I ntroduction: The NIV Study Bible sums this chapter up most succinctly: Judah is the first of the west bank tribes to have its territory delineated. First the outer limits are listed, then the area apportioned to Caleb and Othniel; finally the Canaanite cities allotted to the clans of Judah are named region by region.

This chapter gives us, in great detail, the exact boundaries of the land which the tribe of Judah inherited, as well as the cities which came with it. At the end of the chapter, there will be a clue as to when this book was completed, but geography is our major concern here. We will run into problems. There are places mentioned here which may or may not be cities and there are places which seem to be misplaced, although we do not have supporting manuscript evidence. All in all, this would be a chapter that critics of the Bible would point to as being filled with contradictions. Our problem here is not with the autograph, which is an accurate copy of the original, but of our own manuscripts, which are out of order and violated. Having a portion of the Bible which is clearly geographically problematic, although an unhappy reality, does not mean that we do not have the living, inspired Word of God. It simply means that our manuscripts are not as accurate as we would like them to be. Many of these problems will be dealt with as they occur. Some variations in spelling and differences between the Greek and the Hebrew will not be covered as the general interest in these next few chapters of Joshua are limited at best. Many of the variant readings can be found in Rotherham’s The Emphasized Bible; the Revised English Bible also covers a great many variant readings, primarily in relation to the Greek. However, in the Greek and Hebrew, there are whole cities missing, and these will be mentioned as we come to them.

Even today, the books of Moses are given great reverence by the Jewish people. Furthermore, these books contain untold numbers of references to and God said, something found in Joshua, but not as often. Therefore, from a human standpoint, it would be reasonable to expect their accuracy to be better with the first five books of the Bible, than it would be with the book of Joshua. Furthermore, insofar as many people find this portion of God’s Word as uninteresting as the genealogies, it only stands to reason that a scribe would feel likewise, and therefore not give the book of Joshua his full and undivided concentration. Also, throughout time, the project of copying manuscripts was certainly the project of more than one person at various times. The better copyists would likely be given the more interesting material, which would not necessarily be a delineation of the property dealt out to the Israelites. A final reason that we will find great inaccuracies in this book is that it was simply not read as often as the books of Moses. Whereas if the books of Moses were read, say, once every seven months, then the book of Joshua might be read once every four or five years. If the books of Moses are read from once every five years, one might not open the book of Joshua (or, at least, the second half) but once every twenty or thirty—in other words, its condition might degenerate considerably before anyone was aware of how bad it was. Finally, Moses, the great man of God, did not fully comprehend how important his writings were until possibly the last month or two of his life (notice that we do not find the 1^st person pronoun until we get to the book of Deuteronomy), so it stands to reason that few if any would recognize the spiritual significance of some of the other books. Certainly, even a casual reader cannot help but see over and over in the books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers a continual repetition of thus says Jehovah; but we don’t find that near as often in the book of Joshua and rarely in these few chapters. So, from human viewpoint, if anything is going to be carefully guarded and faithfully copied, it will be the writings of Moses. What would be placed on the back burner would be the writings of Joshua, along with a great many other writings which were certainly extent at that time.

I approached this chapter and subsequent chapters differently than before. Whereas I looked up and often referred to every Scriptural reference found in the NIV Study Bible, NASB, and several other sources, I did not do that in these chapters with the hundreds of cities named. First of all, most people will not find this particularly interesting; and, secondly, most of the Scriptural references are listed by ZPEB already, which I consulted frequently for information concerning each city.

A problem that we will run into is that certain cities are first given over to Judah, and then we will later find these cities given to Simeon or to Dan. My thinking was that these latter were border cities for Dan and Judah, occupied by both groups. Edersheim suggests that after the lots had been cast and country divided up, there was some adjustments which had to be made based upon the size of the tribes.

A general question that we will have to deal with is why were the lots thrown at different times? We will have the lots thrown for Judah, the half-tribe of Manasseh and Ephraim first (apparently at Gilgal?—Joshua 14:6); and later seven lots will be thrown for the tribes which remain. My first thought was southern Palestine, was first conquered and then first divided and thought that could have even occurred prior to conquering northern Palestine. However, that theory won’t wash as Manasseh and Ephraim will occupy north-central Palestine and between Manasseh, Ephraim and Judah will be wedged Benjamin and Dan. My second thought is that this was done by population. However, although Judah is the tribe with the greatest population, Dan is 2^nd, Issachar is 3^rd, Zebulun is 4^th, Asher is 5^th, and Manasseh is 6^th. Ephraim is the second smallest (see Num. 26). However, if you take all of Ephraim and add it to half of Manasseh, then we do have the second largest tribe (and Ephraim and Manasseh together do make up the tribe of Joseph). Now, the problem is, even if the first couple lots were done by population, there is not that large of a gap in population between Judah and Joseph and the more populous of the other tribes.

