Bible Commentaries
Joshua 5

Verse 1

The Crossing of the Jordan (3:1-5:1)

In this section it becomes evident to the careful reader that the writer has welded his material together from various sources without smooth and complete integration. One finds duplications and inconsistencies here and there. For example, 3:17 and 4:1 represent all Israel as having crossed the bed of the Jordan, but 4:10-11 alludes to this again, as if the people had not yet passed over. It is said in one place that the twelve stones taken from the bed of the Jordan were set up at Gilgal, the place of encampment not far from Jericho (4:3, 8, 20); in another passage we read that they were set up in the middle of the Jordan, at the place where the feet of the priests who bore the Ark had stood (4:9). We have two passages dealing with Joshua’s appointment of twelve men to carry stones from the Jordan (3:12; 4:2). The meaning of the stones is twice explained (4:6-7, 21-24). It is obvious that older materials are being combined without careful editing.

The story of the crossing of the Jordan emphasizes the truth set forth in Joshua 1:1-9: the conquest of the land is not Israel’s achievement but the deed of God. Obstacles like the swollen Jordan River are to God no obstacles at all. Joshua’s command to the people to sanctify themselves (that is, to purify themselves ceremonially) as a preparation for the appearance and manifestation of the holy God in their midst (3:5) and the key role said to have been played by the Ark of the Covenant in the events of the crossing underscore the event as wholly God’s doing. Israel can only obey the Lord’s directions, as spoken through Joshua, and trust implicitly in him. The memorial stones are set up to let Israel’s descendants know what God did at the Jordan in drying up its waters, even as he did at the Red (Reed) Sea (4:23-24).

Some details of the story are of interest. How many people are intended by the phrase "all the people of Israel" (3:1) cannot be said. In 4:12-13 the warriors of the two and one-half tribes are numbered at about 40,000, a figure which agrees quite well with statements in Numbers 26:7; Numbers 26:18; Numbers 26:34 (which list something over 100,000 men in these tribes, not all of whom would be usable in military operations). According to the Book of Numbers (26:2, 51) the total fighting force was slightly over 600,000. This would require us to postulate at least two million people—an incredible number, it seems, for the conditions in such an inhospitable wilderness as that lying between Egypt and Canaan. On the other hand, Exodus 1:15-22 assumes that two midwives could service the needs of Israel in Egypt, and Numbers 10:2 implies that all Israel could be summoned to the Tent of Meeting by the blowing of two trumpets—hardly possible for two million people! Someone has pointed out that two million people, when marching, would constitute a column twenty-two miles long, fifty abreast with one yard between each rank. If the numbers are to be taken literally, they represent computations of a later time, perhaps in some way paralleling the figures of the census made by David (2 Samuel 24; 1 Chronicles 21) or possibly the numbers of the tribes of Israel in the period of the Judges. It has also been held that the number of fighting men was derived from the numerical equivalents of the Hebrew letters in the phrase "sons of Israel," which add up to 603. According to Numbers 1:46, one count was 603,550. However the figures are to be explained, it is hardly likely that the refugees from Egypt and the invading tribes numbered more than a few thousand souls.

The role of the Ark of the Covenant in this story is interesting. The origin of the Ark has been much debated. In Deuteronomy 10:1-5 we are told that Moses made the Ark as a container for the two tablets of stone on which the Ten Commandments were written. In Exodus 37:1-9 (see also Exodus 25:10-22) its origin is assigned to Bezalel, who worked at Moses’ direction. The Deuteronomic passage seems to represent it as a simple wooden chest, whereas the Exodus passages describe it as an elaborate golden shrine, topped by a golden mercy seat and two gold cherubim and carried by poles overlaid with gold. Some interpreters have held that the Ark was in form a miniature temple and that it was taken over, probably from the Canaanites, after Israel’s settlement in the land. It is likely, however, that it originated in the Mosaic period, that it was much simpler than the description of it in the Book of Exodus, and that it was carried into battle in the period of the wilderness wanderings (Numbers 10; Numbers 35-36).

