{"commentary":{"id":"adam-clarke","name":"Adam Clarke Bible Commentary","website":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Clarke","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Adam Clarke Bible Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"92e28c9363c876d215e296f2fe04abb3ab7e34a2aacebdf06bd62ae79c6e3dba","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":57,"totalNumberOfChapters":854,"totalNumberOfVerses":13318,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"JOS","commentaryId":"adam-clarke","name":"Joshua","commonName":"Joshua","introduction":"Joshua, the son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, was first called Oshea or Hoshea, הושע, Num 13:16, which signifies saved, a savior, or salvation; but afterwards Moses, guided no doubt by a prophetic spirit, changed his name into יהוש Yehoshua or Joshua, which signifies he shall save, or the salvation of Jehovah; referring, no doubt, to his being God's instrument in saving the people from the hands of their enemies, and leading them from victory to victory over the different Canaanitish nations, till he put them in possession of the promised land. On the change and meaning of the name, see the note on Num 13:16. By the Septuagint he is called Ιησους Ναυη, Jesus Naue, or Jesus son of Nave: and in the New Testament he is expressly called Ιησους, Jesus; see Act 7:45; Heb 4:8. Joshua was denominated the servant of Moses, as he seems to have acted sometimes as his secretary, sometimes as his aid-du-camp, and sometimes as the general of the army. He was early appointed to be the successor of Moses, see Exo 17:14; and under the instruction of this great master he was fully qualified for the important office. He was a great and pious man, and God honored him in a most extraordinary manner, as the sequel of the history amply proves. From the preceding books it appears that he became attached to Moses shortly after the exodus from Egypt; that he was held by him in the highest esteem; had the command of the army confided to him in the war with the Amalekites; and accompanied his master to the Mount, when he went up to receive the Law from God. These were the highest honors he could possibly receive during the life-time of Moses. Commentators and critics are divided in opinion whether the book that goes under his name was actually compiled by him. It is argued by those who deny Joshua to be the author, that there are both names and transactions in it which did not exist till considerably after Joshua's time. The account we have, Jos 4:9, of the twelve stones set up by Joshua in the midst of Jordan remaining to the present day, seems to prove that the book, at least this verse, was not written till after Joshua's time; the same may be said of the account of Ai, that Joshua made it a heap for ever, even a desolation to the present day, Jos 8:28, which is a proof, however, that the book was not written after the time of the kings, as Ai subsisted after the return from the captivity; see Ezr 2:28 : The men of Beth-el and Ai, two hundred twenty and three. It is supposed also, that the relation of the marriage of Achsah, daughter of Caleb, with Othniel the son of Kenaz, necessarily belongs to the time of the Judges; Jos 15:16-19; as also the account of the capture of Leshem by the Danites Jos 19:47, compared with Jdg 18:7, Jdg 18:29. \"What is related, Jos 15:63, concerning the Jebusites dwelling with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day, must certainly have been written before the time of David; for he took the strong hold of Zion, and expelled the Jebusites; see Sa2 5:7-9. Also, what is said, Jos 16:10, They drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer, but they dwelt among the Ephraimites unto this day, must have been written before the time of Solomon, for in his time Pharaoh, king of Egypt, had taken Gezer, burnt it with fire, slain the Canaanites that dwelt in it, and given it a present to his daughter, the wife of Solomon, Kg1 9:16. The country of Cabul, mentioned Jos 19:27, had not this name till the time of Solomon, as appears from Kg1 9:13; and the city called Joktheel, Jos 15:38, had not this name till the reign of Joash, as appears from Kg2 14:7, it having been previously called Selah. The like may be said of Tyre, Jos 19:29; and of Galilee Jos 20:7; Jos 21:32.\" These are the principal objections which are made against the book as being the work of Joshua. Some of these difficulties might be so removed as to render it still probable that Joshua was the author of the whole book, as some think to be intimated Jos 24:26; And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of the Lord; (but this probably refers to nothing more than the words of the covenant which was then made, and which is included in Joshua 24:2-24); but there are other difficulties that cannot be removed on the above supposition and therefore it has been generally supposed that the book was written by some inspired person after the time of Joshua; and positively before many kings had reigned in Israel. The book has been attributed to Samuel, though some give this honor to Ezra. After all, I cannot help considering the book in the main as the composition of Joshua himself. It is certain that Moses kept an accurate register of all the events