, and his providence in the went?’”

ELLICOTT, "Verse 2(2) By lot . . . as the Lord commanded . . . Moses.—See umbers 26:52-56; umbers 34:17-29.

The nine tribes, and for the half tribe; and (3) For Moses had given; and (4) For the children of Joseph were two tribes.—The argument of these verses can only mean that the tribal inheritances were to be twelve in number, and therefore the Levites were excluded from any distinct territorial position, for the children of Joseph were to be two tribes. Of Ephraim and Manasseh, Jacob had said to Joseph, “as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine:” i.e., though grandsons, they shall count as sons of Jacob, and each one shall be the head of a tribe. Thus there are two ways of

counting Jacob’s sons, each making twelve; and these two seem to be recognised as distinct in Exodus 28. There we are told that the high priest should bear the names of the children of Israel on his shoulders according to their birth (i.e., Joseph being counted as well as Levi, but not Ephraim and Manasseh). On his breastplate he must have them according to the twelve tribes (i.e., Ephraim and Manasseh being specified, but Joseph and Levi left out). Both ways of reckoning were necessary in order that the complete Israel might be represented by the high priest. And in each way the number twelve was preserved and emphasised, as it is evidently intended to be in this place,

PULPIT, "Joshua 14:2

By lot was their inheritance. The commentators, following the Rabbis, have amused themselves by speculations how the lot was taken. The question is of no great practical importance; but no doubt the contrivance was a very primitive one, as the word גורל a small pebble, used here, seems to imply. What is of more importance is the fact that the distribution of territory was the result of no one's caprice, or ambition, or intrigue. The whole matter was referred to God, and the leader of the Israelitish hosts and the high priest presided over the ceremony. It was a common belief among the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, that the use of the lot was to refer the matter to a Divine decision. So we read in the Proverbs, "The lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord" (Proverbs 16:33; cf. Proverbs 18:18). It is a strong evidence for the truth of this narrative that we read of no conflicts between the various tribes respecting the division of territory. Jealousies sprung up between the tribes, as the narratives in 8:1-35; 9:1-57; 12:1-15.; 2 Samuel 19:43, are sufficient to show. But in no one case was there any complaint of unfairness, any attempt to disturb the territorial arrangement made at the time of the original settlement in Palestine. There can be little doubt that Keil is right in supposing this original division to have been in outline merely. It is obvious from the onward course of the narrative (especially 2 Samuel 18:1-33) that no very minute accuracy in detail could possibly have been arrived at. The country was roughly mapped out at first, and the complete adjustment of boundaries was a matter which would naturally be put off until the land were actually in possession.

PI K, "Dividing the Land

"And these are the countries which the children of Israel inherited in the land of Canaan, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance to them. By lot was their inheritance, as the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses, for the nine tribes and for the half tribe" (Josh. 14:1, 2). Joshua was now old and stricken in years, and before the time came when no man can work the Lord had bidden him engage in the most important task of superintending the apportioning of Israel’s heritage (Josh. 13:1, 6, 7). Invested with Divine authority to act as Israel’s head, manifestly enjoying the favor of the Lord, possessing the full confidence of the people as their tried and faithful leader, none other was so well suited to perform

this particular work. But like all the other duties which he had discharged, this one called also for the exercise of faith, for Joshua was now required to assign the entire country of Canaan which lay on the western side of Jordan: not only those portions of it which Israel had already conquered and taken possession of, but also the extensive sections which were still occupied by the Canaanites. This called for the most implicit confidence in the Lord—that He would grant the tribes possession thereof.

The land of Canaan had already been conquered, so far as its standing armies had been completely routed, its principal strongholds destroyed, and its kings slain. Yet much of its actual territory was still in the hands of its original inhabitants, who remained to be dispossessed. It is important to distinguish between the work which had been done by Joshua and that which still remained for Israel to do. He had overthrown the ruling, powers, captured their forts, and subdued the Canaanites to such an extent as had given Israel firm foothold in the country. But he had not exterminated the population in every portion of it, yea, powerful nations still dwelt in parts thereof, as is clear from Judges 2:20-23, and 3:1-4; so that much was still demanded from Israel. Therein we behold again the accuracy of the type. The antitypical Joshua has secured for His people an inalienable title to the heavenly Canaan, yet formidable foes have to be overcome and much hard fighting done by them before they enter into their eternal rest. The same is true of the present enjoyment thereof: faith and hope encounter much opposition ere there is an experiential participation of the goodly heritage which Christ has obtained for them.

The method appointed for the dividing of the land is deeply interesting and instructive. Two distinct principles were to operate, yet the giving place to the one appears to rule out the other. The first had been laid down by the Lord through Moses: "Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. To many thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to few thou shalt give the less inheritance: to every one shall his inheritance be given according to those that were numbered of him" ( um. 26:53, 54—repeated in umbers 33:54). There was the general rule which was to be followed in the dividing of Canaan and the quartering of the people: the size of the section allocated was to be determined by the numerical strength of the tribe to which it was given. Yet immediately after umbers 26:54, a second law was named: " otwithstanding the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit. According to the lot shall the possession thereof be divided between many and few." That is to say, the disposition of the inheritance was to be determined by the sovereign will of God, for the lot was regulated by Him and made known His pleasure.

Those two principles seem to be mutually incompatible, and we are not acquainted with any attempt to show the agreement of the one with the other. It is the age-old problem of the conjunction of the Divine and human elements: in this instance, the human by the dimensions of the several tribes; the Divine by God’s determining their respective portions. Yet, in the case now before us, no real difficulty is

presented: the larger tribes would still obtain the biggest sections, but the "lot" specified the particular situation in Canaan which was to be theirs. either Joshua, Eleazar, nor the heads of the tribes were free to dispose of the land according to their own ideas or desires: the final locations were reserved to the providence of God, to whose imperial will all must acquiesce, howsoever contrary to their thoughts and wishes. Such an arrangement not only accorded unto God His proper place in the transaction, but it also precluded the exercise of any spirit of partiality or favoritism on the part of Israel’s leaders, and at the same time served effectually to close the mouths of the people from murmuring.

The more those two apparently conflicting principles be pondered, the more shall we admire the wisdom of Him who appointed the same. Obviously, it was most equitable and advisable that the larger tribes should be accorded more extensive quarters than the lesser ones, for their requirements would be the greater. Yet, fallen human nature being what it is, it is equally evident that had Israel been left entirely unto themselves the weaker tribes would have been deprived of their rightful portions: for if not entirely denied a separate heritage, they would most probably have been obliged to submit unto having the least desirable sections of the land or would there have been any redress, for in such a case (numerical) might would be right. It was therefore necessary for there to be a Divine supervision: not only in fixing the exact boundaries of each allotment, but also in determining their several locations, so that the mountainous sections and the fertile valleys should be fairly distributed. This is one of many examples where we see how the Divine legislation protected the welfare of the weak, and how the Lord ever manifested a concern for the poor and needy.

Side by side with Joshua 14:1, 2, should be placed Leviticus 25:23-28: "The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is Mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with Me. And in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land. If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away some of his possession, and if any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold. And if the man have none to redeem it, and himself be able to redeem it; then let him count the years of the sale thereof, and restore the over-plus unto the man to whom he sold it; that it may return unto his possession. But if he be not able to restore it to him, then that which is sold shall remain in the hand of him that hath bought it until the year of jubilee: and in the jubilee it shall go out, and he shall return unto his possession." That was the Divine law respecting the real estate of the Hebrews and the transferring of the same: a law by which the rights of rich and poor alike were fully and equitably safeguarded. In cases of need, property might be sold conditionally, but not absolutely so that the same should never again return to its original owner.

The above passages set forth a remarkable and unique law of property, displaying a wisdom wherein righteousness and mercy were blessedly intermingled, encouraging as it did individual enterprise, and yet also curbing greed. That disposition and arrangement was the very reverse of "State ownership," for the land was portioned out to the twelve tribes, and within the territory of each tribe the land was divided

among its families. If hardship and poverty required a family to mortgage or sell its property, thereby an opportunity was offered unto the thrifty and ambitious to enlarge their holdings. But in the jubilee year that property reverted to its seller, and thus the cupidity of "capitalists" was restrained, and thereby were they prevented from taking undue advantage of the distress of others by a permanent acquirement of their estates. Thus the Bible not only teaches the right of the individual to own his own house (cf. John 19:27) and possess real estate (Acts 4:34), but, by clear and necessary implication, condemns State ownership, which is a manifest violation of the rights and liberties of the individual. How many-sided and far-reaching is the teaching of Holy Writ!

"The Israelites had acquired the land by conquest, but they were not allowed to seize upon what they could, nor to have it all in common, nor to share it out by consent or arbitration; but, with solemn appeal to God Himself, to divide by lot; for Canaan was His land, and Israel were His people. This was likewise the readiest way of satisfying all parties, and preventing discontent and discord" (Thomas Scott). Yet it should be pointed out that the basic law that operated here has also obtained all through human history. The Lord God is the Proprietor as well as the Governor of both heaven and earth, the sovereign Disposer of all the affairs of the children of men. He is the One who controls the courses of empires and determines the lives of dynasties, and has also decided the limits of each person’s territory. That principle is clearly enunciated in Deuteronomy 32:8, "When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." And none of those nations ever has or will exceed those "bounds" which the Almighty originally prescribed.

As truly as the Divine "lot" assigned the particular parts of Palestine which the different tribes of Israel should possess, so has God predestined the precise portions of the earth which each nation shall occupy. "When He gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass His commandment" (Prov. 8:29), He gave a similar edict unto the nations. And military leaders impelled by the lust of conquest, and aggressive dictators aspiring to world dominion, have discovered that, like the restless sea (which is the scriptural symbol of the nations: Daniel 7:2, and cf. Revelation 17:15), God has set a bound which they "could not pass," "and though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; though they roar, yet can they not pass over it" (Jer. 5:22, and cf. Job 38:11). Men like apoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler might be dissatisfied with the allotments of providence, chafe against the restraints it had placed upon their greed, rage and roar against their neighbors, and attempt to acquire their Divinely given portions, but vain were their efforts. Thus will any present or future aspirant yet find out.

Deuteronomy 32:8, informs us that God had before His mind the children of Israel when He divided to the nations their inheritance, for, as the apostle told his saints, "all things are for your sakes" (2 Cor. 4:5). Thus there was a partial reference to the seven nations whose place and portion were assigned them in Canaan, so that the Hebrews found it in a high state of cultivation, provided with towns and houses, all

prepared for their use! In like manner, the favored land in which the writer and the reader live, with all its natural and national advantages, and the temporal provisions we enjoy therein, is as much the special appointment and gift of God as Canaan was to Israel, and as truly demands our gratitude. God has the sole disposing of this life and the interests thereof, as truly as He has of the life to come. o man has a foot of land more than God has laid out for him in His all-wise providence: so whatever of this world’s goods he obtains let him bear in mind, "thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for it is He that giveth thee power to get wealth" (Deut. 8:18). This world is not governed by blind chance, but by Divine wisdom. However possessions come to us, they are from God as the first cause.

God "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation" (Acts 17:26) As Toplady remarked thereon, "The very places which people inhabit are here positively averred to be determined and fore-appointed by God. And it is very right it should be so, else some places would be overstocked with inhabitants, and others deserted Whereas by God’s having fore-appointed the bounds of our habitations, we are properly sifted over the face of the earth, so as to answer all the social and higher purposes of Divine wisdom." God has appointed where each person shall reside: the particular country in which he should be born, and the very city, town, village, and house in which we shall dwell, and how long he shall remain there; for our times are in His hand (Ps. 31:15). A striking illustration of that is seen in connection with both the birthplace and the subsequent abode of the Savior. It was ordained that He should be born at Bethlehem, and though circumstances appeared to prevent. God set in motion a Roman census throughout the whole of its empire, requiring Joseph and Mary to journey unto Bethlehem, (Luke 2:1-6). Later, they resided at the appointed azareth (Matthew 2:23).

The distribution of Canaan was by lot. To ascertain precisely what it consisted of and how the mind of God was made known therein, Scripture has to be carefully compared with Scripture, and even then we cannot be quite certain of the exact method followed. The first time (which is always of most importance) the lot is mentioned is in Leviticus 16:8, "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat": i.e. to determine which of them should be used for the God-ward side of the atonement (propitiation) and which the man-ward (the removal of sins). Thus the first occurrence of "the lot" associates it with Israel’s high priest, and shows that it was employed in determining the will of God. So too "Eleazar the priest" is expressly mentioned both in umbers 34:17, and Joshua 14:1, in connection with the transaction we are here considering. Likewise, when the claim was made by the daughters of Zelophehad to a portion of Canaan their case was determined before Eleazar the priest, Joshua, and the princes of the tribes (Josh. 17:3-6), because the use of the lot was there involved, as the word "fell," or more literally "came forth" (v. 5), indicates.

Personally we incline strongly to the view taken by the author of The Companion Bible (unprocurable today) that God’s will in "the lot" was obtained by means of the mysterious "Urim and Thummim," which were probably two precious stones,

for there was no commandment given to "make" them, and which were "put in the breastplate" of the high priest, (Ex. 28:30). Apparently they were "put" in a bag in "the ephod" or robe of the high priest, which bag was formed by doubling a part of the garment—note "doubled" in Exodus 28:16, and "inward" (v. 26). In Proverbs 16:33, we are told, "The lot is cast into the lap [Hebrew "bosom," which is put for the clothing covering it—cf. Exodus 4:6, 7]; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord." Thus "the lot" was for the purpose of giving a judgment or infallible decision, and the breastplate is designated "the breastplate of judgment" (Ex. 28:15), because by it God’s judgment or verdict was given when the same was needed—compare 1 Samuel 28:6, where the Lord refused to oblige the apostate Saul.

Thus it seems that when the lot was needed the high priest placed his hand in the bag or pocket behind his breastplate, and drew forth either the Urim or the Thummim, the one signifying Yes, and the other o, for in Joshua 18:11, we are told that the lot "came up," in Joshua 19:1, that it "came forth," and in Joshua 19:17, that it "came out." Joshua 19:51, informs us that this important transaction took place at the entrance to the house of God: "These are the inheritances, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of un, and the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel, divided for an inheritance by lot in Shiloh before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." This casts light upon a number of passages treating of incidents in the later history of Israel. Thus, when they were uncertain as to whether or not they should go up against Benjamin again, they came to the house of God and inquired of the Lord, and it was Phinehas the high priest who obtained answer for them (Judg. 20:26-28). In Ezra 2:61-63, no verdict could be given unless the high priest were present, with his breastplate of judgment, with "the lot," Urim and Thummim, which would give Jehovah’s decision—guilty or innocent.

It is to be duly noted that, in addition to Eleazar the priest and Joshua himself, "the heads of the fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel" (Josh. 14:1) were also present when the official distribution of the land was made. This was in obedience to the Divine injunction given through Moses that "one prince of every tribe" ( um. 34:18) should be taken to serve as commissioners on this occasion. They were entrusted with the oversight, to be witnesses that everything had been conducted fairly and properly in the distribution of the land according to the size of the tribes and in the casting of the lot. Thus would they protect the rights of the tribes, preclude all suspicion that any partiality had been shown, and be qualified authoritatively to determine any controversy which might later arise. "Public affairs should be so managed, as not only to give their right to all, but, if possible, to give satisfaction to all that they have right done them" (Matthew Henry). It is very striking to note that God not only selected those commissioners during the lifetime of Moses, but actually named them all ( um. 34:19-29), which thereby guaranteed their preservation from death during the long interval, either from natural causes or from the fighting in Canaan.

3 Moses had granted the two and a half tribes their inheritance east of the Jordan but had not granted the Levites an inheritance among the rest,

GILL, "And Moses had given the inheritance of two tribes, and an half tribe, on the other side Jordan,.... The two tribes of Gad and Reuben, and the half tribe of Manasseh, whose inheritance is described in Jos_13:8,

but unto the Levites he gave none inheritance among them; this is frequently observed, that it might be taken notice of, to show the disinterestedness of Moses in this affair, Levi being his own tribe; and to recommend the care of the Levites to the other tribes, according to the provision God had made for them.

HE RY 3-5, " The tribes among whom this dividend was to be made were nine and a half. 1. Not the two and a half that were already seated (Jos_14:3), though perhaps now that they saw what a good land Canaan was, and how effectually it was subdued, they might some of them repent their choice, and wish they had now been to have their lot with their brethren, upon which condition they would gladly have given up what they had on the other side Jordan; but it could not be admitted: they had made their election without power of revocation, and so must their doom be; they themselves have decided it, and they must adhere to their choice. 2. Not the tribe of Levi; this was to be otherwise provided for. God had distinguished them from, and dignified them above, the other tribes, and they must not now mingle themselves with them, nor cast in their lot among them, for this would entangle them in the affairs of this life, which would not consist with a due attendance on their sacred function. But, 3. Joseph made two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim, pursuant to Jacob's adoption of Joseph's two sons, and so the number of the tribes was kept up to twelve, though Levi was taken out, which is intimated here (Jos_14:4): The children of Joseph were two tribes, therefore they gave no part to Levi, they being twelve without them.

III. The rule by which they went was the lot, Jos_14:2. The disposal of that is of the Lord, Pro_16:33. It was here used in an affair of weight, and which could not otherwise be accommodated to universal satisfaction, and it was used in a solemn religious manner as an appeal to God, by consent of parties. In dividing by lot, 1. They referred themselves to God, and to his wisdom and sovereignty, believing him fitter to determine for them than they for themselves. Psa_47:4, He shall choose our inheritance for us. 2. They professed a willingness to abide by the determination of it; for every man must take what is his lot, and make the best of it. In allusion to this we are said to obtain an inheritance

in Christ (Eph_1:11), eklerothemen -we have obtained it by lot, so the word signified; for it is obtained by a divine designation. Christ, our Joshua, gives eternal life to as many as were given him, Joh_17:2.

PETT, "Verse 3‘And Moses had given the inheritance of the two tribes, and the half tribe Beyond Jordan, but to the Levites he gave no inheritance among them.’The repetition of this for the third time in a short space (see Joshua 13:14; Joshua 13:33) illustrates the importance that the writer laid on it. The inheritance of the Levites was not given by Moses, it was from God. This was in direct contrast with the Transjordanian tribes whose inheritance was given by Moses. The contrast is deliberate.

K&D 3-5, "So many tribes were to receive their inheritance, for the two tribes and a half had already received theirs from Moses on the other side of the Jordan, and the tribe of Levi was not to receive any land for an inheritance. According to this, there seem to be only eight tribes and a half to be provided for (2 1/2 + 1 + 8 1/2 = 12); but there were really nine and a half, for the sons of Joseph formed two tribes in consequence of the adoption of Ephraim and Manasseh by the patriarch Jacob (Gen_48:5). But although the Levites were to have no share in the land, they were to receive towns to dwell in, with pasture adjoining for their cattle; these the other tribes were to give up to them out of their inheritance, according to the instructions in Num_35:1-8 (see the notes upon this passage).

So far as the division of the land itself was concerned, it was to be distributed by lot, according to Num_26:52.; but, at the same time, the distribution was carried out with such special regard to the relative sizes of the different tribes, that the more numerous tribe received a larger share of the land than one that was not so numerous. This could only be accomplished, however, by their restricting the lot to the discrimination of the relative situation of the different tribes, and then deciding the extent and boundaries of their respective possessions according to the number of families of which they were composed.

(Note: “This was the force of the lot: there were ten lots cast in such a manner as to decide that some were to be next to the Egyptians, some to have the sea-coasts, some to occupy the higher ground, and some to settle in the valleys. When this was done, it remained for the heads of the nation to determine the boundaries of their different territories according to some equitable standard. It was their place, therefore, to ascertain how many thousand heads there were in each tribe, and then to adjudicate a larger or smaller space according to the size of the tribe” (Calvin). Or, as Clericusobserves (Num_26:52), “the lot seems to have had respect to the situation alone, and not to the extent of territory at all.”)

The casting of the lots was probably effected, as the Rabbins assumed, by means of two urns, one filled with slips having the names of the tribes upon them; the other, with an equal number, representing separate divisions of the land: so that when one slip, with a name upon it, was taken out of one urn, another slip, with a division of the land upon it, was taken from the other. The result of the lot was accepted as the direct decree of God; “for the lot was not controlled in any way by the opinion, or decision, or authority of men” (Calvin). See the fuller remarks at Num_26:56.

In the account of the casting of the lots, the first fact which strikes us is, that after the

tribes of Judah and Joseph had received their inheritance, an interruption took place, and the camp was moved from Gilgal to Shiloh, and the tabernacle erected there (Jos_18:1-9); after which the other tribes manifested so little desire to receive their inheritance, that Joshua reproved them for their indolence (Jos_18:3), and directed them to nominate a committee of twenty-one from their own number, whom he sent out to survey the land and divide it into seven parts; and it was not till after this had been done that the casting of the lots was proceeded with, and each of these seven tribes received its inheritance. The reason for this interruption is not given; and the commentators have differed in their opinions as to the cause (see Keil's former Comm. on Joshua, pp. 347ff.). The following appears to be the most probable supposition. When Joshua received the command from the Lord to divide the land among the tribes, they made an approximative division of the land into nine or ten parts, according to the general idea of its extent and principal features, which they had obtained in connection with the conquest of the country, and then commenced distributing it without any more minute survey or more accurate measurement, simply fixing the boundaries of those districts which came out first according to the size of the tribes upon whom the lots fell. As soon as that was done, these tribes began to move off into the territory allotted to them, and to take possession of it. The exact delineation of the boundaries, however, could not be effected at once, but required a longer time, and was probably not finally settled till the tribe had taken possession of its land. In this manner the tribes of Judah, Ephraim, and half Manasseh had received their inheritance one after another. And whilst they were engaged in taking possession, Shiloh was chosen, no doubt in accordance with divine instructions, as the place where the tabernacle was to be permanently erected; and there the sanctuary was set up, the whole camp, of course, removing thither at the same time. But when the casting of the lots was about to be continued for the remainder of the tribes, they showed no great desire for fixed abodes, as they had become so accustomed to a nomad life, through having been brought up in the desert, that they were much more disposed to continue it, than to take possession of a circumscribed inheritance, - a task which would require more courage and exertion, on account of the remaining Canaanites, than a life in tents, in which they might wander up and down in the land by the side of the Canaanites, and supply their wants from its productions, as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had formerly done, since the Canaanites who were left were so weakened by the war that the Israelites had no occasion for a moment's anxiety about them, provided they did not attempt to expel or to exterminate them. But Joshua could not rest contented with this, if he would remain faithful to the charge which he had received from the Lord. He therefore reproved these tribes for their tardiness, and commanded them to take steps for continuing the casting of lots for the land. But as the tribe of Joseph had expressed its dissatisfaction with the smallness of the inheritance allotted to it, and by so doing had manifested its cowardice, which prevented it from attacking the Canaanites who were still left in the territory that had fallen to their lot, Joshua may possibly have had his eyes opened in consequence to the fact that, if the casting of lots was continued in the manner begun, and with nothing more than an approximative definition of the different portions of the land, there was a possibility of still greater dissatisfaction arising among the other tribes, since some of them at any rate would be sure to receive portions of the land in which the Canaanites were more numerous and still stronger than in the possessions of Ephraim. He therefore gave orders, that before the casting of lots was proceeded with any further, the rest of the land should be carefully surveyed and divided into seven districts, and that a statement of the result should be laid before him, that these seven districts might be divided by lot among the seven tribes. This survey of the land no doubt very clearly showed that what remained, after deducting the possessions of Judah and Joseph, was too small for the

remaining seven tribes, in proportion to what had been already divided. Moreover, it had also been discovered that Judah's share was larger than this tribe required (Jos_19:9). Consequently it was necessary that certain partial alterations should be made in the arrangements connected with the first division. The lot itself could not be pronounced invalid when it had once been cast, as its falling was regarded as the decision of God himself, and therefore it was impossible to make a fresh division of the whole land among all the tribes. The only thing that could be done was to leave the two tribes in those districts which had fallen to them by lot (Jos_18:5), but to take certain parts of their territory for the other tribes, which would leave the lot in all its integrity, as the lot itself had not determined either the size of the boundaries. This will serve to explain both the interruption to the casting of the lots, which had been commenced at Gilgal, and also the peculiar manner in which it was continued at Shiloh.

4 for Joseph’s descendants had become two tribes—Manasseh and Ephraim. The Levites received no share of the land but only towns to live in, with pasturelands for their flocks and herds.

CLARKE, "The children of Joseph were two tribes - This was ascertained by the prophetic declaration of their grandfather Jacob, Gen_48:5, Gen_48:6; and as Levi was taken out of the tribes for the service of the sanctuary, one of these sons of Joseph came in his place, and Joseph was treated as the first-born of Jacob, in the place of Reuben, who forfeited his right of primogeniture.

With their suburbs for their cattle - For the meaning of this passage the reader is referred to the note on Num_35:6.

GILL, "For the children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim,.... For the birthright being forfeited by Reuben, was given to Joseph, who had the double portion, the privilege of the firstborn; by which means the number of the twelve tribes was kept up in the division of the land, though that of Levi had no share in it; and which is also a reason why they had none, that Joseph's two sons might be reckoned two tribes:

therefore they gave no part unto the Levites in the land; to make way for the sons of Joseph to have the double portion:

save cities to dwell in; and that only, for they might not sell them, as other Israelites could theirs:

with their suburbs, for their cattle, and for their substance; the Targum is,

"for all their beasts, and for their cattle;''that is, for convenient places to put them into, and for pasturage for, them; which Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret of their larger and lesser cattle, their herds and their flocks, their oxen and sheep.

JAMISO , "The children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim— As two and a half tribes were settled on the east Jordan, and the Levites had no inheritance assigned them in land, there would have been only eight and a half tribes to provide for. But Ephraim and Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph, had been constituted two tribes (Gen_48:5), and although Levi was excluded, the original number of the tribes of Israel was still preserved.

CALVI , "4.They gave no part unto the Levites, etc It is here repeated for the third time with regard to the Levites, that they were not included in the number, so as to have the portion of a tribe assigned to them; but it is mentioned for a different purpose, for it is immediately after added, that the sons of Joseph were divided into two tribes, and were thus privileged to obtain a double portion. Thus had Jacob prophesied, (Genesis 49:0) or rather, like an arbiter appointed by God, he had in this matter preferred the sons of Joseph to the others. God therefore assumed the Levites to himself as a peculiar inheritance, and in their stead substituted one of the two families of Joseph.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:4 For the children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim: therefore they gave no part unto the Levites in the land, save cities to dwell [in], with their suburbs for their cattle and for their substance.

Ver. 4. For the children of Joseph were two tribes.] And so both Joseph had a double portion, the privilege of the firstborn which Reuben had forefeited, [1 Chronicles 5:1] and the number of twelve tribes was made up, notwithstanding the Levites were not reckoned. The Papists, to make up the number of ten commandments, when they have cashiered the second, as making utterly against their image worship, divide the last into two; so loath are heretics to have their asses’ ears seen. But Paul, who knew better than any of them the analysis of the law, calleth that last "the commandment," not commandments. [Romans 7:7]

BE SO , "Joshua 14:4-5. The children of Joseph were two tribes — That is, had the portion of two tribes, and therefore, though Levi was excluded, there remained nine tribes and a half to be provided for in Canaan. They divided, &c. — That is, the persons named, (Joshua 14:1,) who acted in the name of the children of Israel. They were disposed to divide it; they began to take measures for doing it.

PETT, "Verse 4‘For the children of Joseph were two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim, and they gave no portion to the Levites in the land, except for cities to dwell in with their suburbs, for their cattle and for their substance.’With the separation of Levi to the service of YHWH the twelve tribes had been maintained by the split of Joseph into Ephraim and Manasseh to ‘take over’ Levi’s portion. Thus the land would be fully occupied while Levi could be freed for their service. This demonstrates how important the ‘twelveness’ was seen to be. Twelve appears to have been a recognised number of covenant relationship which had to be maintained, compare Genesis 22:20-24; Genesis 25:13-16. Yet it was not said of Manasseh ‘this is the inheritance of the children of Manasseh’ although that is said of all the other tribes. They were still not seen as fully separate from Ephraim. This is an indication of the early date of the sources. They would not have thought that way later.

The portion of Levi has previously been described as ‘the offerings of YHWH, the God of Israel, made by fire’ (Joshua 13:14) and ‘YHWH, the God of Israel’ (Joshua 13:33). Thus it represented participation in supernatural things and special closeness to and separation to YHWH Himself. ow they were to be provided with the means of sustenance, but only as ‘sojourners’ in the land. The Levites were regularly described as sojourners (e.g. Deuteronomy 18:6; Judges 17:7-9; Judges 19:1) , those who dwell in but have no permanent rights in the land. This in their case was not because they were second class, but because they were super-class. In Leviticus 25:23 a similar concept was applied to all Israel demonstrating that the land belonged to YHWH and could not be sold in perpetuity but should be returned to its former owners at the year of yubile if not before.

“Cities to dwell in with their suburbs, for their cattle and for their substance.” The ‘suburbs’ were the common land round a city which were shared by all. Cities were to be set aside in the portions of all the tribes for the Levites to dwell in so that they could carry out their responsibilities to YHWH. This included the collection of tithes, watching over the covenant and the giving of guidance on matters to do with the sanctuary and the Law.

