Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox

Keil and Delitzsch <strong>Commentary</strong> on the Old Testament
among the Canaanites, which they would have done if they had broken the oath
which they had sworn by this God, and had destroyed the Gibeonites. They were
bound to observe the oath which they had once sworn, if only to prevent the sincerity
of the God by whom they had sworn from being rendered doubtful in the eyes of the
Gibeonites; but they were not justified in taking the oath.
They had done this without asking the mouth of Jehovah (v. 14), and thus had sinned
against the Lord their God. But they could not repair this fault by breaking the oath
which they had thus imprudently taken, i.e., by committing a fresh sin; for the
violation of an oath is always sin, even when the oath has been taken inconsiderately,
and it is afterwards discovered that what was sworn to was not in accordance with the
will of God, and that an observance of the oath will certainly be hurtful (vid., Ps
15:4).
(Note: "The binding power of an oath ought to be held so sacred among us, that we should not swerve
from our bond under any pretence of error, even though we had been deceived: since the sacred name of
God is of greater worth than all the riches of the world. Even though a person should have sworn
therefore without sufficient consideration, no injury or loss will release him from his oath." This is the
opinion expressed by Calvin with reference to Ps 15:4; yet for all that he regards the observance of their
oath on the part of the princes of Israel as a sin, because he limits this golden rule in the most arbitrary
manner to private affairs alone, and therefore concludes that the Israelites were not bound to observe this
"wily treaty.")
By taking an oath to the ambassadors that they would let the Gibeonites live, the
princes of Israel had acted unconsciously in violation of the command of God that
they were to destroy the Canaanites. As soon therefore as they discovered their error
or their oversight, they were bound to do all in their power to ward off from the
congregation the danger which might arise of their being drawn away to idolatry-the
very thing which the Lord had intended to avert by giving that command. If this
could by any possibility be done without violating their oath, they were bound to do it
for the sake of the name of the Lord by which they swore; that is to say, while letting
the Gibeonites live, it was their duty to put them in such a position, that they could
not possibly seduce the Israelites to idolatry. And this the princes of Israel proposed
http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos52.html (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:17:42 p.m.]