Another question is that in reference to Judah, Ephraim and Manasseh, the Bible merely states that their lot was, and then their boundaries were described. When we get to the final seven tribes, their lots will apparently be cast in a different place (Shiloh); therefore, at a different time; and theirs will be numbered (i.e., the second lot fell to Simeon; the third lot came up for the sons of Zebulun, etc.). I bring these questions up as they occur to me without any guarantee that at some point in this book I will have the definitive answer to any one of them. Keeping these questions in the back of your mind, let us proceed:

Literally:

Smoother English rendering:

And so the lot was for the tribe of sons of Judah to their families unto a boundary of Edom, a wilderness of Zin, [the] Negev from an end of south;

Joshua

15:1

And so the first lot was for the tribe of the sons of Judah and their families from the border of Edom, the wilderness of Zin and down to the Negev in the south;

We are not told exactly how each tribe was chosen and how the land for the tribe was chosen, but there was apparently some sort of chance involved. It is not given to us precisely so that we could duplicate it, otherwise, we would be making all of our choices by throwing lots, which is not God’s plan for us today, now that we have the completed Word of God.

However, even though we do not know conclusively how the lots were cast, this does not mean that theologians haven’t taken stabs at this. The NIV Study Bible believes that Urim and Thummim must have been used (which was designed for simple yes and no answers, as well as to indicate which tribe had been chosen by God for a certain task. Barnes suggests: Perhaps two urns were employed, one containing a description of the several districts to be allotted, the other the names of the tribes; and the portion of each tribe would then be determined by a simultaneous drawing from the two urns. Or a drawing might be made be some appointed person, or by a delegate of each tribe from one urn containing the description of the ten inheritances. The lot only determined in a general way the position in the country of the particular tribe concerned, whether north or south, &c.; the dimensions of each territory being left to be adjusted subsequently, according to the numbers and wants of the tribe to be provided for. Since the predilections and habits of two tribes and a half were consulted in the apportionment to them of the trans-Jordanic territory...there is no objection to the supposition that something of the same kind may have taken place, subject to the Divine approval, in the distribution of the lands to the nine and a half other tribes; and the lot would thus be appealed to as finally deciding the matter and foreclosing jealousies and disputes. It is apparent that the casting of the ten lots did not take place simultaneously. The tribe of Judah had precedence, whether by express appointment or because its lot “came up” first, does not appear. It was, as it seems, only after this tribe had settled upon its domains, that further lots were drawn for Ephraim and the half tribe of Manasseh. After this a pause, perhaps of some duration, appears to have occurred; the camp was moved from Gilgal to Shiloh; and the further casting of lots for the other seven tribes was proceeded with at the instigation of Joshua (see xviii. 10).

Edersheim: The division of the land among the nine and a half tribes was, in strict accordance with Divine direction..., made by Eleazar, Joshua, and one representative from each of the ten tribes. It was decided by the “lot,” which probably, however, only determined the situation of each inheritance, whether north or south, inland or by the sea-shore, not its extent and precise boundaries. These would depend upon the size of each tribe. In point of fact, the original arrangements had in some cases to be afterwards modified, not as to tribal localisation, which was unalterably fixed by Divine lot, but as to extent of territory. Thus Judah had to give up part of its possession to Simeon (Josh. 19:9), while Dan, whose portion proved too small, obtained certain cities both from Judah and from Ephraim. As regards the lot, we may probably accept the Rabbinical tradition, that two urns were set out, one containing the names of the ten (or rather nine and a half) tribes, the other the designation of the various districts into which the country had been arranged, and that from each a lot was successively drawn, to designate first the tribe, and then the locality of its inheritance.

What we must recognize, above all else, is that, even though there is an indication of some divination in Scripture (Urim and Thummim, the twelve stones on the breastplate, the throwing of lots), there is nowhere in Scripture enough information to really attempt to duplicate these divinations. In fact, we find much to discourage the use of divination (e.g., Deut. 18:10–14) and simultaneously notice a complete lack of the actual mechanics of pre-canon divination.