PULPIT, "Joshua 14:4

For the children of Joseph were two tribes (see Genesis 48:5): therefore they gave. There is no "therefore" In the original. The passage is a simple repetition of what we find in Joshua 13:14, Joshua 13:33, and is added here to explain how the twelve tribes who actually divided the land were composed. Suburbs. Rather, "pasture lands;" literally, places where the cattle were driven out to pasture (cf. umbers 35:2; 1 Chronicles 13:2, where the Hebrew is "cities of driving out"). We may illustrate this phrase by the similar arrangements made by the Germanic tribes in early times. "The clearing," says Professor Stubbs, in his 'Constitutional History of England,' p. 49, "is surrounded by a thick border of wood or waste … In the centre of the clearing the village is placed … The fully qualified freeman has a share in the

land of the community. He has a right to the enjoyment of the woods, the pastures, the meadow and the arable land of the mark … The use of the meadow land is definitely apportioned … When the grass beans to grow the cattle are driven out, and the meadow is fenced round and divided into as many equal shares as there are mark families in the village. For the arable land similar measures are taken although the task is somewhat more complex" (see note on Joshua 13:23). Some similar arrangement must have taken place in the primitive Jewish settlement of Palestine. For the rude huts of the Teutonic tribes we must substitute the more civilised "cities, walled up to heaven," of the Phoenician races; for the scanty supply of gram and pasture, provided by a northern climate, we must substitute the rich plenty of a land "flowing with milk and honey," and with all the produce of a southern sky. The area of land assigned to each of the Levitical cities was definitely marked out (see umbers 35:4, umbers 35:5), and subdivided, as the hints in the narrative seem to imply that all the land was, into as many sections as there were "mark families"—that is, families of freemen exclusive of the servile classes in the town.

5 So the Israelites divided the land, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.

CLARKE, "They divided the land - This work was begun some time before at Gilgal, and was finished some time after at Shiloh. It must have required a very considerable time to make all the geographical arrangements that were necessary for this purpose.

GILL, "As the Lord commanded Moses, so the children of Israel did,.... Particularly with respect to the division of the land, and making provision for the Levites; this they did by their heads and representatives, the high priest and chief ruler, and the princes of the several tribes:

and they divided the land; met about it, and began to take measures in order to do it; they prepared for it, though as yet it was not actually done, and previous to it was the following incident.

JAMISO , "the children of Israel ... divided the land— that is, they made the preliminary arrangements for the work. A considerable time was requisite for the survey

and measurement.

COKE, "Ver. 5. The children of Israel—divided the land— That is, they were disposed so to do; they began to set about it. The Scripture calls that done, which is begun or only resolved upon. Genesis 37:21. Exodus 12:48 chap. Joshua 10:15. The text might be disposed thus: "The children of Israel did as the Lord had commanded Moses, by assigning cities and suburbs to the Levites, [ch. Joshua 21:1-2, &c.] when they divided the land, under the direction of Joshua, Eleazar, and the heads of the tribes."

Allotment for Caleb

6 ow the people of Judah approached Joshua at Gilgal, and Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, “You know what the Lord said to Moses the man of God at Kadesh Barnea about you and me.

BAR ES, "The children of Judah - No doubt, in particular, the kinsmen of Caleb, and perhaps other leading men of the tribe. These came before Joshua, with Caleb, in order to make it manifest that they supported his claim, to be secured in the possessions promised him by Moses before the general allotment should be made to the tribes (compare the marginal references).

CLARKE, "Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite - In the note on the parallel place, Num_32:12, it is said Kenaz was probably the father of Jephunneh, and that Jephunneh not Caleb, was the Kenezite; but still, allowing this to be perfectly correct, Caleb might also be called the Kenezite, as it appears to have been a family name, for Othniel, his nephew and son-in-law, is called the son of Kenaz, Jos_15:17; Jdg_1:13, and 1Ch_4:13; and a grandson of Caleb is also called the son of Kenaz, 1Ch_4:15. In 1Ch_2:18, Caleb is called the son of Hezron, but this is only to be understood of his having Hezron for one of his ancestors; and son here may be considered the same as descendant; for Hezron, of the tribe of Judah, having come into Egypt one hundred and

seventy-six years before the birth of Caleb, it is not at all likely that he could be called his father in the proper sense of the term. Besides, the supposition above makes a very good sense, and is consistent with the use of the terms father, son, and brother, in different parts of the sacred writings.

Thou knowest the thing that the Lord said - In the place to which Caleb seems to refer, viz., Num_14:24, there is not a word concerning a promise of Hebron to him and his posterity; nor in the place (Deu_1:36) where Moses repeats what had been done at Kadesh-barnea: but it may be included in what is there spoken. God promises, because he had another spirit within him, and had followed God fully, therefore he should enter into the land whereinto he came, and his seed should possess it. Probably this relates to Hebron, and was so understood by all parties at that time. This seems tolerably evident from the pointed reference made by Caleb to this transaction.

GILL, "Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal,.... Whither he was returned after the conquest of the kings and their kingdoms; these were not the whole tribe of Judah, but some of the chief men of it who accompanied Caleb, for the honour of him, as Ben Gersom observes, he being their prince; and to second his petition, and to show their consent unto, and an approbation of such an assignment to him as he desired:

and Caleb, the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite, said unto him; whether Caleb or Jephunneh called the Kenezite, and what the reason of the name, are not very material; and of which See Gill on Num_32:12; and as Caleb was personally and singly concerned in the following affair, he alone dressed Joshua, attended with some principal men of his tribe:

thou knowest the thing the Lord said unto Moses the man of God,

concerning thee and me, in Kadeshbarnea; the place from whence the spies were sent, and whither they returned to Moses there, of whom Caleb speaks with great respect and veneration, which he knew would be very pleasing and endearing to Joshua, who could not but remember what had been said by him concerning himself and Caleb, though it was now forty five years ago; it being so very striking and memorable, that only two of that generation then present should enter into the land of Canaan; the fulfilment of which, in all its circumstances, they had lived to see.

HE RY, "Before the lot was cast into the lap for the determining of the portions of the respective tribes, the particular portion of Caleb was assigned to him. He was now, except Joshua, not only the oldest man in all Israel, but was twenty years older than any of them, for all that were above twenty years old when he was forty were dead in the wilderness; it was fit therefore that this phoenix of his age should have some particular marks of honour put upon him in the dividing of the land. Now,

I. Caleb here presents his petition, or rather makes his demand, to have Hebron given him for a possession (this mountain he calls it, Jos_14:12), and not to have that put into the lot with the other parts of the country. To justify his demand, he shows that God had long since, by Moses, promised him that very mountain; so that God's mind being already made known in this matter it would be a vain and needless thing to consult it any further by casting lots, by which we are to appeal to God in those cases only which cannot otherwise be decided, not in those which, like this, are already determined. Caleb is here called the Kenezite, some think from some remarkable victory obtained by him

over the Kenezites, as the Romans gave their great generals titles from the countries they conquered, as Africanus, Germanicus, etc. Observe,

1. To enforce his petition, (1.) He brings the children of Judah, that is, the heads and great men of that tribe, along with him, to present it, who were willing thus to pay their respects to that ornament of their tribe, and to testify their consent that he should be provided for by himself, and that they would not take it as any reflection upon the rest of this tribe. Caleb was the person whom God had chosen out of that tribe to be employed in dividing the land (Num_34:19), and therefore, lest he should seem to improve his authority as a commissioner for his own private advantage and satisfaction, he brings his brethren along with him, and waiving his own power, seems rather to rely upon their interest. (2.) He appeals to Joshua himself concerning the truth of the allegations upon which he grounded his petition: Thou knowest the thing, Jos_14:6. (3.) He makes a very honourable mention of Moses, which he knew would not be at all unpleasing to Joshua: Moses the man of God (Jos_14:6), and the servant of the Lord, Jos_14:7. What Moses said he took as from God himself, because Moses was his mouth and his agent, and therefore he had reason both to desire and expect that it should be made good. What can be more earnestly desired than the tokens of God's favour? And what more confidently expected than the grants of his promise?

JAMISO , "Jos_14:6-15. Caleb privilege requests and obtains Hebron.

Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb ... said— This incident is recorded here because it occurred while the preparations were being made for casting the lots, which, it appears, were begun in Gilgal. The claim of Caleb to the mountains of Hebron as his personal and family possessions was founded on a solemn promise of Moses, forty-five years before (Num_14:24; Deu_1:36; Jos_14:10), to give him that land on account of his fidelity. Being one of the nominees appointed to preside over the division of the country, he might have been charged with using his powers as a commissioner to his own advantage, had he urged his request in private; and therefore he took some of his brethren along with him as witness of the justice and propriety of his conduct.

CALVI , "6.Then the children of Judah came, etc Here the account which had been begun as to the partition of the land is broken off to make way for the insertion of a narrative, namely, that Caleb requested Mount Hebron to be given to him as he had been promised by Moses. This happened a long time before the people had ceased from making war, and it became necessary to cast lots. It is stated to be the fifth year since their entrance into the land, and he does not ask for a locality to be given up to him which was already subdued and cleared of the enemy, but in the midst of the noise and heat of warfare, he asks to be permitted to acquire it by routing and slaying its giants. He only seeks to provide, that when his valor has subdued the giants, he is not to be defrauded of the reward of his labor. The method of so providing, is to prevent its being included in the common lot of a tribe. Accordingly, he does not put forth the claim by himself alone, but the members of his tribe, the sons of Judah also concur with him, because the effect of conferring this extraordinary benefit on one family was so far to make an addition to all. Hence though Caleb alone speaks, all the tribe whose interest it was that his request should be granted were present.

I am not clear why the surname of Kenite was given to Caleb. He is so called also in umbers 32:0. I am not unaware of the conjecture of some expositors, that he was so surnamed from Kenas, because either he himself or some one of his ancestors dwelt among the Kenites. But I see no solid foundation for this. What if he gained this title by some illustrious deed, just as victors sometimes assume a surname from the nations they have subdued? As the promise had not been inserted into any public record, and Joshua was the only witness now surviving, he makes his application to him. And it is probable that when the ten spies made mention of the names of the Anakim, with the view of terrifying the people, Caleb, to refute their dishonesty, answered with truth, that when he beheld them on Mount Hebron, they were so far from being terrible, that he would attack them at his own hand, provided that on their expulsion he should succeed to their lands; and that on these conditions Moses ceded to him a habitation in that locality which he should have acquired by his own prowess.

COFFMA , "Verse 6"Then the children of Judah drew nigh unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that Jehovah spoke unto Moses the man of God concerning me and concerning thee in Kadesh-barnea. Forty years old was I when Moses the servant of Jehovah sent me from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land: and I brought him word again as it was in my heart. evertheless my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt; but I wholly followed Jehovah my God. And Moses sware on that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy foot hath trodden shall be an inheritance to thee and to thy children forever, because thou hast wholly followed Jehovah my God."

The appearance of the tribe of Judah in the person of its official representative Caleb, along with other Judahites who were witnesses, was actually the first order of business on the agenda for casting the lots and distributing the land. Judah naturally came first, due to the "rulership" that pertained to the primogeniture forfeited by Reuben and conveyed upon Judah by their father Jacob. But the so-called Caleb pericope had priority over the casting of lots due to an oath taken by Moses and witnessed by both Caleb and Joshua. What Caleb said here, was, in effect, "We cannot divide the land until this prior question of my right to Hebron is determined." This was nothing but the simple truth. If the lots had been cast, and Hebron had fallen to one of the tribes other than Judah, it would have cost Caleb his rightful reward, as promised by God through Moses. How foolish it is, therefore, to blame some "redactor" or "editor" for the appearance of this episode right where it is. Here is exactly the place this issue was forced to be decided. It is unimaginable that it could have occurred anywhere else!

The masterful manner in which Caleb presented his appeal, the vivid recall of events which at that time were forty-five years in the past, the appeal to Joshua as a witness of Moses' sworn word, according to Woudstra, "reflect an eye-witness account."[13] We are here dealing with events which, of all the people on earth, only Joshua and Caleb had firsthand knowledge and recall of the things mentioned, and the only fair deduction is that in those two men alone we are compelled to find the

source of this material. The ancient tradition of Joshua's authorship of this book that bears his name is strongly supported by this and other similar incidents recorded.

"Caleb, the Kenizzite ..." (Joshua 14:6). "Kenaz was evidently a descendant of Edom, but was assimilated into the tribe of Judah."[14] Caleb rose to the chief of the tribe of Judah ( umbers 13-14). He was born in Egypt, survived the wilderness experience of Israel, and figured prominently in his advanced age in the subjugation of Canaan. His racial extraction does not cast a cloud upon his legitimacy as a Jew, his status being exactly the same as that of the descendants of Ruth the Moabitess (which included King David), and of Rahab the harlot. The descendants of Ruth and Rahab enjoyed their Jewish privileges through marriage, and the same is true of Caleb. "Before the Exodus, Caleb's father, a non-Israelite, had married a daughter of Hur of the clan of Chelubai (Caleb) in the tribe of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:9,18,19)."[15] From this it is perfectly clear that Caleb was not already in Canaan before the Exodus, nor had the Calebites the ownership of Hebron before Joshua.

A full account of the events that led to the pledge of Hebron to Caleb is found in umbers 14:21-24 and Deuteronomy 1:35,36. For further comment on these important happenings, see our comments under those passages in these commentaries..

It appears to us that God Himself might have over-ruled events at this juncture in order to bring this instance of Caleb's faithfulness under great dangers into focus for the benefit of all the children of Israel. "The account of Caleb's courageous stand would serve to remind God's people of how the promised land had to be won."[16]

It is a gross error to attribute Caleb's actions here to greed or avarice on his part. "He later willingly yielded his city to the Levites and lived in the suburbs (Joshua 21:12)."[17]

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:6 Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that the LORD said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadeshbarnea.

Ver. 6. Then the children of Judah,] i.e., The chief of them came, as advocates for Caleb, who was a man of great eminency in their tribe.

And Caleb the son of Jephunneh.] To distinguish him from Caleb the son of Hezron. [1 Chronicles 2:18]

Thou knowest the thing.] What prerogative the Lord promised us for a reward of our constancy. God is a liberal paymaster, and sendeth no man away with cause to

complain of a hard bargain.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:6. Then the children of Judah came — When Joshua, Eleazar, and the rest were consulting about the division of the land, and before they had begun to cast lots, some of the children of Judah interposed in behalf of Caleb, coming along with him to show him respect, to testify their consent that he should be provided for by himself, and to be witnesses of the truth of what he alleged. In Gilgal — Where the division of the land was designed, and begun, though it was executed and finished in Shiloh. The Kenezite — Of the posterity of Kenaz. Thou knowest the thing the Lord said — In general, the promise he made us of possessing this land, and what he said concerning me in particular, Joshua 14:9.

PETT, "Joshua 14:6

‘Then the children of Judah drew near to Joshua in Gilgal, and Caleb, the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite, said to him, “You know what it was that YHWH spoke to Moses the man of God, concerning me and concerning you, in Kadesh-barnea.” ’After the initial wars Joshua and Israel had returned to their camp at Gilgal, and at this time Caleb came to Joshua accompanied by his fellow elders of the tribe of Judah. It was important that his request be seen as official and backed by the elders lest he and Joshua be charged with favouritism. Furthermore as a result of the request the portion of Judah was being fixed as connected with Hebron.

Caleb, with Joshua, had been one of the two princes of Israel who had spied out the land of Canaan forty years before and had returned with a positive view, in contrast with the other ten whose viewpoint had been negative and had caused Israel to sin grievously by refusing to go forward into the land ( umbers 13:1 to umbers 14:10). As a reward for his faithfulness he was then promised that he would one day receive as his possession the land that he had spied out ( umbers 14:24; Deuteronomy 1:36). ow he was laying claim to that promise, a promise made to him by YHWH through Moses.

But what was a Kenizzite doing as a prince of Israel? The Kenizzites had been in the land of Canaan from at least the time of Abraham (Genesis 15:19). But like Israel they too would seek shelter in Egypt in times of famine, and a group of them too may have been made slaves as ‘Canaanites’ after the Hyksos expulsion, and have joined up with the Israelites on their departure from Egypt, taking advantage of the parlous situation Egypt found itself in. Thus they would have been incorporated at Sinai into the covenant and have become Israelites. We note later how many Israelites had such different designations (e.g. Uriah the Hittite - 2 Samuel 11). (Alternatively they may have been descendants of those who were previously servants in the households of the patriarchs).

WHEDO , "CALEB’S I HERITA CE, Joshua 14:6-15.

6. Children of Judah came — Caleb was of the tribe of Judah, and probably by his request the elders of his own tribe accompany him to Gilgal, lest they might suspect

that he was using his office of commissioner to carve out a splendid portion for himself. They may have seconded his petition as having an important bearing on the question of their own portion, which would naturally contain the tract of Caleb, their tribesman, so that the granting of his request would virtually establish southern Canaan as their lot. Caleb was one of the two spies so famous for their faith in Jehovah, and for their courage and independence in making a very unpopular minority report, for which they narrowly escaped stoning at the hands of the infuriated people. umbers 14:6-10. They were spared in the ensuing plague which swept off the faithless ten, and were also excepted when Moses declared that none who were above twenty years old when they came out of Egypt should enter Canaan. umbers 14:29-30.

Kenezite — That is, a son of Kenaz. He was a pure Hebrew, not an Edomite.

Kadesh-barnea — Joshua 10:41, note.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 6I HERITA CE OF JUDAH (Joshua 14:6 to Joshua 15:63).

(6) Caleb the son of Jephunneh—Caleb was the commissioner appointed from the tribe of Judah to divide the land ( umbers 34:19). His coming forward on this occasion to ask for his own inheritance first of all might appear to savour of self-interest, if the post of honour for which he applied had not been also the most dangerous and difficult position in the inheritance of his tribe. He applied for the territory of the gigantic sons of Anak, whom he undertook to drive out in the strength of Jehovah. Therefore “Joshua blessed him” and gave him Hebron for his inheritance. It is noticeable that of the two faithful spies whom Moses sent, Caleb received his inheritance first, and Joshua last of all Israel. (See Joshua 19:49.) The characters of the two men are well seen in this contrast—the one foremost in a service of danger; the other last to seek the things that were his own. Thus, “even Christ pleased not Himself” (comp. Joshua); but “the reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me,” as the conquest of the sons of Anak fell to the lot of Caleb. Observe how the slayer of Goliath is said to take away the reproach from Israel, 1 Samuel 17:26. “Who can stand before the children of Anak?”

EXPOSITOR'S DICTIO ARY, "Joshua 14:6-15

"It is beautiful," says Dr. Blaikie, "to see that there was no rivalry between them. ot only did Caleb interpose no remonstrance when Joshua was called to succeed Moses, but he seems all through the ware to have yielded to him the most loyal and hearty submission. God had set His seal on Joshua , and Caleb was too magnanimous to allow any poor ambition of his, if he had any, to come in the way of the Divine will and the public good." Dr. Blaikie remarks also that there is something singularly touching in Caleb"s asking as a favour what was really a most hazardous but important service to the nation. The driving out of the Anakim was a formidable duty, and the task might have seemed more suitable for one who had the

strength and enthusiasm of youth on his side. But Caleb, though eighty-five, was yet young.

PULPIT, "Joshua 14:6

In Gilgal (see Joshua 9:6). Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite. Or, descendant of Kenaz, as was his kinsman Othniel. As far as we can make out from the genealogy in 1 Chronicles 2:1-55, Caleb and Kenaz were family names, for the Caleb or Calubi (1 Chronicles 2:9) the son of Hezron (1 Chronicles 2:18), the Caleb the son of Hur (1 Chronicles 2:50), and Caleb the son of Jephunneh (1 Chronicles 4:15), could not have been the same persons. And Caleb was a Kenezite, or descendant of Kenaz; he had a grandson, apparently, of that name (so the LXX. and Vulgate translate, 1 Chronicles 4:15), and a brother, according to the most probable rendering of the Hebrew of both Joshua 15:17 and 1:9. See also 1 Chronicles 4:13. For Caleb was the son of Jephunneh, not of Kenaz. Hitzig, 'Geschichte des Volkes Israel,' 1.105, thinks that Caleb was a descendant of the Kenaz mentioned in Genesis 36:11; or, see 15. Some think he was a Kenizzite (see Genesis 15:19). The Bishop of Bath and Wells, in his article in Smiths 'Dictionary of the Bible,' thinks that the view that he was not of Jewish origin agrees best with the Scripture narrative, and removes many difficulties regarding the number of the children of Israel at the Exodus. It certainly serves to explain why the tribe of Judah came with Caleb, when he preferred his request, and the statement in Genesis 15:13, which seems to imply that Caleb was not one of the tribe of Judah by birth, but one of the "mixed multitude" that went up with the Israelites (Exodus 12:38), and acquired afterwards by circumcision the rights of Israelites. If this be the case, it is an illustration of the truth declared in Romans 2:28, Romans 2:29; Romans 4:12; Galatians 3:7. By his faithfulness to God he had well earned the reward which he now sought. Concerning me and thee. And yet Knobel asserts that, according to Galatians 3:8 and Galatians 3:12, Joshua was not one of the spies! He accordingly sees the hand of the "Jehovist" here. So accurate is the criticism which pretends to be able to disintegrate the narratives in the Hebrew Scriptures, and to assign each part to its separate author (see umbers 14:24). As well might we conclude that this verse in umbers 14:1-45. is by a different hand to umbers 14:30 and umbers 14:38 in the same chapter, in spite of the obvious coherence of the whole narrative.

PI K, "Individual Portions

Our previous articles upon the distribution of Canaan were confined almost entirely to the typical side of things, adumbrating as it did that blessed heritage which God decreed and Christ purchased for His people. But we must now consider briefly some of the literal features connected with the same. The orderly dividing of the land was not only a wise provision, but a necessary arrangement, so that the particular section of each tribe should be clearly defined. In Joshua 14–19 a full and detailed description is recorded of the boundaries of each one. That was done by the immediate appointment and direction of God, and not by any human sagacity and prudence, still less by the dictates of partiality and greed. All was regulated by "the lot." This was done long before the whole of Canaan was actually conquered and

possessed by Israel. There was to be no waiting until all the tribes had secured their respective portions: instead, they were now informed of the exact section to which they had been given a Divine title, so that they might go forward and possess their possessions. Thus were they called unto the exercise of faith and full confidence in God as they set about the performing of their respective tasks.

In our last we saw that the method which God selected for the allocating of Canaan unto Israel combined the principles of grace, sovereignty and righteousness: of grace, inasmuch as Israel’s inheritance was a Divine gift; of sovereignty, for all was done by lot or submitting to the Divine will in the dispositions made; of righteousness, for the numerical strength of the tribe was taken into account in the size of the portion allotted it. The plan followed was thus the very opposite of what would be euphemistically termed a "Welfare State," for there was no dividing of the land into twelve equal parts. The whole of Scripture makes it plain that it is the Divine will that there should be distinctions both among nations, in the territory which they occupy, and among individuals, in the property which they possess. Likewise, it is required that each shall be contented with what the Lord has assigned them and him. "Thou shalt not covet" is as much a part of the Divine law as "Thou shalt not kill." When the antitypical Joshua was asked to appoint two of His disciples to the chief places of honor in His kingdom He replied, "to sit on My right hand, and on My left, is not Mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of My Father" (Matthew 20:23), thereby acknowledging the sovereignty of the Father.

The benefits to be derived from the dividing of Canaan to Israel by Divine lot should at once be apparent. ot only did such an arrangement exclude the exercise of human avarice and injustice, but it also precluded any occasion for strife and wrangling between the several tribes, determining as it did the precise location assigned unto each of them, with the limits thereof. Thus all ground for jealousy, misunderstanding and lawsuits about their respective territories was obviated. But more: Israel were thereby taught to submit themselves to the good pleasure of the Lord. Therein lies the chief practical lesson which we should draw from this transaction: to surrender ourselves wholly to the Divine will and beg God to choose for us—whether it be in the matter of our earthly vocation, the selection of a life-partner, or the measure of temporal prosperity which will be most for His glory and our good. As an old writer truly remarked, "Such as refer themselves unto God to choose for them, will never find cause to repent of their lot." o, it is when we leave Him out, lean unto our own understanding, act by carnal impulse, that we bring trouble upon ourselves. How we should pray daily, "work in me both to will and to do of Thy good pleasure."

Before the lot was cast for the determining of the portions of the respective tribes, Caleb appeared before those who had charge of that business, and presented his claim unto Hebron for his own possession. A brief allusion was made to the same at the end of our October 1951 article, but a closer examination of the incident is now called for. Ere so doing, it should be pointed out that Joshua 14:5, is a general statement, which is amplified in Joshua 15:1, and onwards, the narrative being

interrupted by what is now to be before us. "Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that the Lord said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadesh-barnea" (v. 6). Observe here the gracious humility of the man! Caleb was himself one of those who had been Divinely appointed to serve as one of the commissioners, to see that the lot was carried out in a proper manner ( um. 34:17-19); yet, lest it might appear that he was seeking unduly to use his authority in furthering his own interests, he brought with him some of his brethren to act as witnesses. How careful was he to "abstain from all appearance of evil" (1 Thess. 5:22)! Equally circumspect should we be in all of our public transactions.

CO STABLE, "Verses 6-152. Caleb"s inheritance14:6-15

Before the casting of lots began, Caleb came to Joshua with his fellow tribesmen from Judah to request the inheritance that Moses had promised him ( Joshua 14:9; Deuteronomy 1:36; cf. umbers 14:26-38). Moses had promised Caleb land in Canaan but had not specified its location. The reason for this special blessing was Caleb"s faithfulness to God when he served as one of the12spies. Joshua also received a personal allotment later ( Joshua 19:49-50).

"Caleb represents all of Israel as one who receives an allotment and takes the land for himself." [ ote: Hess, p239.]

Caleb was a member of the clan in Judah called the Kenizzites ( Joshua 14:6; Joshua 14:14). He was probably not a descendant of the Kenizzites who were early inhabitants of Canaan ( Genesis 15:19). Another view is that the early Canaanite Kenizzites joined the tribe of Judah before the Exodus. [ ote: Campbell, " Joshua ," p357.]

The references to Caleb"s age enable us to determine the length of the conquest of Canaan. Caleb had received the promise of a portion in the land at Kadesh Barnea38 years before the Israelites crossed the Jordan and entered Canaan ( umbers 14:24). Caleb was40 years old then ( Joshua 14:7). He was now85 ( Joshua 14:10). Forty-five years had elapsed, and Caleb had spent38 of them in the wilderness. Therefore the conquest must have taken the remaining seven years.

The portion Caleb requested was within the tribal allotment of Judah, his tribe. He asked for part of the hill country that the giants who had discouraged his fellow spies still inhabited. In making his request ( Joshua 14:12), Caleb referred to the very things that the unbelieving spies had pointed out to discourage the Israelites from entering the land: hill country, Anakim, and large fortified cities (cf. umbers 13:28-29). Joshua gave him the town of Hebron that was, and still Isaiah , an important city. The notation that the ancient name of Hebron was Kiriath-arba, the city of Arba, the greatest man among the Anakim (giants), is significant ( Joshua 14:15). It recalls God"s faithfulness in giving this giant"s city to Caleb, who had

believed God could do Song of Solomon 45 years earlier.

Caleb was still strong in faith as well as in body, even though he was old. He continued to trust in God to fulfill His promise concerning the land rather than in his personal physical ability to take it from the enemy. His name means "according to the heart."

"It would have been natural for Caleb to ask for a "soft spot"-a portion of land already conquered where he could settle down and spend the rest of his life raising a few vegetables or flowers. Instead, at85 , he asked for the very section that had struck terror into the hearts of the ten spies....

"This courageous old warrior, who did not expect to receive his inheritance without exerting himself, is a splendid example for an age which increasingly looks for cradle-to-casket protection." [ ote: Jacobsen, p100.]

John Cawood identified Caleb"s outstanding features as uncompromising convictions, unreserved commitment, unalterable courage, and unwavering confidence. [ ote: John Cawood, "The Godly Features of Caleb," Confident Living44:10 ( ovember1986):53-55.]

" Joshua 14thus sets forth two major points, which continue to have value for the people of God. Life in all its dimensions is to be lived according to the plans set forth by God, not by the greedy, selfish plans designed by man. Blessing comes ultimately to the man who totally follows God." [ ote: Butler, p175.]

K&D, "Caleb's Inheritance. - Jos_14:6. Before the casting of the lots commenced, Caleb came to Joshua along with the sons of Judah, and asked for the mountains of Hebron for his possession, appealing at the same time to the fact, that forty-five years before Moses had promised it to him on oath, because he had not discouraged the people and stirred them up to rebellion, as the other spies that were sent from Kadesh to Canaan had done, but had faithfully followed the Lord.

