TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Joshua 9:15–21. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Here is, I. The treaty soon concluded with the Gibeonites, Jos 9:15. The thing was not done with much formality, but in short, 1. They agreed to let them live, and more the Gibeonites did not ask. In a common war this would have been but a small matter to be granted; but in the wars of Canaan, which were to make a general destruction, it was a great favour to a Canaanite to have his life given him for a prey, Jer 45:5. 2. This agreement was made not by Joshua only, but by the princes of the congregation in conjunction with him. Though Joshua had an extraordinary call to the government, and extraordinary qualifications for it, yet he would not act in an affair of this nature without the counsel and concurrence of the princes, who were neither kept in the dark nor kept under foot, but were treated by him as sharers in the government. 3. It was ratified by an oath; they swore unto them, not by any of the gods of Canaan, but by the God of Israel only, Jos 9:19. Those that mean honestly do not startle at assurances, but satisfy those with whom they treat, and glorify God by calling him to witness to the sincerity of their intentions. 4. Nothing appears to have been culpable in all this but that it was done rashly; they took of their victuals, by which they satisfied themselves that it was indeed old and dry, but did not consider that his was no proof of their bringing it fresh from home; so that, making use of their senses only, but not their reason, they received the men (as the margin reads it) because of their victuals, perceiving perhaps, upon the view and taste of their bread, not only that now it was old, but that it had been fine and very good at first, whence they inferred that they were persons of some quality, and therefore the friendship of their country was not to be despised. But they asked not counsel at the mouth of the Lord. They had the Urim and Thummim with them, which they might have advised with in this difficult case, and which would have told them no lie, would have led them into no error; but they relied so much on their own politics that they thought it needless to bring the matter to the oracle. Joshua himself was not altogether without blame herein. Note, We make more haste than good speed in any business when we stay not to take God along with us, and by the word and prayer to consult him. Many a time we see cause to reflect upon it with regret that such and such an affair miscarried, because we asked not counsel at the mouth of the Lord; would we acknowledge him in all our ways, we should find them more safe, easy, and successful.
II.The fraud soon discovered, by which this league was procured.
A lying tongue is but for a moment, and truth will be the daughter of time. Within three days they found, to their great surprise, that the cities which these ambassadors had treated for were very near them, but one night's foot-march from the camp at Gilgal, Jos 10:9. Either their own scouts or the parties that sallied out to acquaint themselves with the country, or perhaps some deserters that came over to them from the enemy, informed them of the truth in this matter. Those that suffer themselves to be deceived by the wiles of Satan will soon be undeceived to their confusion, and will find that near, even at the door, which they imagined was very far off.
III.The disgust of the congregation at this.
They did indeed submit to the restraints which this league laid upon them, and smote not the cities of the Gibeonites, neither slew the persons nor seized the prey; but it vexed them to have their hands thus tied, and they murmured against the princes (Jos 9:18) it is to be feared, more from a jealousy for their own profit than from a zeal for the fulfilling of God's command, though some of them perhaps had a regard to that. Many are forward to arraign and censure the actions of princes while they are ignorant of the springs of those actions and are incompetent judges of the reasons of state that govern them. While therefore we are satisfied in general that those who are over us aim at nothing but the public good, and sincerely seek the welfare of their people, we ought to make the best of what they do and not exercise ourselves in things above us.
IV.The prudent endeavour of the princes to pacify the discontented congregation, and to accommodate the matter; herein all the princes concurred and were unanimous, which doubtless disposed the people to acquiesce.
1.They resolved to spare the lives of the Gibeonites, for so they had expressly sworn to do (Jos 9:15), to let them live.