However this was done, Barnes is correct in indicating that this took place at two different times. Also, of great importance, is that land was apportioned as per the size of the tribe. God had given these commands: “Among these the land will be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. To the larger, you will increase their inheritance and to the smaller, you will diminish their inheritance; each will be given their inheritance according to those who were numbered of them. But the land will be divided by lot. They will receive their inheritance according to the names of the tribes of their fathers, according to the selection by lot, their inheritance will be divided between the larger and the smaller.” (Num. 26:53–56). “When you cross over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, then you will drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and you will destroy all their figured stones, and you will destroy all their molten images and demolish all their high places; and you will take possession of the land and you will live in it, for I have given the land to you to possess it. And you will inherit the land by lot according to your families; to the larger you will give more inheritance, and to the smaller you will give less inheritance. Whenever the lot falls to anyone, that shall be his. You will inherit according to the tribes of your fathers.” (Num. 33:51b–54). And even many years later, the psalmist wrote: For Jehovah Most High is to be fears—a great King over all the earth. He subdues peoples under us, and nations under our feet. He chooses our inheritance for us, the glory of Jacob whom He loves (Psalm 47:2–4). Thirdly, there was some sort of divinely-guided chance, the throwing of lots, which was associated with the whole thing, as is clearly presented in this first verse, without giving us any specific mechanics.

The first thing that we ought to look at is the word translated lot. It is the masculine singular gôrâl (ל ָר) [pronounced goh-RAWL], and this is the same word which we find in Num. 26:55–56 33:54. The KJV is quite consistent here, rendering this lot (or, lots). BDB spends nearly a page on this word, allowing for such translations as lot, allotment, portion, recompense, retribution (see Isa. 17:14 Jer. 13:25). Gesenius calls this the metaphysical use, of which we have a similar saying. When we are about ready to do something that we do not know the outcome to, or whether we should do it or not, we occasionally say, “Let’s just roll the dice and see what happens.” Strong’s #1486 BDB #174.

Judah, although not the firstborn, was to become the pre-eminent of the tribes, as his father Jacob predicted. “Judah, your brother will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies. Your father’s sons will bow down to you. Judah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He crouches, he lies down as a lion, and as a lion, who dares to rouse him up? The scepter will not depart from Judah nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet until Shiloh comes; and to him the obedience of the peoples.” (Gen. 49:8–10). Based upon Jacob’s prediction and upon the behavior of the sons of Jacob and the graciousness of Joseph in the final chapters of Genesis, it would seem that the pre-eminent of the tribes would be Judah and Joseph. Their portion of land is by far the largest of the twelve tribes. In fact, the land area they will possess is roughly half of all Israel.

Now, the land of Edom was somewhat in the shape of an upside down V which began at the southernmost tip of the Dead Sea. Somewhat between Judah and Edom was the wilderness of Zin. Following Zin we have the masculine substantive nege^bv (ב ∵ג ∵נ) [pronounced ne-GHE^BV], which is a very well defined portion of Israel and, generally, best translated south-country. It is often rendered Negev or Negeb; and it can means south, southward. The word originally meant south (Gen. 13:14) and became the general designation for this portion of the promised land (Gen. 12:9 13:1, 3 20:1). Strong's #5045 BDB #616. This is followed by the mîn preposition and the masculine singular construct of qâtseh (ה ∵צ ָק) [pronounced kaw-TSEH], which means end, extremity. With the mîn preposition, it means at the end of, after. Strong’s #7097 BDB #892. This is followed by the feminine singular noun têtmân (ן ָמי ֵ) [pronounced tay-MAHN], which means south, southward. Strong’s #8486 (and #8487 as a proper noun) BDB #412. Essentially our southern boundary is Edom and the Negev.

And so he was to them a boundary of [the] south from an end of a sea of salt from the bay [or, tongue] the one facing [the] Negev;

Joshua

15:2

And it was their southern boundary from the Salt Sea, from the bay which faces the Negev;

We have nege^bv two more times in this verse; it is a tough call, but I would think that the Nege^bv of the previous verse is their southern boundary which ran from the Salt Sea across over to the Mediterranean. We also have the preposition min (from, off of), the definite article the masculine substantive lâshôwn (ןש ָל) [pronounced law-SHOHN], which means tongue. It has several meanings; here, as in Isa. 11:15, it means bay. I am thinking that the connection is not only of shape, but of sound. This word is also used for lapping in Judges 7:5, so what we would have is an auditory similarity as well. The sound of lapping water is what one would hear in a bay. Strong’s #3956 BDB #546. This area today is a salt marsh.

The southern boundary of Judah is the southern boundary of the land of Israel (Num. 34:3–4).

And he goes out unto [the] Negev to an ascent of Akrabbim and he passes along Zin and he goes up from [the] Negev to Kadesh-barnea and he passes along Hezron and he goes up to Addar and he turns around at the Karka;

Joshua

15:3

The border goes out to the Negev along the ascent of Akrabbim (or, Scorpion Pass), passing along the Zin, going out from the Negev to Kadesh-barnea, passing along Hezron, going up to Addar and turning around at Karka;

Apparently we are just describing the southern trek across the Negev. Akrabbim is a mountain or a mountain pass along the south side of the Dead Sea, a landmark used primarily by way of providing a geographical boundary (Num. 34:4 Joshua 15:3 Judges 1:36). The NIV renders this as Scorpion Pass, certainly a more colorful moniker, and not out of line with the original Hebrew. It will also be mentioned in I Macc. 5:3. At Kadesh-barnea, we are moving south-southwest and we are close to the River of Egypt.