(Note: The grounds upon which Knobel follows Maurer and others in affirming that this account does not belong to the so-called Elohist, but is merely a fragment taken from the first document of the Jehovist, are formed partly from misinterpretations of particular verses and partly from baseless assumptions. To the former belongs the assertion, that, according to Jos_14:8, Jos_14:12, Joshua was not one of the spies (see the remarks on Jos_14:8); to the latter the assertion, that the Elohist does not represent Joshua as dividing the land, or Caleb as receiving so large a territory (see on the contrary, however, the exposition of Jos_14:13), as well as the enumeration of all kinds of words which are said to be foreign to the Elohistic document.)

This occurred at Gilgal, where the casting of the lots as to take place. Caleb was not “the head of the Judahites,” as Knobel maintains, but simply the head of a father's house of Judah, and, as we may infer from his surname, “the Kenizzite” or descendant of Kenaz (“the Kenizzite” here and Num_32:12 is equivalent to “son of Kenaz,” Jos_15:17, and Jdg_1:13), head of the father's house which sprang from Kenaz, i.e., of a subdivision of

the Judahite family of Hezron; for Caleb, the brother of Jerahmeel and father of Achzah, according to 1Ch_2:42 (cf. 1Ch_2:49), was the same person as Caleb the descendant of Hezron mentioned in 1Ch_2:18. From the surname “the Kenizzite” we are of course not to understand that Caleb or his father Jephunneh is described as a descendant of the Canaanitish tribe of Kenizzites (Gen_15:19); but Kenaz was a descendant of Hezron, the son of Perez and grandson of Judah (1Ch_2:5, 1Ch_2:18, 1Ch_2:25), of whom nothing further is known. Consequently it was not the name of a tribe, but of a person, and, as we may see from 1Ch_4:15, where one of the sons of Caleb is called Kenaz, the name was repeated in the family. The sons of Judah who came to Joshua along with Caleb were not the Judahites generally, therefore, or representatives of all the families of Judah, but simply members or representatives of the father's house of Judah which took its name from Kenaz, and of which Caleb was the head at that time. Caleb reminded Joshua of the word which the Lord had spoken concerning them in Kadesh-barnea, i.e., the promise of God that they should both of them enter the land of Canaan (Num_14:24, Num_14:30), and then proceeded to observe (Jos_14:7): “When I was forty years old, and was sent by Moses as a spy to Canaan, I brought back an answer as it was in my mind,” i.e., according to the best of my convictions, without fear of man or regard to the favour of the people.

EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMME TARY

THE I HERITA CE OF CALEB*.

Joshua 14:6-15.

CALEB is one of those men whom we meet with seldom in Bible history, but whenever we do meet them we are the better for the meeting. Bright and brave, strong, modest and cheerful, there is honesty in his face, courage and decision in the very pose of his body, and the calm confidence of faith in his very look and attitude. It is singular that there should be cause to doubt whether his family were originally of the promised seed. When introduced to us in the present passage he is emphatically called "Caleb, the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite" (R.V., Kenizzite, rightly, same as Kenizzite in Genesis 15:19), as if he had been a descendant of Kenaz, a son of Esau (Genesis 36:11; Genesis 36:15), and a member of the Kenizzite tribe. It was not customary to distinguish Israelites in this way, but only those who had come among them from other tribes, like "Heber the Kenite," "Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite" ( 4:11; 4:17), Uriah the Hittite, Hushai the Archite, etc. Moreover, Othniel, Caleb's younger brother, is called the son of Kenaz (Joshua 15:17); and further, when it is recorded in the fourteenth verse of this chapter that Hebron became the possession of Caleb, the reason assigned is that he "wholly followed the Lord God of Israel." On the other hand, in the genealogical list of 1 Chronicles 4:13; 1 Chronicles 4:15, Othniel and Caleb occur as if they were regular members of the tribe; but that list shows obvious signs of imperfection. On the whole, the preponderance of evidence is in favour of the opinion that Caleb's family were originally outside the covenant, but had become proselytes, like Hobab, Rahab,

Ruth, and Heber. Their faith was pre-eminently the fruit of conviction, and not the accident of heredity. It had a firmer basis than that of most Israelites. It was woven more closely into the texture of their being, and swayed their lives more powerfully. It is pleasing to think that there may have been many such proselytes; that the promise to Abraham may have attracted souls from the east, and the west, and the north, and the south; that even beyond the limits of the twelve tribes many hearts may have been cheered, and many lives elevated and purified by the promise to him, "In thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed."

*There is some difficulty in adjusting the three passages in which the settlement of Caleb is referred to. From this first passage of the three, we are led to think that it was before the tribe of Judah obtained its portion. Again, from Joshua 15:13 we might suppose that it was simultaneously with the rest of the tribe. From 1:10, again, it might be thought that the subduing of the natives in Hebron was effected, not by Caleb alone, but by the tribe of Judah, and that it took place "after the death of Joshua " ( 1:1). Putting all these together, it would appear that Hebron was assigned to Caleb before the tribe of Judah was settled; that this allocation was ratified at the general settlement; that as Caleb was a member of the tribe, his services against the Canaanites, and especially the Anakim, were ascribed to his tribe; and that the process of dispossessing the Canaanites went on for some time after the death of Joshua. The repetitions in the narrative concerning Caleb form one of the considerations that favour the idea of more sources than one having been made use of in the composition of this book.

Caleb and Joshua had believed and acted alike, in opposition to the other ten spies; but Caleb occupies the more prominent place in the story of their heroism and faith. It was he that "stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it " ( umbers 13:30); and at first his name occurs alone, as exempted from the sentence of exclusion against the rest of his generation: ''But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed Me fully, him will I bring into the land where into he went: and his seed shall possess it " ( umbers 14:24). As we have said before, it is probable that Caleb was the readier speaker, and it is possible that he was the firmer man. Joshua seems to have wanted that power of initiation which Caleb had. It was because he had always been a good follower that Joshua in his old age was fitted to be a leader. Because he had been a good servant he became a good master. As long as Moses lived, Joshua was his servant. After Moses died, Joshua set himself simply to carry out his instructions. It was a happy thing for him on the return of the ten spies that Caleb was one of them, otherwise he might have found himself in a condition of embarrassment. Caleb was evidently the man who led the opposition to the ten, not only asserting the course of duty, but manifesting the spirit of contempt and defiance toward the faithless cowards that forgot that God was with them. In his inmost heart Joshua was quite of his mind, but probably he wanted the energetic manner, the ringing voice, the fearless attitude of his more demonstrative companion. Certain it is that Caleb reaped the chief honour of that day*.

*Some readers may no doubt prefer the explanation that when Caleb is mentioned

alone one document was followed, and when Caleb and Joshua are coupled, another.

It is beautiful to see that there was no rivalry between them. ot only did Caleb interpose no remonstrance when Joshua was called to succeed Moses, but he seems all through the wars to have yielded to him the most loyal and hearty submission. God had set His seal on Joshua, and the people had ratified the appointment, and Caleb was too magnanimous to allow any poor ambition of his, if he had any, to come in the way of the Divine will and the public good. His affectionate and cordial bearing on the present occasion seems to show that not even in the corner of his heart did there linger a trace of jealousy toward the old friend and companion whom on that occasion he had surpassed, but who had been set so much higher than himself. He came to him as the recognised leader of the people - as the man whose voice was to decide the question he now submitted, as the judge and arbiter in a matter which very closely concerned him and his house.

And yet there are indications of tact on the part of Caleb, of a thorough understanding of the character of Joshua, and of the sort of considerations by which he might be expected to be swayed. There were two grounds on which he might reasonably look for the conceding of his request - his personal services, and the promise of Moses. Caleb knows well that the promise of Moses will influence Joshua much more than any other consideration; therefore he puts it in the foreground. "Thou knowest the thing that the Lord said unto Moses, the man of God, concerning me and thee in Kadesh-barnea." "Moses, the man of God." Why does Caleb select that remarkable epithet? Why add anything to the usual name, Moses? The use of the epithet was honouring to all the three.

That which constituted the highest glory of Moses was that he was so much at one with God. God's will was ever his law, and he was in such close sympathy with God that whatever instructions he gave on any subject might be assumed to be in accordance with God's will. Moreover, in calling him "the man of God" when addressing Joshua, Caleb assumed that Joshua would be impressed by this consideration, and would be disposed to agree to a request which was not only sanctioned by the will of Moses, but by that higher will which Moses constantly recognised. In short, when Joshua considered that the particular wish of Moses which Caleb now recalled was only the expression of the Divine will, Caleb felt assured that he could not withhold his consent. The three men were indeed a noble trio, worthy descendants of their father Abraham, even if one of the three was no son of Jacob. Long before our Lord taught the petition "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven," it had become habitual to them all. Moses was indeed ''the man of God," - preeminently in fellowship with Him; in a lower sphere both Caleb and Joshua were of the same order, men who tried to live their lives, and every part of them, only in God.

Having fortified his plea with this strong reference at once to Moses and to God, Caleb proceeds to rehearse the service which had led to the promise of Moses. The facts could not but be well known to Joshua. "Forty years old was I when Moses, the

servant of the Lord, sent me from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land, and I brought him word again as it was in my heart. evertheless, my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt; but I wholly followed the Lord my God." Why does Caleb put the matter in this way? Why does he not couple Joshua with himself as having been faithful on that never-to-be- forgotten occasion? The only explanation that seems feasible is, that from the pre-eminent position of Joshua this was unnecessary, perhaps it might have appeared even unbecoming. A soldier making a request of the Duke of Wellington, and recalling some service he had done at the battle of Waterloo, would hardly think it necessary, or even becoming, to say how the Duke, too, had been there, and what surpassing service he had rendered on that day. A soldier like the Duke occupying a position of unrivalled pre-eminence on account of long and brilliant service, does not need to be told what he has done, Joshua was now the leader of Israel, and the last few years had crowned him with such manifold glory that his whole life was transfigured, and individual acts of service did not need to be spoken of Caleb was comparatively an obscure individual, whose fame rested on a single service now nearly half a century old, which could not, indeed, be quite forgotten, but amid the brilliant events of later times might easily pass out of sight and out of mind. There was no disparagement of Joshua, therefore, in his not being mentioned by Caleb, but, on the contrary, a silent tribute to his exalted office as chief ruler of Israel, and to his all but unparalleled services, especially during these later years.

"I brought him word again, as it was in my heart." The statement is made in no boasting spirit, and yet what a rare virtue it denotes! Caleb, as we now say, had the courage of his convictions. He had both an honest heart and an honest tongue. We can have but little idea what temptations he lay under not to speak what was in his heart. For six weeks these ten men had been his close companions. They had eaten together, slept under the same canvas, walked by the same paths, beguiled the long way by story and anecdote, and no doubt by joke and play of humour, and done kind offices to each other as circumstances required. To break away from your own set, from the comrades of your campaign, to upset their plans, and counsel those in power to a course diametrically opposed to theirs, is one of the most difficult of social duties. And in these days of ours there is no duty more commonly set aside. Moral cowardice has been well said to be one of the most common vices of our age.

What more common in Parliament, for example, than for men to differ strongly from some of the measures of their party, and yet, because it is their party, support them by their votes? And in the ranks of the Church and of its various sections the same tendency prevails, though it may be in a less degree. Of the many able and seemingly honest prelates of the Roman Church who dissented, often with vehemence, from the Vatican decree of the pope's infallibility, what became finally of their opposition? Were there more than one or two who did not surrender in the end, and agree to profess what they did not believe? And to come to more ordinary matters, when our opinions on religious subjects are at a discount, when they are met with ridicule, how often do we conceal them, or trim and modify them in order that we may not share in the current condemnation? The men that have the courage of their convictions are often social martyrs, shut out from the fellowship of their

brethren, shut out from every berth of honour or emolument, and yet, for their courage and honesty, worthy of infinitely higher regard than whole hundreds of the time-servers that ''get on" in the world by humouring its errors and its follies.

evertheless, though most of us show ourselves miserably weak by not speaking out all that is "in our hearts," especially when the honour of our Lord and Master is concerned, we are able to appreciate and cannot fail to admire the noble exhibitions of courage that we sometimes meet with. That beautiful creation of Milton's, the Seraph Abdiel, "faithful found among the faithless, faithful only he," is the type and ideal of the class. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego resisting the enthusiasm of myriads and calmly defying the fiery furnace; the Apostle Paul clinging to his views of the law and the gospel when even his brother Peter had begun to waver; Martin Luther, with his foot on the Bible confronting the whole world; John Knox defying sovereign and nobles and priests alike, determined that the gospel should be freely preached; Carey, going out as a missionary to India amid the derision of the world, because he could not get the words out of his head, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel unto every creature," - have all exemplified the Caleb spirit that must utter what is in the heart; nor has any new idea commonly laid hold of mankind till the struggles of some great hero or the ashes of some noble martyr have gone to sanctify the cause.

"He that believeth shall not make haste." Caleb believed, and therefore he was patient. Five-and-forty long years had elapsed since Moses, the man of God, speaking in the Spirit of God, had promised him a particular inheritance in the land. It was a long time for faith to live on a promise, but, like a tree in the face of a cliff that seems to grow out of the solid rock, it derived nourishment from unseen sources. It was a long time to be looking forward; but Caleb, though he did not receive the promise during all that time, was persuaded of it and embraced it, and believed that at last it would come true. He did not anticipate the proper time, though he might have had as plausible reasons for doing so as the two tribes and a half had for asking leave to settle on the east side of the river. He bore his share of warlike work, bore the burden and heat of the day, waited till the proper time for dividing the land. or did he rush forward selfishly by himself, disregarding the interests of the rest of his tribe; for the children of Judah, recognising his claim, draw near to Joshua along with him. or was it a portion of the land which any tribe might be eager to enter upon that he asked; for it was still so harassed by the Anakim, that there would be no peace till that formidable body of giants were driven out.

It seems that when acting as one of the twelve spies, Caleb had in some emphatic way taken his stand on Hebron. "The land on which thy foot hath trodden will be an inheritance to thee." Perhaps the spies were too terrified to approach Hebron, for the sons of the Anakim were there, and, in the confidence of faith, Caleb, or Caleb and Joshua, had gone into it alone. Moses had promised him Hebron, and now he came to claim it. But he came to claim it under circumstances that would have induced most men to let it alone. The driving out of the Anakim was a formidable duty, and the task might have seemed more suitable for one who had the

strength and enthusiasm of youth on his side. But Caleb, though eighty-five, was yet young. Age is not best measured by years. He was a remarkable instance of prolonged vigour and youthful energy. "As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me; as my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war, and to go out and to come in." Faith, and temperance, and cheerfulness are wonderful aids to longevity. As one reads these words of Caleb, one recalls the saying of a well-known physician, Dr. Richardson, that the human frame might last for a hundred years if it were only treated aright.

There is something singularly touching in Caleb's asking as a favour what was really a most hazardous but important service to the nation. Rough though these Hebrew soldiers were, they were capable of the most gentlemanly and chivalrous acts. There can be no higher act of courtesy than to treat as a favour to yourself what is really a great service to another. Well done, Caleb! You do not ask for a berth which there will be no trouble in taking or in keeping. You are not like Issachar, the strong ass couching between the sheepfolds: "and he saw a resting-place that it was good, and the land that it was pleasant; and he bowed his shoulder to bear, and became a servant under task-work." The dew of youth is yet upon you, the stirring of lofty purpose and noble endeavour; you are like the warhorse of Job -"he paweth in the valley and rejoiceth in his strength; he mocketh at fear, and is not dismayed; he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the captains and the shouting."

There is nothing we admire more in military annals than a soldier volunteering for the most hazardous and difficult of posts, - showing

"That stern joy which warriors feel

In foemen worthy of their steel."

In the spiritual warfare, too, we do not want instances of the same spirit. We recall Captain Allan Gardiner choosing Tierra del Fuego as his mission sphere just because the people were so ferocious, the climate so repulsive, and the work so difficult that no one else was likely to take it up. We think of the second band who went out after Gardiner and his companions had been starved to death; and still more after these were massacred by the natives, of the third detachment who were moved simply by the consideration that the case was seemingly so desperate. Or we think of Livingstone begging the directors of the London Missionary Society, wherever they sent him, to be sure that it was "Forward"; turning aside from all previous mission stations, and the comparative ease they afforded, to grapple with the barbarian where he had never begun to be tamed; his eyes thirsting for unknown scenes and untried dangers, because he scorned to build on the foundation of others, and thirsted for "fresh woods and pastures new." We think of him persevering in his task from year to year in the same lofty spirit; disregarding the misery of protracted pain, the intense longings of his weary heart for home, the repulsive society of savages and cannibals, the vexations, disappointments, and obstacles that seemed to multiply every day, the treachery of so-called friends whom

he had helped to raise, the indifference of a careless world, and of a languid Church; but ever girding himself with fresh energy for the task which he had undertaken, and of which the difficulties and trials had never been absent from his thoughts. We think of many a young missionary turning away from the comfortable life which he might lead at home and which many of his companions will lead, that he may go where the need is greatest and the fight is hottest, and so render to his Master the greatest possible service. A crowd of noble names comes to our recollection - Williams, and Judson, and Morrison, and Burns, and Patteson, and Keith- Falconer, and Hannington, and Mackay - men for whom even the Anakim had no terrors, but rather an attraction; but who, serving under another Joshua, differed from Caleb in this, that what they desired was not to destroy these ferocious Anakim, but to conquer them by love, and to demonstrate the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ to change the vilest reprobates into sons of God.

And even now there are other Anakim among us for whom the fate of the Canaanite giants ought to be reserved. Anakim within us - greed, selfishness, love of ease, lust, passion, cruelty - all, if we are faithful, to be put to the edge of the sword. And there are Anakim, tremendous Anakim, around us - drunkenness, and all that fosters it, despite the paltry excuses we so often hear; sensuality, that vile murderer of soul and body together; avarice, so cruelly unjust, and content to gather its hoard from the thews and sinews of men and women to whom life has become worse than slavery; luxurious living, that mocks the struggles of thousands to whom one crumb from the table or one rag from the wardrobe would bring such a blessed relief. With giants like these we need to wage incessant war, and for the necessary spirit we need constant supplies of the faith and courage that were so remarkable in Caleb. He followed the Lord fully; believing that if the Lord deserved to be followed at all. He deserved to be followed in full. What was there to gain by following Him one half, and surrendering the other half to the world? Could he count on God helping him if he went with but half his heart into His service, and, like Lot's wife, looked back even when flying from Sodom? "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy might."

The tendency to compromise is one of the besetting sins of the day. In the army or the navy, if one is to serve God at all, one must serve Him wholly. Decision is eminently requisite there, and Christians there are commonly more whole-hearted and consistent than in many circles nominally Christian. Decision is manly, is noble; it brings rest within, and in the end it conciliates the respect of the bitterest foes. Courage is the ornament of Christianity, and the crown of the Christian youth. "Fear not" is one of the brightest gems of the Bible.

MACLARE , "CALEB-A GREE OLD AGEJoshua 14:6.Five and forty years had passed since the Lord had ‘said this thing.’ It was the promise to these two, now old men, of the prolongation of their lives, and to Caleb of his inheritance in the land. Seven years of fighting have been got through, and the preparations are being made for the division of the land by lot. But, before that is

done, it is fitting that Caleb, whose portion had been specially secured to him by that old promise, should have the promise specially recognised and endorsed by the action of the leader, and independent of the operation of the lot. So he appears before Joshua, accompanied by the head men of his tribe, whose presence expresses their official consent to the exceptional treatment of their tribesman, and urges his request in a little speech, full of pathos and beauty and unconscious portraiture of the speaker. I take it as a picture of an ideal old age, showing in an actual instance how happy, vigorous, full of buoyant energy and undiminished appetite for enterprise a devout old age may be. And my purpose now is not merely to comment on the few words of our text, but upon the whole of what falls from the lips of Caleb here.

I. I see then here, first, a life all built upon God’s promise.Five times in the course of his short plea with Joshua does he use the expression ‘the Lord spake.’ On the first occasion of the five he unites Joshua with himself as a recipient of the promise, ‘Thou knowest the thing that the Lord said concerning me and thee.’ But in the other four he takes it all to himself; not because it concerned him only, but because his confidence, laying hold of the promise, forgot his brother in the earnestness of his personal appropriation of it. And so, whatsoever general words God speaks to the world, a true believer will make them his very own; and when Christ says, ‘God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish,’ faith translates it into ‘He loved me, and gave Himself for me.’ This is the first characteristic of a life built upon the promise of God, that it lays its hand upon that promise and claims it all for its very own.Then notice, still further, how for all these forty-five years Caleb had ‘hid the word in his heart,’ had lived upon it and thought about it and believed it, and recognised the partial fulfilment of it, and cherished the secret fire unknown to any besides. And now at last, after so long an interval, he comes forward and stretches out a hand, unweakened by the long delay, to claim the perfect fulfilment at the end of his days. So ‘the vision may tarry,’ but a life based upon God’s promise has another estimate of swiftness and slowness than is current amongst men who have only the years of earthly life to reckon by; and that which to sense seems a long, weary delay, to faith seems but as ‘a watch in the night’. The world, which only measures time by its own revolutions, has to lament over what seem to the sufferers long years of pains and tears, but in the calendar of faith ‘weeping endures for a night, joy cometh in the morning.’ The weary days dwindle into a point when they are looked at with an eye that has been accustomed to gaze on the solemn eternities of a promising and a faithful God. To it, as to Him, ‘a thousand years are as one day’; and ‘one day,’ in the possibilities of divine favour and spiritual growth which it may enfold, ‘as a thousand years.’ To the men who measure time as God measures it, His help, howsoever long it may tarry, ever comes ‘right early.’Further, note how this life, built upon faith in the divine promise, was nourished and nurtured by instalments of fulfilment all along the road. Two promises were given to Caleb-one, that his life should be prolonged, and the other, that he should possess the territory into which he had so bravely ventured. The daily fulfilment of the one fed the fire of his faith in the ultimate accomplishment of the other, and he

gratefully recounts it now, as part of his plea with Joshua-’ ow, behold, the Lord hath kept me alive as He spake, these forty and five years, even since the Lord spake this word unto Moses. And now, lo! I am this day fourscore and five years old.’Whosoever builds his life on the promise of God has in the present the guarantee of the better future. As we are journeying onwards to that great fountain-head of all sweetness and felicity, there are ever trickling brooks from it by the way, at which we may refresh our thirsty lips and invigorate our fainting strength. The present instalment carries with it the pledge of the full discharge of the obligation, and he whose heart and hope is fixed with a forward look on the divine inheritance, may, as he looks backward over all the years, see clearly in them one unbroken mass of preserving providences, and thankfully say, ‘The Lord hath kept me alive, as He spake.’And, still further, the life that is built upon faith like this man’s, is a life of buoyant hopefulness till the very end. The hopes of age are few and tremulous. When the feast is nearly over, and the appetite is dulled, there is little more to be done, but to push back our chairs and go away. But God keeps ‘the good wine’ until the last. And when all earthly hopes are beginning to wear thin and to burn dim, then the great hope of ‘the mountain of the inheritance’ will rise brighter and clearer upon our horizon. It is something to have a hope so far in front of us that we never get up to it, to find it either less than our expectations or more than our desires; and this is not the least of the blessednesses of the living ‘hope that maketh not ashamed,’ that it lies before us till the very end, and beckons and draws us across the gulf of darkness. ‘The Lord hath kept me alive, as He said; now give me this mountain whereof the Lord spake.’II. Further, I see here a life that bears to be looked back at.Caleb becomes almost garrulous in telling over the old story of that never-to-be-forgotten day, when he and Joshua stood alone and tried to put some heart into the cowardly mob before them. There is no mock modesty about the man. He says that, amidst many temptations to be untrue, he gave his report with sincerity and veracity, ‘speaking as it was in mine heart,’ and then he quotes twice, with a permissible satisfaction, the eulogium that had come upon him from the divine lips, ‘I wholly followed the Lord my God.’ The private soldier’s cheek may well flush and his eye glitter as he repeats over again his general’s praise. And for Caleb, half a century has not dimmed the impression that was made on his heart when he received that praise, through the lips of Moses, from God. ow, of course, such a tone of speaking about one’s past savours of an earlier stage in revelation than that in which we live, and, if this were to be taken as a man’s total account of his whole life, we could not free it from the charge of unpleasing self-complacency and self-righteousness. But for all that, it is not the same thing in the retrospect whether you and I have to look back upon years that have been given to self, and the world, and passion, and pride, and covetousness, and frivolities and trifles of all sorts, or upon years that in the main, and regard being had to their deepest desires and governing direction, have been given to God and to His service. Many a man looking back upon his life-I wonder if there are any such men listening to me now-can only see such a sight as Abraham did on that morning when he looked down on the plain of Sodom, and ‘Lo! the smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a furnace.’ Dear friends I the only thing that makes life in the retrospect

tolerable is that it shall have been given to God, and that we can say, ‘I wholly followed the Lord my God.’III. Again, I see here a life which has discovered the secret of perpetual youth.‘I,’ says the old man-’am as strong this day as I was in the day when Moses sent me. As my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war, both to go out and to come in.’ For fighting, and for all the intercourse and manifold activities of life, his sinews are as braced, his eyes as clear, his spirit and limbs as alert as they were in those old days. o doubt you will say that was due to miraculous intervention. o doubt it was; but is it not true that, in a very real sense, a man may keep himself young all his life, if he will go the right way to work? And the secret of perpetual youthfulness lies here, in giving our hearts to God and in living for Him. Christianity, with its self-restraint and its exhortations to all, and especially to the young, to be chaste and temperate and to subdue the animal passions, has a direct tendency to conserve physical vigour; and Christianity, by the inspiration that it imparts, the stimulus that it gives, and the hopes that it permits us to cherish, has a direct tendency to keep alive in old age all the best of the characteristics of youth. Its buoyancy, its undimmed interest, its cheeriness, its freedom from anxiety and care-all these things are directly ministered to, and preserved by, a life of simple faith that casts itself upon God, and dwells securely, in joy and in restfulness, and not without a great light of hope, even when the shadows of evening are falling.One of the greatest and most blessed of the characteristics of youth is the consciousness that the most of life lies before us; and to a Christian man, in any stage of his earthly life, that consciousness is possible. When he stands on the verge of the last sinking sandbank of time, and the water is up to his ankles, he may well feel that the best and the most of life is yet to be.‘The last of life, for which the first was made:Our times are in His handWho saith, “A whole I planned.Youth shows but half; trust God: see all, nor be afraid.”‘‘They shall still bring forth fruit in old age, they shall be full of sap and green.’ A gnarled old tree may be green in all its branches, and blossom and fruit may hang together there. The ideal of life is, that into each stage we shall carry the best of the preceding, harmonised with the best of the new, and that is possible to a Christian soul. The fountain of perpetual youth, of which the ancients fabled, is no fable, but a fact; and it rises, where the prophet in his vision saw the stream coming out, from beneath the threshold of the Temple door.IV. So, lastly, I see here a beautiful example of a life which to the last is ready for danger and enterprise.Caleb’s words as to his undiminished strength were not meant for a boast. They express thankfulness and praise, and they are put as the ground of the request that he has to make. He gives a chivalrous reason for his petition when he says,’ ow, therefore, give me this mountain, for the Anakims {the giants} are there; and the cities great and fenced.’Caleb’s readiness for one more fight was fed by his reliance on God’s help in it. When he says, ‘It may be the Lord will be with me,’ the perhaps is that of humility, not of doubt. The old warrior’s eye flashes, and his voice sounds strong and full, as he ends his words with ‘I shall drive them out, as the Lord spake.’ That has the true

ring. What were the three Anak chiefs, with their barbarous names, Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai, and their giant stature, to the onset of a warrior faith like that? Of course, ‘Caleb drove out thence the three sons of Anak,’ and Hebron became his inheritance. othing can stand against us, if we seek for our portion, not where advantages are greatest, but where difficulties and dangers are most rife, and cast ourselves into the conflict, sure that God is with us, though humbly wondering that we should be worthy of His all-conquering presence, and sure, therefore, that victory marches by our sides.Old age is generally much more disposed to talk about its past victories than to fight new ones; to rest upon its arms, or upon its laurels, than to undertake fresh conflicts. ow and then we see a man, statesman or other, who, bearing the burden of threescore years and ten lightly, is still as alert of spirit, as eager for work, as bold for enterprise, as he was years before. And in nine cases out of ten such a man is a Christian; and his brilliant energy of service is due, not only, nor so much, to natural vigour of constitution as to religion, which has preserved his vigour because it has preserved his purity, and been to him a stimulus and an inspiration.Danger is an attraction to the generous mind. It is the coward and the selfish man who are always looking for an easy place, where somebody else will do the work. This man felt that this miraculously prolonged life of his bound him to special service, and the fact that up in Hebron there were a fenced city and tall giants behind the battlements, was an additional reason for picking out that bit of the field as the place where he ought to be. Thank God, that spirit is not dead yet! It has lived all through the Christian Church, and flamed up in times of martyrdom. On missionary fields to-day, if one man falls two are ready to step into his place. It is the true spirit of the Christian soldier. ‘A great door and effectual is opened,’ says Paul, ‘and there are many adversaries.’ He knew the door was opened because the adversaries were many. And because there were so many of them, would he run away? Some of us would have said: ‘I must abandon that work, it bristles with difficulties; I cannot stop in that post, the bullets are whistling too fast.’ ay! says Paul; ‘I abide till Pentecost’-a good long while- because the post is dangerous, and promises to be fruitful.So, dear friends, if we would have lives on which we can look back, lives in which early freshness will last beyond the ‘morning dew,’ lives in which there shall come, day by day and moment by moment, abundant foretastes to stay our hunger until we sit at Christ’s table in His kingdom, we must ‘follow the Lord alway,’ with no half-hearted surrender, nor partial devotion, but give ourselves to Him utterly, to be guided and sent where He will. And then, like Caleb, we shall be able to say, with a ‘perhaps,’ not of doubt, but of wonder, that it should be so, to us unworthy, ‘It may be the Lord will be with me, arid I shall drive them out.’ In all these things ‘we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.’