(1.)The oath was lawful, else it had not bound them any more than Herod's oath bound him to cut off John Baptist's head; it is true God had appointed them to destroy all the Canaanites, but the law must be construed, in favorem vitae - with some tender allowance, to mean those only that stood it out and would not surrender their country to them, and not to bind them so far to put off the sense of honour and humanity as to slay those who had never lifted up a hand against them nor ever would, but before they were reduced to any extremity, or ever attempted any act of hostility, with one consent humbled themselves; the kings of Israel were certainly more merciful kings than to do so (Kg1 20:31), and the God of Israel a more merciful God than to order it so. Satis est prostrasse leoni - It is enough to have laid the lion prostrate. And besides, the reason of the law is the law; the mischief designed to be prevented by that law was the infecting of the Israelites with their idolatry, Deu 7:4. But if the Gibeonites renounce their idolatry, and become friends and servants to the house of God, the danger is effectually prevented, the reason of the law ceases, and consequently the obligation of it, especially to a thing of this nature. The conversion of sinners shall prevent their ruin.
(2.)The oath being lawful, both the princes and the people for whom they transacted were bound by it, bound in conscience, bound in honour to the God of Israel, by whom they had sworn, and whose name would have been blasphemed by the Canaanites if they had violated this oath. They speak as those that feared an oath (Ecc 9:2), when they argued thus: We will let them live, lest wrath be upon us, because of the oath which we swore, Jos 9:20. He that ratifies a promise with an oath imprecates the divine vengeance if he wilfully break his promise, and has reason to expect that divine justice will take him at his word. God is not mocked, and therefore oaths are not to be jested with. The princes would keep their word, [1.] Though they lost by it. A citizen of Zion swears to his own hurt and changes not, Psa 15:4. Joshua and the princes, when they found it was to their prejudice that they had thus bound themselves, did not apply to Eleazar for a dispensation, much less did they pretend that no faith is to be kept with heretics, with Canaanites; no, they were strangers to the modern artifices of the Romish church to elude the most sacred bonds, and even to sanctify perjuries [2.] Though the people were uneasy at it, and their discontent might have ended in a mutiny, yet the princes would not violate their engagement to the Gibeonites; we must never be over-awed, either by majesty or multitude, to do a sinful thing, and go against our consciences. [3.] Though they were drawn into this league by a wile, and might have had a very plausible pretence to declare it null and void, yet they adhered to it. They might have pleaded that though those were the men with whom they exchanged the ratifications, yet these were not the cities intended in the league; they had promised to spare certain cities, without names, that were very far off, and upon the express consideration of their being so; but these were very near, and therefore not the cities that they covenanted with. And many learned men have thought that they were so grossly imposed upon by the Gibeonites that it would have been lawful for them to have recalled their promise, but to preserve their reputation, and to keep up in Israel a veneration of an oath, they would stand to it; but it is plain that they thought themselves indispensably obliged by it, and were apprehensive that the wrath of God would fall upon them if they broke it. And, however their adherence to it might be displeasing to the congregation, it is plain that it was acceptable to God; for when, in pursuance of this league, they undertook the protection of the Gibeonites, God gave them the most glorious victory that ever they had in all their wars (ch. 10), and long afterwards severely avenged the wrong Saul did to the Gibeonites in violation of this league, Sa2 21:1. Let this convince us all how religiously we ought to perform our promises, and make good our bargains; and what conscience we ought to make of our words when they are once given. If a covenant obtained by so many lies and deceits might not be broken, shall we think to evade the obligation of those that have been made with all possible honesty and fairness? If the fraud of others will not justify or excuse our falsehood, certainly the honesty of others in dealing with us will aggravate and condemn our dishonesty in dealing with them.
2.Though they spared their lives, yet they seized their liberties, and sentenced them to be hewers of wood and drawers of water to the congregation, Jos 9:21. By this proposal the discontented congregation was pacified; for,
(1.)Those who were angry that the Gibeonites lived might be content when they saw them condemned to that which, in the general apprehension, is worse than death, perpetual servitude.
(2.)Those who were angry that they were not spoiled might be content when their serving the congregation would be more to the public advantage than their best effects could be; and, in short, the Israelites would be not losers either in honour or profit by this peace with the Gibeonites; convince them of this, and they will be satisfied.
