Chapter 14

1 The nine tribes and a half are to have their inheritance by lot. 6 Caleb by privilege obtaineth Hebron.

1. These are the countries. The words “are the countries” are supplied. I would be as correct to read, these “are the inheritances,” or these “are those who inherited.” The LXX has for the opening sentence of this verse, “these are they of the children of Israel that received their inheritance.” This chapter is a preface to the division of the land among the nine and a half tribes. The time had come for the Israelites to disperse themselves and to take over their new conquests. Canaan would have been subdued in vain, if it was not now inhabited. Centuries had passed since the call of Abram out of Ur of the Chaldees, and since the promise that his seed should inherit the land. God’s promises are sometimes long delayed because of the unfaithfulness of those to whom they are made. It is our privilege to hasten the fulfillment of His promises.

Eleazar. Literally, “God has helped.” Eleazar was Aaron’s third son and successor in the high priesthood (Ex. 6:23, 25; Num. 3:2, 4; 20:25–28; Deut. 10:6). The order in which the names appear is not Joshua and Eleazar, but the reverse. The naming of Eleazar first is in accordance with the law of Moses, and the form of government that he was ordered to establish in Israel. God was to be supreme through His priest. Joshua was to stand before Eleazar (Num. 27:21), and the priest was to ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord. At Eleazar’s word both Joshua and the congregation were to go out and come in (see Deut. 17:9). Under the system of government established in Israel by Moses, the priest, under the direction of God, had the legislative authority, and the executive power rested with the judge. Such a system is known as a theocracy. As long as the priest depended wholly on God, the arrangement was ideal. On the other hand, a corrupt priesthood could take control and endanger the whole realm. The theocratic form of government ceased when Israel as a nation was rejected. The system has never been revived.

Heads of the fathers. The names of these are found in Num. 34:19–28. No prince was taken from the tribes of Reuben and Gad, because these had already received their inheritance on the other side of Jordan.

2. Lot. Literally, “pebble,” the name evidently preserved from the primitive method of casting lots by the use of a pebble. Rabbinical scholars have a conjecture that two urns were used. In one had been placed little tablets (anciently perhaps stones) with the names of the tribes, and in the other, similar tablets with the names of the districts, and one of each was drawn at the same time by Eleazar and Joshua or by the representative of each tribe when his turn arrived. There is, of course, no verification for this story. There may have been only one urn containing the names of the districts, which the heads of the several tribes may have drawn. The exact method employed is not known. It seems evident that the land so divided could only point out the districts in general. The extent of their boundaries had to be decided by the leaders of the people. A larger tribe would require more territory, and a smaller tribe, less. This was the rule specified by the Lord (Num. 26:51–56; 33:54). The whole distribution was evidently overruled by special providence so that it would correspond with the inspired predictions of Jacob and Moses respecting the allotment of each tribe (Gen. 49 and Deut. 33). To Judah fell a country abounding in vineyards and pastures; to Zebulun, seacoasts; to Issachar, a rich plain between ranges of mountains; to Asher, one abounding in oil, wheat, and metals; and so to the others.

4. Two tribes. The Levites were not reckoned among the tribes as far as inheritance was concerned. Their dwelling was to be among all the tribes. One of the sons of Joseph took his place so as to make up the number 12 in the reckoning of the tribes. Thus there are two ways of enumerating the tribes of Israel, each yielding the total 12. It has been suggested that these two systems may have been distinguished in the account given in Ex. 28. Mention is there made that the high priest should bear the names of the children of Israel on his shoulders according to birth (that is, Joseph being counted as well as Levi, but not Ephraim and Manasseh). On his breastplate these names were to appear according to the 12 tribes (that is, Ephraim and Manasseh being specified but Joseph and Levi left out).

Suburbs. Literally, “pastures.” The Hebrew word comes from a root that means “to drive out.” Therefore, literally, the suburbs were places to which cattle were driven to graze. Num. 35:1–5 gives the size of these pasture grounds.

6. In Gilgal. Where the tabernacle and the camp of Israel were still located, for Joshua had not removed his camp from here. The work of dividing the land began in Gilgal. It was completed later in Shiloh (ch. 18). Considerable time must have been required to make all the geographical measurements and observations necessary for the proper and equitable division of the land.

Caleb. An interesting question arises as to the birth and parentage of Caleb. He is always spoken of as the son of Jephunneh, and so must not be confused with the other Calebs referred to in 1 Chron. 2. His younger brother, Othniel, is called the son of Kenaz (Judges 1:13), and here Caleb is called the Kenezite. It may be that Othniel was the son of Caleb’s stepfather. Or, more likely, Kenaz and Caleb were brothers, for the Hebrew can be understood in that way. That would make Othniel a nephew of Caleb rather than brother. Jephunneh’s lineage cannot be traced back, but some have thought that Caleb was a descendant of Kenaz, the grandson of Esau (Gen. 36:11), and that Caleb was a proselyte, one of the mixed multitude who had joined himself to Israel like some of the Kenites, Moses’ relatives (Judges 1:16; Gen. 15:19; see on 1 Sam. 15:2).

The fact that Caleb was loyal and true, for he “wholly followed the Lord” (Num. 32:12), has been taken by some to be the reason that he was chosen to represent the tribe of Judah and was given a part “among the children of Judah” (Joshua 15:13).