We know nothing about Hezron other than it is in the south (Num. 34:4 Joshua 15:3). In fact, in Num. 34:4, it is Hazaraddar and here it is Hezron Addar. It was either combined to refer to a general area in Numbers, or we have the exact same areas which should have been separated by a comma (in the Hebrew, there is very little difference between the words Hezron and Hazer. Without the vowels, the difference is pretty much just a thin, straight line at the end (the nun; pronounced noon). Addar is also just mentioned in these two passages. Karka is mentioned only here. I hesitate to call any of these towns or cities as they will not be included in the list of cities which belong to Judah.

And he passes along Azmon and he goes out [to] a brook of Egypt and he is [to] an end of the boundary, a sea; this is to you [plural] a boundary of [the] south.

Joshua

15:4

And the border passes along the Azmon territory out to the Brook of Egypt all the way to the west—this is your southern boundary.

The Emphasized Bible ...and passeth over to Azmon and goeth forth at the ravine of Egypt, and so the extensions of the boundary are to the sea [or, west].

NASB And it continued to Azmon and proceeded to the brook [or, Wadi] of Egypt; and the border ended at the sea. This shall be your south border.

Young's Lit. Translation ...and gone out at the brook of Egypt, and the outgoings of the border have been at the sea; this is to you the south border.

Azmon is also only found elsewhere in Num. 34:4 and refers probably more to an area rather than to a city. This southern boundary given for Judah is the southern boundary given for all of Israel. It is almost word for word as God spoke to Moses: “Your southern side will be from the wilderness of Zin along the side of Edom; and your southern border will be from the end of the Salt Sea at the east. Then your border will turn from the south to the ascent of Akrabbim, and continue to Zin, and it will extend to the south of Kadesh-barnea; and it will go to Hazaraddar and is to Azmon. And the border will run from Azmon to the book of Egypt, and its termination will be at the sea.” (Num. 34:3–5). The Brook of Egypt runs on out to the Salt Sea. The boundary given to Judah on the south extended quite a distance. The sea spoken of in this verse is the Mediterranean. The masculine singular noun used here is yâm (ם ָי) [pronounced yawm], and it is a sea or a lake. This word has also denoted the direction of the Mediterranean from the Palestine area, so it meant seaward, and came to mean west, westward, in reference to direction. Strong’s #3220 BDB #410. NIV Study Bible: The points listed formed a curved line beginning at the lower tip of the Dead Sea and moving under Kadesh Barnea to join the Mediterranean coast at the mouth of the Wadi el-Arish.

Finally, concerning this verse, I should mention that Israel now controlled the Land of Promise, but it was nowhere near the size which God had originally promised Abraham. “To your descendants will have given this land. From the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates.” (Gen. 15:18). The land now occupied by Israel might be a tenth of what God had promised Abram over a half a millennium previous.

And a boundary eastward, a sea of the Salt as far as a mouth of the Jordan and a boundary to a side of [the] north from a bay of the sea from a mouth of a Jordan;

Joshua

15:5

The boundary on the east: the Salt Sea up to the mouth of the Jordan River.

Boundary (or, border) is followed by the adverb kêdem (ם ∵ד ֵק) [pronounced KAY-dem], which means eastward, toward the east. The Englishman’s Concordance of the Old Testament has it as kedem (ם ∵ד ∵ק) [pronounced KEH-dem]. In the passage before us, it is actually kêdemâh (ה ָמ ∵ד ֵק) [pronounced KAY-deh-maw]. Strong’s #6924 BDB #870. Already, the lion’s share of the land is going to the tribe of Judah.

And the boundary goes up to Beth-hoglah and he passes along from north to Beth-arabah and the boundary goes up to a stone of Bohan a son of Reuben.

Joshua

15:6

And the boundary extended up to Beth-hoglah and then passed along the north to Beth-arabah to a stone marker placed by Bohan, a Reubenite.

Beth-hoglah was a city on the northern border of Judah which belonged to Benjamin (Joshua 15:6 18:19, 21). It means house of partridge). Beth-araba means house of the crossing whereas Beth-arabah means house of the desert. We find the h here and in Joshua 15:61. What we would like to have is the house of crossing or even simply the crossing, as that would indicate that this is perhaps where the Israelites crossed the Jordan (they did cross at a very wide girth, given their numbers). This could also indicate that this was a city where people commonly crossed over the Jordan. Such a name would make more sense here than house of the desert and the best we can hope for is that the addition of the h was an early corruption in the manuscript.