BI 6-15, "Caleb . . . said . . . the Lord hath kept me alive, as He said.

Caleb’s reflection on the goodness and faithfulness of God to him

I. It is God that keepeth us alive. The Scriptures often remind us of this, and urge it as a motive to religious fear, gratitude, and obedience. They teach us “that in Him we live and move and have our being: that in Him is the breath of every living thing and the spirit of

all mankind”; that He gave it at first and that He taketh it away. More particularly, God preserveth us from many accidents that would be fatal to us. “He giveth His angels charge over us, to keep us in all our ways.”

II. The aged have peculiar reason to make this acknowledgment. When any arrive at old age, it is proper to do this, with peculiar seriousness and gratitude; considering that, like Caleb, they have been wandering all their days in a wilderness. Dangers surround us on every side. The aged cannot but often reflect upon this; what numbers they have survived! Their own infirmities render the acknowledgment of God’s preservation of them almost natural and peculiarly proper.

III. It is a great satisfaction to aged christians to reflect on their obedience to God, and the accomplishment of his promises to them. They recollect with gratitude and delight, that grace, which began, maintained and improved the Divine life in their souls, amidst innumerable temptations, from without and within; and though they have fallen into trouble, they have been prevented from making shipwreck of faith and a good conscience. It is pleasant to them to trace up all these streams to the fountain; to consider them as the displays of rich and free grace; as the accomplishment of the promises of God, and proofs of His fidelity. Their mercies were sweet in the enjoyment, and are sweet in the reflection, when they consider them as founded on the covenant of grace, made with all true believers through Christ Jesus.

IV. The experience which aged saints have had of God’s goodness and faithfulness is a strong encouragement to them to hope and trust in him. Application:

1. Let us all re, member our constant dependence upon God, and learn those useful instructions which that is adapted to teach us.

2. What hath been said should be an inducement to young persons to follow the Lord fully. Instead of “possessing the iniquities of your youth,” you will have unspeakable pleasure in being able to appeal to God, with Hezekiah, “that you have walked before Him in truth, and with an upright heart, and have done that which was good in His sight.”

3. The example of Caleb is worthy the imitation of aged Christians. When, like Caleb, you are mentioning your age, your contemporaries, or what happened in the former part of your lives, let it be done with seriousness, with an humble and thankful acknowledgment of God. Further, let the remainder of your lives be faithfully devoted to God’s service. One important branch of this is humbly to relate your own experience for the instruction and consolation of others. (J. Orton.)

Caleb’s confession

We meet with old men who are continually asking us, with a slight twinkle in their eye, “How old do you think I am?” and the answer, of course, is meant to bring out that you never would dream that they were such veterans in years, they are so fresh, and sprightly, and springy. That is an evil thing, and would have been evil in Caleb but for this saving clause, “Behold, the Lord hath kept me alive.” That is the saving clause, my green and vigorous aged friend, with whom all things have prospered. See to it that boastfulness be not found in your heart. Let not that “dead fly” spoil your ointment, Do not give to yourself the credit and glory of your strength and prowess of body, and brain, and mind. Give all the glory where all is due. “The Lord hath kept me alive.” I want you to notice this also about Caleb. He says, “I have wholly followed the Lord my God”; and

in the Hebrew that is quite a striking word—more striking than in the English. It is a pictorial word in the Hebrew, and describes a ship going out at full sail. Why, that is the very keynote of Caleb from beginning to end. He was the man he was, from the beginning to the end, because he was out and out—because there were no limitations and provisions with him. He was not a man who, as Paul would say, “made provision for the flesh for the lust thereof”; but having been called by God to His service, he made it his meat and his drink. He “went in” for God and His cause, like a ship in full sail. He flung every power of body, and soul, and spirit like a free sheet to the winds of God’s grace, and God’s Spirit, and God’s Providence. He “let go.” Young fellow, it is the ruin of you that you are holding back. You will never be a Caleb; you will never be a Joshua; you will never be a David—never, never—at this rate of it; hanging back and saving your life, and therefore losing it; taking so much of the programme because it fits you, and scoring out certain other items that you do not like. Go in for a full programme, if you would enjoy Christian life. (John McNeill.)

Joshua’s grateful retrospect

A great Alpine climber was asked about the ascent of a high mountain, and said, “I was very weary before I got to the top, and found the best plan was just to follow the guide in front of me. At the summit I turned round, and when I saw the grand view, and the dangers through which the guide had brought me, I felt I could have fallen down on my knees to thank him for having led me to such a wonderful place.” (Our Own Magazine.)

I am as strong this day as I was.

Caleb—youth in old age

I. A life built on God’s promise. Five times in his short speech does he refer to the word which “the Lord spake.” The word of promise to Caleb dealt with two things—his prolonged life and his possession of the land “whereinto he went” (Num_14:24). For five and forty years he had kept this word “hid in his heart,” and now he puts out a hand, unweakened by age and long-delayed fulfilment, to grasp the realisation—a grand example of steady, persistent faith, which waits for the vision, though it tarry, and buoyantly welcomes it when it comes at last! A life thus filled with trust in God’s faithful word has ever present instalments of accomplishment, as brooks by the way, to keep its hope fresh. The prolongation of Caleb’s life was the pledge to him of the fulfilment of the remoter promise. Such a life is consciously surrounded with Divine operations, too plain to be ignored, and when looked at in retrospect, presents one solid and homogeneous mass of preserving providences, which are all summed up in saying, “Behold, the Lord hath kept me alive, as He spake . . . while Israel walked in the wilderness.” Such a life has hope burning as a guiding star to the very end. The hopes of age are few and tremulous, if they be limited to earth. When the feast is near an end, appetite is dulled, and there is little to do but to get up and go away. But if we set our hope on God, our hope is immortal. He keeps the good wine till the last.

II. A life which bears being remembered. We may freely admit that the tone of this retrospect savours of an earlier stage in the process of revelation than ours, and that, if this were a complete account given by a man of his life, we should miss in it the voice of humble penitence, which must always sound through a Christian autobiography. But still, a life of trust and following Christ, however imperfectly, does yield calm

remembrances, which nothing else does, and for the lack of which nothing can compensate. If we would lay up for ourselves against old age the treasure of such calm and humble memories, we must in youth and manhood choose God for our God, and Lake heed to follow Him, though we may be singular; and to do it wholly.

“I backward east mine e’e

On prospects drear,”

said poor, brilliant Robert Burns, whose youth of riotous pleasure burnt itself out before he was forty, and had been full of self-reproach and bitterness long before the end. Many a life which grasps at delight and spurns the slow-going puritanical ways of God-fearing, sense-coercing Christians, comes at last to be gnawed by memories sharp and poisonous like a serpent’s tooth. The only way to secure that at the end we may be able to say, “I have fought a good fight,” is to become Christ’s soldier. Recruits for His army are most surely enlisted in youth.

III. A life-preserving youthful vigour to old age. This “old young man,” as Thomas Fuller calls him, followed the Lord wholly; therefore he “brought forth fruit in old age,” and the aged tree was “full of sap and green” in all its gnarled branches. In a very true sense a man may keep himself young all his days. A youth and manhood of Christian sobriety and self-restraint, temperate, chaste, and free from the “sins of youth,” which rot “the bones” and “lie down with” their victims “in the dust,” is likely to conserve physical vigour, A life of Christian devotion and faith will keep its spring flowers blowing till late autumn, and blossom and fruit will hang together. The buoyancy, carelessness, hopefulness, cheeriness of youth are not far away from the aged heart, which lives by faith, and therefore dwells at ease, and is glad and secure, though the shadows of evening be falling.

IV. A life still eager at last for further enterprise. That is the true temper of the Christian soldier, seeking the hardest, not the easiest, work, and finding in danger an attraction. How nobly it has been exemplified in many a mission field, to which, whenever disease has smitten down one, two have been ready to go! An old Highland legend tells how his foster-brothers made a ring round the chief in a battle, and how, as each that shielded him with his own body fell, the foster-father cried, “Another for Hector,” and another strode into the fatal empty place. The annals of the Church are full of like incidents. The call for another to stand in some deadly breach for the sake of the elder brother has never been sounded in vain; and to-day American and English Christianity is showing that the old heroic fire burns yet, in the men who, on the Congo and elsewhere, have hazarded their lives for the name of Jesus, and been drawn to the field by its very dangers. (A. Maclaren. D. D.)

Caleb’s vigour of mind in old age

was equal to his vigour of body in youth. As his strength was in the day that Moses sent him, so was his strength then for war, both to go out and to come in: yea, he had waxed stronger and stronger, and, as is said of the righteous, “brought forth fruit in old age.” As all other graces, true faith increases in its exercise, and becomes mightier by conflict. They who are strong in faith when young, and have the word of God abiding in them, are not likely to become weak in faith when old. Interesting sight, to behold one grown old in the service of God, still a veteran in the ranks, with a resolution never to yield or return his sword, while an enemy remains unsubdued. One had thought it now time for this old warrior to leave the field, and quietly to enjoy his earthly portion; and had his mind been

affected less with things future than things present, had he sought rest only in Canaan, and not rest in heaven, he would have so thought himself. It is a lovely sight, and what must command admiration from all, to see an old believer to the very last ready to testify his faith in God and hope of the promise by a sacrifice of ease, and even at the hazard of life. But they may well be inspired with the fortitude of unyielding valour, and fight even till they die, who are under the command of Jehovah and the banner of the Cross; for a crown of life and eternal triumphs await the slain—they shall rise and reign for ever in the kingdom of glory. The Christian, whose brightest portion lies beyond this world, must not wonder if, as age creeps on, new conflicts arise, and if at last, before he take possession of his eternal settlement, the Anakims, a people tall and great, should still be to be conquered. They are all an easy conquest through Him that hath loved us, so that he may say as Caleb (Jos_14:12). (W. Seaton.)

Give me this mountain.—

Caleb’s choice

1. In this choice we find a revelation of a sturdy character. There is a powerful individuality about the man who chooses a mountain as his ideal possession. It means climbing and hard work. I knew a veteran who, late in life, bought a rugged mountain, built his house in one of its hollows, cultivated a portion of its slope, and let his sheep wander for a living over the remaining portion. He was as happy in breathing the clear mountain air, and in climbing the mountain steeps, as Adam was in Paradise. There was wonderful congeniality between him and his surroundings. There was a great deal of rugged grandeur about him. To come into contact with that man was as bracing as to climb his mountain, and to breathe the pure inspiring air upon its summit. In Caleb we have a man of similar robust make—a man who not only chose the mountainous district of Hebron while others sought the plains, but also chose that mountain while as yet every crevice in its fastnesses bristled with foes of giant stature. Caleb was charmed with the thought of a possession which involved most of faith and heroism in making his own.

2. This choice further reveals to us the continuity of his character. It is the brave man who stood before Israel and the ten spies who brought depressing news of the land, and exclaimed, “Let us go up at once and possess it,” that now, forty years later, claims it as his privilege to drive the sons of Anak out of their last fastness. He had done enough to wear out half a dozen ordinary men. There seemed to be endless wear in him. This is the speech of an old soldier. You trace the same man, and he affirms—and gives proof of his affirmation subsequently—that he has the same vigour as of old. Throughout his life we trace one master-feeling, one supreme purpose, one distinctive personality. This unity running through life is one of the glories of a great character.

3. Caleb’s choice shows his hopefulness and faith. We are not so surprised that when forty-five years of age he should have taken such a bright view of things, as that now in prospect of such a difficult task he should say, “If so be that the Lord be with me, then”. This is not the “if” of doubt, but the “if” of great possibilities, of a large hope, and of a mighty faith (R.V.). “It may be that the Lord will be with me, and I shall drive,” &c. He is willing to risk all upon that “may be.” He bases all upon what the Lord had promised.

4. This choice shows Caleb’s wisdom. The mountain fastnesses of the land were the

most difficult to win, but having been once won could best be held, and would finally become the greatest centres of strength. It is a general rule of life that what is hardest won is worth the winning most, and is the most lasting good when won. The strength of a life as well as of a country is in its mountain fastnesses and passes, and not in its broad and luxuriant plains.

5. The whole incident reveals the sacredness which Caleb and Joshua attached to a promise given by Moses forty years previously. Moses was dead, but the promise lived. Caleb repeated it, and Joshua honoured it.

6. Observe how the name of a comparatively unknown father is connected with the choice now made by a noble son. Caleb is usually designated as the “son of Jephunneh.” Jephunneh seems to have belonged to an Edomite tribe, the Kenezites, but all that we know of him besides is that he was the father of Caleb. All that we know, too, of Nun is that he was the father of Joshua. These were two noble sons who made their fathers famous. Young men, take note of that I How largely the father’s reputation is in the hands of his son! “A wise son maketh a glad father.” (D. Davies.)

Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb . . . because that he wholly followed the Lord.—

God rewards His faithful followers

I. What is implied in” Caleb’s following the Lord wholly. Though this may imply a great deal, yet it cannot imply absolute perfection.

1. It implies that his heart was renewed. He had a filial, dutiful, submissive spirit, which the Scripture calls a perfect heart.

2. It implies that he paid an external respect to all the intimations of His will. If he had allowed himself in one sin, or habitually offended in one point, he would have been guilty of all. It is essential to the character of a good man to follow the Lord in all His precepts and appointments. “This is the love of God that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not grievous.”

3. This amiable character implies that he persevered in obedience under every trial and temptation. Such a sincere, uniform, and constant course of obedience, for forty or fifty years, fully verified the Divine declaration that “he wholly followed the Lord God of Israel.” But this is not all. God not only approved, but rewarded his obedience.

II. Why the Lord rewarded him for following him wholly.

1. Because his wholly following the Lord was a strong expression of his supreme love to Him. Obedience is the natural expression of love. “Ye are My friends,” says Christ, “if ye do whatsoever I command you.” Neither the hosts of Pharaoh, nor the absence of Moses, nor the defection of Aaron, nor the giants of Canaan, could cool his zeal or warp his resolution. He determined to endure unto the end; and unto the end he endured. He loved God sincerely and supremely, and he meant to express his love to Him, by uniform obedience, under the most trying circumstances. This God saw, approved, and rewarded, agreeably to His own declaration, “I love them that love Me; and those that seek Me early shall find Me.”

2. Caleb greatly promoted the glory of God and the good of His people, by his

uniform and persevering obedience. This rendered him one of the principal instruments in the hand of God of conducting His people to Canaan, and of executing His wise and gracious purposes respecting them. By walking with God, and observing His wise and holy providence, he became a man of great experimental and practical knowledge, which enabled him to be very useful in guiding and instructing an ignorant and refractory people. It is natural to suppose that he had a principal hand in forming the lives and manners of that generation, which was educated in the wilderness, and eventually prepared for the promised inheritance. And his great and extensive usefulness was a good reason why the Lord God of Israel should reward his signal services, agreeably to His own maxim, “Them that honour Me, I will honour.”

3. There was something very distinguishing in Caleb’s conduct. None but he and Joshua persevered in their allegiance to God. This singularity of his obedience not only displayed, but really enhanced, the worth of his virtue and piety, and laid a proper foundation for God to reward him with peculiar marks of His favour.

Reflections:

1. What great encouragement have all true saints to persevere in the ways of well-doing!

2. What great benefit may those, who follow the Lord wholly, derive from the evils and burdens of their wearisome pilgrimage! Caleb acquired a beautiful character, and a distinguished reward, by properly improving a series of great and complicated trials. He learned obedience by the things which he suffered.

3. How will saints hereafter admire the distinguishing grace of God by which they were conducted to heaven!

4. Does God speak respectfully of those who follow Him wholly, and graciously reward their faithful labours? Then we must justly conclude that we ought to honour those whom He delights to honour. (N. Emmons, D. D.)

Following the Lord

I. What is included in the expression, “wholly following the Lord”? It is impossible to take the words in their strictly literal sense. There are so many slips, so many wanderings, so many shortcomings, that the strict perfection of obedience is unattainable by any of the children of Adam. But the expression is one which, nevertheless, can be applied to those who honestly and simply give themselves up through Divine grace to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

1. A realisation that the will of God is paramount.

2. A resting upon the Word of God as clear and authoritative.

3. A laying hold of the promises of God as sure.

II. The circumstances under which it is said of Caleb that he wholly followed God.

1. Caleb wholly followed God, though others who were in the same position of influence with himself deserted the side of God and of His truth.

2. Caleb wholly followed God, though the whole congregation feared to walk in the right way.

3. Caleb wholly followed the Lord in spite of opposition. The current of excited

feeling set dead against him, and threatened to bear him down. And you will observe that it was not the mere opposition of abuse, insult, and prejudice; it assumed a far more dangerous form (Num_14:10). His life was perilled. Yet no degree of violence, however determined, could drive him from the position which he had been enabled to take up. Oh, what encouragement there is here for those who find themselves in the midst of difficulties and trial for the sake of the Gospel! Caleb was a man of like passions with ourselves. Naturally he had the same aversion to the will of God that others have; but in his case grace was strong, faith triumphed. And what a glorious sight it is to see, when you behold one thus meeting any storm of indignation, coldness, or scorn from man, rather than forsake the way and truth of the Lord Jesus! (C. D. Marston, M. A.)

Caleb the soldier

I. Caleb’s fidelity. Fidelity is one of the first properties of a soldier; and it were well that every good cause, and especially that of Christ, could boast of such fidelity as gallant men have often shown in the ranks of war. Mere boys have bravely carried the colours of their regiment into battle; and to save them from falling into the hands of the enemy they have been known, when they themselves fell, to wrap them around their bodies and die within their encrimsoned folds. An incident more heroic still occurred on one of those fields where Austria lately suffered disastrous defeat. When the bloody fight was over, and the victors were removing the wounded, they came on a young Austrian stretched on the ground, whose life was pouring out in the red streams of a ghastly wound. To their astonishment he declined their kind services. Recommending others to be removed, he implored them, though he might still have been saved, to let him alone. On returning sometime afterwards they found him dead—all his battles o’er. But the mystery was explained. They raised the body to give it burial; and there, below him, lay the colours of his regiment. He had sworn not to part with them; and though he clung to life, and tenderly thought of a mother and sisters in their distant home, he would not purchase recovery at the price of his oath and the expense of a soldier’s honour—“he was faithful unto death.” The property of a good soldier was eminently illustrated by Caleb.

II. Caleb’s courage. Courage, which has in all ages won the praise of poets and admiration of mankind, is a property for which our seamen and soldiers have been long and eminently distinguished. Descended from ancestors who met the Romans on the sea-beach, and those brave Norsemen who ploughed the stormiest oceans with their warlike prows, our countrymen have proved themselves worthy of their sires; and the repute of a courage which has been tested in many a hard-fought field has proved, under God, the strongest bulwark of our island-home. It is remarkable, and highly creditable to the resolution and bravery of our soldiers, that, notwithstanding all the wars in which they have engaged, no foreign nation flaunts a flag of ours as the trophy of its victory, and of our defeat. No British banner, so far as I know, hangs drooping in dusty folds from the walls of foreign castle or cathedral to make us blush; nor in that proud pillar the great Napoleon raised, whose bronze, formed of the cannon taken by him in battle, commemorates his victories, is there an ounce of metal that belonged to a British gun. I have heard indeed how cowards, probably drawn from the scum of the people, hung back when the bugler in the trenches sounded a new assault, and refused to cross ground so strewed with their fallen comrades as to resemble a field carpeted with scarlet cloth. Yet, whatever may be their defects, our soldiers have been commonly as much distinguished for their courage when the battle raged as for their clemency when the victory was won. For that courage, true, calm courage, which does not lie in insensibility

to danger, nor in the violent animal passion which may bear a coward forward as a whirlwind does the dust, or a wave the seaweed on its foaming crest, Caleb presents the very model of a soldier. How bravely he bears himself when the other spies prove traitors! The source of Caleb’s courage, of a bravery so admirable and dauntless, is not far to seek. In him, as in those noble Christian soldiers whom I have mentioned, and in others also who have maintained their religion in the camp, courage, if it did not spring from, was sustained by piety. He had faith in God. Therefore he did not fear the face of man, though that man were a giant, nor of death itself. From the same lofty source, and none other, the soldier of the Cross, he who fights with foes more formidable than giants—the devil, the world, and the flesh, that trinity of evil—is to draw his courage. More of it may be needed to face the jeers of an ungodly world than a blazing battery of cannon. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)

Caleb’s history—piety portrayed and piety promoted

I. Piety portrayed: Caleb “wholly followed the Lord God of Israel.”

1. Genuine piety is the sublimest of all pursuits.

2. Genuine piety accords with the constitutional cravings and powers of the human soul.

II. Piety promoted: “Hebron became the inheritance of Caleb.” (Homilist.)

The inheritance of Caleb

Caleb is one of those men whom we meet with seldom in Bible history, but whenever we do meet them we are the better for the meeting. Bright and brave, strong, modest, and cheerful, there is honesty in his face, courage and decision in the very pose of his body, and the calm confidence of faith in his very look and attitude. It is singular that there should be cause to doubt whether his family were originally of the promised seed. On the whole, the preponderance of evidence is in favour of the opinion that Caleb’s family were originally outside the covenant, but had become proselytes like Hobab, Rahab, Ruth, and Heber. Their faith was pre-eminently the fruit of conviction, and not the accident of heredity. It had a timer basis than that of most Israelites. It was woven more closely into the texture of their being, and swayed their lives more powerfully. It is pleasing to think that there may have been many such proselytes; that the promise to Abraham may have attracted souls from the east, and the west, and the north, and the south; that even beyond the limits of the twelve tribes many hearts may have been cheered, and many lives elevated and purified by the promise to him, “In thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” Caleb and Joshua had believed and acted alike, in opposition to the other ten spies; but Caleb occupies the more prominent place in the story of their heroism and faith. Caleb was evidently the man who led the opposition to the ten, not only asserting the course of duty, but manifesting the spirit of contempt and defiance toward the faithless cowards that forgot that God was with them. In his inward heart Joshua was quite of his mind, but probably he wanted the energetic manner, the ringing voice, the fearless attitude of his more demonstrative companion. Certain it is that Caleb reaped the chief honour of that day. It is beautiful to see that there was no rivalry between them. Not only did Caleb interpose no remonstrance when Joshua was called to succeed Moses, but he seems all through the wars to have yielded to him the most loyal and hearty submission. His affectionate and cordial bearing on the present

occasion seems to show that not even in the corner of his heart did there linger a trace of jealousy toward the old friend and companion whom on that occasion he had surpassed, but who had been set so much higher than himself. He came to him as the recognised leader of the people—as the man whose voice was to decide the question he now submitted, as the judge and arbiter in a matter which very closely concerned him and his house. And yet there are indications of tact on the part of Caleb, of a thorough understanding of the character of Joshua, and of the sort of considerations by which he might be expected to be swayed. “Thou knowest the thing that the Lord said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadesh-barnea.” “Moses the man of God.” Why does Caleb select that remarkable epithet? Why add anything to the usual name, Moses? The use of the epithet was honouring to all three. That which constituted the highest glory of Moses was that he was so much at one with God. God’s will was ever his law, and he was in such close sympathy with God that whatever instructions he gave on any subject might be assumed to be in accordance with God’s will. Moreover, in calling him “the man of God” when addressing Joshua, Caleb assumed that Joshua would be impressed by this consideration, and would be disposed to agree to a request which was not only sanctioned by the will of Moses, but by that higher will which Moses constantly recognised. Having fortified his plea with this strong reference at once to Moses and to God, Caleb proceeds to rehearse the service which had led to the promise of Moses. “Forty years old was I when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me,” &c. Why does Caleb put the matter in this way? Why does he not couple Joshua with himself as having been faithful on that never-to-be-forgotten occasion? The only explanation that seems feasible is, that from the pre-eminent position of Joshua this was unnecessary, perhaps it might have appeared even unbecoming. A soldier making a request of the Duke of Wellington, and recalling some service he had done at the battle of Waterloo, would hardly think it necessary, or even becoming, to say how the Duke, too, had been there, and what surpassing service he had rendered on that day. “I brought him word again, as it was in my heart.” The statement is made in no boasting spirit, and yet what a rare virtue it denotes! Caleb, as we now say, had the courage of his convictions. To break away from your own set, from the comrades of your campaign, to upset their plans, and counsel those in power to a course diametrically opposed to theirs, is one of the most difficult of social duties. The men that have the courage of their convictions are often social martyrs, shut out from the fellowship of their brethren, shut out from every berth of honour or emolument, and yet, for their courage and honesty, worthy of infinitely higher regard than whole hundreds of the time-servers that “get on” in the world by humouring its errors and its follies. Nevertheless, though most of us show ourselves miserably weak by not speaking out all that is “in our hearts,” especially when the honour of our Lord and Master is concerned, we are able to appreciate and cannot fail to admire the noble exhibitions of courage that we sometimes meet with. “He that believeth shall not make haste.” Caleb believed, and therefore he was patient. Five-and-forty long years had elapsed since Moses, the man of God, speaking in the Spirit of God, had promised him a particular inheritance in the land. It was a long time for faith to live on a promise, but, like a tree in the face of a cliff that seems to grow out of the solid rock, it derived nourishment from unseen sources. It was a long time to be looking forward; but Caleb, though he did not receive the promise during all that time, was persuaded of it and embraced it, and believed that at last it would come true. It seems that when acting as one of the twelve spies, Caleb had in some emphatic way taken his stand on Hebron. “The land on which thy foot hath trodden will be an inheritance to thee.” Perhaps the spies were too terrified to approach Hebron, for the sons of the Anakim were there, and, in the confidence of faith, Caleb, or Caleb and Joshua, had gone into it alone. Moses had promised him Hebron, and now he came to claim it under circumstances that would

have induced most men to let it alone. The driving out of the Anakim was a formidable duty, and the task might have seemed more suitable for one who had the strength and enthusiasm of youth on his side. But Caleb, though eighty-five, was yet young. Age is not best measured by years. He was a remarkable instance of prolonged vigour and youthful energy. “As yet I am as strong,” &c. As one reads these words of Caleb, one recalls the saying of a well-known physician, Dr. Richardson, that the human frame might last for a hundred years if it were only treated aright. There is something singularly touching in Caleb’s asking as a favour what was really a most hazardous but important service to the nation. Rough though these Hebrew soldiers were, they were capable of the most gentlemanly and chivalrous acts. There can be no higher act of courtesy than to treat as a favour to yourself what is really a great service to another. Well done, Caleb! In the spiritual war fare, too, we do not want instances of the same spirit. We recall Captain Allan Gardiner choosing Tierra del Fuego as his mission sphere just because the people were so ferocious, the climate so repulsive, and the work so difficult that no one else was likely to take it up. We think of the second band who went out after Gardiner and his companions had been starved to death; and still more, after these were massacred by the natives, of the third detachment who were moved simply by the consideration that the case was seemingly so desperate. Or we think of Living stone begging the directors of the London Missionary Society, wherever they sent him, to be sure that it was “Forward”; turning aside from all previous missionary stations, and the comparative ease they afforded, to grapple with the barbarian where he had never begun to be tamed; his eyes thirsting for unknown scenes and untried dangers, because he scorned to build on the foundation of others, and thirsted for “fresh woods and pastures new.” We think of him persevering in his task from year to year in the same lofty spirit; disregarding the misery of protracted pain, the intense longings of his weary heart for home. A crowd of noble names comes to our recollection—Williams, and Judson, and Morrison, and Burns, and Patteson, and Keith-Falconer, and Hannington, and Mackay—men for whom even the Anakim had no terrors, but rather an attraction; but who, serving under another Joshua, differed from Caleb in this, that what they desired was not to destroy these ferocious Anakim, but to conquer them by love, and to demonstrate the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to change the vilest reprobates into sons of God. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)

Caleb the Kenezite

I. In all probability Caleb was a proselyte. In Gen_36:42, Kenaz is named as one of the Edomite “dukes.” In 1Ch_2:50, Caleb is called “son of Hur.” Many critics assume that this indicates that he was adopted into the family of Hur. This foreigner had the true faith of an Israelite. Sometimes those whose early years have been spent in heathenism, home or foreign, become noted in Christian circles for their moral virtues and foremost in every good work.