The Lord said. There is no direct statement recorded in Scripture that Caleb and his posterity should receive Hebron and its environs. However, God made the promise, “Him will I bring into the land whereinto he went” (Num. 14:24); and again, “Him will I give the land that he hath trodden upon” (Deut. 1:36). The following circumstances have been suggested as perhaps forming the background to this promise. it is quite likely that, to avoid detection, the 12 spies did not all go together as a group. They may have gone out by twos. In this case it is likely that Caleb and his companion spied out the land of the Anakim around Hebron, but his companion, terrified by the size of the inhabitants and the strength of their fortifications, did not agree that Israel would be able to take the city. This would make the phrases “the land whereinto he went” (Num. 14:24) and “the land that he hath trodden upon” (Deut. 1:36) refer specifically to Hebron. Caleb and Joshua would definitely understand what God meant even though Hebron was not mentioned specifically by name.

7. Forty years. See on ch. 11:18.

As it was in mine heart. Literally, “as it was with my heart.” The expression denotes real sincerity. Without fear or favor Caleb had reported the facts as he saw them, and expressed his faith in the power of God to overcome these giants. Even now, at the age of 85, he was willing to attack these formidable inhabitants, which, also, he successfully undertook a short time later (ch. 15:14).

8. I wholly followed. Literally, “I fulfilled after.” The LXX reads, “I applied myself to follow.” The words give the idea of a traveler, who, intent upon following his guide, walks so closely in his steps as to leave hardly any space between. The value of the character of a man becomes manifest when, despite others’ failures, he stands for principle. Such was the character of Caleb.

9. Moses sware. See Num. 14:20–24 and Deut. 1:34–36, where this oath is attributed to the Lord. There is no contradiction here. Moses was God’s spokesman, and may have afterward repeated the oath of God, and confirmed it with his own mouth. We today use similar terminology when we say that Isaiah says so and so, when the word actually originated with the Lord.

Whereon thy feet. Probably a direct reference to Hebron (see on v. 6).

10. Kept me alive. In the ordinary course of events Caleb would likely have died before this. All his contemporaries in age, except Joshua, had passed from the scene of action years before. Caleb knew that his long life was the result of his obedience. He had fully followed the Lord. His life was a demonstration of faith, for in all things he accepted the program of God instead of his own. God can do great things for those who are wholly surrendered to Him. But those who follow only so much of the divine program as suits them, and neglect those items displeasing to them, cannot expect the blessing of Heaven.

Forty and five years. See on ch. 11:18.

11. As strong. The reward of a life of virtuous youth and temperate manhood, by nature’s own law, is ordinarily a vigorous, healthy, and respected old age. Loyalty to God had apparently preserved Caleb from the dissipating sins of his fellow Israelites. He had not indulged appetite as they had, nor had he lost sleep and rest at night struggling with a pained conscience. His abstemious life had paid off in dividends in this life, and now he presented himself before Joshua with undiminished strength at an age when most others had already been called from this life.

12. This mountain. He did not mean the city of Hebron alone, which had been taken before by Joshua, but he included, in his request, all the adjacent country, including the caves and strongholds to which the Anakim had retired, and where they were now abiding in considerable force. We may suppose that Caleb, in the light of the stress that the other spies had laid upon the difficulty of conquering Hebron and the surrounding area, asked for the territory of Hebron as evidence of his faith in complete victory.

Thou heardest. Probably, as suggested (see on v. 6), it was another companion and not Joshua who accompanied Caleb to Hebron. But Joshua would later have heard from the lips of Caleb the expression of his convictions.

If so be. The Hebrew word here translated “if so be” may express hope as well as fear, and need not be taken as an expression of doubt as the English makes it appear. The whole statement is the language of one who disclaims reliance on his own ability—one who realizes that the battle is not to the strong, nor the race to the swift (Eccl. 9:11). It may be that Hebron had fallen again to its former possessors after Joshua had once taken it. On the other hand, the request of Caleb, no doubt, had reference mainly to the adjacent country where the Anakim still held out in their strongholds. Caleb’s example of utter dependence upon God should teach us to make certain of the presence of God in all our undertakings. Our equipment may not be the best—we may not have had superior training, but if God be for us, who can be against us (Rom. 8:31))?

14. Wholly followed. See on v. 8.

15. Kirjath-arba. Kirjath means “city,” and Arba is the name of the father of Anak (ch. 15:13), from whom came the Anakim. The first mention of this place in Scripture is by the name Hebron (Gen. 13:18), but it was either built or rebuilt by the Anakim and named Kirjath-arba.

After that territory was reconquered by Caleb, the city was called Hebron. The name Hebron, meaning “alliance,” is a derivative of the Hebrew verb chabar, which has the meaning “to ssociate,” “to join fellowship,” or “to ally.”

The land had rest. This statement appears in ch. 11:23, where its position is perfectly natural. There it closes the record of the wars of Joshua. It is not so easily accounted for here, but its apparent reference is to the land taken by Caleb from the Anakim. Then, again, the statement may be a reiteration of the conclusion of Joshua’s campaigns. After this the conquest consisted more of isolated battles than of general wars. The enemy was now disjointed and broken, and Israel could move in and take over without too much resistance. God had promised to go before His people to subdue the rest of the land, and if Israel had moved forward by faith and obedience, the land would soon have had rest in the fullest sense of the word.

Ellen G. White comments

1–15PP 511, 512

6–9PP 511

10–14PP 512

13   Ed 149