that took place during his administration in the wilderness, at least from the giving of the law to the time of his death. And in that wilderness he wrote the book of Genesis, as well as the others that bear his name. Now, it is not likely that Joshua, the constant servant and companion of Moses, could see all this - be convinced, as he must be, of its utility - and not adopt the same practice; especially as at the death of Moses he came into the same office. I therefore take it for granted, that the Book of Joshua is as truly his work, as the Commentaries of Caesar are his; and all the real difficulties mentioned above may be rationally and satisfactorily accounted for on the ground, that in transcribing this book in after ages, especially between the times of Joshua and the Kings, some few changes were made, and a very few slight additions, which referred chiefly to the insertion of names by which cities were then known instead of those by which they had been anciently denominated. This book therefore I conceive to be not the work of Ezra, nor of Samuel, nor of any other person of those times; nor can I allow that \"it is called the Book of Joshua, because he is the chief subject of it, as the heroic poem of Virgil is called the Aeneis, because of the prince whose travels and actions it relates;\" but I conceive it to be called the Book of Joshua, 1. Because Joshua wrote it. 2. Because it is the relation of his own conduct in the conquest, division, and settlement of the promised land. 3. Because it contains a multitude of particulars that only himself, or a constant eye-witness, could possibly relate. 4. Because it was evidently designed to be a continuation of the Book of Deuteronomy, and is so connected with it, in narrative, as to prove that it must have been immediately commenced on the termination of the other. 5. I might add to this, that with the exception of a few individuals, the whole of the ancient Jewish and Christian Churches have uniformly acknowledged Joshua to be its author. The Book of Joshua is one of the most important writings in the old covenant, and should never be separated from the Pentateuch, of which it is at once both the continuation and completion. Between this Book and the five Books of Moses, there is the same analogy as between the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. The Pentateuch contains a history of the Acts of the great Jewish legislator, and the Laws on which the Jewish Church should be established. The Book of Joshua gives an account of the establishment of that Church in the Land of Canaan, according to the oft-repeated promises and declarations of God. The Gospels give an account of the transactions of Jesus Christ, the great Christian legislator, and of those Laws on which his Church should be established, and by which it should be governed. The Acts of the Apostles gives an account of the actual establishment of that Church, according to the predictions and promises of its great founder. Thus, then, the Pentateuch bears as pointed a relation to the Gospels as the Book of Joshua does to the Acts of the Apostles. And we might, with great appearance of probability, carry this analogy yet farther, and show that the writings of several of the Prophets bear as strict a relation to the Apostolical Epistles, as the Books of Ezekiel and Daniel do to the Apocalypse. On this very ground of analogy Christ obviously founded the Christian Church; hence he had his twelve disciples, from whom the Christian Church was to spring, as the Jewish Church or twelve tribes sprang from the twelve sons of Jacob. He had his seventy or seventy-two disciples, in reference to the seventy-two elders, six chosen out of each of the twelve tribes, who were united with Moses and Aaron in the administration of justice, etc., among the people. Christ united in his person the characters both of Moses and Aaron, or legislator and high priest; hence he ever considers himself, and is considered by his apostles and followers, the same in the Christian Church that Moses and Aaron were in the Jewish. As a rite of initiation into his Church, he instituted baptism in the place of circumcision, both being types of the purification of the heart and holiness of life; and as a rite of establishment and confirmation, the holy eucharist in place of the paschal lamb, both being intended to commemorate the atonement made to God for the sins of the people. The analogies are so abundant, and indeed universal, that time would fail to enumerate them. On this very principle it would be a matter of high utility to read these Old Testament and the New Testament books together, as they reflect a strong and mutual light on each other, bear the most decided testimony to the words and truth of prophecy, and show the ample fulfillment of all the ancient and gracious designs of God. This appears particularly evident in the five Books of Moses and the Book of Joshua compared and collated with the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles; and the analogy will be the more complete as to the number of those books, though that is a matter of minor consideration, when we consider Joshua, as we ought, a continuation of the Book of Deuteronomy, though written by a different hand, which two books should be rated only as one history. Of