Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox
Share Embed Flag
Download ePaper

Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox

Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox

davidcox.com.mx
from davidcox.com.mx More from this publisher
22.08.2013 Views

Keil and Delitzsch ong>Commentaryong> on the Old Testament 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 (Josh 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 (Josh 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. Joshua 14:6-7 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. Caleb's Inheritance. - Vv. 6ff. 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 http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos85.html (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:18:24 p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch ong>Commentaryong> on the Old Testament 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 vv. 8, 12, Joshua was not one of the spies (see the remarks on v. 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 v. 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," Josh 15:17, and Judg 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 1 Chron 2:42 (cf. 1 Chron 2:49), was the same person as Caleb the descendant of Hezron mentioned in 1 Chron 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 (1 Chron 2:5,18,25), of whom nothing further is known. Consequently it was not the http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos85.html (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:18:24 p.m.]

<strong>Keil</strong> and <strong>Delitzsch</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Commentary</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> the Old Testament<br />

had promised it to him <strong>on</strong> oath, because he had not discouraged the people and stirred<br />

them up to rebelli<strong>on</strong>, as the other spies that were sent from Kadesh to Canaan had<br />

d<strong>on</strong>e, but had faithfully followed the Lord.<br />

(Note: The grounds up<strong>on</strong> which Knobel follows Maurer and others in affirming that this account does not<br />

bel<strong>on</strong>g to the so-called Elohist, but is merely a fragment taken from the first document of the Jehovist, are<br />

formed partly from misinterpretati<strong>on</strong>s of particular verses and partly from baseless assumpti<strong>on</strong>s. To the<br />

former bel<strong>on</strong>gs the asserti<strong>on</strong>, that, according to vv. 8, 12, <strong>Joshua</strong> was not <strong>on</strong>e of the spies (see the remarks<br />

<strong>on</strong> v. 8); to the latter the asserti<strong>on</strong>, that the Elohist does not represent <strong>Joshua</strong> as dividing the land, or<br />

Caleb as receiving so large a territory (see <strong>on</strong> the c<strong>on</strong>trary, however, the expositi<strong>on</strong> of v. 13), as well as<br />

the enumerati<strong>on</strong> of all kinds of words which are said to be foreign to the Elohistic document.)<br />

This occurred at Gilgal, where the casting of the lots as to take place. Caleb was not<br />

"the head of the Judahites," as Knobel maintains, but simply the head of a father's<br />

house of Judah, and, as we may infer from his surname, "the Kenizzite" or<br />

descendant of Kenaz ( "the Kenizzite" here and Num 32:12 is equivalent to "s<strong>on</strong> of<br />

Kenaz," Josh 15:17, and Judg 1:13), head of the father's house which sprang from<br />

Kenaz , i.e., of a subdivisi<strong>on</strong> of the Judahite family of Hezr<strong>on</strong>; for Caleb, the brother<br />

of Jerahmeel and father of Achzah, according to 1 Chr<strong>on</strong> 2:42 (cf. 1 Chr<strong>on</strong> 2:49), was<br />

the same pers<strong>on</strong> as Caleb the descendant of Hezr<strong>on</strong> menti<strong>on</strong>ed in 1 Chr<strong>on</strong> 2:18. From<br />

the surname "the Kenizzite" we are of course not to understand that Caleb or his<br />

father Jephunneh is described as a descendant of the Canaanitish tribe of Kenizzites<br />

(Gen 15:19); but Kenaz was a descendant of Hezr<strong>on</strong>, the s<strong>on</strong> of Perez and grands<strong>on</strong><br />

of Judah (1 Chr<strong>on</strong> 2:5,18,25), of whom nothing further is known. C<strong>on</strong>sequently it<br />

was not the<br />

<br />

http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos85.html (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:18:24 p.m.]

logo

products

Resources

Company

Terms of service
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Cookie settings
Imprint
Change language
Made with love in Switzerland
© 2024 Yumpu.com all rights reserved

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!