Commentary on Joshua - Keil & Delitzsch - David Cox

Keil and Delitzsch <strong>Commentary</strong> on the Old Testament
before Ai the Israelites were to learn that He would also sanctify Himself on them if
they transgressed His covenant, and that the congregation of the Lord could only
conquer the power of the world so long as it was faithful to His covenant. But
notwithstanding the command which Joshua had enforced upon the people (Josh
6:18), Achan, a member of the tribe of Judah, laid hands upon the property in Jericho
which had been banned, and thus brought the ban upon the children of Israel, the
whole nation. His breach of trust is described as unfaithfulness (a trespass) on the part
of the children of Israel in the ban, in consequence of which the anger of the Lord
was kindled against the whole nation. ma`al (OT:4604) maa`al (OT:4604), to
commit a breach of trust (see at Lev 5:15), generally against Jehovah, by purloining
or withholding what was sanctified to Him, here in the matter of the ban, by
appropriating what had been banned to the Lord. This crime was imputed to the
whole people, not as imputatio moralis , i.e., as though the whole nation had shared
in Achan's disposition, and cherished in their hearts the same sinful desire which
Achan had carried out in action in the theft he had committed; but as imputatio civilis
, according to which Achan, a member of the nation, had robbed the whole nation of
the purity and holiness which it ought to possess before God, through the sin that he
had committed, just as the whole body is affected by the sin of a single member.
(Note: In support of this I cannot do better than quote the most important of the remarks which I made in
http://207.44.232.113/~bible/comment/ot/k&d/josh/jos33.html (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 01:17:21 p.m.]