Unknown
Commentaries and Other Bible Study Helps - Prayer Tents - Prayer Tents
9:1-27 Israel's Canaanite Covenant: The Gibeonite Ruse. As did the sparing of the Canaanite prostitute Rahab with her family and their incorporation into Israel (2:1-21; 6:22-25), the present episode forces reflection on the divinely mandated "complete destruction" of the Canaanite "nations"--especially since the mandate explicitly states, "You shall make no covenant with them and show no mercy to them" (Deut. 7:1-2). The rationale given in the Deuteronomy passage is that to spare and intermarry with Canaanites will "turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods" (Deut. 7:4). Thus, the issue is one of religious loyalty to the true God rather than to "other gods." That both Rahab and the Gibeonites express belief in the power and supremacy of the Lord eases the tension created by their inclusion.
9:3 The identification of the city of Gibeon with el-Jib, a site
9:4 Cunning (Hb. ‘ormah) implies cleverness and calculation. The extra emphasis in saying they on their part underscores the comparison between Joshua and the Gibeonites--that is, just as Joshua had acted shrewdly to win at Ai, so the Gibeonites acted shrewdly for the sake of their survival.
9:6 The Gibeonites claimed they came from a distant country as grounds for Israel's making a covenant with them. This deception suggests awareness of the distinction Moses drew between cities inside and outside the Land of Promise (Deut. 20:10-18).
9:7 The Hivites are included in the virtually identical lists of Deut. 20:17 (those to be devoted "to complete destruction") and Josh. 9:1-2 (those determined to "fight against Joshua and Israel"). The Gibeonites may have represented a subset of a larger Hivite population in Canaan. The Hivites, often identified as Hurrians, appear to have been of Indo-European origin. The comment perhaps you live among us indicates that the men of Israel were initially suspicious, but they nevertheless proceed without inquiring of the Lord (v. 14).
9:14 The notice that Israel did not ask counsel from the Lord represents a rare instance of explicit commentary by the narrator. While it helps explain how Israel was duped, it also constitutes a serious criticism of Israel's willingness to trust their own surface-level impressions while neglecting the insight that inquiring of the Lord could have offered. What would have happened if the Lord had revealed the Gibeonites' deception to Israel? This, of course, remains an open question--though Gibeon may have been spared on the basis of their acknowledgment of the Lord. Without directly criticizing the Gibeonites, the narrator simply notes that they "acted with cunning" (see note on v. 4) to escape God's judgment. A few verses later, however, the Gibeonites are cursed for their deception (vv. 22-23).
9:18 the leaders . . . had sworn. The right course of action in the case of wrongful or unlawful oaths involving action yet in the future (e.g., Jephthah's unwitting vow to sacrifice his daughter; Judg. 11:30-40) is to repudiate the oath and to seek forgiveness for having made it (cf. Lev. 5:4-6); however, oaths that establish a covenant relationship are of a different order and must be kept (cf. Gen. 26:26-31; 1 Sam. 20:8; 2 Sam. 21:7; Ezek. 16:59-60). The text does not state why the congregation murmured against the leaders, but it may have been because the covenant with the Gibeonites prevented the congregation from destroying them, or, perhaps more selfishly, from despoiling them.
9:23 There is an interesting ambiguity in Joshua's words to the Gibeonite deceivers. They are pronounced cursed, never to be anything but servants. Specifically, they are to be cutters of wood and drawers of water (which were menial tasks in ancient societies). Yet, while v. 21 states that these duties are to be carried out "for all the congregation," Joshua assigns the Gibeonites more particularly to the house of my God (the summary statement in v. 27 combines both the general and the particular statements). Supplying wood and water for the extensive sacrificial system in Israel would indeed be hard work, but to be closely associated with the house of God should be construed as a blessing (Ps. 84:10).
9:27 in the place that he should choose. Cf. Deut. 12:5. Shiloh appears to have served as Israel's central sanctuary from the time of Joshua (see Josh. 18:1) until the fall of Shiloh on the eve of the monarchy (1 Sam. 4:3; cf. Ps. 78:60; Jer. 7:12). From the time of David and Solomon, Jerusalem served as the central sanctuary (2 Sam. 6:12-14; 1 Kings 9:3).