This is not the same as the city mentioned in John 1:28, in connection to John the Baptist and his ministry.

Most of the manuscript evidence has that as the city of Bethany [actually pronounced bayth-a-NEE-a] (which is not the same as the city where Martha, Mary and Lazarus lived).

Here, we are on the north side of a mountain ridge along which is found Beth-hoglah and Beth-arabah. This chain of hills which runs from Kasr Hajla toward the south on up to just north of the Salt Sea is called Katar Hhadije, which means a row of camels harnessed together.

The stone of Bohan is apparently some sort of a commemorative stone laid down by Bohan of the tribe of Reuben. There is no implication that the tribe of Reuben lived in this area. Very likely, it referred to some great deed of valor in Israel’s war against the indigenous peoples there. This stone was erected in the slope of a hill (Joshua 18:17), whose exact location is unknown. In these next few chapters we have a serious geography lesson, the likes of which few modern-day students could duplicate in their own area. This means that as Israel invaded the Land of Promise, there were some whose responsibility it was to note where towns and various landmarks were. NIV Study Bible: Judah’s [northern] border with Benjamin ran in a westerly line from the mouth of the Jordan through the Hinnom Valley, just south of Jerusalem, over to Timnah, then northwest to the coastal city of Jabneel (later called Jamnia); about ten miles south of Joppa.

And the boundary went up to Debir from a Valley of Achor and northward turning [or, facing] toward the Gilgal which [is] opposite to an ascent of Adummim which [is] from south of the valley and the boundary passed along unto waters of En-shemesh and his ends were toward En-rogel.

Joshua

15:7

Furthermore, the boundary went up to Debir from the Valley of Achor going northward turning toward Gilgal, which is opposite the pass of Adummim [or, the terrace of red-brown hills], which is at the southern portion of the valley; the boundary continues along the waters of En-shemesh and terminates near En-rogel.

This was a bit of a problem in the Hebrew, so let me give you a couple of other translations:

The Emphasized Bible ...and the boundary goeth up toward Debir out of the vale of Achor, then northward turning unto Gilgal, which is over against the ascent of Adummim, which is on the south side of the ravine,—then the boundary passeth over unto the waters of Enshemesh, and so the extensions thereof are unto En-rogel;

NASB And the border went up to Debir from the valley of Achor, and turned northward toward Gilgal which is opposite the ascent of Adummim, which is on the south of the valley; and the border continued to the waters of En-shemesh, and it ended at En-rogel.

Young's Lit. Translation ...and the border hath gone up towards Debir from the valley of Achor, and northward looking unto Gilgal, which is over-against the ascent of Adummim, which is on the south of the brook, and the border hath passed over unto the waters of EnShemesh, and its out-goings have been unto En-Rogel;

Debir could mean word, treasure, writing. It’s location is rather confusing. We have a Debir which is clearly found in the hill country of southern Judah (Joshua 10:38 12:13) and here we appear to be further north near the Jordan. Therefore, this would likely be a different Debir (they are both spelled D^ebirâh).

Next we have the masculine singular construct of ׳emeq (ק ∵מ ∵ע) [pronounced EH-mek or GEH-mek], and it means valley, vale, lowland, deepening, depth. Strong’s #6010 BDB #770. You will recall this area because this is where Achor and his family were stoned after he took that which was dedicated to God (Joshua 7). This occurred at the beginning of of the troop movement of Israel, further indicating that we are in central Palestine.

Gilgal has been of the central campsite for all of Israel, but this is not that Gilgal. In Joshua 18:17, we have of the parallel passage where of the boundary of Benjamin is laid out and everything is almost identical except we have of the name Geliloth rather than Gilgal. Both words mean circle and possibly refer to a circle of stones. Of the primary difference is that Geliloth is of the feminine plural of Gilgal.

This place, which is mentioned again in Judges 3:19, is probably a small round valley called of the field of Adommim by Pococke

; and called a red field by others because of the color of the ground.

Adummim is guessed to be a pass six miles southwest of Jericho, a border between Benjamin and Judah. Rotherham gives of the alternate translation for Adummim: of the terrace of the red-brown hills.

Barnes suggests that this is a pass on of the road between Jerusalem and Jericho. Jerome says that of the name signifies red as in blood shed there by robbers. It is this road which is of the scene for of the parable of the Good Samaritan.

The waters of En-shemesh is found only here and in Joshua 18:17; it is thought to be a spring which is three miles east of Jerusalem. It must extend further up than that, since it is a border between Judah and Benjamin. Rotherham informs us that it means fountain of the sun, which would place it in an eastward direction. Barnes identifies this as “the Fountain of the Apostles,” which is about two miles from Jerusalem, and the only well on the road to Jericho.

