Joshua 16 Commentary
Verse-by-verse exposition of Joshua chapter 16
Chapter OverviewRead →
Adam ClarkeAdam Clarke Commentary · 1826
or village, (see the note on Gen 28:12 ), and that sometimes the whole place was called Beth-el, at other times Luz, and sometimes, as in the case above, the two places were distinguished. As we find the term London comprises, not only London, but also the city of Westminster and the borough of Southwark; though at other times all three are distinctly mentioned. Archi to Ataroth - Archi was the country of Hushai, the friend of David, 2Sam 15:32 , who is called Hushai the Archite. Ataroth, called Ataroth-addar, Ataroth the illustrious, Jos 16:5 , and simply Ataroth, Jos 16:7 , is supposed to have been about fifteen miles from Jerusalem. Verse 3 Beth-horon the nether - This city was about twelve miles from Jerusalem, on the side of Nicopolis, formerly Emmaus. - Calmet. See the note on Jos 10:10 . Verse 5 Ataroth-addar - See the note on Jos 16:2 . Beth-horon the upper - The situation of this town is little known. It was eastward of Beth-horon the nether, and consequently not far from it. Verse 8 Tappuah - This was a city in the tribe of Manasseh, and gave name to a certain district called the land of Tappuah. See Jos 17:8 . The sea - The Mediterranean, as before. Verse 9 And the separate cities - That is, the cities that were separated from the tribe of Manasseh to be given to Ephraim; see Jos 17:9 . Verse 10 The Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer - It appears that the Canaanites were not expelled from this city till the days of Solomon, when it was taken by the king of Egypt his father-in-law, who made it a present to his daughter, Solomon's queen. See 1Kgs 9:16 . And see the note on Jos 10:33 . The Ephraimites, however, had so far succeeded in subjecting these people as to oblige them to pay tribute, though they could not, or at least did not, totally expel them. Of the names and places in this chapter, we may say the same as of others already mentioned. See the note on Jos 15:1 . Many of those towns were small, and, we may rationally conclude, slightly built, and consequently have perished perhaps more than a thousand years ago. It would be therefore useless to look for such places now. Several of the towns in England, a land not exposed to such revolutions as that of Palestine has ever been, mentioned by Caesar and other ancient writers, are no longer discernible. Several have changed their names, and not a few their situation. Tradition states that the city of Norwich anciently stood some miles from its present situation; and we have the fullest proof that this was the case with the city of Salisbury. Such changes do not affect the truth of the ancient geography of our own country; nor can they impeach that of the sacred historian before us. Introduction The lot of the half tribe of Manasseh, Jos 17:1 , Jos 17:2 . Case of the daughters of Zelophehad, Jos 17:3-6 . The borders of Manasseh described, Jos 17:7-11 . The Canaanites dwell among them, but are laid under tribute, Jos 17:12 , Jos 17:13 . The children of Joseph complain of the scantiness of their lot, Jos 17:14-16 . Joshua authorizes them to possess the mountainous wood country of the Perizzites, and gives them encouragement to expel them, though they were strong and had chariots of iron, Jos 17:17 , Jos 17:18 . Verse 1
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
Children of Joseph - That is, of Ephraim, and the half tribe of Manasseh, which are here put together in one; because in these first verses he speaks of them in common; and then of their several portions.
Matthew HenryMatthew Henry's Complete Commentary · 1714
The Lot of Joseph. ( b. c. 1444.) 1 And the lot of the children of Joseph fell from Jordan by Jericho, unto the water of Jericho on the east, to the wilderness that goeth up from Jericho throughout mount Beth-el, 2 And goeth out from Beth-el to Luz, and passeth along unto the borders of Archi to Ataroth, 3 And goeth down westward to the coast of Japhleti, unto the coast of Beth-horon the nether, and to Gezer: and the goings out thereof are at the sea. 4 So the children of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, took their inheritance. Though Joseph was one of the younger sons of Jacob, yet he was his eldest by his most just and best beloved wife Rachel, was himself his best beloved son, and had been the greatest ornament and support of his family, kept it from perishing in a time of famine, and had been the shepherd and stone of Israel, and therefore his posterity were very much favoured by the lot. Their portion lay in the very heart of the land of Canaan. It extended from Jordan in the east ( v. 1 ) to the sea, the Mediterranean Sea, in the west, so that it took up the whole breadth of Canaan from side to side; and no question the fruitfulness of the soil answered the blessings both of Jacob and Moses, Gen. xlix. 25, 26 , and Deut. xxxiii. 13 , &c. The portions allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh are not so particularly described as those of the other tribes; we have only the limits and boundaries of them, not the particular cities in them, as before we had the cities of Judah and afterwards those of the other tribes. For this no reason can be assigned, unless we may suppose that Joshua being himself of the children of Joseph they referred it to him alone to distribute among them the several cities that lay within their lot, and therefore did not bring in the names of their cities to the great council of their princes who sat upon this affair, by which means it came to pass that they were not inserted with the rest in the books. The Inheritance of Joseph's Child
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
Manasseh - That is, half Manasseh. Their inheritance - Their several portions which here follow. It is said, they took their inheritance, which also Judah had done before them, because the tribes of Judah and Joseph did take their inheritances before the rest; and it was fit they should do so, for the security of the main camp, and the body of the people which were at Gilgal, chap. 18:5 .