Judges and Ruth it may be said they are a sort of supplement to the Book of Joshua. Whoever goes immediately from the reading of the Pentateuch to the reading of the Gospels, and from the reading of Joshua to that of the Acts, will carry with him advantages which on no other plan he will be able to command. Even a commentator himself will derive advantages from this plan, which he will seek in vain from any other. To see the wisdom and goodness of God in the ritual of Moses, we must have an eye continually on the incarnation and death of Christ, to which it refers. And to have a proper view of the great atonement made by the sacrifice of our Lord, we must have a constant reference to the Mosaic law, where this is shadowed forth. Without this reference the law of Moses is a system of expensive and burdensome ceremonies, destitute of adequate meaning; and without this entering in of the law that the offense might abound, to show the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the frailty of man, and the holiness of God; the Gospel of Christ, including the account of his incarnation, preaching, miracles, passion, death, burial, ascension, and intercession, would not appear to have a sufficient necessity to explain and justify it. By the Law is the knowledge of sin, and by the Gospel its cure. Either, taken separately, will not answer the purpose for which God gave these astonishing revelations of his justice and his grace.","order":6,"numberOfChapters":24,"sha256":"33260d975dbfa7adde11914818070725a0bc9268563cf5bd235d4f8eaf794682","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/JOS/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"JOS","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":24,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/JOS/24.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"JOS","chapter":24},"totalNumberOfVerses":405},"chapter":{"number":21,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["The heads of the fathers of the Levites - The Levites were composed of three brand families, the Gershonites, Koathites, and Merarites, independently of the family of Aaron, who might be said to form a fourth. To none of these had God assigned any portion in the division of the land. But in this general division it must have been evidently intended that the different tribes were to furnish them with habitations; and this was according to a positive command of God, Num 35:2, etc. Finding now that each tribe had its inheritance appointed to it, the heads of the Levites came before Eleazar, Joshua, and the chiefs of the tribes who had been employed in dividing the land, and requested that cities and suburbs should be granted them according to the Divine command. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["And the children of Israel gave unto the Levites - They cheerfully obeyed the Divine command, and cities for habitations were appointed to them out of the different tribes by lot, that it might as fully appear that God designed them their habitations, as he designed the others their inheritances. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["Out of the tribe of Judah - Simeon, and - Benjamin, thirteen cities - These tribes furnished more habitations to the Levites in proportion than any of the other tribes, because they possessed a more extensive inheritance; and Moses had commanded, Num 35:8, From them that have many, ye shall give many; and from them that have few, ye shall give few: every one shall give of his cities unto the Levites, according to his inheritance. It is worthy of remark, that the principal part of this tribe, whose business was to minister at the sanctuary, which sanctuary was afterwards to be established in Jerusalem, had their appointment nearest to that city; so that they were always within reach of the sacred work which God had appointed them. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["And the rest of the children of Kohath - That is, the remaining part of that family that were not priests, for those who were priests had their lot in the preceding tribes. Those, therefore, of the family of Kohath, who were simply Levites, and not of the priests or Aaron's family, (see Jos 21:10), had their habitations in Ephraim, Dan, and the half tribe of Manasseh. It has been asked in what sense did the Levites possess those cities, seeing they had no inheritance? To which it may be answered that it is not likely the Levites had the exclusive property of the cities in which they dwelt, for it is evident that the other Israelites dwelt among them. We know, says Calmet, by history, that the cities of the Levites were almost entirely filled with Israelites of other tribes. For instance, Gibeah of Benjamin, which is here given to the Levites, Jos 21:17, was always peopled by the Benjamites, as appears from the history of the Levite, whose wife was so horribly abused by them; Jdg 19:22-27. Saul and all his family dwelt in the same city; and David and his court spent the first years of his reign at Hebron, which was also a city of the Levites, Jos 21:10. It appears, therefore, that they had no other property in those cities than merely the right to certain houses, which they might sell, but always with the right of perpetual redemption, for they could finally alienate