En-rogel means “the fountain of fullness” and we will look at it more carefully in II Sam. 17:17.

And the boundary went up a valley of a son of Hinnom to a side of the Jebusite from [the] south she [who is] Jerusalem and a boundary goes up to a top of the mountain which [is] over-against a valley of Hinnom west which [is] from an end of a valley of Rephaim north.

Joshua

15:8

Then the boundary continued up the Valley of the son of Hinnom along side the Jebusites from the south (the Jebusites occupy Jerusalem); and the boundary goes to the top of the mountain which is opposite the valley of Hinnom on the west which is from the end of the plain of the Raphaim toward the north.

Although this valley of the son of Hinnom will be mentioned several times in Scripture, we do not know where it is, other than being on the border between Judah and Benjamin (Joshua 15:8 18:16). However, Barnes seems to know. This valley begins on the west of Jerusalem at the road to Joppa, and turning south-eastward round the foot of Mount Zion joins the deeper valley of Kedron on the south of the city. It was in this ravine, more particularly at Tophet in the more wild and precipitous part of it towards the east, that the later kings of Judah offered the sacrifices of children to Moloch.

Best guess is that this is a proper name of possibly the original Jebusite owner. Even this is unclear. We will cover it later in more detail either in II Chronicles or II Kings.

The word used to reference the Jebusite is the feminine construct of kâthêph (ף ֵת ָ) [pronounced kaw-THAFE],which means side, shoulder, shoulder-blade. The connection is, obviously, that the shoulder is at the side of us. Strong’s #3802 BDB #509. I don’t follow by the wording exactly how Jerusalem is tied in here, except as a boundary. However, some of the translations read:

The Emphasized Bible ...Then ascendeth the boundary by the valley of the son of Hinnom to the side of the Jebusite on the south, the same is Jerusalem,—and the boundary goeth up unto the top of the mountain which faceth the valley of Hinnom, to the west, which is at the end of the Vale of Giants northwards;

NASB Then the border went up the valley of Ben-hinnom to the slope of the Jebusite on the south (that is, Jerusalem); and the border went up to the top of the mountain which is before the valley of Hinnom to the west, which is at the end of the valley Rephaim toward the north.

Young's Lit. Translation ...and the border hath gone up the valley of the son of Hinnom unto the side of the Jebusite on the south (it is Jerusalem), and the border hath gone up unto the top of the hill-country which is on the front of the valley of Hinnom westward which is in the extremity of the valley of the Rephaim northward;

By glancing at the other translations, the parenthetical suggestion of Young seems the most apropos. The Jebusites did occupy Jerusalem and apparently Jerusalem was to the south of this valley. There was either a mountain or some hills that the valley fed into. This plain lay southwest of Jerusalem and terminates at a rocky ridge which overlooks the valley of Hinnom. The Rephaim primarily lived in trans-Jordan area; however, apparently they had some outposts by Jerusalem? They were very large people. I have no clue how this plain received its name other than the fact that the Israelites saw the Land of Promise as being a land of giants. This place is mentioned several times in II Samuel as a battlefield which lies west of Jerusalem, with a ridge of rock separating it and the valley of Ben-hinnom. It is described by Keil and Delitzsch as being an hour long by a half an hour long and is a very fertile area, carefully cultivated to this day.

The addition of the explanatory Jerusalem is probably a gloss; that is, someone later added this to the text, very possibly Samuel or David.

And the boundary extended from the top of the mountain to a spring of waters of Nephtoah and he went out to cities of a mountain of Ephron and the boundary extended [to] Baalah—she [is] Kiriath-jearim.

Joshua

15:9

And the boundary went from the top of the mountain to the spring of the waters of Nephtoah and then extended out to the cities of Mount Ephron; and the boundary extended to Baalah, which is Kiriath-jearim.

The waters of Nephtoah are found only here and in Joshua 18:15. Barnes guesses them to be about 2½ miles northwest of Jerusalem. Ephron, you may recall, was the Hittite who sold a plot of land in Hebron to Abraham which was used as a burial place for his family. This mountain is north of there. We do not know what the connection is and we will never here Ephron’s name mentioned again. Baalah is mentioned here, in the next two verses, v. 29 and in I Chron. 13:6. Also known as Kiriath-jearim, this was one of the cities which allied themselves with Israel (Joshua 9) and is found 9 miles west of Jerusalem.

And the boundary circled from Baalah west to a mountain of Seir and passed along to a shoulder of Mount Jearim from north (she [is] Chesalon; and he passes along to Beth-shemesh and he passes along by Timnah.