II. Caleb had the courage to be in a minority of two (Num_14:1-10). The secret of this courage was—

1. His faith in God’s promise.

2. That the Lord put His fear upon their enemies (Num_14:9).

3. His sense of the Divine presence.

III. Caleb’s whole conduct was consistent. “I wholly followed” may mean—

1. The full measure of his days.

2. The whole-heartedness of his life.

IV. At the end of his career he receives his reward.

1. A happy old age.

2. An unfailing faith in God.

3. The people acknowledge his faithful service.

4. The seed of Caleb received the benefit resulting from the father’s fidelity. (Henry Smith.)

Caleb’s inheritance

I. An old man’s inheritance. Old age has its benedictions, its redeemed pledges, its inheritance. The faithful, tireless servant of God has his portion, though he has not gathered, sold, and joined field to field. Caleb had been seeking for a country, not scattering an estate.

II. An old man’s request. “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints”; but the life approaching the grave with a weight of honourable service is alike cherished by the Lord. It must have been so with Caleb, His strength was as great for war as when he received his commission. The old man does not ask for land he may cultivate, on which to raise choice varieties of those grapes whose single clusters weary two men to bear them on a staff. He has led the life of a soldier His service for the Lord he thinks still lies in that direction. Those giants who frightened his comrades forty years ago have been on his mind ever since. The Israelites are not likely to become more warlike in this rich country where they can till the soil. He therefore proposes to take care of those enemies of God himself. When Herod the Great wished to rid the cliffs of Arbela of robbers, he caused Roman soldiers to be let down in cages to fight the outlaws in the mouths of their caves. Caleb did not ask for a Hebrew regiment to help him manage those sons of Anak. Hebron, that ancient city built seven years before Zoan in Egypt, ought not to remain longer in the hand of the infidel. Alien born or Hebrew, he cannot bear that God’s people should be defied in their inheritance. In after-years, when crusading knights took this city, it was not with more righteous purpose than that which stirred the heart of this ancient servant of Jehovah.

III. An old man’s request. Caleb’s first work was to purify his inheritance. He got the iniquity out of it. He did not levy tribute on the brigands and live luxuriously on the income of robbery. This veteran was not a man of compromises. The enemies of God and righteousness could get no terms with him. His hands were not soiled with the revenue or the rents of a nefarious business. They did not close around the rewards of iniquity. Something of the spirit which in after-years stirred the heart of the Master as He drove the money-changers from the temple now rested on this old man. The spirit of reform was strong in him, and it had fuel to keep it burning, for it was fed by the Spirit of God and of righteousness. That mountain was not first cleared of timber, and lawns, parks, and terraces laid out and built on its slopes. There was perhaps no summer-house commanding a view of the distant Mediterranean, but there was some honourable estate to pass onward. There was a remainder which, according to Divine promise, would go to his descendants. It was cleared of the enemies of God. Whoever received it would get an inheritance without any bill of attainder against it for treason. Such a man as Caleb does not impoverish his estate, though he lessen it in behalf of righteousness. The bare mountain was to him a better property than a large rent-roll of criminal tenants. (W. R.

Campbell.)

Caleb’s reward

Caleb’s reward illustrates the immense difference between a full and a partial following of God. It is the difference between the river and the sea. Both are water, and the river is all well in its way and is useful to man and beast in small services. The sea is something more than mere water, for it is infinite; and as we gaze upon it a sense of its immeasurableness comes over us as never is the case when we behold the largest lake or the Mississippi river. You cannot measure a wholly following servant of the living God, and you can too easily take the dimensions of a half-and-half Christian. You come to form an idea of about how much money he will give to a needy enterprise, about how much time to a pressing work, how long he will stay to push a fresh project in the kingdom, and what pleasures and business engagements he will surrender to help revival efforts. We get tired of these easy measurements. But take a Caleb, and you cannot tell what Divine energies are locked up within him to come forth when needed..

I. One with Caleb’s spirit sees clearly the good things which God has promised. He has sight and insight. Twelve good men go over the same country, but on the whole they see differently, and so report what they see. Ten, with a common-sense vision of the greatness of the foes, and making no allowance for hidden and supernatural factors, did not see things as they were. On the other hand, Caleb saw all that they did, but he had a power of seeing Him who is invisible, and so of seeing truly. The man who followed fully had a clear eye, a single eye, and his whole body was full of light. In this way he perceived the essential weakness and rottenness of confederated evil. All achieving men have the same vision, and so they persist and wait and return to the same attack until they win the day, and the people that once bade stone them bring out garlands for their graves.

II. Men of Caleb’s spirit, wholly following the Lord, have the power of standing alone. The mass move with the stream. The few stand like a rock. No one knows who has not tried it what it costs the soul of self-searching, fear, doubt, sorrowful parting with loved friends, and the crushing weight of popular disapproval. In one of his noblest odes Horace speaks in admiration of him who can resist the heated demands of citizens who call for evil things,

III. Those who are like Caleb have the patience of faith. It was a long and wearisome time before the word of God to His trusty servant was fulfilled—more than a whole generation. No doubt sometimes, for he was human, he wondered when God would arise and His enemies be scattered. Have you seen some new possession in the things of the Spirit? Repeat the promise. Though it tarry, wait for it; it will surely come; it will not tarry. We get tired and run away from our own prayers, so that when the answer comes some one else lives where we did when we prayed. Oh, let us seek the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ!

IV. Men of Caleb’s spirit have to fight the good fight of faith. Hebron was beautifully situated upon the hills to the south of Jerusalem, where even to-day there is a luxuriant vegetation and the grapes as of Eschol are gathered. From it one looks over a wide expanse of country, eastward, westward, northward, southward, towards Edom. There David was crowned and reigned seven years. It was a splendid reward after forty-three years’ delay. Perhaps on the great expedition with the spies Caleb marked the place and made a vow that, if the people entered in, he would have that abode, and the picture may have dwelt in his memory to cheer him in long years, just as the heavenly hills glow

before the eye of Christian faith. But even at last the prize did not drop into his hands like a ripe apple. No; he must draw his sword and expel the sons of Anak who were in possession, for they also loved the high places. It costs to get the best, but it is wise economy to be satisfied with nothing less. Faith, the patience of faith, the fight of faith, the reward of faith—these come before us in this ancient story with the freshness of the Word of God. And now it remains to be said that there is a peculiar need of Calebs to-day, when great things are offered us in the providences of God and we have not far to go to enter into them. Make it personal. Sometimes the Spirit shows you while you are praying or reading or listening to others an attainment beyond all you have ever reached. It is your Hebron. No matter what the precise form of the blessing, if you have had it clearly set before you, it is a call to possess it by faith, just as Caleb went up to his reward among the hills of Palestine. All that your feet press is yours. Saints are more to blame for not walking upon the high places as children of the heavenly King than sinners are for not turning to God in penitence. Saints have great promises made to them and great helps offered them. Make it more general. Before the whole Church to-day there is a promised world to be won for Christ by prayer and toil. Our charter gives it to us for a possession, and the doors are wide for our entrance therein. Another field for faith is the deeper Christianising of the already Christian nations of the earth. Dr. Herren says in his little book, “The Larger Christ”: “The realisation of heaven upon earth is more than a mystic ideal. It is the crowning fact of history. It is the solid reality with which God is displacing the insubstantial materialism underlying the rude social structures of human selfishness. It is the Divine errand upon which white-souled prophets have walked serene through a world ablaze with scorn. The pledge of God is behind it, and the victorious forces of the universe are allied in its behalf. The Bible is its written warrant and the Cross its seal which none can break. It may take us with violence, but it advances to conquer. And the saints shall judge the world!” (Edward N. Packard.).

Introduction to chaps. 15-19

The law of distribution

We come now in earnest to the distribution of the land. The narrative looks very bare, but important principles and lessons underlie it. These lists of unfamiliar names look like the debris of a quarry—hard, meaningless, and to us useless. But nothing is inserted in the Bible without a purpose—a purpose that in some sense bears on the edification of the successive generations and the various races of men.

1. There is something to be learned from the maintenance of the distinction of the twelve tribes and the distribution of the country into portions corresponding to each. In some degree this was in accordance with Oriental usage; for the country had already been occupied by various races, dwelling in a kind of unity—the Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites, Perizzites, and Girgashites. What was peculiar to Israel was that each of the tribes was descended from one of Jacob’s sons, and that their relation to each other was conspicuously maintained, though their dwelling-places were apart. As in the case of the separate states of North America, or the separate cantons of Switzerland, it provided for variety in unity; it gave a measure of local freedom and independence, while it maintained united action; it contributed to the life and vigour of the commonwealth without destroying its oneness of character or impairing its common purpose and aim. It promoted that picturesque variety often found in little countries, where each district has a dialect, or a pronunciation, or traditions, or a character of its own; as Yorkshire differs from Devon, or Lancashire from Cornwall; Aberdeenshire from Berwick, or Fife from Ayr. As in a garden variety of species enlivens and enriches the effect, so in a community variety

of type enriches and enlivens the common life. In the case of the Hebrew commonwealth the distinction of tribes became smaller as time went on, and in New Testament times the three great districts Judaea, Samaria, and Galilee showed only the survival of the fittest. A larger individuality and a wider variety would undoubtedly have prevailed if a good spirit had continued to exist among the tribes, and if all of them had shown the energy and the enterprise of some. But the wrong spirit came in, and came in with a witness, and mischief ensued. For distinctions in race and family are apt to breed rivalry and enmity, and not only to destroy all the good which may come of variety, but to introduce interminable mischief. For many a long day the Scottish clans were like Ishmael, their hand against every man and every man’s hand against them; or at least one clan was at interminable feud with another, and the country was wretched and desolate. Among the twelve tribes of Israel the spirit of rivalry soon showed itself, leading to disastrous consequences. Many arrangements of our modern civilisation that conduce to our comfort when in good order become sources of unexampled evil when they go wrong. The drainage of houses conduces much to comfort while it works smoothly; but let the drains become choked, and send back into our houses the poisonous gases bred of decomposition, the consequences are appalling. The sanitary inspector must be on the alert to detect mischief in its very beginnings, and apply the remedy before we have well become conscious of the evil. And so a vigilant eye needs ever to be kept on those arrangements of Providence that are so beneficial when duly carried out, and so pernicious when thoughtlessly perverted. What a wonderful thing is a little forbearance at the beginning of a threatened strife! What a priceless blessing is the soft answer that turneth away wrath!

2. Again, in the allocation of the tribes in their various territories we have an instance of a great natural law, the law of distribution, a law that, on the whole, operates very beneficially throughout the world. In society there is both a centripetal and a centrifugal force; the centripetal chiefly human, the centrifugal chiefly Divine. Men are prone to cluster together; God promotes dispersion. In the early ages they clustered about the plain of Shinar; the confusion of tongues scattered them abroad. And generally, in any fertile and desirable spot, men have been prone to multiply till food has failed them, and either starvation at home or emigration abroad becomes inevitable. And so it is that, in spite of their cohesive tendency, men are now pretty well scattered over the globe. And when once they are settled in new homes, they require adaptation to their locality, and begin to love it. It is a proof of Divine wisdom that a world that presents such a variety of climates and conditions has, in all parts of it, inhabitants that enjoy their life. The same law operates in the vegetable world. Everywhere plants seem to discover the localities where they thrive best. There is always a place for the plant, and a plant for the place. And it is so with animals, too. The elephant in the spreading forest, the rabbit in the sandy down, the beaver beside the stream, the caterpillar in the leafy garden. Some of the great deserts that our imagination used to create in Africa or elsewhere do not exist. Barren spots there are, and “miry places and marshes given to salt,” but they are not many. The earth has been replenished, and the purpose of God so far fulfilled. And then there is a distribution of talents. We are not all created alike, with equal dividends of the gifts and faculties that minister in some way to the purposes of our life. We depend more or less on one another; women on men, and men on women; the young on the old, and sometimes the old on the young; persons of one talent on those of another talent, those with strong sinews on those with clear heads, and those with clear heads on those with strong sinews; in short, society is so constituted

that what each has he has for all, and what all have they have for each. The principle of the division of labour is brought in; and in a well-ordered community the general wealth and well-being of the whole are better promoted by the interchange of offices than if each person within himself had a little stock of all that he required. The same law of distribution prevails in the Church of Christ. It was exemplified in an interesting way in the case of our Lord’s apostles. No one of these was a duplicate of another. And throughout the history of the Church the distribution of gifts has been equally marked. Chrysostom and Augustine, Jerome and Ambrose, Bernard and Anselm, were all of the same stock, but not of the same type. At the Reformation men of marked individuality were provided for every country. The missionary field has in like manner been provided for. India has had her Schwartz, her Carey, her Duff, and a host of others; China her Morrison, Burmah her Judson, Polynesia her Williams, Africa her Livingstone. The most unattractive and inhospitable spots have been supplied. Greenland was not too cold for the Moravians, nor the leper-stricken communities of India or Africa too repulsive. And never were Christian men more disposed than to-day to honour that great Christian law of distribution—“Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature,” It was a great providential law, therefore, that was recognised in the partition of the land of Canaan among the tribes. Provision was thus made for so scattering the people that they should occupy the whole country, and become adapted to the places where they settled and to the pursuits proper to them.

3. Still further, in the allocation of the tribes in their various territories we have an instance of the way in which God designed the earth to minister most effectually to the wants of man. We do not say that the method now adopted in Canaan was the only plan of distributing land that God ever sanctioned; very probably it was the same method as had prevailed among the Canaanites; but it is beyond doubt that, such as it was, it was sanctioned by God for His chosen people. It was a system of peasant proprietorship. The whole landed property of the country was divided among the citizens. The extremes of wealth and poverty were alike checked and discouraged, and the lot eulogised by Agur—a moderate competency, neither poverty nor riches—became the general condition of the citizens. It is difficult to tell what extent of land fell to each family. The portion of the land divided by Joshua has been computed at twenty-five million acres. Dividing this by 600,000, the probable number of families at the time of the settlement, we get forty-two acres as the average size of each property. For a Roman citizen, seven acres was counted enough to yield a moderate maintenance, so that even in a country of ordinary productiveness the extent of the Hebrew farms would, before further subdivision became necessary, have been ample. When the population increased the inheritance would of course have to be subdivided. But for several generations this, so far from an inconvenience, would be a positive benefit. It would bring about a more complete development of the resources of the soil. The great rule of the Divine economy was thus honoured—nothing was lost. We in this country, after reaching the extreme on the opposite side, are now trying to get back in the direction of this ancient system. All parties seem now agreed that something of the nature of peasant proprietorship is necessary to solve the agrarian problem in Ireland and in Great Britain too. It is only the fact that in Britain commercial enterprise and emigration afford so many outlets for the energies of our landless countrymen that has tolerated the abuses of property so long among us—the laws of entail and primogeniture, the accumulation of property far beyond the power of the proprietor to oversee or to manage, the employment of land agents acting solely for the proprietor, and without that sense of

responsibility or that interest in the welfare of the people which is natural to the proprietor himself. It is little wonder that theories of land-possession have risen up which are as impracticable in fact as they are wild and lawless in principle. Such desperate imaginations are the fruit of despair—absolute hopelessness of getting back in any other way to a true land law—to a state of things in which the land would yield the greatest benefit to the whole nation.

4. In the arrangements for the distribution of the land among the twelve tribes we may note a proof of God’s interest in the temporal comfort and prosperity of men. It is not God that has created the antithesis of secular and spiritual, as if the two interests were like a see-saw, so that whenever the one went up the other must go down. Things in this world are made to be enjoyed, and the enjoyment of them is agreeable to the will of God, provided we use them as not abusing them. In ordinary circumstances God intends men to be fairly comfortable; He does not desire life to be a perpetual struggle, or a dismal march to the grave. The very words in which Christ counsels us to consider the lilies and the ravens, instead of worrying ourselves about food and clothing, show this; for, under the Divine plan, the ravens are comfortably fed and the lilies are handsomely clothed. The characteristic of a good man, when he enjoys a share of worldly prosperity, is, that he does not let the world become his idol—it is his servant, it is under his feet; he jealously guards against its becoming his master. His effort is to make a friend of the mammon of unrighteousness, and to turn every portion of it with which he may be entrusted to such a use for the good of others that when at last he gives in his account, as steward to his Divine Master, he may do so with joy, and not with grief. (W. G. Blaikie, D. D.)

7 I was forty years old when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me from Kadesh Barnea to explore the land. And I brought him back a report according to my convictions,

CLARKE, "As it was in mine heart - Neither fear nor favor influenced him on the occasion; he told what he believed to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

GILL, "Forty years old was I when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me from Kadeshbarnea to espy out the land,.... Not he alone, but eleven more with

him, one out of every tribe; his age he mentions, and of which, or near it, it is highly probable the rest of the spies were, to show that he and they were in the prime of their days, both as to bodily strength and intellectual capacity, which were requisite for such service as to spy out the land, of what quality that and its inhabitants were; and Moses he calls the servant of the Lord, because it was by the order and appointment of God, signified to Moses, that this was done; and the place from whence they were sent forth is named, which ascertains what that Kadesh was, where Israel was encamped when the spies were sent, Num_13:26,

and I brought him word again, as it was in mine heart; that is, he gave to Moses upon his return a sincere, honest and faithful representation of the land, and its inhabitants, as it appeared to him.

HE RY 7-8, ". In his petition he sets forth,

(1.) The testimony of his conscience concerning his integrity in the management of that great affair on which it proved the fare of Israel turned, the spying out of the land. Caleb was one of the twelve that were sent out on that errand (Jos_14:7), and he now reflected upon it with comfort, and mentioned it, not in pride, but as that which, being the consideration of the grant, was necessary to be inserted in the plea, [1.] That he made his report as it was in his heart, that is, he spoke as he thought when he spoke so honourably of the land of Canaan, so confidently of the power of God to put them in possession of it, and so contemptibly of the opposition that the Canaanites, even the Anakim themselves, could make against them, as we find he did, Num_13:30; Num_14:7-9. He did not do it merely to please Moses, or to keep the people quiet, much less from a spirit of contradiction to his fellows, but from a full conviction of the truth of what he said and a firm belief of the divine promise. [2.] That herein he wholly followed the Lord his God, that is, he kept close to his duty, and sincerely aimed at the glory of God in it. He conformed himself to the divine will with an eye to the divine favour. He had obtained this testimony from God himself (Num_14:24), and therefore it was not vain-glory in him to speak of it, any more than it is for those who have God's Spirit witnessing with their spirits that they are the children of God humbly and thankfully to tell others for their encouragement what God has done for their souls. Note, Those that follow God fully when they are young shall have both the credit and comfort of it when they are old, and the reward of it for ever in the heavenly Canaan. [3.] That he did this when all his brethren and companions in that service, except Joshua, did otherwise. They made the heart of the people melt (Jos_14:8), and how pernicious the consequences of it were was very well known. It adds much to the praise of following God if we adhere to him when others desert and decline from him. Caleb needed not to mention particularly Joshua's conduct in this matter; it was sufficiently known, and he would not seem to flatter him; it was enough to say (Jos_14:6), Thou knowest what the Lord spoke concerning me and thee.

CALVI , "7.Forty years old was I, etc He seems to talk of his own virtue in rather loftier terms than becomes a pious and modest man. But let us remember that, seeing the thing was in itself invidious and liable to many objections, it stood in need of special commendation as a means of suppressing envy. He therefore mentions that he had acted in good faith in bringing back an account of what he had learned concerning the land. For the expression, “As it was in my heart,” evidently denotes sincerity, the heart being thus opposed to deceitful words. It is a ridiculous fiction to imagine that he had said it in his heart, because from fear of being killed by his

companions he had not ventured to mention anything of the kind by the way. othing more is meant than simply this, that he acted honestly according to the command given him, without gloss or dissimulation. He enlarges on the merit of his integrity, because though he was opposed by all his colleagues, with the exception of Joshua, he did not yield to their malice, nor was dispirited by their iniquitous conspiracy, but steadfastly pursued his purpose. The words taken in their most literal sense are, I filled or fulfilled to go after thy God; but the obvious meaning is, that he was not seduced from a faithful discharge of his duty by the wicked machination of ten men, however difficult it was to resist them, because he followed God with inflexible perseverance, feeling perfectly assured that God was the author of the expedition, from which those perfidious men were endeavoring to draw off the people.

Let us learn from this passage, first, that unless the last part corresponds to the first, good beginnings vanish away; secondly, that constancy is deserving of praise only when we follow God.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:7 Forty years old [was] I when Moses the servant of the LORD sent me from Kadeshbarnea to espy out the land; and I brought him word again as [it was] in mine heart.

Ver. 7. As it was in my heart.] Sincerely, and without dissimulation; he was all heart, or, as heart, so his name Caleb signifieth, Egregie cordatus homo. One of the disciples was called Lebbaemus, or hearty; and Hooper the martyr was called for like cause Hearty Hooper. His nephew abal was none such, but churlish and evil in his doings: yet he was of the house of Caleb, [1 Samuel 25:3] but as little like him as young Cicero was his worthy father; or as wise Socrates’s children, who took after the mother altogether, as Seneca testifieth.

BE SO ,"Joshua 14:7-8. I brought him word, as it was in my heart — I spake my opinion sincerely, without flattery and fear, when the other spies were biassed by their own fears, and the dread of the people, to speak otherwise than in their consciences they believed. I wholly followed the Lord my God — The Hebrew, מלאתי milleeti acharei Jehovah, is literally, I filled after the Lord my God, which ,אחרי יהוהwords, as Dr. Dodd justly observes, “give the idea of a traveller, who, attentive to the following of his guide, so treads in his steps, as to leave hardly any void space between his guide and him, and continually fills up the traces of his feet.” This testimony, God himself had borne to Caleb, and his repeating it here is perfectly consistent with modesty, and was even necessary, as being the ground of his petition and claim.

PETT, "Joshua 14:7-9

“I was forty years old when Moses, the servant of YHWH, sent me from Kadeshbarnea to spy out the land, and I brought him word again, as it was in my heart. evertheless, my brothers who went up with me made the heart of the people melt, but I wholly followed YHWH my God. And Moses swore on that day, saying,

‘Surely the land on which your foot has trodden will be an inheritance to you, and to your children for ever, because you have wholly followed YHWH your God’.”Caleb outlined the basis of his claim. He had been true to YHWH when ten of the spies had proved unworthy. (He had hardly to point out Joshua’s participation when he was speaking to Joshua. Indeed that is a sign of authenticity). They had discouraged the people, but he had encouraged them. Then Moses had promised him the land on which his foot had trodden. ow he was laying claim to it, to Hebron (Joshua 14:13). ote the double stress on the fact that he followed God.

“Forty years old.” A figure regularly used of a man’s age, not to be applied literally but as signifying full maturity (Genesis 25:20; Genesis 26:34; 2 Samuel 2:10).

Kadesh-barnea was an oasis on the edge of the wildernesses of Paran and Zin ( umbers 13:26; umbers 20:1), possibly modern ‘Ain Qudeirat. Through the ages it has been a recognised landmark (Genesis 14:5-9; Genesis 16:7; Genesis 16:14; umbers 34:4; Joshua 15:3; Ezekiel 47:19; Ezekiel 48:28). If the identification is correct it was eventually fortified around 10th century BC. It was from there that the spies went out ( umbers 13:26; Deuteronomy 1:19) and to it that they returned after their abortive attempt to enter the land (Deuteronomy 1:46; umbers 20:1), and from where messengers were sent to the king of Edom ( umbers 20:14). They were in its vicinity for thirty eight years (Deuteronomy 2:14 compare Deuteronomy 1:46).

WHEDO , "7. Forty years old was I — When, in the plains of Moab near the banks of the Jordan, Moses numbered Israel, not a man was left of those who had heard the law thundered from Sinai, save these two veterans who now stand face to face, Caleb and Joshua. umbers 26:63. The desert of the sojourn had been the nation’s tomb. Joshua had succeeded Moses as leader of the tribes; Caleb now comes forward to claim the patrimony that had been promised by Jehovah to him.

In mine heart — Heart means here not the affections solely, but the understanding. See note on Romans 10:10. He made his report a perfect transcript of things as he saw them, uncoloured by cowardice, or faithlessness to Jehovah, or compliance with the people.

ELLICOTT, "(7) Forty years old was I . . . and (10) I am this day fourscore and five years old.—In this speech we have the only direct evidence as to the duration of the wars of Canaan under Joshua. The spies were sent from Kadesh-barnea in the second year of the Exodus, about 38½ years before the passage of Jordan (see Deuteronomy 2:14). Thus Caleb would be 40+38=78 years old when they crossed the Jordan. He was 85 when they began to divide the country. Therefore the conquest itself must have extended over a period of seven years. It is manifest that the record of the capture of Jericho and Ai, with the two campaigns of Joshua against the southern and northern confederacies, does not give all the details of the war.

PULPIT, "Joshua 14:7

Forty years old. The Hebrew expression is "the son of forty years." Compare the expressions "son of man," "sons of Belial," "son of the perverse re. bellious woman." As it was in my heart. Literally, according as with my heart, i.e; in agreement with what I saw and felt. The LXX. reads "according to his mind," i.e; that of Moses. Houbigant and Le Clerc approve of this reading, but it seems quite out of keeping with the character of Caleb. He did not endeavour to accommodate his report to the wishes of any man, but gave what he himself believed to be a true and faithful account of what he had seen and heard (see umbers 13:30; umbers 14:7-9; Deuteronomy 1:36).

PI K, ""Forty years old was I when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me from Kadesh-barnea to espy out the land; and I brought him word again as it was in mine heart" (v. 7, and cf. umbers 13:30). Those last words are very expressive and blessed. It was in Caleb’s heart that God was fully able to give what He had promised: that the gigantic Amorites with their chariots of iron were nothing to Him. Caleb was strong in faith, and therefore he was quite sure that Jehovah would make good His word. It was the Lord Himself who had put such a firm persuasion in his heart: just as at a later date, when faced with a task that was formidable unto flesh and blood, ehemiah declared "neither told I any man what my God had put in my heart to do at Jerusalem" (Josh. 2:12): that too was something which burned within and sustained him through heavy trials. David also had "found it in his heart to build the house of the Lord." How that language of Caleb’s made it evident that his heart was set upon the Promised Land! His "treasure" was there, and so was his heart also. That was his animating hope all through the forty years he had to spend with his unbelieving fellows in the wilderness. And so it should be with each Christian: his affections set upon things above as he journeys through this world to the antitypical Canaan.

8 but my fellow Israelites who went up with me made the hearts of the people melt in fear. I, however, followed the Lord my God wholeheartedly.

GILL, "Nevertheless, my brethren that went up with me,.... Meaning the rest of the spies, excepting Joshua, that went up with him into the land of Canaan to spy it, which they might be properly said to do, since they went up a hill or mountain, in order

to go into it, Num_13:17,

made the heart of the people melt; discouraged them, filled them with fears, sunk their spirits, that their hearts flowed, and became as weak as water, having no strength left in them, or hope of possessing the land; being told what stout and gigantic men the inhabitants of it were, and how strongly fortified were their cities:

but I wholly followed the Lord my God; and did not join with them in an ill report of the good land; but having the fear of God before his eyes, walked after that, and delivered in his report faithfully, according to the dictates of his conscience, and the real sentiments of his mind; of this phrase; see Gill on Num_14:24.

K&D, "Whereas the other spies discouraged the people by exaggerated reports concerning the inhabitants of Canaan, he had followed the Lord with perfect fidelity (Num_13:31-33). He had not been made to waver in his faithfulness to the Lord and His promises either by the evil reports which the other spies had brought of the land, or by the murmuring and threats of the excited crowd (see Num_14:6-10). “My brethren” (Jos_14:8) are the rest of the spies, of course with the exception of Joshua, to whom Caleb was speaking.

(Note: That Joshua was not included was evident from this circumstance alone, and consequently it is a complete perversion on the part of Knobel to argue, that because the expression is a general one, i.e., because Joshua is not expressly excepted by name, therefore he cannot have been one of the spies, not to mention the fact that the words “concerning me and thee,” in v. 6, are sufficient to show to any one acquainted with the account in Num 13-14, that Joshua was really one of them.)

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:8 evertheless my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt: but I wholly followed the LORD my God.

Ver. 8. But I wholly followed the Lord my God.] Heb., I fulfilled after the Lord. A metaphor taken from a ship under sail carried strongly with the wind, as if it feared neither rocks nor sands. Thus he commendeth himself, that none might tax him of injustice or ambition, for that which he was now about to require of Joshua.

COKE, "Ver. 8. I wholly followed the Lord my God— The Hebrew literally is, I filled after the Lord my God: Words, the energy of which is very well rendered in our version; they give the idea of a traveller, who, attentive to the following of his guide, so treads in his steps, as to leave hardly any void space betwixt his guide and him, and continually fills up the traces of his feet. See Poole's Synopsis.

PI K, "" evertheless my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt: but I wholly followed the Lord my God" (v. 8). His fellows walked by sight instead of faith, and consequently they were occupied with and appalled by the obstacles which stood in the way. Full of distrust themselves, they infected the whole of the congregation with the same, intimidating and discouraging them so far that

their spirits sank. But Caleb refused to be influenced by them, yea, boldly withstood them. "I wholly followed the Lord my God" was not the language of presumption, but a plain declaration that he was neither daunted by the power of the enemy nor swayed by the skepticism of his brethren. It signified that on that occasion he had faithfully discharged his duty, remained steadfast in his faith in God, assured that He would enable His people to overcome the mighty sons of Anak. That meaning of his, "I wholly followed the Lord," is made clear by the contrast of umbers 32:11, where the Lord complained of his unbelieving fellows, "they have not wholly followed Me," and from the fact that He there predicated the same fidelity and perseverance of Joshua. The great value which God set upon His servant’s steadfastness appears in His having recorded it in His Word no less than six times: umbers 14:2; 32:12; Deuteronomy 1:36: Joshua 14:8, 9, 14.