Continue studying Joshua 9:20 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Joshua 9:20 encapsulates the Israelite leaders' profound decision to uphold their solemn oath to the Gibeonites, despite having been cunningly deceived into the covenant. Faced with the revelation that the Gibeonites were not distant people but close neighbors whom God had commanded to be utterly destroyed, the elders chose to honor their word, fearing divine retribution if they broke a sacred vow made in the Lord's name. This pivotal verse underscores the inviolable sanctity of oaths and covenants within ancient Israelite society and before God, highlighting the grave spiritual consequences perceived to accompany their violation.
Context
Literary Context
Joshua 9:20 is strategically positioned immediately following the dramatic revelation of the Gibeonites' deception (as detailed in Joshua 9:16-19) and preceding the formalization of their perpetual servitude within Israel (recorded in Joshua 9:21-27). Israel had recently achieved stunning, divinely-assisted victories at Jericho and Ai, instilling widespread fear among the Canaanite inhabitants. The Gibeonites, a formidable Hivite city, shrewdly feigned a long journey to secure a peace treaty with Israel. The critical error of the Israelite leaders, explicitly highlighted in Joshua 9:14, was their failure to "ask counsel of the LORD" before entering this binding covenant. Upon discovering the truth three days later, the entire congregation murmured against their leaders, who were then compelled to decide how to proceed. This verse records their resolute decision: to spare the Gibeonites' lives due to the binding nature of the oath, thereby averting potential divine wrath upon the nation.
Historical & Cultural Context
In the ancient Near East, oaths and treaties were considered profoundly sacred and legally binding, often invoked in the name of powerful deities. Breaking such a covenant, even if secured under duress or deception, was widely believed to invite the severe wrath of the invoked god(s). For Israel, an oath sworn "before the LORD" carried exceptional solemnity, reflecting God's own immutable covenant faithfulness and His demand for integrity from His people. Furthermore, Israel was under a stringent divine command (the herem, or ban) to utterly destroy the inhabitants of Canaan to prevent idolatry and moral corruption (Deuteronomy 7:1-6 and Deuteronomy 20:16-18). The Gibeonites were explicitly part of these condemned nations. The dilemma presented in Joshua 9 was therefore acutely complex: uphold a divinely-sanctioned command for destruction or honor a human oath made in God's name, albeit deceptively acquired. The leaders' decision reveals their profound theological understanding of the sanctity of an oath and their very real, biblically-informed fear of God's righteous judgment for its violation.
Key Themes
This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes within the book of Joshua and the broader Old Testament narrative. Firstly, it emphatically underscores the sanctity of oaths and covenants, demonstrating that even a deceptively acquired oath, once sworn in the Lord's name, was considered inviolable by Israel's leadership. This highlights God's unwavering expectation of integrity and truthfulness from His people, reflecting His own unchanging character and faithfulness (Numbers 23:19). Secondly, the explicit phrase "lest wrath be upon us" profoundly emphasizes the fear of divine judgment for covenant infidelity, a recurring and critical theme throughout Israel's history (2 Samuel 21:1-6). Thirdly, it vividly illustrates the consequences of human error and lack of discernment, as Israel's failure to consult God in Joshua 9:14 directly led to this complex moral and theological dilemma. Finally, it subtly introduces the theme of grace within judgment, as the Gibeonites, though initially condemned to destruction, are spared their lives and integrated into Israel's service, albeit in a subordinate and perpetual role (Joshua 9:27).
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This primitive root (H2421) signifies to exist, to remain alive, or to be restored to life, whether literally or figuratively. Causatively, it means to revive or preserve life. In this context, it refers to the Israelite leaders' decision to "let them live," prioritizing the preservation of the Gibeonites' physical existence despite the divine command for their destruction. This choice, stemming from the oath, highlights the immediate and tangible outcome of their fear of divine wrath.
