The Pulpit Commentary — Joshua — Section 131

has been hefore remarked, a marked feature eh. v. 10, will bear close au11lysis, and refutes of earl~- Hchrew composition was repeti- the clumsy compiler theory. There was tion: repetition "ith additional details to just time between the tenth e.nd fourteenth add to the complet<eness of the nan·ati,-e, day of the month for the events described in but designed principally to emphasise the the meantime. An<l the scrupulous obe- principal facts. Thus we are now told dience to the law, the provisions of which, that it was at the command of Joshua, on we are expressly told, had been of necessity God's express intimation, that the priests neglected hitherto, is a fact closely ia keep- left their post. And t-0 mark more clearly ing with the character of Joshua, and the the histo1ian's sense of the importance of whole spirit of the na1Tative. Gllgal. 7'he the miracle, it is added that, as soon as the G ilgal, according to the Masori tes, no doubt p1iest.s' teet had left the channel in which from its being a. circular encampment. Not the waters had flowed up to the moment as ~-et, however, called by this name (see that they entered the waters of Jordan on eh. V; 9). It w11s "about five miles" (50 the othe;- side, the wat<ers which had been stadi11, according to Josephus), "from the cut off returned, and flowed exactly where river b11nks" (Stanley, 'Sinai and Palestine,' the~- had done before. This additional fact, p. 307). We gather from eh. v. 3 that it supplementing as it docs the briefer detail was a rising ground, but it is impossible to in eh. iii. 17 and eh. i,. 11, must be there- identify the spot, since there never existed fore regarded as a record of the solemn any town or village there. A spot is shown conYiction of the historian that in the events by the inhabitants about two miles from he is narrating be recognised a special inter-· Jelicbo, which is held by them in great position of the hand of God (see vers. 23, 24), reverence, but this is further from Jericho in which in like m.e.nner we find a repetition than Josephus imagines it to be, for he in fuller detail of tbe command concerning places it 0.bout a mile and a quarter from the stones, designed to mark more clearly Jericho. Tristram (' Land of Israel,' p. 216) the sense the historian wishes his readers identifies Rib11 (see note on eh. ii. 1) with to ha '"e of the direct int.erference of God in Gilgal, but Bartlett (p. 452) places it "a what he has recorded. mile east of Riha," " some three miles or Ver. 16.-The testimony. The word m,v. more from the fords." It is hardly probable, though derived from the same root as 1V. however, that the Israelites, in their then unprepared condition (see next chapter, and witness, would seem rather to have the cf. Gen. xxxiv. 25), encamped so near the sense of precept, from the idea of repetition city, even though they were conscious of contained in the root. Compare the well- Divine protection, 11s Josephus would have known Hebrew particle 1~V again. It must us suppose. It bas been denied by some refer to the two tables of the law which that the Gilgal mentioned in eh. ix. 6, x. 6 (Heb. x. 4.) were placed in the ark (see Dent. is the same 11s this one (see notes there, as x. 5, and comp. Exod. xxv. 16, 21, 40, well as the Masoretic translation above). Num. xrii. 10, ..-here this is said to be the The reverence for sacred places, such as t.estimony). Other things were placed in Gi!gal, degenerated in the course of ti'!'le, the ark, such as the manna, Aaron's roil, according to a well-known law of humamty, and these, no doubt, were for a witness to the into superstition- a superstition severely facts of the Mosaic record. The LXX., how- rebuked by the prophets (Hosea. iv. 15; ix. e\'er, consistently render this word by µap- 15; Amos iv. 4; v. 5). We m11y compare ,i,p,a, µaprvpwv. The Vulge.t.e here bas the idolatrous worship of the brazen serpent a ream f rederu. (2 Kings xviii. 4). It is sometimes contended Ver. 18.-When the priests ... were by Roman Catholic commentators that no come np. There i• a difference of reading approval of the concluct of Hezekiah is here here. The Masorit.es read as our version. expressed ; but a co_mpari~on of thi~ pe.ss~ge The Hebrew text implies that the waters with those above cited will show m which began to flow from the very moment that direction the minds of inspired men tended. the priests' feet left the channel of the Jordan. Other places seem to have been similarly Were llfted up. The original is more vivid, regarded with superstitious reverence. Not and marks the authentic sources from which only do we find Bethel mentioned among this history is derived. Were plucked up, i.e., such places as we might well expect from out of the soft adhesive mud in the channel Jeroboam's idolatrous worship there, but of the river. The construction of the Beersheba alw seems to have become B seat original is a con,,tructio pro:_grums. They of this misdirected devotion (see Amos v. 5 , dragged their feet out of the mud, and viii. 14) planted them on dry ground. Ver. 19.-0n the tenth d:Ly of the ftrst Ver. 21.-When. Heh. "1~~- The relative month. This stat.ement, compared wiU! pr1,n9un here is sometimes equiv11lent t~ r;,r, I\', 1--24.] THE BOOK OF JOSHGA. 65