WHEDO , "8. My brethren — Words of tenderness for his long-remembered comrades.

Heart… melt — In modern sense this would indicate compassion; in the ancient, fear.

Wholly followed the Lord my God — This phrase wholly followed is emphatically repeated from Jehovah’s own words, ( umbers 14:24; Deuteronomy 1:36,) here reiterated at Joshua 14:9 and at Joshua 14:14. This wholeness of his adherence to Jehovah is explained by his and Joshua’s loyal speech, given umbers 14:6-10. There no treachery of their brethren the fellow-spies, no panic of their own, no fury of the people, could disturb the calmness of their witness for God. Then and there the sentence of death in the wilderness, passed upon the entire people, left them untouched. And of that eventful day these two Hebrew princes were now the sole living and speaking mementoes.

PARKER, "Caleb"s Claim

Joshua 14

CALEB was a prince of the tribe of Judah, and before the allotment of the land was proceeded with he said, in effect, I have something to say about this; the allotment ought not to proceed until I have been heard: whether the word was written or not, Caleb said, in effect, I cannot tell, but it was surely written in my heart; I will tell thee what it was: A distinct promise was made to me some five-and-forty years ago, and that promise was to this effect. Then Caleb quoted the words or their substance, and set the case before Joshua , who, as prince of the host, listened kindly and answered generously and justly. How wonderfully the Past affects the Present! We must not think that affairs are lying upon the surface and are open to the handling of anyone; that the business of life is superficial, easy, requiring no reference to the historical past, and no reference to unwritten, but eternal law. There is nothing so simple as it often seems to be. Sometimes simplicity is but the last result of complexity. Beware, therefore, of all counsellors who treat life in an off-hand, easy

fashion, as if things could be set up, and pulled down, and changed without much anxiety or without appealing to the deepest affections and sometimes the tenderest memories of the soul. Caleb referred to the past; Caleb said, A promise was made to me in this matter, and I will tell you what that promise was. Mark the wonderful consistency of Caleb"s spirit. He is the same at forty and at eighty-five. At forty he was a man of chivalrous spirit: a tall man did not affright him; he looked upon walled cities as upon paper castles. He returned with Joshua , saying to Moses, The work can be done. All the other princes or heads of houses had "melted" hearts; their courage had gone out of them; they said, The people are very tall, and the cities are very strong, and there is no more spirit in us. But Caleb was a man of "another spirit." That spirit kept him young to the last day of his life. King David was called "very old" at seventy. We saw in our last reading that the word "old" is not a time-word; it is a word that relates to work, and to the effect of work upon the worker. The wear and tear of work tells terrifically upon some natures; they are so intensely devoted: there is nothing trifling to them; every moment brings its own judgment, every day its own solemn sense of destiny. David was old because his work had been heavy. It is trouble that makes men old. Where is there a man that says he has been overborne by mere work, mere labour? But a thousand men could stand up and challenged to reply to the question whether trouble does not wear down the spirit, take out the very strength of the Prayer of Manasseh , and make him old at five-and-twenty, aged and venerable at half a century. So it was with Joshua. He took hardly to the work; it was a great study to him; he did nothing perfunctorily or within the limits of the moment for the moment"s sake; all he did, drew blood—"virtue"—out of his interior nature. So it was with king David—"very old" at seventy. Other men are younger as the years pass on! They have a happy way of working; they are blessed with the inestimable blessing of cheerfulness; they are able to take everything, as it were, with a light hand and yet not frivolously; they are so buoyant, so happy, so cheery altogether, that, whatever comes, they approach it almost with friendliness, and they pass through controversy as if it were but a variety of life"s pleasantness. The man who is now speaking in the text is eighty-five years old, and he says he is as strong as he was nearly half a century ago. May we not be so in our degree? Why do we so soon give up the work? Why this whining after rest, this desire to be let go, to be let alone, and to be permitted to flee into the wilderness or "some boundless contiguity of shade"? To touch such men as Caleb, is to receive new life, new hope. The cheerful man comes into history, bringing a warming influence with him, helping men to carry their burdens more resolutely and more hopefully.

But perhaps Caleb was simply asserting this youthfulness in order that he might claim the inheritance. Did he affect juvenility? Was he for the moment buoyed up with a false hope? The answer is very distinct, and there is no escape from it. In the eleventh verse he says,—

"As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me: as my strength was then, even so is my strength now" [what for?] "for war, both to go out, and to come in." ( Joshua 14:11)

Who can estimate the indirect influence of such an example? Indirect influence is a subject we do not perhaps sufficiently consider. There is a direct influence which is much spoken about and highly valued, and not improperly so; but who can tell all the mystery of radiation? Who knows in what direction the warm rays shoot? Who can follow all the palpitation of heat, and say it begins here and ends there? Who can tell the indirect influence of Scripture well read, of a Gospel well preached, of a life well lived? There are observers on the outskirts. The prisoners were listening whilst the apostles were singing. Taking into account indirect influence as well as direct service, many a life will in the judgment be surprised because God attributes to it the outworking of so many and such gracious results. Who could refuse the better portions of Canaan when Caleb said, "I will take the hard part. Let the old man grapple with the difficulty. As for these young people, they will get younger as they grow older perhaps; they will become more courageous as the years come and go. Meanwhile, I will take the land that is now peopled by the giants; and in the strength of God I will subdue the land and make it part of the inheritance of heaven "? We want to hear such voices. We are tired of the moaning word, the despairing note, the sign of dejection, the cowardice that betrays itself even in the voice. Many persons can follow a tune who cannot raise one. We must have leaders, captains, mighty men. Who knows what influence Lebbus had in the first discipleship? He is a man of no historical account; he does not figure among the three mighties; but "Lebbus" means "hearty, cheerful." Who can tell what influence the man had by virtue of his cheeriness? We are not all speakers; we do not all go to the front and lift up an ensign; but many help the good work who stay at home and make the house glad, make every window face southward, wherever the builder has made it turn, to catch all in the sunshine. Who can estimate the influence of home music, home love, home encouragement? When we go home, carrying life"s burden with us, and say we are now exhausted and can return no more, who knows the effect of a cheerful word, an encouraging expression? These things are pointed out that many may be encouraged who suppose they are doing nothing. Apparently they are not engaged in much public work of any consequence; but they do so much good to us at home or on the highway: we never met them in the dark night but they brought all the stars out; we never spoke to them in the storm but within the tempest there was a great calm. Let every man discover what his gift Isaiah , and his vocation, what he can do, and let him do it in the name and fear, the sight and love of God.

Who could give up when the senior was willing to go forward? We are shamed into some good deeds. Who would give anything to a collection if the congregation was not present? Who would really give in the dark? Some people would: the darkness and the light are both alike to them; but is it any libel upon human nature to say that there are some other people who would not do it? We are moved by example. There is a subtle contagion in social unity and action. We thought we would not go out; but seeing Caleb arraying himself for the night and going out into the storm, we cannot for very shame stay at home. So we look to our leaders, our senior men, to be young to speak the glowing word, and to show that what they say is not sentimental, but real, because they themselves are willing to keep the door, to watch the gate, to stand outside, or to accept the most difficult position. Are there not some secondary

heroes in the Bible? Very little is said about Caleb. There are three men of the name of Caleb in the Bible, and if you put all the three Calebs together the space required for the record of their deeds would not be a large one. There are under-heroes, men who are not of the stature and volume and force of Elijah, who fills the whole space of the time he lived in: but there are Calebs, men who are less, and yet of the same quality; men who have accepted Heaven"s vocation and are working it out with a rare courage and a sweet patience. May such a word as this touch many a man who is wondering what he is doing, and help many a woman to believe that in quietness and in peace in household privacy she may be touching with helpfulness some of the boldest and bravest lives of the time.

What was the secret of this continual cheerfulness? It was a religious secret. Caleb says,—

" evertheless, my brethren that went up with me made the heart of the people melt: but I wholly followed the Lord my God" ( Joshua 14:8).

So Caleb"s cheerfulness was met by a buoyancy equal to itself, and Hebron was given to him with a blessing breathed from the sincere heart. Is not many a blessing kept from us because we have not been like a ship in full sail? Have not our iniquities kept good things from us? How can we claim the inheritance if we have never been ready, for the battle? And why should we sit in contemptuous judgment upon the Calebs of any age, when we have not known the stress that was put upon them, or entered into their labour, which made their lives oftentimes a great burden? Understand that we have come into an inheritance of history. We enjoy a Hebron that has been made for us. The civilisation round about us today is none of our handiwork; at the best we have only put a kind of top upon it. To-day gathers up into its throbbing heart the energy of all the centuries that have gone. Blessed are they who live under the inspiration of this idea. They will be grateful to their forefathers; their forefathers will not be spoken of as dead men, but as men who are now living and historically ruling the sentiment of their age. One thing is certain: God will not forsake a man who has been "wholly" devoted to him. God knows the number of Caleb"s years, and the promise shall be redeemed. O poor heart, wondering when the good time is to come, when Hebron is to fall in as part of the inheritance, thinking the time is long, long in coming, and there may not be many days left in which to enjoy the heritage, take courage! God knows every word he has spoken. He is not unfaithful or unrighteous to forget our works of faith and labours of love. When he does bring in the inheritance, he will surprise us by it. It will be no mere handful of mud, no little measurable Canaan, but all heaven"s blessedness, all heaven"s purity, all heaven"s music. Cheer thee! He is faithful who hath promised; he is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think.

9 So on that day Moses swore to me, ‘The land on

which your feet have walked will be your inheritance and that of your children forever, because you have followed the Lord my God wholeheartedly.’[a]

CLARKE, "The land whereon thy feet have trodden - This probably refers to Hebron, which was no doubt mentioned on this occasion.

GILL, "And Moses sware on that day, saying,.... Or declared the oath of the Lord, for it was the Lord that sware to what follows; see Deu_1:34,

surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance, and thy children's for ever: not the whole land of Canaan, nor all the parts of it Caleb travelled through, but particularly Hebron; which though not expressly mentioned in the aforesaid oath, yet was understood and known to be the meaning of it, and which Joshua by the following grant owned, and it is elsewhere expressly affirmed, Jdg_1:20; and it is remarked, that it is not said "they", but "he" came to Hebron, Num_13:22; that is Caleb, so that it was literally true that his feet had trodden there: now the reason of this oath, and the inheritance assured by it to Caleb, was:

because thou hast wholly followed the Lord thy God; in all his ways, and with full purpose of heart, and particularly had acted the upright and faithful part in the report he made of the g

HE RY, " The promise Moses had made him in God's name that he should have this mountain, Jos_14:9. This promise is his chief plea, and that on which he relies. As we find it (Num_14:24) it is general, him will I bring into the land whereunto he went, and his seed shall possess it; but it seems it was more particular, and Joshua knew it; both sides understood this mountain for which Caleb was now a suitor to be intended. This was the place from which, more than any other, the spies took their report, for here they met with the sons of Anak (Num_13:22), the sight of whom made such an impression upon them, Jos_14:3. We may suppose that Caleb, observing what stress they laid upon the difficulty of conquering Hebron, a city garrisoned by the giants, and how thence they inferred that the conquest of the whole land was utterly impracticable, in opposition to their suggestions, and to convince the people that he spoke as he thought, bravely desired to have that city which they called invincible assigned to himself for his own portion: “I will undertake to deal with that, and, if I cannot get it for my inheritance, I will be without.” “Well,” said Moses, “it shall be thy own then, win it and wear it.” Such a noble heroic spirit Caleb had, and so desirous was he to inspire his brethren with it, that he chose this place only because it was the most difficult to be conquered. And, to show

that his soul did not decay any more than his body, now forty-five years after he adheres to his choice and is still of the same mind.

K&D 9-11, "Jehovah swore at that time, that the land upon which his (Caleb's) foot had trodden should be an inheritance for him and his sons for ever. This oath is not mentioned in Num_14:20., nor yet in Deu_1:35-36, where Moses repeats the account of the whole occurrence to the people. For the oath of Jehovah mentioned in Num_14:21, Num_14:24, viz., that none of the murmuring people should see the land of Canaan, but that Caleb alone should come thither and his seed should possess it, cannot be the one referred to, as the promise given to Caleb in this oath does not relate to the possession of Hebron in particular, but to the land of Canaan generally, “the land which Jehovah had sworn to their fathers.” We must assume, therefore, that in addition to what is mentioned in Num_14:24, God gave a special promise to Caleb, which is passed over there, with reference to the possession of Hebron itself, and that Joshua, who heard it at the time, is here reminded of that promise by Caleb. This particular promise from God was closely related to the words with which Caleb endeavoured to calm the minds of the people when they rose up against Moses (Num_13:30), viz., by saying to them, “We are well able to overcome it,” notwithstanding the Anakites who dwelt in Hebron and had filled the other spies with such great alarm on account of their gigantic size. With reference to this the Lord had promised that very land to Caleb for his inheritance. Upon this promise Caleb founded his request (Jos_14:10-12) that Joshua would give him these mountains, of which Joshua had heard at that time that there were Anakites and large fortified cities there, inasmuch as, although forty-five years had elapsed since God had spoken these words, and he was now eighty-five years old, he was quite as strong as he had been then. From the words, “The Lord hath kept me alive these forty-five years,” Theodoret justly infers, that the conquest of Canaan by Joshua was completed in seven years, since God spake these words towards the end of the second year after the exodus from Egypt, and therefore thirty-eight years before the entrance into Canaan. The clause

וגו הלך� וגו is also dependent upon (Jos_14:10) אשר �ר�עים viz., “these forty-five years :יד

that Israel has wandered in the desert” (on this use of אשר, see Ewald, §331, c.). The expression is a general one, and the years occupied in the conquest of Canaan, during which Israel had not yet entered into peaceful possession of the promised land, are reckoned as forming part of the years of wandering in the desert. As another reason for his request, Caleb adds in Jos_14:11 : “I am still as strong to-day as at that time; as my strength was then, so is it now for war, and to go out and in” (see Num_27:17).

CALVI , "9.And Moses swear on that day, etc Here, then, is one fruit of the embassy honestly and faithfully performed — to gain possession of an inheritance of which the whole people is deprived. For although long life is justly accounted one of the mercies of God, the end proposed by it is here added, viz., that Caleb may obtain the inheritance which is denied to others. This was no ordinary privilege. He next extols the faithfulness of God in having prolonged his life, and not only so, but supplied vigor and strength, so that though he was now above eighty years of age, he was not a whit feebler than when in the flower of his youth. Others, too, had a green old age, but they were few in number, and then in their case there was not added to the even tenor of their days a manly vigor, remaining wholly unimpaired up to their eighty-fifth year. For he lays claim not only to the skill and valor of a leader, but

also to the physical strength of a soldier.

He next adds the other offices and actions of his life. For to go out and in is equivalent in Hebrew to the observance and execution of all parts of our duty. And this Caleb confirms by fact, when he demands it as his task to assail and expel the giants. He is not, however, elated by stolid pride to a confident assurance of victory, but hopes for a prosperous event from the assistance of God. There seems, indeed, to be an incongruous expression of doubt in the word Perhaps, as if he were begirding himself fortuitously for the fight. (141) Those expositors who think that he is distrusting himself from a feeling of modesty and considering his own weakness, say something to the point, but do not say the whole. They certainly omit what is of principal import, viz., that this Perhaps refers to the common feelings which men would entertain on taking a view of the actual state of matters.

The first thing necessary is duly to consider what his design is. Had he asked the gift of a mountain, which he could have seized without any great exertion, it would have been more difficult to obtain it. But now when the difficulty of the task is plainly set forth, he gains the favor of Joshua and the princes, because in assenting to his prayer, they grant him nothing but the certainty of an arduous, doubtful, and perilous contest. Knowing, then, that the children of Israel trembled and were in terror at the very name of the giants, he speaks according to their opinion as of a matter attended with doubt and uncertainty. As regards himself, the words clearly demonstrate how far he was from viewing that which had been said to him with a dubious or vacillating mind. I shall drive them out, he says, as the Lord has declared. Shall we say that when he utters the declaration of God, he is in doubt whether or not God will do what he promised? It is quite plain that he only reminded them how dangerous the business was, in order that he might the more easily obtain their assent. Although it is not uncommon in Hebrew to employ this term to denote difficulty merely, without meaning to imply that the mind is agitated by distrust or disquietude. How very difficult it was to drive out the giants from that fastness, (142) may be inferred from the fact that the death of Joshua took place before Caleb ventured to attack them.

COKE, "Ver. 9. And Moses sware on that day, saying— See umbers 14:21-24 and Deuteronomy 1:34-35. It was God who sware, and not Moses; but as he sware by the mouth of the latter, the expression used by the sacred writer is just. Ver. 11. As yet I am as strong, &c.] Caleb adds this consideration only the better to shew the high sense he has of the divine goodness, which had so preserved his vigour in this advanced age, as to enable him either to take from the enemies, which still retained them, the possessions to which he was entitled, or to defend what should belong to him against their attempts. For the expression, to go out, and to come in, see umbers 27:17.

PULPIT, "And Moses sware on that day (cf. umbers 14:21-24; Deuteronomy 1:35, Deuteronomy 1:36). Keil raises the difficulty that in the above passage not Moses, but God is said to have sworn, and that no special inheritance is promised to Caleb, but only that he shall enter the promised land. But this is not the fact, as a

comparison of this passage with Deuteronomy 1:36 will show. That either passage gives the ipsissima verba of Moses is unlikely. The main sense of the promise is given in each. And there is no impropriety in speaking of the proclamation by Moses of God's decree as an oath pronounced by Moses himself.

PI K, ""And Moses sware on that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance, and thy children’s for ever, because thou hast wholly followed the Lord my God" (v. 9). The sure word of prophecy he had hid—held fast, treasured—in his heart throughout the lengthy interval. It is to be considered that probably most of that generation of Israel would be ignorant of the Divine grant which had been made unto him and his descendants so long before, and therefore Caleb quoted the Lord’s promise thereon for their benefit more than Joshua’s, so that it might appear that he was not now making any selfish or unreasonable demand. The Divine promise was recorded in Deuteronomy 1:36, and treasured in the mind of Caleb. His object was to prevent this particular part of Palestine being put in the lot with the other portions of the country. He had a definite and valid claim upon the same, and he here insisted upon his right. Since God’s own mind concerning it had been plainly made known, then it would be useless to appeal unto His will respecting it via the lot, as in the case of the sections for the tribes.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:9 And Moses sware on that day, saying, Surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance, and thy children’s for ever, because thou hast wholly followed the LORD my God.

Ver. 9. Whereon thy feet have trodden.] And whereon thy faith hath triumphed.

Because thou hast wholly followed.] See Joshua 14:8, and take notice that God’s retributions are more than bountiful.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:9. Moses sware on that day — See Deuteronomy 1:35-36. What is here mentioned was first pronounced by God himself, and that with an oath, umbers 14:21-24. It was also, however, repeated by Moses, so that the expression of the sacred writer is just.

10 “ ow then, just as the Lord promised, he has kept me alive for forty-five years since the time he

said this to Moses, while Israel moved about in the wilderness. So here I am today, eighty-five years old!

BAR ES, "Forty and five years - The word of God to Moses was spoken after the return of the spies in the autumn of the second year after the Exodus Num_13:25; subsequently, 38 years elapsed before the people reached the Jordan Num_20:1; after the passage of the Jordan seven more years had passed, when Caleb claimed Hebron, before the partition of the land among the nine tribes and a half. These seven years then correspond to the “long time” Jos_11:18 during which Joshua was making war with the Canaanites. They are in the sequel of this verse added by Caleb to the years of wandering, since during them the people had no settled abodes.

CLARKE, "These forty and five years - See the note on Jos_13:1.

GILL, "And now, behold, the Lord hath kept me alive, as he said,.... Had upheld him in life, and preserved him from many dangers in the wilderness; and had continued him not only in life, but in health to that day, according to his promise to him, that he would bring him into the land of Canaan, and that he should see and possess it, Num_14:24 Deu_1:36,

these forty and five years, even since the Lord spake this word unto Moses, and while the children of Israel wandered in the wilderness; not that the children of Israel were wandering in the wilderness forty five years, but it was while they were in the wilderness this word or promise, concerning Caleb, was spoken by the Lord to Moses; and it was in the second year of their coming out of Egypt, after which they wandered in the wilderness thirty eight years, so that they had now been in the land of Canaan seven years; and from hence the Jewish chronologers (s) gather, that the land was seven years in subduing, and which their commentators in general take notice of. Maimonides (t) seems to be displeased with the Arabs for calling the wilderness, through which the Israelites travelled, "the desert of wandering"; but it appears from hence to be a very proper epithet of it; and Kadesh the place where they were first threatened, that they should be wanderers in the wilderness for such a time, had the additional name of Barnea, which signifies the son of a wanderer:

and now, lo, I am this day fourscore and five years old; being forty years of age when sent a spy into the land, Jos_14:7; thirty eight years he was with Israel in the wilderness, and seven years more since they entered into the land, in all eighty five; there is no necessity of understanding it that this was his precise birth day, but that about this time, or that he was now completely of such an age, which was more by fifteen years than the age of man in common at that time, see Psa_90:10.

HE RY, " The experience he had had of God's goodness to him ever since to this day. Though he had wandered with the rest in the wilderness, and had been kept thirty-eight years out of Canaan as they were, for that sin which he was so far from having a hand in that he had done his utmost to prevent it, yet, instead of complaining of this, he mentioned, to the glory of God, his mercy to him in two things: - [1.] That he was kept alive in the wilderness, not only notwithstanding the common perils and fatigues of that tedious march, but though all that generation of Israelites, except himself and Joshua, were one way or other cut off by death. With what a grateful sense of God's goodness to him does he speak it! (Jos_14:10). Now behold (behold and wonder) the Lord hath kept me alive these forty and five years, thirty-eight years in the wilderness, through the plagues of the desert, and seven years in Canaan through the perils of war! Note, First,While we live, it is God that keeps us alive; by his power he protects us from death, and by his bounty supplies us continually with the supports and comforts of life. He holdeth our soul in life. Secondly, The longer we live the more sensible we should be of God's goodness to us in keeping us alive, his care in prolonging our frail lives, his patience in prolonging our forfeited lives. Has he kept me alive these forty-five years? Is it about that time of life with us? Or is it more? Or is it less? We have reason to say, It is of the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed. How much are we indebted to the favour of God, and what shall we render? Let the life thus kept by the providence of God be devoted to his praise. Thirdly, The death of many others round about us should make us the more thankful to God for sparing us and keeping us alive. Thousands falling on our right hand and our left and yet ourselves spared. These distinguishing favours impose on us strong obligations to singular obedience. [2.] That he was fit for business, now that he was in Canaan. Though eighty-five years old, yet as hearty and lively as when he was forty (Jos_14:11): As my strength was then, so is it now. This was the fruit of the promise, and out-did what was said; for God not only gives what he promises, but he gives more: life by promise shall be life, and health, and strength, and all that which will make the promised life a blessing and comfort. Moses had said in his prayer (Psa_90:10) that at eighty years old even their strength is labour and sorrow, and so it is most commonly. But Caleb was an exception to the rule; his strength at eighty-five was ease and joy: this he got by following the Lord fully. Caleb here takes notice of this to the glory of God, and as an excuse for his asking a portion which he must fetch out of the giants' hands. Let not Joshua tell him he knew not what he asked; could he get the possession of that which he begged for a title to? “Yes,” says he, “why not? I am as fit for war now as ever I was.”

COFFMA , "Verse 10"And now, behold, Jehovah hath kept me alive, as he spake, these forty and five years, from the time that Jehovah spake this word unto Moses, while Israel walked in the wilderness: and now, Lo, I am this day fourscore and five years old. As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me: as my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war, and to go in and out and to come in. ow therefore give me this hill-country, whereof Jehovah spake in that day; for thou heardest in that day how the Anakim were there, and cities great and fortified: it may be that Jehovah will be with me, and I shall drive them out, as Jehovah spake."

"And Jehovah hath kept me alive ..." Every person of advanced age should be aware of the special providence that has been given in making it possible. In no person is unbelief any more stupid and pitiful than when it occurs in persons past threescore and ten years of age.

"These forty and five years ..." This and Moses' mention of his being "forty years old" (Joshua 14:7) when Moses sent out the spies, and of his being now eighty-five years old are among the most important chronological facts given in Joshua. Israel wandered in the wilderness only about 38 years, because the first two years of the traditional "forty years" were utilized in the giving of the Law, the construction of the tabernacle etc. The sending out of the spies evidently occurred after about two years had elapsed following the Exodus ( umbers 10:11).[18] Thus, thirty-eight years later when Israel entered Canaan, Caleb would have been seventy-eight years of age. Since he gives his age here as eighty-five, that would allow seven years for the Conquest of Canaan up to this point. As Longacre said, "This (Joshua 14:10) is the only statement in the book that bears on the length of time the conquest was supposed to cover."[19]

"It may be that Jehovah will be with me ..." (Joshua 14:12). Some have expressed surprise that a man of such courage and conviction as that of Caleb should have appeared to express a little doubt here by the employment of the words "may be." This is not true. Those words, in this context, express conviction without presumption. "`It may be' expresses not doubt, but full dependence upon the Lord."[20] "The expression also signifies HOPE."[21] Critics think they have found a contradiction between Joshua 10:36-39 which describe the fall of Hebron to Joshua, and this passage, along with Joshua 15, where Caleb actually takes the place, subdues it, and occupies it."[22] Cook's wise comment on this is:

"The Anakims had in the course of Joshua's southern campaign been expelled from "this mountain" (Hebron); but they had only withdrawn to the neighboring cities of Philistia (Joshua 11:22). Thence they had, as must be inferred from the text here, returned and reoccupied Hebron, probably when Joshua and the main force of the Israelites were campaigning against the northern confederacy."[23]

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:10 And now, behold, the LORD hath kept me alive, as he said, these forty and five years, even since the LORD spake this word unto Moses, while [the children of] Israel wandered in the wilderness: and now, lo, I [am] this day fourscore and five years old.

Ver. 10. And now, behold, the Lord both kept me alive.] Which mercy was therefore the greater, because of these many thousands of others whose carcasses had fallen in the wilderness. How oft have the arrows of death come whisking by us, and yet we are alive!

Wandered in the wilderness.] By God’s command to and fro, backward and forward, as if they had been treading a maze.

I am this day fourscore and five years old.] Whereby it appeareth that they were near upon seven years in conquering of Canaan. Difficilia quae pulchra.

PETT, "Joshua 14:10-11

“And now, behold, YHWH has kept me alive, as he said, these forty and five years, from the time that YHWH spoke this word to Moses while Israel walked in the wilderness, and now, see, I am eighty and five years old. As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me. As my strength was then, even so is my strength now for war, and to go out and come in.”His words were with a view to contrasting his own situation with that of the other spies apart from Joshua who had been unfaithful, who had died of the plague ( umbers 14:37). YHWH had kept him strong and in good health through the years. They are the words of an old man still conscious of vigour and strength, and still able to fight. He did not need the help of a stick to go in and out. They are probably not to be applied too literally. They were the words of a man confident in his strength. They were simply intended to say that he was in remarkable health for his age.

“Forty and five.” A few years over forty. ‘Eighty and five’, in the third stage of life. He had experienced a remarkable amount over those forty or so years, the long stay at Kadesh and its surrounding oases, and then the movement forward through various battles to where they were now, and yet he still saw himself as being as strong as ever.

PULPIT, "Forty and five years. This marks the date of the present conversation as occurring seven years after the invasion. Caleb was forty years of age when be went to spy the land of Canaan. For thirty-eight years the Israelites wandered in the wilderness. And Caleb was now eighty-five years old. This remark has been made as far back as the time of Theedoret. Doubtless the apportionment of the land, and its occupation by the Israelites, was a long and tedious business (see also Joshua 13:1). Even since. Literally, from the time when.