Derived from a root meaning "to chip off" or "splinter," this noun (H7110) figuratively denotes strong displeasure, indignation, or divine anger. It is consistently associated with God's righteous judgment against sin, rebellion, or, as here, covenant breaking. The leaders' fear of "wrath" was not a superstitious dread but a profound theological understanding that God holds His people accountable for their word, especially when given in His name, and that His justice would respond to such infidelity.
This feminine passive participle (H7621) properly refers to "something sworn," specifically a solemn vow or sworn declaration. An oath was a binding commitment, often accompanied by an imprecation or curse invoked upon oneself if the vow was broken. The use of this word here underscores the immense gravity of the Israelites' commitment and their recognition that breaking it would invite the very divine judgment they had implicitly invoked upon themselves by swearing "before the LORD."
Verse Breakdown
"This we will do to them; we will even let them live,"
This opening clause reveals the immediate, resolute decision of the Israelite leaders. Despite the Gibeonites' cunning deception and the clear divine mandate to eradicate the Canaanite inhabitants, the leaders resolve to spare their lives. This choice demonstrates a profound prioritization of the sanctity of a sworn oath over the initial command, showcasing a nuanced and ethically complex approach to divine directives when a binding covenant has been established. It sets the stage for the Gibeonites' future role as perpetual servants within the Israelite community, a detail elaborated upon later in the chapter.
"lest wrath be upon us,"
This crucial phrase articulates the primary and compelling motivation behind the leaders' decision. They understood that breaking an oath made in the Lord's name would inevitably incur divine displeasure, judgment, and potentially severe national consequences. This fear was not a sign of weakness or lack of faith, but rather a profound reverence for God's holiness, justice, and unwavering faithfulness to His own word. It signifies their deep theological conviction that God expects His people to be faithful to their promises, and that covenant infidelity carries serious implications in the eyes of a righteous God.
"because of the oath which we sware unto them."
This final clause explicitly states the foundational reason for their action: the absolute and binding nature of the oath. It unequivocally confirms that the covenant, even though secured through cunning and misrepresentation, was considered inviolable by the Israelite leadership. This emphasizes the supreme sanctity of a sworn promise in ancient Israelite law and theology, particularly when God's name was invoked as a witness. It highlights that integrity, truthfulness, and adherence to one's word were paramount values, reflecting the very character of God.
Literary Devices
The narrative in Joshua 9, culminating in Joshua 9:20, masterfully employs several literary devices to deepen its theological impact. There is significant Irony in the Gibeonite deception: their cunning lie, intended to save their lives from immediate destruction, ultimately leads to a permanent state of servitude, becoming "hewers of wood and drawers of water" for the congregation and the altar of the Lord (Joshua 9:27). This outcome, while preserving their lives, serves as a form of judgment for their dishonesty. Furthermore, the narrative contains powerful Foreshadowing, as the leaders' fear of "wrath" for breaking the oath is tragically realized much later in Israel's history. King Saul's subsequent assault on the Gibeonites, violating this very oath, leads to a three-year famine upon Israel, requiring atonement (2 Samuel 21:1-6). This demonstrates God's unwavering commitment to the sanctity of oaths, even those made in error. Finally, there is a profound Contrast between God's clear command to utterly destroy the Canaanites and the human oath that seemingly overrides it, creating a theological tension that the leaders resolve by prioritizing the oath's sanctity to avoid divine wrath.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Joshua 9:20 serves as a powerful theological statement about the nature of oaths, the character of God, and the consequences of human actions. It reveals that God holds His people accountable for their word, even when given under less than ideal circumstances or through human error. The Israelite leaders, though initially deceived, recognized that an oath sworn "before the LORD" invoked God as a witness and guarantor, making its violation a direct affront to His integrity and faithfulness. This passage underscores that divine wrath is a real and inevitable consequence of covenant infidelity, reflecting God's justice and His unwavering demand for integrity from those who bear His name. It teaches that God values truthfulness and the keeping of promises so highly that even a command for destruction can be superseded by the sanctity of a sworn oath, once made, demonstrating His complex and righteous governance over His people.