Joshua

15:10

And the boundary circle from Baalah to the west toward Mount Seir and along the shoulder of Mount Jearim from the north (which is Chesalon) and the border then goes along to Beth-shemesh and to Timnah.

Seir means rough, shaggy and this is obviously not the Mount Seir found down in Edom, but is perhaps a mountain reminiscent of that one and called so only in this verse. The name is applicable to any rugged or well-wooded hill. Here it probably denotes the range which runs south-westward from Kirjath-jearim to the Wady Surar.

It is described by Keil and Delitzsch as a lofty ridge composed of rugged peaks, with a wild and desolate appearance, upon which Saris and Mishir are situated.

This is the only place where we hear of Mount Jearim (and Chesalon, which is identified by both ZPEB and Barnes as the modern-day Kesla, ten miles west of Jerusalem).

Beth-shemesh means house of the sun. It was probably the name of any place where a shrine was erected to the sun-God. We will find one as a city of Naphtali (Joshua 19:38) in upper Galilee; one in lower Galilee in Issachar’s territory (Joshua 19:22). Since these two tribes border one another, this could be the same area. The most prominent Beth-shemesh (house of the sun) is the one we have here in Judah, also called Ir-shemesh (city of the sun) in Joshua 19:14.

Timnah (or, Timnath) means a portion. Is also found in Joshua 19:43 where it is assigned to the tribe of Dan (recall, we are only looking at the border of Judah, not its cities). We will see this city again in Judges 14. This is not equivalent to the Timnah found in Joshua 15:57 24:30 and Gen. 38:12–14). In Canaan, there seems to be several cities with the names Timnah (or, Timnath), Gilgal, Ramah, Kirjath, etc.

And the boundary went out to a shoulder of Ekron north and the boundary bends around to Shikkeron and he passes along to Mount Baalah and he goes out to Jabneel and a boundary is an extremity a sea.

Joshua

15:11

And the boundary continues to the side [or, slope] of Ekron in the north and it curves around to Shikkeron and passes along Mount Baalah and continues along to Jabneel and the boundary ends at the sea.

We studied Ekron back in Joshua 13:3. Shikkeron is found only here. Jabneel means God causes to build. There are two Jabneel’s. One we will find later in the southern portion of Naphtali (which is quite a bit north from here). This Jabneel is fairly close to the coast on the border between Judah and Ephraim. It appears as though the Philistines occupied this territory until the time of Uzziah in I Chron. 26:6, where we are told that he broke down the wall of Jabneh. This would have given Israel access to the sea through the mouth of the Yarknon River. This makes me think, why not set that river as the northern border of Judah? I can’t answer that, but it would make perfect sense. Much of the history of this city is extra-Biblical with a few tie-in’s to Biblical history. Jabneel is mentioned several times in the books of the Maccabees (I Macc. 4:15 II Macc. 12:8) as a haven during the wars of the Maccabees. Philip very likely visited this city when he was teaching from Azotus to Caesarea (Acts 8:40). It was also here where the famous Synod of Jamnia was held, circa 100 a.d. to determine the canon of the sacred Jewish writings. ZPEB has a great deal more to say on this.

And a boundary west the Sea Great and a boundary; this [is its] boundary—sons of Judah round about—to their families.

Joshua

15:12

And their western boundary is the Great Sea and its territory; this [Vv. 1–12] is the boundary around of the sons of Judah for their families.

After the first wâw conjunction, after the Great Sea, and after the demonstrative adjective, we have the masculine singular noun which we find a lot in the chapter: g^ebvûl (לב׃) [pronounced g^eb-VOOL], which means border, boundary, territory. Strong’s #1366 BDB #147.

Vv. 1–12 give the general boundary of Judah. Now we will cover an incident which is not from this exact time period of distributing the land.

And to Caleb, ben Jephunneh, he gave a portion in a midst of sons of Judah regarding a commandment of Y^ehowah to Joshua [concerning] Kiriath-arba father of Anak; that is, Hebron.

Joshua

15:13

And he gave to Caleb ben Jephunneh a portion in the midst of the sons of Judah as per the commandment of Jehovah to Joshua concerning Kiriath-arba (or, Hebron). (Arba was the father of Anak).

This is almost identical to Judges 1:10ff; so the exegesis can be almost duplicated here.

In the previous chapter, Caleb asked for a particular plot of land. Caleb was of the tribe of Judah, but his ties to the tribe are nebulous. My educated guess is that Joshua was the son of a mistress outside the tribe of Israel or that he was adopted by someone in the tribe of Israel. Under Moses, he took on a leadership position. Since this chapter deals primarily with the land given to the tribe of Judah, the land granted to Caleb is also dealt with again here. Less detail is given to the request by Caleb (like, no details) and what Caleb did is mentioned. It is open to interpretation whether Caleb was given the land and then came in and destroyed these three sons (probably tribes); or whether he was given the land because he had already gone in and destroyed these three tribal chiefs. I would think the latter is the case.