PI K, ""And now, behold, the Lord hath kept me alive, as He said, these forty and five years, even since the Lord spake this word unto Moses, while the children of Israel wandered in the wilderness: and now, lo, I am this day fourscore and five years old" (v. 10). What a God-honoring testimony was this! Passing through all the vicissitudes of Israel’s wilderness wanderings, during which so many of his fellows were removed from this scene, engaged in the five years of fighting in Canaan, when no doubt there was often but a step betwixt him and death, Caleb here ascribed his preservation not to "good luck" or "fortune" (heathen terms!), but unto Him "which holdeth our soul in life" (Ps. 66:9). Caleb had something more than a general realization that his times were in God’s hands (Ps. 31:15): his faith had laid hold of a special promise, as his "as He said" plainly shows. He was resting on the

word of One who cannot lie—as David, at a later date, relied upon God’s changeless veracity · "do as Thou hast said" (2 Sam. 7:25). We are on both sure and comfortable ground, my reader, when we take our stand upon God’s promise, expecting a fulfillment. Caleb’s repeated "and now" was tantamount to his saying, The time has at last arrived for the Lord to make good His engagement.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:10-11. The Lord hath kept me alive these forty and five years — Whereof thirty-eight were spent in the wilderness, and seven since they came into Canaan. The longer we live the more sensible we should be of God’s goodness to us in keeping us alive! Of his care in prolonging our frail lives, his patience in prolonging our forfeited lives! And shall not the life thus kept by his providence, be devoted to his praise? I am as strong this day, &c. — Though eighty-five years of age, he was as lively and strong as when he was forty. As my strength was then so it is now — This was the fruit of the promise, and was beyond what God had expressed; for God not only gives what he promises, but more. If he promises life, he will add health and strength, and all that which will make the life promised a blessing and comfort. This Caleb mentions here to the glory of God, and as a reason for his asking a portion which he must rescue out of the hands of the giants. For war — ot only for counsel, but for action; for marching and fighting. And therefore this gift will not be cast away upon an unprofitable and an unserviceable person. To go out, and to come in — To perform all the duties belonging to my place. Moses had said, that at eighty years old, even our strength was labour and sorrow. But Caleb was an exception to this rule: at eighty-five years old, his strength was still ease and joy. This he got by following the Lord fully.

11 I am still as strong today as the day Moses sent me out; I’m just as vigorous to go out to battle now as I was then.

CLARKE, "Even so is my strength now - I do not ask this place because I wish to sit down now, and take my ease; on the contrary, I know I must fight, to drive out the Anakim, and I am as able and willing to do it as I was forty-five years ago, when Moses sent me to spy out the land.

GILL, "As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me,.... To spy the land, forty five years ago; suggesting that he was as sound in his mind, understanding, judgment and memory, and as hale, strong, and robust in his body now, as he had been so long ago; which was a wonderful instance of the care of divine Providence over him in upholding him in life, and continuing him in vigour and health at such an age, when the carcasses of so many thousands had pined away and fell in the wilderness:

as my strength was then, even so is my strength now for war; he had the same strength of body and courage of mind to engage in warlike enterprises as he had so many years ago; and this he the rather mentions, to prevent any objection Joshua might make to the giving of Hebron to him, since being inhabited by giants, it required a large share of strength and courage to attempt the conquest of it: but Caleb had strength

both to go out, and to come in; to do any civil business, to preside over his tribe, or to govern any city, and its appendages, that should be put into his hands.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:11 As yet I [am as] strong this day as [I was] in the day that Moses sent me: as my strength [was] then, even so [is] my strength now, for war, both to go out, and to come in.

Ver. 11. As yet I am strong this day.] Viridis et vegeta senectus singulare Dei donum est [Deuteronomy 34:7] Mr Dod, as he was another Moses for meekness, so for health of body in extreme old age; a mercy that he much valued. Deficere potius quam desinere visus est.

WHEDO , "11. Strong this day — As strong to defend his heritage as he was forty-five years ago to win it. He had kept the ten commandments which his own ears had heard from Jehovah’s voice so well, that they had been permanent youth in his blood and bones.

Go out — To the battle.

Come in — With the spoils. See Judges 1:20. This was no senile boast of youthful strength, as the three sons of Anak found to their cost. Joshua 15:14. The old hero never became, like his fellow Joshua, ruler of all Israel, but he had a son-in-law-nephew that did.}

ELLICOTT, "(11) As yet I am as strong this day . . .—But by Joshua 13:1, “Joshua had aged.” Yet Joshua died at the age of 110, only 25 years older than Caleb was at this time. They were contemporaries. But the far greater responsibility lying upon Joshua (with a possible difference of temperament) may very naturally account for the one man’s having aged so much more rapidly than the other.

PULPIT, "As yet am I as strong this day. A vigorous and respected old age is ordinarily, by ature's own law, the decreed reward for a virtuous youth and a temperate manhood. Caleb's devotion to God's service had preserved him from the

sins as well as from the faithlessness and murmuring of the Israelites. And thus, with a body not enfeebled by indulgence, he presents himself before Joshua with undiminished strength, at a time when most men are sinking under the weight of their infirmities, and is ready still for battle with the most formidable foes.

PI K, ""As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me: as my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war, both to go out, and to come in" (v. 11). In those words he was forestalling an objection which might be made against his appeal. Should the demurrer be advanced, But you are much too old for such a difficult and dangerous venture as the dispossessing of the giants from the mountainous district of Hebron, that such a strenuous and hazardous task called for a much younger man. Caleb here pressed his physical fitness for the same. The One who had preserved his life throughout the years had also renewed his youth like the eagle’s (Ps. 103:5). Ah, my reader, God does nothing by halves when He appoints a man for any particular work, He also equips the worker and furnishes him with everything needful. ot only so, He sustains and animates the heart for the task. Faith inspires resolution and courage, and He who had enabled His servant to hold fast for so long to His promise also removed all hesitation and fear, so that Caleb was just as ready and eager to set about the task which lay before him as he was in the prime of life.

12 ow give me this hill country that the Lord promised me that day. You yourself heard then that the Anakites were there and their cities were large and fortified, but, the Lord helping me, I will drive them out just as he said.”

BAR ES, "The Anakims had in the course of Joshua’s campaigns in the south been expelled from “this mountain,” i. e. the mountain country round Hebron, but they had only withdrawn to the neighboring cities of Philistia Jos_11:22. Thence, they had, as must be inferred from the text here, returned and reoccupied Hebron, probably when Joshua and the main force of the Israelites had marched northward to deal with Jabin

and his confederates. Caleb finally drove out this formidable race and occupied Hebron and its dependent towns and district permanently. See Jos_15:13 following.

CLARKE, "I shall be able to drive them out - He cannot mean Hebron merely, for that had been taken before by Joshua; but in the request of Caleb doubtless all the circumjacent country was comprised, in many parts of which the Anakim were still in considerable force. It has been conjectured that Hebron itself had again fallen under the power of its former possessors, who, taking the advantage of the absence of the Israelitish army, who were employed in other parts of the country, re-entered the city, and restored their ancient domination. But the first opinion seems best founded.

GILL, "Now therefore give me this mountain, whereof the Lord spake in that day,.... The mountainous part of the country, the hill country of Judea, in which Hebron, Debir, and other cities were; for it was not one particular city only that Caleb requested, but a large tract of ground:

for thou heardest in that day how the Anakims were there, and that the cities were great and fenced; that the giants, called Anakims, dwelt in the mountainous country, and their cities, Hebron, Debir, and Anab, were very large, and well fortified; this Joshua heard at the time the spies were sent into the land, he being one of them; and this he heard, not from the report of the spies, but from the people of the country, and therefore must know that to conquer these men, and subdue their cities, was an arduous undertaking; but since he had strength and courage, he hoped his request would be granted:

if so be the Lord will be with me; which he spake not as doubting of his presence and power to be with him, and assist him, but as placing his confidence therein, and, distrusting his own power and ability, having no dependence or that, but believing that the Lord, or, as the Targum, the Word of the Lord, would be with him for his help:

then, says Caleb:

I shall be able to drive them out, as the Lord said; that is, to drive the Anakims out of their cities, or out of the mountains, the caves and dens there, to which they betook themselves, since the taking of Hebron, Debir, and Anab, by Joshua, Jos_11:22; and he relied upon the promise of God to enable him to do this, and not upon his natural strength and courage, or the number and prowess of the warlike tribe of Judah, of which he was prince.

HE RY, "The hopes he had of being master of it, though the sons of Anak were in possession of it (Jos_14:12): If the Lord will be with me, then I shall be able to drive them out. The city of Hebron Joshua had already reduced (Jos_10:37), but the mountain which belonged to it, and which was inhabited by the sons of Anak, was yet unconquered; for though the cutting off of the Anakim from Hebron was mentioned Jos_11:21, because the historian would relate all the military actions together, yet it seems it was not conquered till after they had begun to divide the land. Observe, He builds his hopes of driving out the sons of Anak upon the presence of God with him. He

does not say, “Because I am now as strong for war as I was at forty, therefore I shall drive them out,” depending upon his personal valour; nor does he depend upon his interest in the warlike tribe of Judah, who attended him now in making this address, and no doubt would assist him; nor does he court Joshua's aid, or put it upon that, “If thou wilt be with me I shall gain my point.” But, If the Lord will be with me. Here, [1.] He seems to speak doubtfully of God's being with him, not from any distrust of his goodness or faithfulness. He had spoken without the least hesitation of God's presence with Israel in general (Num_14:9); the Lord is with us. But for himself, from a humble sense of his own unworthiness of such a favour, he chooses to express himself thus, If the Lord will be with me. The Chaldee paraphrase reads it, If the Word of the Lord be my helper, that Word which is God, and in the fulness of time was made flesh, and is the captain of our salvation. [2.] But he expresses without the least doubt his assurance that if God were with him he should be able to dispossess the sons of Anak. “If God be with us, If God be for us, who can be against us, so as to prevail?” It is also intimated that if God were not with him, though all the forces of Israel should come in to his assistance, he should not be able to gain his point. Whatever we undertake, God's favourable presence with us is all in all to our success; this therefore we must earnestly pray for, and carefully make sure of, by keeping ourselves in the love of God; and on this we must depend, and from this take our encouragement against the greatest difficulties.

3. Upon the whole matter, Caleb's request is (Jos_14:12), Give me this mountain, (1.) Because it was formerly in God's promise, and he would let Israel know how much he valued the promise, insisting upon this mountain, whereof the Lord spake in that day,as most desirable, though perhaps as good a portion might have fallen to him by lot in common with the rest. Those that live by faith value that which is given by promise far above that which is given by providence only. (2.) Because it was now in the Anakim's possession, and he would let Israel know how little he feared the enemy, and would by his example animate them to push on their conquests. Herein Caleb answered his name, which signifies all heart.

JAMISO , "give me this mountain, whereof the Lord spake in that day—this highland region.

for thou heardest in that day how the Anakims were there— The report of the spies, who tried to kindle the flame of sedition and discontent, related chiefly to the people and condition of this mountain district, and hence it was promised as the reward of Caleb’s truth, piety, and faithfulness.

K&D, "“The mountain,” according to the context, is the mountainous region of Hebron, where the spies had seen the Anakites (Num_13:22, Num_13:28). The two

clauses, in Jos_14:12, beginning with י� are not to be construed as subordinate to one another, but are co-ordinate clauses, and contain two distinct motives in support of his petition: viz., “for thou heardest in that day,” sc., what Jehovah said to me then, and

also “for (because) the Anakites are there;” ... ”perhaps Jehovah is with me (אתי for א"י, see Ges. §103, 1, anm. 1, and Ewald, §264, b.), and I root them out” (vid., Jos_15:14). The word “perhaps” does not express a doubt, but a hope or desire, or else, as Masiussays, “hope mixed with difficulty; and whilst the difficulty detracts from the value, the hope stimulates the desire for the gift.”

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:12 ow therefore give me this mountain, whereof the LORD spake in that day; for thou heardest in that day how the Anakims [were] there, and [that] the cities [were] great [and] fenced: if so be the LORD [will be] with me, then I shall be able to drive them out, as the LORD said.

Ver. 12. ow therefore give me this mountain,] i.e., This mountainous territory about Hebron, extraordinarily and without lot. That was a Lucifer like monk who said when he died, Redde mihi aeternam vitam quam debes: and another proud Papist blusheth not to say in print, Caelum gratis non accipiam; I will not have heaven of free gift.

If so be the Lord will be with me.] This he speaketh not out of distrust, but self-denial; and to imply a difficulty, which yet doth but whet on heroic spirits.

BE SO , "Joshua 14:12. ow, therefore, give me this mountain — The mountainous country where Hebron lay, (Joshua 11:21,) which was the place promised to him. He names the country rather than the city, because that was given to the Levites, Joshua 21:11-13. Thou heardest in that day — Didst understand, both by the reports of others and by thy own observation. Hearing, the sense by which we get knowledge, is often put for knowing or understanding. If so be the Lord will be with me — These are not the words of diffidence; but an humble and pious acknowledgment that nothing could be successfully enterprised without God’s gracious assistance; of which Caleb was undoubtedly deeply sensible. By this expression he both signifies the absolute necessity of God’s help, and his godly fear, lest, for his sins, God should deny his assistance to him; for although he was well assured, in general, that God would crown his people with success in this war, yet he might doubt of his particular success in this or that enterprise. Then I shall be able to drive them out — Out of their fastnesses, where they yet remained. Caleb desires this difficult work as a testimony of his own faith, and as a motive to quicken his brethren to the like attempts.

COKE, "Ver. 12. In that day (for thou heardest) &c.— The LXX and Vulgate construe these words with what goes before, and render the whole thus: Give me, therefore, this mountain, which the Lord promised me, as thou thyself heardst. Beside the city of Hebron, the Anakims possessed at least two others in this district. See umbers 13:29; umbers 13:32-33; Joshua 11:21, Joshua 20:7.

If—the Lord will be with me, then I shall be able, &c.— Here arises a difficulty. We observed that Joshua had already taken Hebron; how, therefore, can Caleb say now that he shall drive out the Anakims? Some are of opinion, that Caleb claimed the country of Hebron before the city of that name was conquered. But, without making any alteration in the narrative here given by the sacred historian, we may answer, that still, though Joshua had taken the city of Hebron, the Anakims kept in the adjacent mountains, whence they frequently descended and infested the country,

and were therefore necessarily to be expelled by Caleb. This conjecture is the more probable, as it appears by the sequel that the city of Hebron was given to the priests, (ch. Joshua 21:11-13.) and not to Caleb, who only possessed the country wherein it stood, and therefore doubtless required no more. We would, however, choose rather to answer, with some other interpreters, that the Anakims had evidently retaken Hebron, and the other cities in that district, while Joshua was engaged elsewhere; in which case, the whole verse might be rendered thus: ow, therefore, give me this mountain, whereof the Lord spake in that day, as thou thyself then heardest; for though the Anakims are there—if the Lord be with me, I shall be able to drive them out. It must not be thought here, that Caleb at all doubts the faithfulness of God: so far from it, his language is that of a pious and modest man, who means to declare, that without the assistance of heaven he cannot succeed in the enter-prize which his valour had projected. The paraphrase of Jonathan has it, If the WORD of the Lord is my help, agreeable to his usual style throughout. See Houbigant on the place.

PETT, "Joshua 14:10-11

“And now, behold, YHWH has kept me alive, as he said, these forty and five years, from the time that YHWH spoke this word to Moses while Israel walked in the wilderness, and now, see, I am eighty and five years old. As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me. As my strength was then, even so is my strength now for war, and to go out and come in.”His words were with a view to contrasting his own situation with that of the other spies apart from Joshua who had been unfaithful, who had died of the plague ( umbers 14:37). YHWH had kept him strong and in good health through the years. They are the words of an old man still conscious of vigour and strength, and still able to fight. He did not need the help of a stick to go in and out. They are probably not to be applied too literally. They were the words of a man confident in his strength. They were simply intended to say that he was in remarkable health for his age.

“Forty and five.” A few years over forty. ‘Eighty and five’, in the third stage of life. He had experienced a remarkable amount over those forty or so years, the long stay at Kadesh and its surrounding oases, and then the movement forward through various battles to where they were now, and yet he still saw himself as being as strong as ever.

WHEDO , "12. Give me this mountain — Hebron is the highest point of southern Palestine, (see Joshua 10:3, note,) higher even than Jerusalem. “The spot on which Caleb had set his heart was the fertile valley of Hebron. Of all the country which the twelve spies, with Caleb and Joshua at their head, had traversed, this is the one scene which remains fixed in the sacred narrative, as if because fixed in the memory of those who made their report. There was one field in the whole land which they might fairly call their own, the field which contained the rocky cave of Machpelah, with the graves of their first ancestors. But it was not even this sacred enclosure which had most powerfully impressed the simple explorers of that childlike age. It

was the winding valley whose terraces were covered with the rich verdure and the golden clusters of the Syrian vine, so rarely seen in Egypt, so beautiful a vesture of the bare hills of Palestine. In its rocky hills are still to be seen the ancient winepresses. Thence came the gigantic cluster, ( umbers 13:24,) the only relic of the Promised Land which was laid at the feet of Moses.” — Stanley.

Anakim — The long-necked; called also sons of Anak; a race of giants in southern Canaan. See on umbers 13:28; umbers 13:33.

PULPIT, "This mountain. The neighbourhood of Hebron is described by Bartlett 'Egypt to Palestine,' p. 401, as "a region of hills and valleys." In one of the hollows in this "hill country of Judaea" Hebron still nestles, hut at a height which is "only 400 feet lower than Helvellyn," the highest point but one in England. The Dean remarks on the fact that Palestine was a mountainous country, and that therefore in its history we may expect the characteristics of a mountain people. Whereof the Lord spake in that day. There must therefore have been a promise made to Caleb, regarding which the Pentateuch, having to deal with matters of more general interest, is silent, that he should lead the forlorn hope, as it were, of the children of Israel, and that the task of subduing the mountain fastnesses of the most powerful tribes in Palestine should be assigned to him. That the original inhabitants reoccupied the districts round Hebron, while the Israelites were otherwise engaged, we have already seen (see note on Joshua 11:21). The final work was to be carried out by Caleb. Houbigant, it is true, thinks that here the same incident is referred to as in Joshua 11:21, Joshua 11:22, and that Joshua is there credited with what was clone by Caleb at his command. But we read that that expedition followed close upon the battle of Merom, whereas seven years elapsed before the final expulsion of the Anakim by Caleb. It is important to notice that the author of the Book of Joshua has access to sources of information beside the Pentateuch. This, though not sufficient to disprove, does at least seem inconsistent with the "Elohist" and "Jehovist" theory. For thou heartiest in that day. The LXX. and Vulgate avoid the difficulty here by referring these words to what goes before—i.e; the promise made to Caleb. In that case we must render the second כי "for," instead of "that," or "how." Joshua can hardly have heard for the first time that the Anakim were in Hebron if, as umbers 13:22 appears to assert, he, in common with the other spies, had visited the place. But it is possible, though the narrative as it stands seems to suggest that they went together, that the spies went different ways, either separately or in pairs, and that Caleb visited Hebron, and that Joshua heard the account of it for the first time from Caleb's lips, as they brought their report to Moses, and that Caleb then asked and received the grant of Hebron. We may observe the minute agreement here in matters of detail between the Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua. The Pentateuch states that the spies visited Hebron. The Book of Joshua, without mentioning this, makes Caleb appeal to Joshua as a witness that a premise had been made to him, long before the entrance of Israel into the promised land, that this particular place should be allotted to him. The description of Hebron also in umbers 13:1-33. agrees in every respect with what is stated here. Fenced. Literally, inaccessible, as surrounded by walls. If so be. Rather, perhaps.

PI K, "" ow therefore give me this mountain, whereof the Lord spake in that day; for thou hearedst in that day how the Anakims were there, and that the cities were great and fenced: if so be the Lord will be with me, then I shall be able to drive them out, as the Lord said (v. 12). The second halt of this verse is very lovely, yet some have quite misunderstood its force. Though Caleb still retained his vigor, it was not that upon which he relied, nor yet upon his military ability and experience; but instead, upon the Lord. Thus his "if so be the Lord will be with me" was not the language of doubting, but of self-renunciation. He had no confidence in the flesh and felt his own insufficiency. There will not be faith in God, nor even a sincere looking to Him, my reader, while we retain faith in ourselves. Trust in the Lord is ever accompanied by distrust of self. o, Caleb was conscious that the successful accomplishment of the work before him was quite beyond his own powers, but he counted upon the faithfulness of God to undertake for him. Proof was this that the Divine promise was no empty theory to him, but a precious reality. Therein he differed sharply from his unbelieving companions: they were occupied with the power of the enemy and their own impotence; he with the omnipotent One and the sureness of His word.

PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGEJoshua 14:12

Caleb's inheritance.

But little comparatively is said in the sacred writings concerning Caleb. What is recorded is decidedly in his favour, He stands before us as a model of unbending integrity. Selected from among the princes of Judah to be one of the twelve appointed to search the land of Canaan, he remained stedfast in his adherence to the will of God. either the remembrance of the giant sons of Anak and their fortified towns, nor the passionate wailings of his brethren, could make Caleb falter and falsify the report he had to give, and the recommendation he desired to make. For this he received the praise of Jehovah, and the promise that, not only should he be preserved to enter the land of Palestine, but also that the very part of the country concerning which some had given an unfavorable report should be allotted to him as his portion. Forty-five years had passed. The wilderness was full of graves. Joshua had succeeded Moses as leader of the Israelites; had overthrown in pitched battles the chief nations of Canaan; it was time to distribute to the tribes their inheritance. The partition was made in the first instance by lot. Then the arrangements for families were made by commissioners, and, as one of these, Caleb might have seized the city he desired. But, avoiding all suspicion of unfairness, he came with the children of Judah publicly to offer his petition. The text presents us therefore with—

I. A REQUEST FOR THE FULFILME T OF A PROMISE, "Give me this mountain whereof the Lord spake in that day." As God's representative Joshua is

desired to see that the ancient oath is not made void. The declaration of God would not remain without effect, yet observe the manner in which it was to be accomplished, viz; by the petition of the man to whom the declaration was granted. Caleb set a high value on the promise of God. Lightly would he have treated it had he allowed it to rest uncherished in his thoughts. God loves to see His people appreciate what He has offered to bestow. He has given "exceeding great and precious promises," and yet "will be inquired of" to do it for them. Our duty is clear. To lay hold of the announcements of His Word and ground on them our requests. Surely the reason why multitudes never pray is that they think little of the blessings promised to those that ask. We need quickened memories. Are the Scriptures to be empty volumes or full of life and power? The Bible may be our charter; the will of our Father bequeathing rich portions in this world and the world to come; our catalogue of precious furniture that may be had to adorn the household of saints. How many things we have never asked for or claimed as our own! Graces to beautify, gifts to enrich for evermore. "All Scripture is given that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Man is expected to do his part even in the obtaining of a privilege. Some think, "If we are to be saved we shall be." Caleb might have thought similarly, and neglected to make his request, and gone without his portion. God requires men to use their reasoning powers, to examine the evidences of religion, to repent and believe in Christ—yes, to ask for the adoption that shall make them members of His family.

II. A REWARD SOUGHT LITTLE TO BE DESIRED I THE EYES OF SOME. Hebron was a large city, a royal city, but the surrounding hills were the fastnesses of giants, who must be attacked and driven away. Before the owner could settle down on the estate he must dislodge the former proprietors. o easy conquest was to be anticipated, yet the courageous soldier said, "Give me this mountain. Others may choose quiet resting places, let me go to the high places of the field." Is there not here an example worthy of imitation? Who will be the advanced guard of the Christian army to attack the fortresses of Sin and Satan? An infusion of Caleb's spirit would do much to reconcile us to what we mourn over as the hardships of our lot. We should take a different view and regard them as our reward, increasing the honour put upon us by God. One man has to struggle in business against fearful odds, another is plagued by a wretched temper, a third is sorely tempted to murmur under a heavy bereavement. God intends these various trims as discipline and as honours. The troubles are the Anakim, who must be cheerfully, bravely encountered. How deep felt will be the joy of triumph! o soldier ought to lament when placed by God in the forefront of the battle. When Jesus drew near His hour of suffering He exclaimed, " ow is the Son of man glorified." Caleb believed that special power had been given for special work. He appealed to facts as indicative of Jehovah's intention respecting him. ot for indolence had he been "kept alive these forty and five years," and his strength preserved, his strength "for war both to go out and to come in" (verses 10, 11). This principle admits of wide application. The gifts of God are various. To one is granted money, that institutions may be supported and enterprises commenced. To another the power of speech, that he may "speak to the people all the words of this life." To another a persuasive manner, a winning smile, the grace of hospitality. These are so many talents of which the

Master will exact an account. bier will the question turn so much on actual accomplishment as on the ratio of abilities to results.

III. A ACK OWLEDGME T OF DEPE DE CE UPO THE HELP OF GOD. His speech would sound like the utterance of self confidence and presumption did there not run through it a tone of devout thanksgiving, which removes the charge of boastfulness and reveals the source of his assurance. The Lord had kept him alive, and if the Lord were with him he would soon drive out the giants from their strongholds. When David essayed to fight the Philistine he reasoned from past experience. "The Lord that delivered me … bear, will deliver me from … Philistine." The same succour is assured to all Christian warriors. We want this mingled dependence and confidence. "If God be for us, who can be against us?" The commission, "Go therefore, preach the gospel to all nations," was preceded by the announcement, "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth." Can we complain of tribulation and distress? " ay, in all these things we are more than conquerors;" they do but heighten the victory we gain, "through Him that loved us."—A.

13 Then Joshua blessed Caleb son of Jephunneh and gave him Hebron as his inheritance.

CLARKE, "Joshua blessed him - As the word bless often signifies to speak good or well of or to any person, (see the note on Gen_2:3), here it may mean the praise bestowed on Caleb’s intrepidity and faithfulness by Joshua, as well as a prayer to God that he might have prosperity in all things; and especially that the Lord might be with him, as himself had expressed in the preceding verse.

GILL, "And Joshua blessed him,.... By granting him his request, congratulating him upon it, and praying for and wishing him success in his attempt to drive out the giants, and possess their country:

and gave unto Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, Hebron for an inheritance; being satisfied of the justness of his suit, of its being the will of God, and the order of Moses, that he should have this for an inheritance, which he had heard himself, had knowledge of, and well remembered: this is to be understood not of the city of Hebron itself, for that was given to the Levites, and was a city of refuge, but the countr

HE RY 13-14, " Joshua grants his petition (Jos_14:13): Joshua blessed him,commended his bravery, applauded his request, and gave him what he asked. He also prayed for him, and for his good success in his intended undertaking against the sons of Anak. Joshua was both a prince and a prophet, and upon both accounts it was proper for him to give Caleb his blessing, for the less is blessed of the better. Hebron was settled on Caleb and his heirs (Jos_14:14), because he wholly followed the Lord God of Israel. And happy are we if we follow him. Note, Singular piety shall be crowned with singular favours. Now, 1. We are here told what Hebron had been, the city of Arba, a great man among the Anakim (Jos_14:15); we find it called Kirjath-arba (Gen_23:2), as the place where Sarah died. Hereabouts Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob lived most of their time in Canaan, and near to it was the cave of Machpelah, where they were buried, which perhaps had led Caleb hither when he went to spy out the land, and had made him covet this rather than any other part for his inheritance. 2. We are afterwards told what Hebron was. (1.) It was one of the cities belonging to priests (Jos_21:13), and a city of refuge, Jos_20:7. When Caleb had it, he contented himself with the country about it, and cheerfully gave the city to the priests, the Lord's ministers, thinking it could not be better bestowed, no, not upon his own children, nor that it was the less his own for being thus devoted to God. (2.) It was a royal city, and, in the beginning of David's reign, the metropolis of the kingdom of Judah; thither the people resorted to him, and there he reigned seven years. Thus highly was Caleb's city honoured; it is a pity there should have been such a blemish upon his family long after as Nabal was, who was of the house of Caleb, 1Sa_25:3. But the best men cannot entail their virtues.

JAMISO 13-14, "Joshua blessed him, and gave unto Caleb Hebron for an inheritance— Joshua, who was fully cognizant of all the circumstances, not only admitted the claim, but in a public and earnest manner prayed for the divine blessing to succor the efforts of Caleb in driving out the idolatrous occupiers.

COFFMA , "Verse 13"And Joshua blessed him; and gave Hebron unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh for an inheritance. Therefore Hebron became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh unto this day; because that he wholly followed Jehovah, the God of Israel. ow the name of Hebron beforetime was Kiriath-arba; which Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim. And the land had rest from war."

"And Joshua blessed him ..." (Joshua 14:13). These words show the endorsement by Joshua of all that Caleb had claimed, including a number of things nowhere mentioned in the Pentateuch, indicating, as Plummer said, that Joshua had access to information not even mentioned in the Pentateuch, including such things as the oath that Moses swore in this connection.

"Kiriath-arba ..." "This means `city of four.' It is unlikely that ARBA is a proper name."[24] Behold the wisdom of the critics! Against a fact clearly stated in the Holy Bible, such men offer their opinion instead of what the text says. We will have none of this. Of course, "The Rabbis have translated the place, `the city of four,' telling us that the `four' are Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who were buried

there."[25] Still others suppose `the four' to have been four great giants who captured the city and took possession of it. We are confronted with diverse opinions regarding the Septuagint (LXX) here. Sizoo stated that it reads, "Kiriath-arba the metropolis (or mother city) of the Anakim."[26] Boling tells us that, "Read with LXX, the Hebrew text of the O.T. has, `He was the great man among the Anakim.'"[27] Our own copy of the Septuagint (LXX) reads, "It is the metropolis of the Anakim."[28] Dummelow pointed out that the Septuagint translates a reference to this city in Joshua 15:13 as, "the metropolis of Anak," and another similar reference in Joshua 21:11 as "the metropolis of the sons of Anak," adding that:

"`Metropolis of Anak' may be the true sense."[29] On such evidence as this, therefore, we are bound to agree with our translators of the ASV and to reject the fanciful substitutes often offered.