Reflection and Application
Joshua 9:20 offers profound and enduring lessons for believers today concerning integrity, discernment, and the reverent fear of God. In a contemporary world where promises are often treated lightly and truth can seem malleable, this passage calls us to a significantly higher standard. Our word, as followers of Christ, should be our bond, faithfully reflecting the trustworthiness and integrity of the God we serve. Even when circumstances shift unexpectedly, or we realize we have made a commitment unwisely, the core biblical principle remains: honor your word. This does not imply that we are bound to sinful or unrighteous promises, but it emphatically means we must exercise extreme caution, diligent prayer, and spiritual discernment before making any commitments, especially those that involve God's name or impact our Christian witness. The Israelites' initial error was their failure to consult God; our application must be to seek His divine counsel in all decisions, whether seemingly insignificant or monumentally impactful, to avoid dilemmas born of haste, human pride, or reliance solely on our own wisdom. Ultimately, this passage powerfully reminds us that God is a God of truth and justice, who expects His people to walk in unwavering integrity, understanding that our actions carry profound spiritual consequences.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did the Israelites honor an oath that was obtained through deception, especially since it contradicted God's command to destroy the Canaanites?
The Israelite leaders honored the oath primarily out of a profound and biblically-informed fear of divine wrath. In the ancient Near East, and especially for Israel, an oath sworn in the name of a deity (in this case, "before the LORD") was considered absolutely binding, regardless of how it was obtained. To break such an oath was to invite the direct judgment of the invoked deity. While God had indeed commanded the utter destruction of the Canaanites (Deuteronomy 7:1-6), the leaders understood that God's own character is one of unwavering faithfulness to His promises. Breaking an oath, even one made in error or through deception, would demonstrate a fundamental lack of integrity and truthfulness that could provoke God's anger more directly and severely than the failure to execute the herem in this specific instance. Their decision prioritized the sanctity of the oath and the avoidance of divine punishment for perjury. This decision is later vindicated in Israel's history when King Saul's subsequent violation of this very oath brings a three-year famine upon Israel, requiring atonement (2 Samuel 21:1-6).
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Joshua 9:20, with its profound emphasis on the inviolable sanctity of an oath and the very real fear of divine wrath for its violation, powerfully foreshadows the ultimate and perfect fulfillment of God's promises in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The Israelite leaders' difficult decision to honor a deceitful oath, fearing God's righteous anger, points to a deeper theological truth: God's own unwavering, perfect faithfulness to His covenant promises. Unlike the Gibeonites' cunning deception, God's new covenant with humanity, established in Christ, is founded on absolute truth, perfect righteousness, and unfailing love. Jesus Christ is the ultimate "Amen," the faithful and true witness who perfectly embodies and fulfills every single promise of God (2 Corinthians 1:20). He is the one who, in His perfect obedience, willingly took upon Himself the "wrath" that humanity justly deserved for its covenant breaking, rebellion, and sin (Romans 5:9). Through His obedient life, sacrificial death on the cross, and glorious resurrection, Christ honored God's justice, satisfied the righteous demands of the Law, and upheld divine integrity in a way that Israel, even in its best efforts, could only dimly reflect. The Gibeonites, though spared from destruction, entered a state of perpetual servitude; similarly, humanity, though deserving of eternal judgment, is redeemed through Christ's complete and perfect work, entering into a new covenant of grace (Hebrews 8:6) and becoming willing servants of righteousness and God's kingdom (Romans 6:18). Thus, Joshua 9:20, while a narrative of human error and divine fear, ultimately directs our gaze to the perfect oath-keeper, Jesus, who secures our eternal peace by fully absorbing the wrath we deserved, thereby establishing an everlasting covenant of grace.