Chapter 9

1 The kings combine against Israel. 3 The Gibeonites by craft obtain a league. 16 For which they are condemned to perpetual bondage.

1. When all the kings. Undoubtedly the reports that came to these kings both angered and frightened them, with the result that they called this emergency meeting. They had heard not only of the fall of Jericho, and of Ai, but doubtless also of the great meeting at Ebal, where the Israelites had proclaimed the law of Jehovah as the law of the entire land of Canaan. The convocation at Mt. Ebal showed clearly that the children of Israel intended to be its sole rulers. The resulting anger of the Canaanites probably overcame their fright, and they determined to resist together, hoping thereby to prevent any encroachment upon their territory. For a description of “the kings” see the Introduction to Joshua.

This side Jordan. The Hebrew has, “beyond the Jordan.” The reference, of course, is definitely to the western side of the river, and either the writer was writing on the eastern side, or the arrival on the western side had been so recent that he still thinks of the territory as “beyond the Jordan.” If the writer had already made the land of Palestine his permanent home, he would hardly have used such an expression. This observation argues for an early writing of at least this portion of the book of Joshua. The expression “beyond the Jordan” subsequently refers to the east side of Jordan, unless the speaker is there or thinks of himself as being there (see Judges 5:17).

Hills. By the “hills” is meant the mountainous uplands in the central part of Palestine that afterward became the territory of Judah and Ephraim. The “valleys” are what is called the Shephelah, or western foothills. The “coasts of the great sea” include the maritime plains of Philistia and Sharon.

2. One accord. Literally, “one mouth.” The word for “mouth” is frequently used for “command,” and this might here be the intent of the expression. These six nations pooled their military forces and banded themselves together under one command to meet the emergency. Although of different clans, and with differing interests, doubtless often at variance with one another, they were ready to make common cause against the people of God. Their hatred of the righteous was the common bond that united them, as has often been true of wicked men. For instance, opposition to Christ brought Pilate and Herod together. In the last days it will unite all the religious and political forces against the true remnant of God, “which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus” (Rev. 12:17).

3. Gibeon. Literally, “a hill.” The city was situated on a terraced hill, and had a pool of water in it. Jeremiah refers to it as “great waters” (Jer. 41:12). The city was nearly 6 mi. (9 km.) northwest of Jerusalem, on the road to Joppa. Its inhabitants, the Hivites (Joshua 9:7; see on Gen. 10:17), were included in the confederacy of vs. 1 and 2. When the Gibeonites received the news of the destruction of Jericho and Ai, they concluded that it was futile to resist the army of Israel, and accordingly worked out a carefully planned scheme to gain favor with Israel and make a league with them.

Some scholars have considered the Hivites (see on Gen. 10:17) to be the same as the Horites or Hurrians (see on Gen. 36:20). The LXX calls the Hivites the Chorrhaion. If this identification has any validity, then a group of Horites, originally from the region southwest of Lake Van, in Armenia, settled in the vicinity of Gibeon some time before the arrival of the Hittites.

The Gibeonite form of government must have been more or less democratic, for the Gibeonites spoke of their elders and all their people as sending them (v. 11). Had their government at this time been headed by a king, his heart might have been too proud to bow to the conquering Israelites. In that event the Gibeonites might have joined with the other Canaanite kings in resisting Israel. The Gibeonites may have had spies at Ebal, when the law was read, who brought them word of the command given to Israel (see Deut. 7:1–3) to show no mercy to the Canaanites, to give them no quarter in battle, and to make no league with them (see on Ex. 23:32). To say the least, their determination not to resist showed a degree of faith in the strength of Israel’s God. They were willing to enter into a league, which included their pledge to renounce idolatry and to accept the worship of Jehovah (PP 506).

4. They did work wilily. The ruse would immediately have been disclosed had Joshua sought counsel of the Lord, but once more, as at Ai, he neglected to do so.

Made as if. The clause thus introduced is translated from a single Hebrew word, one that occurs nowhere else in the Scriptures. The root idea of the word is “to revolve.” Elsewhere the word is unknown, except in Arabic. By the substitution of a d for an r, which letters are easily mistaken in the Hebrew, we get the translation “and provided themselves with provisions.” The word then becomes the same as that found in v. 12 and there translated “took hot for our provision.” This reading agrees with many MSS and ancient translations, including the LXX and Syriac. That they would go as ambassadors is understood. “Provided themselves with provisions” seems to fit the context more adequately.