What conception Israel had of the purpose and significance of the Ark is equally difficult to determine. It probably changed considerably through the centuries. In the early days the Ark seems to have been regarded as a portable throne for the invisible presence of God (1 Samuel 4:4). Kings of the ancient East were represented as sitting on thrones supported by cherubim. The putting of the tables of stone inscribed with the Law of God into the Ark would enhance the authority of the Law and conform to the practice of depositing covenant documents in sacred places. When the Ark was carried into battle, the warriors would feel that their God was going before them and victory was assured. It must have been a shock to Israel’s faith when the Ark failed to bring victory and was even captured by enemies (1 Samuel 4:1-11).

In the light of Israel’s view of the Ark as the visible throne of the invisible God, it is not strange that Joshua sent it ahead of the people at the crossing of the Jordan. The two thousand cubits’ (about three thousand feet) separation of Ark and people was meant to keep the people away from the awful Presence of the Lord. In seeing the Ark going before, they would know that "the living God is among you" (3:10-11).

The cutting off of the waters of the Jordan at flood time (in April, due to the melting snow of the Lebanon Mountains) may have resulted from an earthquake shock which threw down the high mud banks of the river about twenty-five miles north of the Dead Sea. An Arab historian reported such an occurrence in 1267; it happened again in 1909 and yet again in 1927. In the latter year an earthquake caused the west bank to collapse near the location of ancient Adam, and the Jordan was dammed up for more than twenty-one hours. The miracle is not minimized by a suggestion of the means by which it happened.

The setting up of commemorative stones is mentioned numerous times in the Old Testament (Genesis 28:18; Genesis 31:45-49; Joshua 7:26; Joshua 8:29; Joshua 24:26). The appeal to remembrance was a dominant emphasis in Israel’s religion. The children of each generation must be taught concerning the deeds of God and the meaning and the requirements of the Covenant into which he had entered with Israel (Exodus 12:26-27; Exodus 13:14; Deuteronomy 6:20-25). The children must not be allowed to forget God’s mighty deed at the Jordan. They are to live in gratitude and to fear and serve the Lord forever (Joshua 4:24).

Two piles of stones—one in the bed of the Jordan where the feet of the priests had stood (4:9) and one at Gilgal, the place of encampment after the crossing (4:8, 20)—are suggested in the present form of the narrative. But directions were given by Joshua for the setting up of just one pile (3:12; 4:3, 5, 8). It is evident that two traditions persisted concerning the place where they were set up and that the traditions have been joined in this narrative. To have set up the stones in the bed of the Jordan would have been fruitless, once the water had returned to its normal flow. The word "Gilgal" means "circle of stones" and undoubtedly refers to sacred stones of the type said to have been erected here. This place—probably modern Khirbet Mefjir, someone and one-fourth miles east of Canaanite Jericho—was investigated in 1954 by archaeologists and was found to contain artifacts from about 1200-600 B.C. During much of this period, according to biblical evidence, Gilgal served as a military base and religious center. Some historians assume that some of the traditions lying behind the Book of Joshua were preserved at this sanctuary center.

Verses 2-15

Religious Preparations (5:2-15)

The religious preparations for entrance into the land consist of two acts of fulfillment of the Law by all the people and one of worship on the part of their leader. These acts illustrate the twin emphases enunciated in chapter 1 and throughout the book: if Israel is to succeed in the Conquest, it must fully obey the Law; and if it does, it may be certain of God’s presence and leadership.

The act of circumcision recorded here (5:2-7) is explained as required by the non-practice of the rite during the days of the wilderness wandering. The males who had come out of Egypt under Moses had been circumcised, but their sons who had been born since the Exodus had not. Without the obedience of this new generation to the Law in respect to this rite, Israel could expect no help from God in the conquest of the land.