nothing; and if the possessor of such a house, having sold it, did not redeem it at the year of jubilee, it reverted to the Levites. And as to their lands for their cattle, which extended two thousand cubits without the city, these they were not permitted to sell: they were considered as the Lord's property. See Lev 25:32-34 (note), and the notes there. It is therefore very likely that, in the first instance, the Levites had simply the right to choose, in all the cities assigned them, the houses in which they were to dwell, and that those of the tribe to which the city belonged occupied all the other dwellings. There is also reason to believe that in process of time, when the families of the Levites increased, they had more dwellings assigned to them, which were probably built at the public expense. We may also observe that the Levites were not absolutely bound to live in these and no other cities: for when the tabernacle was at Nob, priests and Levites dwelt there, see Sa1 21:1, etc.; and when the worship of God was established at Jerusalem, multitudes both of priests and Reviles dwelt there, though it was no Levitical city: as did the courses of priests afterwards at Jericho. This was a circumstance which Moses had foreseen, and for which he had provided. See Deu 18:6, etc. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["The city of Arba - See the note on Jos 14:15. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["The fields of the city - gave they to Caleb - This was an exclusive privilege to him and his family, with which the grant to the Levites did not interfere. See the notes on Jos 14:14. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":18,"content":["Anathoth - Celebrated as the birthplace of Jeremiah, about three miles northward of Jerusalem, according to St. Jerome. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":19,"content":["Thirteen cities with their suburbs - At the time mentioned here certainly thirteen cities were too large a proportion for the priests, as they and their families amounted to a very small number: but this ample provision was made in reference to their great increase in after times, when they formed twenty-four courses, as in the days of David. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":22,"content":["Beth-horon - There were two cities of this name, the upper and the nether; but which is intended here, cannot be ascertained. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":24,"content":["Aijalon - See on Jos 10:12 (note). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":27,"content":["Golan in Bashan - On this and the other cities of refuge mentioned here, see the note on Jos 20:7. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":35,"content":["Dimnah with her suburbs, etc. - It is well known to every Hebrew scholar that the two following verses are wholly omitted by the Masora; and are left out in some of the most correct and authentic Hebrew Bibles. Between critics there is no small controversy relative to the authenticity of these verses; and those who wish to see the arguments at large on both sides, must consult the Variae Lectiones of De Rossi on this place. Dr. Kennicott, who is a strenuous advocate for their authenticity argues thus in their behalf: \"Jos 21:41 and Jos 21:42 of this chapter tell us that the Levitical cities were forty-eight, and that they had been all as such described; so that they must have been all specified in this chapter: whereas now in all the Hebrew copies printed in full obedience to the Masora, which excludes two verses containing four of these cities, the number amounts only to forty-four.\n\"The cities are first mentioned, in the general, as being thirteen and ten, with thirteen and twelve, which are certainly forty-eight. And yet when they are particularly named, Jos 21:13-19 gives thirteen cities; Jos 21:20-26 gives ten cities; Jos 21:27-33 gives thirteen; Jos 21:34-36 gives four cities; and Jos 21:35-36 gives four more, all which can make but forty-four. And what still increases the wonder is, that Jos 21:40 infers from the verses immediately preceding, that the cities allowed to the Merarites were twelve, though they here make eight only, unless we admit the four other cities expressed in those two verses, which have been rejected by that blind guide the Masora. In defiance of this authority these two verses, thus absolutely necessary, were inserted in the most early editions of the Hebrew text, and are found in Walton's Polyglot, as well as in our English Bible. But they have scarce ever been as yet printed completely, thus, And out of the tribe or Reuben, A City of Refuge for the Slayer, Bezer, in the Wilderness, with her suburbs, and Jahazah with her suburbs, Kedemoth with her suburbs, and Mephaath with her suburbs; four cities. See on this place my edition of the Hebrew Bible, where no less than one hundred and forty-nine copies are described, which happily preserve these verses, most clearly essential to the truth and consistency of this chapter. See also General Discourse, pp. 19, 26, 54.