6. The camp at Gilgal. The children of Israel returned to their former camp at Gilgal near Jericho, and not to some new “Gilgal” near Shechem as some have thought (see PP 505 and on 2 Kings 2:1). Chapter 9:17 states that Israel arrived at the city of Gibeon from their encampment at Gilgal on the third day. But Shechem is only a short distance from Gibeon, and three days would not have been required to make the journey. The expression, “Joshua ascended” (ch. 10:7), again points to the Israelite camp as being in the Jordan valley.

7. The men of Israel. The Hebrew has the singular “man,” not “men,” but the verb is plural, evidently because the “men” are thought of as individuals. The LXX reads, “sons [children] of Israel,” and the Syriac, “[they] of the house of Israel.” Apparently the negotiations were carried on by the princes (v. 18).

The Hivites. See on v. 3.

Make a league. The Israelites were permitted to make peace with cities that were far off, but not with the seven Canaanite nations living in close proximity to them (Deut. 7:1, 2; 20:10–15). These were to be completely destroyed (Deut. 20:17) lest Israel become contaminated by their false religion and low moral principles. Hence the repeated instruction to Israel not to make any league with them (see Ex. 23:32; 34:12; Deut. 7:2; 20:16–18). The Gibeonites seem to have been aware of this edict, and accordingly resorted to the strategy of feigning to come from a far country.

8. We are thy servants. This statement was probably more of a polite form of address rather than a sincere declaration of their submission (see Gen. 32:4, 18; 50:18; 2 Kings 10:5; 16:7). However, it was calculated to impress Israel. The Gibeonites, no doubt, expected to make some concession such as paying tribute, but they hoped that the contract would be as favorable as possible. Nevertheless, their carefully worded reply did not satisfy Joshua, as is clear from the questions he continued to direct at them. At this moment of doubt and uncertainty he should have sought the Lord. He probably felt as many Christians do today, that here was a matter he could handle without troubling the Lord. But God has bidden us to come to Him with all of our problems. We are not to feel that we weary or burden Him. Many pitfalls might be avoided by taking all our problems to the Lord, not trusting to our own understanding (Prov. 3:5–7).

9. Because of the name. Literally, “for the name,” or, “in respect to the name,” of Jehovah thy God. These words reveal a degree of reaching out after God on the part of the Gibeonites. They had received a measure of knowledge, and they acted upon this limited enlightenment. We find fault with their approach, but we should not find fault with the fact that they here made a beginning at serving the true God. They did not know all that was involved, but they did know that what Jehovah had done for Israel was greater than what any so-called god had done for his people. By this rule they measured the relative merit of the gods. God honored their limited faith, and would not permit Israel to cancel their pledge to them. God accepts men where they are, and then seeks to lead them on to more perfect service. Some begin their worship of God from entirely wrong motives, but God accepts the surrender of the soul and then works to more commendable motives. Thus it was with the Gibeonites. To them were opened the full covenant blessings, as far as spiritual privileges were concerned.

All that he did. They were careful to enumerate only the events in Egypt and beyond Jordan. Had they mentioned Jericho or Ai, their subterfuge would have been exposed, for anyone coming from a far country would not, presumably, have had time to hear of so recent an event.

11. Our elders. From this it is inferred that Gibeon and her cities had no king over them (see on v. 3).

12. Mouldy. The word here translated “mouldy” is used only three times in the OT, twice in this chapter (vs. 5, 12) and in 1 Kings 14:3, where it is translated “cracknels” (“cakes,” margin). In this last instance it would be impossible to translate it “mouldy,” and there is a question as to whether it should be so translated here. It has been suggested that it would be appropriate to translate it the same way in Joshua as in 1 Kings. Furthermore, in the case of each of occurrence in Joshua the word is preceded by the perfect tense of the verb “to be.” Thus here it would read literally, “And now, behold, it is dry, and it was cakes.” Most translators and commentators, however, take it to mean “mouldy” (see PP 505).

14. Took of their victuals. This seems to be a better translation than that suggested in the margin, “they received the men by reason of their victuals.” Many commentators favor the marginal reading, in spite of the fact that there is nothing in the Hebrew that requires it. Their reason for doing so is that it seems to agree better with the context. The Hebrew leaders took from the provisions to taste, handle, and test for themselves, so that they might be certain in their decision. Having done so, they felt confident in their own judgment. This test differed from the one they had met at the time of their first attempt to take Ai, or they might have recognized the tempter in his new guise. Satan has many tricks, and employs the one he thinks will best suit his victim. We are never safe in any problem with human wisdom alone.