Matthew HenryMatthew Henry's Complete Commentary · 1714
ren. ( b. c. 1444.) 5 And the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families was thus: even the border of their inheritance on the east side was Ataroth-addar, unto Beth-horon the upper; 6 And the border went out toward the sea to Michmethah on the north side; and the border went about eastward unto Taanath-shiloh, and passed by it on the east to Janohah; 7 And it went down from Janohah to Ataroth, and to Naarath, and came to Jericho, and went out at Jordan. 8 The border went out from Tappuah westward unto the river Kanah; and the goings out thereof were at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim by their families. 9 And the separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages. 10 And they drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute. Here, 1. The border of the lot of Ephraim is set down, by which it was divided on the south from Benjamin and Dan, who lay between it and Judah, and on the north from Manasseh; for east and west it reached from Jordan to the great sea. The learned, who aim to be exact in drawing the line according to the directions here, find themselves very much at a loss, the description being short and intricate. The report of those who in these latter ages have travelled those countries will not serve to clear the difficulties, so vastly unlike is it now to what it was then; not only cities have been so destroyed as that no mark nor footstep of them remains, but brooks are dried up, rivers alter their courses, and even the mountain falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place, Job xiv. 18 . Unless I could hope to solve the doubts that arise upon this draught of the border of Ephraim, it is to no purpose to mention them: no doubt it was then perfectly understood, so as that the first intention of recording it was effectually answered, which was to notify the ancient landmarks, which posterity must by no means remove. 2. Some separate cities are spoken of, that lay not within these borders, at least not if the line was drawn direct, but lay within the lot of Manasseh ( v. 9 ), which might better be read, and there were separate cities for the children of Ephraim among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, because it proved that Manasseh could spare them, and Ephraim had need of them, and it might be hoped that no inconvenience would arise from this mixture of these two tribes together, who were both the sons of Joseph, and should love as brethren. And by this it appears that though, when the tribes were numbered in the plains of Moab, Manasseh had got the start of Ephraim in number, for Manasseh was then 52,000, and Ephraim but 32,000 ( Num. xxvi. 34 , 37 ), yet by the time they were well settled in Canaan the hands were crossed again, and the blessing of Moses was verified, Deut. xxxiii. 17 , They are the ten thousands of Ephraim and they are the thousands of Manasseh. Families and kingdoms are diminished and increased, increased and diminished again, as God pleases. 3. A brand is put upon the Ephraimites, that they did not drive out the Canaanites from Gezer ( v. 10 ), either through carelessness or cowardice, either for want of faith in the promise of God, that he would give them success if they would make a vigorous effort, or for want of zeal for the command of God, which obliged them utterly to drive out the Canaanites, and to make no peace with them. And, though they hoped to satisfy the law by putting them under tribute, yet (as Calvin thinks) this made the matter worse, for it shows that they spared them out of covetousness, that they might be profited by their labours, and by dealing with them for their tribute they were in danger of being infected with their idolatry; yet some think that, when they brought them under tribute, they obliged them to renounce their idols, and to observe the seven precepts of the sons of Noah; and I should think so, but that we find in the sequel of the story that the Israelites were so far from restraining idolatry in others that they soon fell into it themselves. Many famous places were within this lot of the tribe of Ephraim, though not mentioned here. In it were Ramah, Samuel's city (called in the New Testament Arimathea, of which Joseph was, that took care of our Saviour's burial), and Shiloh, where the tabernacle was first set up. Tirzah also, the royal city of Jeroboam and his successors, and Deborah's palm-tree, under which she judged Israel, were in this tribe. Samaria, built by Omri after the burning of the royal palace of Tirzah, was in this tribe, and was long the royal city of the kingdom of the ten tribes; not far from it were Shechem, and the mountains Ebal and Gerizim, and Sychar, near which was Jacob's well, where Christ talked with the woman of Samaria. We read much of Mount Ephraim in the story of the Judges, and of a city called Ephraim, it is probable in this tribe, to which Christ retired, John xi. 54 . The whole kingdom of the ten tribes is often, in the prophets, especially in Hosea, called Ephraim.
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
East - side - That is, the north - east side. It is no wonder, if some of these descriptions are dark to us at this distance of time; there having been so many alterations made in places, and so many circumstances, being now altogether undiscoverable. But this is certain, that all the descriptions here mentioned, were then evident to the Israelites, because these were the foundations of all the possessions which then they took, and peaceably possessed in succeeding ages.
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
Toward the sun - The midland sea, towards the west.
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
To Jericho - Not to the city of Jericho, which belonged to Benjamin's lot, chap. 18:21 , but to its territory.
John WesleyJohn Wesley's Explanatory Notes · 1754
The separate cities - That is, besides those cities which were within Ephraim's bounds, he had some other cities, to which all of all their territories were annexed out Manasseh's portion, because his tribe was all here, and was larger than Manasseh's.