The circumcising is to be done with flint knives (vs. 2). At Joshua’s time (the thirteenth century B.C.) tools of bronze had largely replaced stone implements, and soon afterward (from the twelfth century on) bronze was gradually replaced by iron in Palestine. But in religious customs of long standing, ancient materials and methods persist long after general cultural changes.

When Israel adopted the practice of circumcision and exactly what it meant at first have been strongly debated. Circumcision was practiced by the Egyptians and by most of the ancient Semites. Wall reliefs from Egypt of the third millennium 8.c. show the operation being performed. The Babylonians, Assyrians, and Philistines did not circumcise. The latter were contemptuously labeled by the Hebrews "the uncircumcised" (Judges 14:3; Judges 15:18; 1 Samuel 14:6).

Some have argued on the basis of the Septuagint text of Joshua 5:2 (which does not have the words "again the second time") that circumcision was adopted by the Hebrews in the time of Joshua—at the event described in Joshua 5:2-9—and that the claim that it was instituted by Abraham (Genesis 17:9-14; Genesis 21:4) is a late and unhistorical view. But in view of the antiquity of the rite among ancient Near Eastern peoples, the traditions that connect it with Moses (Exodus 4:25-26; Exodus 12:43-51) and Abraham, the use of flint (rather than bronze or iron) knives, and the actual unfeasibility of strict practice of the rite in the conditions under which Israel lived in the wilderness period, it is better to credit its origin among the Hebrews to a time considerably before Joshua, as this passage affirms.

In Israel circumcision was an act of initiation into the Covenant community (Genesis 17:11), whatever it may have meant to surrounding peoples (perhaps preparation for marriage or sacrifice of powers of fertility to the deity or tribal mark, or some combination of these). Without the mark of membership in the Covenant community, uncircumcised Israelites would have no assurance of God’s help.

The explanation of "Gilgal" as the place where the Lord "rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you" (vs. 9) is an alternate and inferior explanation to that provided in 4:19-24. It is likely that Gilgal ("circle of stones"), an early and important Israelite sanctuary, was a place where circumcision was practiced and that this secondary explanation of the name grew up at a later time.

The second act of religious preparation was the celebration of the Passover, which appropriately followed upon circumcision. According to Exodus 12:43-49 no uncircumcised male could eat the Passover. Now all Israel was fitted for the sacred feast of remembrance. What greater support for the uncertain future could be imagined than the remembrance in dramatic ceremony of the mighty deliverance from Egypt under the guidance of God, whose power was so much greater than that of the petty kings of Canaan?

The eating of unleavened cakes and parched grain from the produce of Canaan marked the end of the supply of manna. The people of Israel are said, according to one tradition (Exodus 16:35), to have eaten manna for forty years, "till they came to the border of the land of Canaan." In the Book of Joshua the manna is said to have lasted until the encampment at Gilgal, west of the Jordan. (For "manna," see comment on Deuteronomy 8:1-20.)

The promise of God’s presence with Joshua and his unfailing help in the Conquest (1:5, 9) is now dramatically symbolized in the appearance of "the commander of the army of the LORD" (5:14). Joshua perhaps may be thought of as inspecting the terrain and the defenses of Jericho and planning his attack. Suddenly he becomes acutely aware of the presence of Deity, by whose help alone the victory could be won. The commander-in-chief of the Lord’s armies apparently is conceived of as an angel, but the distinction between the appearance of God himself and that of his angel is not very clearly drawn in the Old Testament (Genesis 18; Judges 6:11-18). The "army of the LORD" here is probably the hosts of angels who fight for the people of God (Genesis 32:1-2; 2 Kings 6:17), though the term does not necessarily exclude the forces of Israel. The point of view is that God and his heavenly hosts fight with and for the armies of Israel.

Like Moses (Exodus 3:5), Joshua is commanded to remove his shoes when standing on ground made holy (taboo) by the presence of Deity. And again like Moses, Joshua is only the servant of the Lord (1:1-2; Deuteronomy 34:5), whose delight is to do the Lord’s bidding. In worship and humble obedience will both leader and people find the overcoming power of the Lord.