Asked not counsel. God had made provision for His will to be known through Eleazar, the priest, by means of the Urim and Thummim (Num. 27:18–23). Joshua might thus have obtained divine guidance in this important decision. What the Lord’s answer in this instance would have been, we are not told. Possibly the Gibeonites would still have been spared; God’s mercy embraces all who seek His salvation. He had forbidden His people to make any covenant with the inhabitants of the land, but this was for a specific reason, namely, that they might not be turned to follow the abominations of the inhabitants. Had any of these heathen people, like Rahab, turned from their abominations and sought divine mercy, God would have accepted them as readily as He afterward accepted Nineveh (Jonah 3:10). But the ultimate decision in each case must rest with God. He is the only one who can truly read the heart. He could not entrust such decisions to men. Therefore, He gave command for the total annihilation of all the Canaanitish nations, but this did not mean that He might not make exceptions where the circumstances so indicated. It would not be safe to trust the people with power to make peace with even single cities, lest repentance be simulated by the Canaanites. Such deception could rapidly spread, and many of the inhabitants of the land would feign repentance, while remaining in heart as idolatrous as ever.

The worker for God today should exercise great care in ascertaining whether an individual has given evidence of faith before admitting him into the covenant of faith. In such instances it is well not to be self-assertive and confident in one’s own opinions, but always humble, sincerely seek the guidance of God (Ps. 32:8).

15. The princes. Literally, “the lifted up ones,” that is, the heads of the various tribes.

17. The third day. That is, the third day after they set out for Gibeon. They were thus on the journey for two days. This is evidence that they did not set out from the new Gilgal, as some think, because it would not have taken more than a few hours at most from there to Gibeon (see on v. 6). Three days after the treaty had been made and the messengers had departed, the Israelites discovered that the Gibeonite cities were close by and that they had been deceived. Perhaps some deserter told them, or Israelite scouts may have found someone who told them the truth. Under Joshua’s direction the army of Israel immediately set out to investigate. Possibly Joshua had in mind to revise the treaty because of the deception practiced upon him by the Gibeonites, and to see what use could be made of their cities.

Their cities. Gibeon, meaning “a hill,” Chephirah, “a young lioness,” and Beeroth, “wells,” later fell to the tribe of Benjamin (ch. 18:25, 26), while Kirjath-jearim, “city to the tribe of Judah (ch. 15:60). It was later at Kirjath-jearim that the ark rested before David moved it to Jerusalem (1 Sam. 6:21; 7:1, 2; 2 Sam. 6:2). Gibeon is known today as ejРJйЖb, Chephirah as Tell KefйЖreh, and Kirjath-jearim as Tell elРAzhar.

18. Smote them not. Even though the congregation murmured against the princes, and the princes had done wrong in making such an agreement, the Israelites felt obligated to keep their oath. A promise, once made, should be held sacred if it does not bind the one making it to perform a wrong act (see Prov. 12:22; Ps. 24:4; 15:4; PP 506). The leaders of Israel involved the whole congregation in trouble because of their mistake. Yet, to their credit, they felt that they should abide by the promise they had made. How careful those in responsibility need to be lest, by reliance on their own judgment, they bring difficulty on the whole congregation.

20. Because of the oath. Had the fulfilling of the oath required a sinful deed, it would not have been binding, for we cannot be bound to commit a sin (see Judges 11:29–40). Though the princes were at fault in engaging so rashly in this matter, they were not to violate the oath, even though it was to their own hurt (Ps. 15:4). It is evident that God approved their conduct in this, and was displeased with Saul when, long after, he infringed it (2 Sam. 21:1–3).

21. Hewers of wood. According to vs. 23 and 27, this service was to be for the congregation and for the house of God. Such laborers were reckoned among the lowest class of people (Deut. 29:10, 11), and these services were to be performed by the strangers among them. The assignment of these menial tasks constituted the punishment of the Gibeonites. Had they dealt honestly with Israel, their lives would still have been spared, and they would probably have been exempted from servitude. Yet even a curse may be turned into a blessing. They were servants, it is true, but their service was for the house of God. By doing the work of the house of the Lord, they would be in a position where they could readily learn of the true God. They were thus placed under an influence that would prevent their returning to the idolatry of their fathers. Though bondmen to Israel, they would be freemen of the Lord, for in His service the lowest office is liberty, and His work is its own wages. Some have thought that the “Nethinims” of Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 2:70; 8:20; Neh. 7:60) were the Gibeonites, inasmuch as the Nethinim were the temple servants. The Heb. nethinim means “given ones” or “devoted ones”; this lends some support to their possible identity with the Gibeonites. That the Gibeonites existed as such in the time of David is evident from the circumstance mentioned in 2 Sam. 21:1–9. However, it is possible that Saul’s misguided zeal all but annihilated them, and that David replaced them with a new order—the Nethinim of Nehemiah’s day.

Ellen G. White comments

1–27PP 505, 506

7, 8, 12–16PP 505

15–19PK 369

18   PP 506

21, 23  CE 30

24–27PP 506