"Arba, the greatest man among the Anakim ..." "This is the literal meaning of the Hebrew text here; he was the renowned ancestor of the tribe and the founder of its greatness."[30]

"Unto this day ..." This is precisely the kind of etiological expression that critics seize upon in order to make it the grounds of all kinds of irresponsible allegations. Yes, as Woudstra said, "All history has an etiological element in it, seeking to preserve those memories of the past that make the present meaningful. This kind of etiology is squarely rooted in fact, and not in fictitious compositions invented by the author."[31] "Unto this day," "to this day," etc. "are actually meant as the confirmation of the veracity of the account."[32] In this usage, the words are absolutely idiomatic. They are not a typical expression introducing an etiological tale. It is possible of course, that the words were added in days following the death of Joshua by some inspired author such as Samuel, Ezra, ehemiah, or others unknown to us. They have no bearing whatever upon allegations of a late date for Joshua.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:13 And Joshua blessed him, and gave unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh Hebron for an inheritance.

Ver. 13. And Joshua blessed him.] He approved of his petition: he did not blame him for being too hasty, nor bid him stay till himself were first served; but granted him Hebron, helped him to gain it, [Joshua 10:37] and wished him much joy of it. Some think that Caleb afterwards yielded up Hebron to the Levites, and the rest of the tribes did the like, as glad of their company, by whom they might learn the ways of holiness, that lead to happiness.

BE SO ,"Joshua 14:13. Joshua blessed him — Commended his bravery, applauded and granted his request, and prayed to God to bless and help him according to his own desire. Joshua was both a prince and a prophet, and on both accounts it was proper for him to give Caleb his blessing.

PETT,"Joshua 14:13

‘And Joshua blessed him, and gave Hebron to Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, for an inheritance.’Joshua gave his consent and allocated the land to Caleb with the blessing of YHWH. ‘Hebron’ here stands for the whole area around, including ‘all the cities of it’ (Joshua 10:37).

WHEDO , "13. And Joshua blessed him — Bade him God speed in his warfare, and invoked the help of Jehovah to attend him.

And gave unto Caleb — Joshua could not resist an appeal from his venerable associate spy, based on facts of which he himself had been cognizant.

PI K, ""And Joshua blessed him, and gave unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh Hebron for an inheritance" (v. 13). Thus was the promise of God through Moses made good by Joshua. This is very blessed, for it causes us to look beyond the shadow to the substance: the fulfillment of all the Divine promises is in and through the antitypical Joshua. "For all the promises of God in Him [Christ] are yea, and in Him Amen, unto the glory of God by us" (2 Cor. 1:20). Since Christ Himself is the end and chief object of all the promises, He has become by His mediatorial character both the channel of supply to all who receive the grace of God in truth and the medium of their responsive praise. To the certified promises thus declared to God’s elect, in the person of His Son, the Church now sets the seal of her Amen, affirming thus adoringly to the glory of the Father what the lips of Christ have first spoken to her heart. In Christ we now have by an everlasting covenant of grace whatever good things God spoke aforetime. In the Lord Jesus the very fullness of God dwells, and in that holy humanity which He took upon Him for our sakes. The concentrating of God’s mercies in the living and effective Vindicator of His promises—"the Amen, the faithful and true witness" (Rev. 3:14)—is declared to be "to the glory of God by us," because of the praise which He receives from His people as they realize that all is summed up for them in God’s Beloved and in their Beloved.

PULPIT, "HOMILIES BY R. GLOVERJoshua 14:13

A true man.

Consider Caleb—the companion of Joshua in early enterprise, constant faithfulness, Divine reward. From the epithet Kenazite, constantly applied to him; the fact that one of the "dukes of Edom" bears the name Kenaz; and the expression, "Unto Caleb he gave a part among the children of Judah" (Joshua 15:13), which suggests that though settled amongst them he was not really of them, many have, with considerable probability, concluded that Caleb was a proselyte. One of those who,

like Heber the Kenite, threw in his lot with Israel—perhaps a Midianitish youth who attached himself to Moses—and by force of faith, energy, and wisdom commended himself for any service of special difficulty. Whatever his origin, he was one of the twelve prominent men chosen to survey the land and report on the best method of invasion. The result of that expedition was, unfortunately, a unanimous testimony to the excellence of the land, but an all but unanimous testimony to the impossibility of taking it. Ten out of twelve declared its conquest impossible. Two only—Caleb and Joshua—asserted its practicability. They were too brave and too believing to yield to despair. They reckoned on more than natural probabilities, arguing, "The Lord is with us; and their defence is departed from them." But overborne by the numbers of those on the other side, and by the unbelief of the crowd, they can only grieve over what they cannot avert. And Israel turns back to the wilderness—where the carcases of all the grown men except these two fall before they next approach to Canaan. ow he reappears after the conquest of the land to ask the fulfilment of the promise made by Moses to him. This district of Hebron was consecrated by early recollections of Abraham. The Amorites, though driven out from the city temporarily, are still in possession of the mountains about Hebron. Full of the old heroic fire, Caleb asks for a land still in the hands of enemies. Joshua grants it, and the Lord gives it him. And the land which saw his courage became his inheritance for generations. Let us consider a few features of this story in umbers 13:1-33. and 14; and Joshua 14:1-15. and 15.

I. First observe—THERE IS EED FOR GOOD ME I SUBORDI ATE AS WELL AS I EXALTED STATIO . Caleb is not over all Israel, not even prince of Judah. Only a spy—he is a man of eminence, but not of the highest. He fills a humbler place which some would have thought not worth while adorning. But, in addition to integrity and service in those at the head of the State, you want righteousness and courage throughout all classes of it. Had they had twelve Calebs for spies the land would have been theirs forty years before it was. As it was, the heroism of Caleb and Joshua was not wasted. Their testimony remained, inspiring wanderings; round it the purpose of the nation crystallised. Their testimony of the possibility, of conquering Canaan, helped to create the possibility. Their faith was a leaven that took forty years to do it, but ultimately leavened the whole lump. In whatever station we be, remember, there is need for faith, energy, and service, and there is reward for the exercise of these in the lowly as well as in the lofty sphere.

II. Secondly observe—GODLI ESS BEGETS MA LI ESS OF THE OBLEST KI D. What a charm there is in manliness, in its vigour, its honesty, in its fortitude and daring. What worth is in the manliness that dares to differ from friends, as well as to defy foes. The happy union of strength and spirit, which knows not fear nor halting. Besides the charm and worth, there is great joy in it as well. It feels no dread or dismay. It enjoys the leisure of the lofty nature, and its quickening sell respect. "Add to your faith manliness," says Peter. Courage to avow and to obey your faith. Most failures in conduct are preceded by failures in courage. To face duty as well as danger requires hardihood of spirit. ow observe the magnificent manliness of Caleb. It gleams through his report as a spy. It is apparent in this choice of the as yet unconquered territory. It comes out in the energy of his old age.

And this simple quality in one man was of incalculable service to Israel. We all need this quality, men and women,

"Our doubts are traitors,

And make us lose the good we oft might win,

By fearing to attempt."

More manliness would mean less falsehood, less failure, less wretchedness of apprehension, more enterprise and grand success. And godliness begets it. For godliness gives larger thought, greater dignity, scope for grand purposes, consciousness of help laid up in all providential law and processes. By communion with God man attains calmness, wisdom, strength, and help. either David nor Elijah was less manly, but more so, for being devout. If you would form a list of the kingliest men you will be surprised how many of the godliest are in it. John Knox and Luther amongst teachers, Cromwell and William the Silent among statesmen, Sir Philip Sidney and Henry Havelock among soldiers. We are short of manliness because short of godliness. If religion ever enervates a man, or withers him, it is a superstitious and not the genuine thing. elson said his Methodists were his best sailors. Let the young note this. Godliness does not enfeeble, it enlarges every essential element of manhood.

III. Thirdly observe—THE GREAT REWARDS OF CO SECRATIO . That manliness was its own magnificent reward, as it produced an expansion of nature, which would be immortal. But there were besides, special rewards.

(a) Accurate light. Good judgment grew from it. Knowledge of the possible, a grand self measurement, in which no vanity exaggerated nor dismay diminished powers marked him. "A good understanding have all they that love Thy law." Walk with God and the light in which you walk will illumine common as well as sacred things.

(b) Providential mercies attend him. With Joshua, he is only man who has length of days sufficiently given ]aim to lead from Egypt to Canaan. atural influences of devotion tend to preserve life, and they were in his case intensified by special providence. It may be said with all reverence and truth devotion saves numberless lives by preserving men from worry, folly, brooding, and needless quarrelling. God never fails to set His seal on goodness. "Corruption wins not more than honesty."

(c) Justice is done him in the judgment of his fellows. When he protested against the evil report of the other spies the people "sought to stone him with stones." But now all the princes of Judah are proud to come with him to support his prayer! He has the opportunity of justifying himself and his report, and he does it grandly.

(d) THE PLACE WHERE HIS FAITH TRIUMPHED OVER FEAR BECOMES THE PLACE OF HIS I HERITA CE. He believed Hebron could be won. He has liberty to win it and permission to keep it for himself when it is won. It had fallen to

his lot to survey that district especially, and although three tribes of giants were there, yet he was fearless. That fastness against which his valour would have led his brethren becomes his own possession. ot only his in title and grant, but his in possession. Is there not something typical here? All things that threaten and oppose become serviceable when we face them bravely. That which threatens to destroy becomes a quiet resting-place and peaceable habitation. The enemies become the servants, the hindrances the helps, terrors change to fountains of refreshment. Let us be braver, refusing to despair, and refusing to shrink from difficulty. The same Saviour rules now as then, calls us to noble, and therefore difficult, duties. There are lots of children of Anak still; fear them, and you doom yourself to wilderness wanderings and a dishonourable grave. Meet them, and you conquer them easily. Shame and reproach for Christ are children of Anak; the fear of falling is another; a corrupting taste and an indolent inclination is another. Christ has grand rewards and blessed helps for such as face these. As to Caleb, so always, He gives ultimate inheritance and present rewards. Let us not miss these, but seek to secure them with all our heart.—G.

K&D, "Then Joshua blessed Caleb, i.e., implored the blessing of God upon his undertaking, and gave him Hebron for an inheritance. Hebron is mentioned as the chief city, to which the surrounding country belonged; for Caleb had asked for the mountains (Jos_14:9), i.e., the mountainous country with and around Hebron, which included, for example, the fortified town of Debir also (Jos_15:15).

14 So Hebron has belonged to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite ever since, because he followed the Lord, the God of Israel, wholeheartedly.

CLARKE, "Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb - Joshua admitted his claim, recognized his right, and made a full conveyance of Hebron and its dependencies to Caleb and his posterity; and this being done in the sight of all the elders of Israel, the right was publicly acknowledged, and consequently this portion was excepted from the general determination by lot; God having long before made the cession of this place to him and to his descendants.

GILL, "Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite unto this day,.... The time of the writing of this book:

because he wholly followed the Lord God of Israel; as in Jos_14:8; Hebron signifies fellowship or communion; and this in a spiritual sense is very desirable by all the people of God, as Hebron was by Caleb, even communion with God, Father, Son and Spirit, with angels and saints, both now and hereafter; and they are willing to engage with their spiritual enemies in the name and strength of Christ, though ever so potent, may they but enjoy this blessing, and which is more or less granted, to all the hearty, sincere, and faithful followers of Christ; see Joh_14:21.

K&D 14-15, "This inheritance, the historian adds, was awarded to Caleb because he had followed the God of Israel with such fidelity. - In Jos_14:15 there follows another

notice of the earlier name of Hebron (see at Gen_23:2). The expression לפנים (before), like the words “to this day,” applies to the time when the book was composed, at which time the name Kirjath-arba had long since fallen into disuse; so that it by no means follows that the name Hebron was not so old as the name Kirjath-arba, which was given to Hebron for the first time when it was taken by Arba, “the great man among the Anakites,” i.e., the strongest and most renowned of the Anakites (vid., Jos_15:13). The remark, “and the land had rest from war,” is repeated again at the close of this account from Jos_11:23, to show that although there were Anakites still dwelling in Hebron whom Caleb hoped to exterminate, the work of distributing the land by lot was not delayed in consequence, but was carried out in perfect peace.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:14 Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite unto this day, because that he wholly followed the LORD God of Israel.

Ver. 4. Because that he wholly, &c.] See Joshua 14:8; Joshua 14:12.

PETT, "Joshua 14:14

‘Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kennizite to this day, because he wholly followed YHWH, the God of Israel.’The writer now sums up both the act and its consequence. It was given to Caleb and by the time this was written he had succeeded in taking it, simply because he was fully obedient to YHWH.

PI K, ""Hebron therefore became the inheritance of Caleb . . . unto this day, because that he wholly followed the Lord God of Israel. And the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-arba: which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war" (vv. 14, 15). Hebron signifies "fellowship," and may have been so named because of the wonderful communion which Abraham had with God there (Gen. 13:18, first mention). This is the place above all others which the enemy of souls seeks to prevent God’s people occupying. What a suitable place was Hebron for Caleb! How appropriate an inheritance for the one who (we are once more told)

"wholly followed the Lord God of Israel"—who persevered in the performing of his duty, though opposed by ten of his companions and menaced by the whole congregation; which shows us that the ones and twos who are out and out for God must not expect to be popular, no, not with their brethren. evertheless, Hebron or the place of intimate fellowship with God is ever the portion of such. Finally, let it be duly noted that upon Caleb was conferred the honor of the hardest task of all—the overcoming of the mighty sons of Anak. The next chapter tells us, "And Caleb drove thence the three sons of Anak" (Josh. 15:14). Of course he did ! God never fails such a one.

In Joshua 17:3, 4, another case is recorded of claim to an individual portion being laid before Joshua, which is in some respects similar to that of Caleb. It was made by the five daughters of Zelophehad, who belonged to the tribe of Manasseh. Those women had received promise through Moses that when Canaan was divided among Israel they should have an inheritance, and now they came before those who had charge of the allotting, making request for the implementing of the same. God’s commandment and promise by Moses is recorded in umbers 27:1-11. These women appeared before what might be termed the supreme court, pointing out that their father was dead and had left no son. Up to that time no legal provision had been made where the male issue had failed, and thus these daughters of Zelophehad, having neither father nor brother, found themselves destitute. Instead of murmuring and mourning over their hard lot, they wisely came before God’s servants and asked for arrangement to be made for them to have a portion of their tribe’s section. Moses did not presume to answer their inquiry personally, but brought the case before the Lord, and He declared, "thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them."

In umbers 36 we learn that the case of those five women was brought again before Israel’s high court. This time it was the chief fathers of the families of Gilead, to which Zelophehad belonged, who appeared. A difficulty was anticipated: should these five women intermarry with other tribes, then their portion would pass out of Manasseh’s possessions unto another’s, and that would probably occasion future strife and confusion. In reply thereto, a more specific law was enacted: "Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry. So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe" (vv. 6, 7). It is very blessed to see how the Lord honored the faith of those women by protecting their interests. At the time when they first appeared before the judges, Israel was in the wilderness! Canaan had not then been entered, still less conquered and possessed, yet so sure were these women that God would fulfill His promise to give that land unto His people that even then they put in their claim to a portion thereof. As Matthew Henry wittily remarked, "they were five wise virgins indeed."

In a striking address made in 1918 on the Virgin Birth, Dr. A.T. Scofield (not the editor of the Scofield Bible) pointed out that but for the above scriptures an insuperable difficulty had stood in the way of Christ’s being "the King of the Jews." "Therefore in any case it seems our Lord could not be the inheritor of the throne of

David, either through Joseph, for he was not born of Joseph, or through Mary, because a woman could not inherit it: and but for one remarkable circumstance it would be impossible for Him to be King of the Jews. In fact, the virgin birth in itself would appear to bar Him from the throne." Then the doctor went on to show that the "remarkable circumstance" which removed all difficulty was found in umbers 27:8, "If a man die, and have no son [as in the case of Heli, the father of Mary], then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter." Thus our Lord, according to the flesh, had legal title to inherit the throne of David, while umbers 36:6, shows why it was necessary for Mary to be espoused to Joseph. From which we may see that not only in the ceremonial law, but in the civil law of Israel also, God ever had Christ before Him !

15 (Hebron used to be called Kiriath Arba after Arba, who was the greatest man among the Anakites.)

Then the land had rest from war.

BAR ES, "A great man - literally, the great man; i. e. the renowned ancestor of the tribe, regarded as the founder of its greatness Jos_15:13.

CLARKE, "And the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-arba - That is, the

city of Arba, or rather, the city of the four, for thus קרית�ארבע kiryath�arba may be literally translated. It is very likely that this city had its name from four Anakim, gigantic or powerful men, probably brothers, who built or conquered it. This conjecture receives considerable strength from Jos_15:14, where it is said that Caleb drove from Hebron the three sons of Anak, Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai: now it is quite possible that Hebron had its former name, Kirjath-arba, the city of the four, from these three sons and their father, who, being men of uncommon stature or abilities, had rendered themselves famous by acts proportioned to their strength and influence in the country. It appears however from Jos_15:13 that Arba was a proper name, as there he is called the father of

Anak. The Septuagint call Hebron the metropolis of the Enakim, µητροπολις�των�Ενακιµ. It was probably the seat of government, being the residence of the above chiefs, from

whose conjoint authority and power it might have been called חברון chebron; as the word

,chabar literally signifies to associate, to join in fellowship, and appears to be used חברJob_41:6, for “associated merchants, or merchants’ companions, who traveled in the same caravan.” Both these names are expressive, and serve to confirm the above conjecture. No notice need be taken of the tradition that this city was called the city of the four because it was the burial-place of Adam, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Such traditions confute themselves.

The land had rest fromwar - There were no more general wars; the inhabitants of Canaan collectively could make no longer any head, and when their confederacy was broken by the conquests of Joshua, he thought proper to divide the land, and let each tribe expel the ancient inhabitants that might still remain in its own territories. Hence the wars after this time were particular wars; there were no more general campaigns, as it was no longer necessary for the whole Israelitish body to act against an enemy now disjointed and broken. This appears to be the most rational meaning of the words, The land had rest from war.

The Jewish economy furnishes, not only a history of God’s revelations to man, but also a history of his providence, and an ample, most luminous, and glorious comment on that providence. Is it possible that any man can seriously and considerately sit down to the reading even of this book, without rising up a wiser and a better man? This is the true history which everywhere exhibits God as the first mover and prime agent, and men only as subordinate actors. What a miracle of God’s power, wisdom, grace, justice, and providence are the people of Israel in every period of their history, and in every land of their dispersions! If their fall occasioned the salvation of the Gentile world, what shall their restoration produce! Their future inheritance is not left to what men would call the fortuitous decision of a lot; like Caleb’s possession it is confirmed by the oath of the Lord; and when the end shall be, this people shall stand in their lot at the end of the days, and shall again be great to the ends of the earth.

GILL, "And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba,.... According to Jerom (u), it had its name of Hebron from a son or grandson of Caleb of that name, 1Ch_2:42; and if so, then it is here, and in some other places, so called by anticipation: Kirjatharba may be rendered "the city of the four"; and had its name, as some think, from the four couple buried there, or near it, Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah; or from four eminent persons, who formerly dwelt there, Aner, Eshcol, Mamre, and Abraham; or rather from four persons that more lately dwelt there, Anak and his three sons, Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai; or Arba is the name of some great man, to whom this city belonged, and so was called the city of Arba, which is the sense of our version, as appears by the following supplement:

which Arba was a great man among the Anakims; both in stature and in dignity, and in authority, which some take to be Anak himself, the father of the Anakims; so Jarchi and Kimchi:

and the land had rest from war; as is observed in Jos_11:23; after Joshua had finished his conquest; and here again it is remarked just before the division of the land, as being now a proper time for it.

JAMISO , "Kirjath-arba— that is, the city of Arba, a warrior among the native race remarkable for strength and stature.

the land had rest from war— Most of the kings having been slain and the natives

dispirited, there was no general or systematic attempt to resist the progress and settlement of the Israelites.

TRAPP, "Joshua 14:15 And the name of Hebron before [was] Kirjatharba; [which Arba was] a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war.

Ver. 15. Was a great man.] Both for his person and power; but there is a double greatness: (1.) Belluine; (2.) Genuine. In that, a beast may and doth exceed us. In this, we exceed ourselves and others.

And the land had rest from war.] It had at last, bello confecto. See Joshua 10:23, from whence hitherto, is a digression.

PETT, "Joshua 14:15

‘And the name of Hebron before was Kiriath-arba, the greatest man among the Anakim. And the land had rest from war.’“The name of Hebron was previously Kiriath-arba.” This means ‘the city of four’ or ‘city of Arba’ - see Genesis 23:2. LXX has ‘it was the mother-city of the Anakim’. But there is no reason to reject Arba as a name or nickname and it is certainly related to the Anakim in some way, so when we are told here that it was named after a famous ancestor of the Anakim, named Arba, possibly because he had the strength or usefulness of four men (compare Joshua 15:13; Joshua 21:11 - which suggests that LXX translated ‘father’ as ‘mother’ because it related the latter idea more to a city) it makes good sense.

“And the land had rest from war.” Compare Joshua 11:23. The two incidents there and here clearly parallel one another.

The whole story of Caleb is a reminder that God does not forget a man’s faithfulness. Men may not reward us, but God will in His own way. He had had to wait a long time for his blessing but at last it had come, although he still had to prove his constant trust and obedience in possessing it.

The Settling of the Land.

Judah, and Joseph, the latter incorporating Ephraim and Manasseh who would at first work together, were dealt with first as composing the largest and most powerful tribes (Joshua 15 & Joshua 16). Joshua would inevitably be swayed by the Patriarchal blessing in Genesis 49, for such blessings were looked on as affecting things into the future. Thus the prophecy that Judah would be like a lion and have royal power (Genesis 49:10) and that Joseph would, being a fruitful bough, be strong at arms by the hand of YHWH (Genesis 49:22; Genesis 49:24-25) almost guaranteed their first selection for the lot when the taking and defending of the important hill country was involved. At this stage Levi was still numbered among

the tribes and thus Manasseh and Ephraim were seen as one, another indication of the early date of the narrative.

Their allocation in the northern and southern hill countries necessarily had to be settled first because it was vital that they take full possession of that part of the land as soon as possible. It had been invaded by Joshua, who had left it weak and vulnerable, but it had not in the main yet been settled. ow it was necessary to settle there and finally drive out what remained of the inhabitants for good. Joshua was therefore concerned that they receive their allocation quickly. And he had been spurred on by the eagerness of Caleb to go forward and possess his inheritance.

We should note that very little land had actually been settled under Joshua. There was a great gap between conquest and settlement. He had conquered, but he had moved on. His aim had been to establish their presence in the land and make them safe from attack, and he had defeated the enemy all around while maintaining their central headquarters at Gilgal. Some land was already possessed during the life of Joshua thanks to the persistence of men like Caleb (Joshua 15:13-19; Joshua 11:21-23), but it was only a beginning and Joshua was now old. His twofold aim was thus to spur the tribes into active possession (Joshua 24:28) and seal them together in the tribal covenant (Joshua 24). He wanted to arouse their enthusiasm and to maintain their unity in diversity around the central sanctuary, for he knew that for him death was not far away (Joshua 24:29). Then the actual final settlement of the whole of the land must continue in earnest.

What a different picture is presented as Joshua grows old. While he was in command and subduing the inhabitants all was optimism. They went from victory to victory. But now there was hesitancy. Judah under Caleb had commenced possession of the southern hill country and lowland hills, as had Ephraim and Manasseh in the northern hills, but the latter had already declared that the task was too much for them (Joshua 17:16) and the other tribes were even more hesitant (Joshua 18:3). Conquest under Joshua had been ‘great’. Settling the land and removing the inhabitants without him was different. A covenant treaty with Shechem had been fine but it prevented them taking up all the land in that area, and thus the hills were not sufficient for them (Joshua 17:16) and in the plains they now knew that there were chariots with iron accoutrements (Joshua 17:16).

WHEDO , "15. Before was Kirjath-arba — That is, City of Arba. The original name, in Abraham’s day, was Hebron. Afterwards Arba, a giant, one of the Anakim, conquered the city and called it the City of Arba. See Joshua 10:3, note.

And the land had rest from war — This is only a repetition of Joshua 11:23, to prepare the way for the account of the peaceful allotment of the land. As Caleb’s portion was really “among the children of Judah,” the actual conquest of it is recorded under the head of Judah’s lot. See Joshua 15:13-19.

COKE, "Ver. 15. And the name of Hebron before was, &c.— Perhaps the words, a great man, might be rendered a strong man; the original word גדול gadol signifying

greatness of size and strength, as well as greatness of authority and power. See Genesis 24:35. Arba was the father of Anak; ch. Joshua 15:13, Joshua 21:11. He built or fortified Kir-jath, or made it the city of his residence, after the manner of princes, and perhaps was there buried. Hence its name. See umbers 13:33 and particularly Genesis 13:18.

And the land had rest from war— The sacred writer repeats what he had said before, because, having gone aside by way of digression, which had a little diverted him from the history of the division of the conquered country, and now coming to that interesting detail, he would shew, that the enemies who remained still in the land of Canaan dared not lift the head to hinder the disposition of their territories.

Caleb, in right of former promise, when now the land was about to be divided, puts in his claim for a particular possession in Hebron, which, as being given him of God, ought not to be put into a lot, God's will being determined before by his promise. The children of Judah accompany him to support his plea, which he urges with great simplicity, deep piety, and noble courage.

1. He mentions his faithful report among the faithless spies; not by way of proud boasting, but to the honour of God, whom he followed, speaking the truth from his heart. ote; (1.) It is not pride, but due acknowledgment, to declare what a gracious God has done for us, and by us. (2.) The more singular our fidelity to God has been, the more commendable. (3.) They who serve God in simplicity in their youth, will find the comfort and blessing of it when they are old.

2. He repeats his long experience of God's care of him, as kept alive for the fulfilment of the promise. Five-and-forty years he had been preserved, when all the men of his own age had long since been buried: and he not only lived, but was as strong as ever, as if reserved at eighty-five more gloriously to magnify the Divine power, in the destruction of those sons of Anak who had so terrified the host of Israel in the wilderness. ote; (1.) The issues of life are in God's hand; nor age, nor sickness, nor the sword, can hurt those whose preservation he determines. (2.) Every year that we are spared is a call for new thankfulness to him who keepeth our souls in life. (3.) The death of others around us should make us more sensible of the mercy which preserves us. (4.) A vigorous old age is an unusual blessing.

3. He offers now, aged as he was, to dispossess the Anakims, who had, after the taking of the city of Hebron, retired to the fastnesses of the mountains; and doubts not but by the Divine blessing, to which alone he trusted, to be able to subdue them. ote; (1.) They, who trust in God, will never find themselves disappointed of their hope. (2.) If God be with us, the sons of Anak, our giant-like corruptions, must fall before us.

4. Joshua admits the claim, and consents to the offer; commends his courage, and prays for his success. Thus Caleb received his reward for having wholly followed the Lord; and they who carefully copy his steps shall as surely share his blessing in a better country, that is, a heavenly.

ELLICOTT, "(15) Kirjath-arba.—“Arba the father of Anak” (Joshua 21:11). Arba means four in Hebrew, and therefore some have endeavoured to interpret it as the city of four. Rashi, for example, says it was “the city of Ahiman, and Sheshai, and Talmai, and their father.” Others have tried to make it one of four confederate cities like Gibeon and its allies. But the text of Joshua seems to leave no doubt that Arba was a man’s name, whatever may have been the

occasion of his being so named. Unless the Anakim are of the same date as the Zuzim, and Rephaim, and Emim of Genesis 14 (who are known to be giant races by Deuteronomy 2, 3) Hebron must have been named Hebron before it was Kirjath-arba. But the text of Genesis 23:2 seems to make Kirjath-arba the name of the place where Sarah died, at the time of her death; and it is perfectly possible that it was so. (See ote on umbers 13:22.)

A great man.—Rather, the great man among the Anakim.

And the land had rest from war.—This clause appears in Joshua 11:23, where its position is perfectly natural. It closes the record of the wars of Joshua. It is not so easily accounted for here. If we were quite certain at what period the Anakim were dispossessed and slain, we might connect it with that portion of the story; but see ote on Joshua 15:14, and also on the next verse.

PULPIT, "And the name of Hebron before was Kirjath-arba. Hengstenberg, according to Keil, has conclusively shown that Hebron was the original name of the city. At the time of Joshua's invasion, however, it was known as Kirjath (or "the city of ") Arba, from a giant named Arba who had conquered the city. Hebron is known as Kirjath-arba in Genesis 23:2, but the way in which it is mentioned by Moses seems to bear out Hengstenberg's theory. The Rabbis translated "the city of four," and assert that the four patriarchs, Adam, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were buried there. The word translated "man" here is Adam. The Vulgate follows this tradition, trans. lating "Adam maximus ibi inter Enacim situs est." And our own Wiclif literally translates the Vulgate "Adam moost greet there in the loond of Enachym was set." Rosenmuller renders the words translated "a great man" by "the greatest man." And certainly the words have the article; and this is also the way in which the superlative is expressed in Hebrew. It also adds to the force of Caleb's request. He desired the most important city of a warlike race. And the land had rest from war (see Joshua 11:23).