\"\nThough this reasoning of Dr. Kennicott appears very conclusive, yet there are so many and important variations among the MSS. that retain, and those that reject these verses, as to render the question of their authenticity very difficult to be determined. To Dr. Kennicott's one hundred and forty-nine MSS. which have these two verses, may be added upwards of forty collated by De Rossi. Those who deny their authenticity say they have been inserted here from Ch1 6:78, Ch1 6:79, where they are found it is true, in general, but not exactly as they stand here, and in Dr. Kennicott's Hebrew Bible. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":36,"content":["Jahazah - See on Jos 13:18 (note). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":41,"content":["Forty and eight cities - At the last census of the Hebrew people, related Numbers 26, we find from Num 26:62 that the tribe of Levi amounted only to 23,000; and it is supposed that forty-eight cities were too great a proportion for this tribe, the other tribes having so very few. But,\n1. All the cities of the other tribes are not enumerated.\n2. They had the circumjacent country as well as the cities.\n3. The Levites had no other cities than those enumerated.\n4. They had no country annexed to their cities, the 2,000 cubits for their cattle, etc., excepted.\n5. Cities in those ancient times were very small, as most villages went under this appellation.\n6. The Levites had now the appointment that was suited to their consequent increase. The other tribes might enlarge their borders and make conquests, but this was not suitable to the mere servants of God; besides, had they made conquests, they would have become proprietors of the conquered land; and God determined that they should have no inheritance in Israel, He himself being their portion. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":43,"content":["And the Lord gave - all the land which he sware - All was now divided by lot unto them, and their enemies were so completely discomfited that there was not a single army of the Canaanites remaining to make head against them; and those which were left in the land served under tribute, and the tribute that they paid was the amplest proof of their complete subjugation. Add to this, they had as much of the land in actual possession as they could occupy; and, as they increased, God enabled them to drive out the rest of the ancient inhabitants; but in consequence of the infidelity of the Israelites, God permitted their enemies often to straiten them, and sometimes to prevail against them. It should also be remembered, that God never promised to give them the land, or to maintain them in it, but on condition of obedience; and so punctually did he fulfill this intention, that there is not a single instance on record in which they were either straitened or subjugated, while obedient and faithful to their God.\nThe cavil is as foolish as it is unprincipled which states, \"The Israelites never did possess the whole of the land which was promised to them, and therefore that promise could not come by Divine revelation.\" With as much reason might it be urged that Great Britain has not subdued the French West India Islands and Batavia, (Feb. 1812), because the ancient inhabitants still remain in them; but is not their serving under tribute an absolute proof that they are conquered, and under the British dominion? So was the whole land of Canaan conquered, and its inhabitants subdued, though the whole of the ground was not occupied by the Israelites till the days of David and Solomon. In the most correct and literal sense it might be said, There failed not aught of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel: all came to pass. Nor shall one word of his ever fail to any of his followers while the sun and moon endure.\n\n"]}],"introduction":"The Levites apply to Eleazar, Joshua, and the elders, for the cities to dwell in which Moses had promised, Jos 21:1, Jos 21:2. Their request is granted, Jos 21:3. The priests receive thirteen cities out of the tribes of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin, Jos 21:4. The Levites receive ten cities out of the tribes of Ephraim, Dan, and the half tribe of Manasseh, Jos 21:5; and thirteen out of the other half tribe of Manasseh, and the tribes of Issachar, Asher, and Naphtali, Jos 21:6. The children of Merari had twelve cities out of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Zebulun, Jos 21:7. The names of the cities given out of the tribes of Judah and Simeon, Jos 21:8-16. Those granted out of the tribe of Benjamin, Jos 21:17-19. Out of Ephraim, Jos 21:20-22. Those out of Dan, Jos 21:23, Jos 21:24. Those out of both the halves of the tribe of Manasseh, Jos 21:25-27. Those out of the tribe of Issachar, Jos 21:28, Jos 21:29. Those out of Asher, Jos 21:30, Jos 21:31. Those out of Naphtali, Jos 21:32. These were the cities of the Gershonites, Jos 21:33. The cities of the Merarites, Jos 21:34-40. The sum of the cities given to the Levites, forty-eight, Jos 21:41, Jos 21:42. The exact fulfillment of all God's promises, Jos 21:43-45. \n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/JOS/21.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"JOS","chapter":21},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/JOS/22.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"JOS","chapter":22},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/JOS/20.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"JOS","chapter":20},"numberOfVerses":15}