Keil and Delitzsch assert that neither the author of the book of Judges copied this nor did Joshua copy this from the book of Judges, but that they both took this from a common source. I don’t quite follow exactly how this conclusion was reached. Keil and Delitzsch claim that most of the conquests found in the book of Joshua were taken from that common source. Joshua was the writer of this book, but he is not mentioned as a witness to what transpired between Caleb and his daughter.

There is also the matter of the time period that this occurred. I am of the opinion that the conquering of this particular piece of property occurred twice: first under Joshua and the army of Israel; and later by Caleb and the Judæan army. The division of the land took place immediately after the conquering of the northern portion of the land, of which this is a part. Edersheim suggests that the incident recorded here did not occur until after the death of Joshua.

This is almost identical to Judges 1:10ff; so the exegesis can be almost duplicated here.

And so Caleb dispossessed from there three sons of Anak—Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai, descendants of Anak.

Joshua

15:14

And so Caleb dispossessed from that area three sons of anak—Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai, all descendants of Anak.

In this verse we have the wâw consecutive (and then) and the Hiphil imperfect of yârash (ש ַר ָי) [pronounced yaw-RAHSH] means to possess, to take possession of, to occupy [all] geographical area—by driving out the previous occupants], to inherit, to dispossess. Strong’s #3423 BDB #439. With the wâw consecutive and the imperfect, the first conclusion one would draw is that Caleb is now about to dispossess these sons of Anak from the property. The imperfect tense usually indicates that we are dealing with action in progress or unfinished action. However, the Hiphil stem means that he is being caused to inherit, caused to possess. Caleb has already done the preliminary work of wiping out the inhabitants of that area; however, he is in the process of being caused to possess the property. He has been given the property in the previous chapter and that is mentioned here as well, as that is in part the subject of this chapter. What will follow will be a description of how he began to possess the land, which was a process not complete at the time of the casting of the lots for the properties.

And he went up from there against inhabitants of Debir (and a name of Debir [was] formerly Kiriath-sepher).

Joshua

15:15

And he had gone up from there against the inhabitants of Debir (Debir was formerly called Kiriath-sepher).

Went up is the Qal imperfect and we have the preposition el (ל ∵א) [pronounced el] used in the sense of against (it usually denotes direction and means in, into, toward, unto, to, regarding). Strong's #413 BDB #39. We also have the less common use of the word pânîym (םי ̣נ ָ) [pronounced paw-NEEM], which is generally rendered faces; however, this can also refer to time and simply mean before or formerly. Strong’s #6440 BDB #815. We will cover Debir again in Judges 1:11, which is the third repeat of this story.

And so Caleb said, “Whoever strikes down Kiriath-sepher and has taken her and I will give to him Achsah my daughter to wife.”

Joshua

15:16

Then Caleb said, “Whoever strikes down Kiriath-sepher and takes this city, to him I will given Achsah, my daughter, as his wife.”

We will actually hear a fair amount from Achsah, whose name means anklet. Caleb, one of the bravest and fiercest warriors, was wrapped around the finger of his daughter. In this passage, she will tell her husband what to ask for. He apparently doesn’t get it right. She will tell her husband to ask for a plot of land—a field. He does, but the field has no access to water, so she goes herself to her father and requests a water source. She is given the natural spring above and below the field they were given. We will find this story repeated almost word-for-word in Judges 1:11–15. Achsah will be one of the few women mentioned in the genealogical tables of I Chronicles (I Chron. 2:49).

We actually have two instances in the Bible where victory in battle is sufficient payment for a sought-after bride. Here, Othniel’s victory will secure him Achsah, the daughter of Caleb, as his bride; and in I Sam. 18:25, David will have to provide a dowry of 100 Philistine foreskins for the Michal, the daughter of Saul.

And so Othniel ben Kenaz, brother of Caleb, took her [i.e., Debir] and so he gave to him Achsah his daughter to wife.

Joshua

15:17

And so Othniel ben Kenaz, a brother of Caleb, took Debir. Therefore, Caleb gave him Achsah, his daughter, as a wife.

The verb here is the 3^rd person masculine singular, with a 3^rd person feminine singular suffix, Qal imperfect of lâkad (ד ַכ ָל) [pronounced law-KAHD], which means to capture, to seize, to take. Strong’s #3920 BDB #539. In looking at this, I wonder if this is not a play on words. Othniel both took the city of Debir as well as Achsah.

Now would be a good place to make a list:

What do we know ?	What do we have Questions About?