Study Focus:Joshua 24; Gen. 12:7; Deut. 17:19; Deut. 5:6; 1 Kings 11:2, 4, 9; 2 Tim. 4:7, 8.
In Mosaic fashion, the book of Joshua concludes with a speech in which Joshua urges the people to take a stand. After a long and intense life, Joshua is ready to complete his mission. In the first part of the address, Joshua’s words are Yahweh’s, recounting what God has done for Israel since Abraham’s call (Josh. 24:1–13). By using 19 verbs in the first person, God reinforces the passive role of Israel in this enterprise, in contrast with the repeated use of the second person “you/your” to describe Israel.
The second part of the speech begins with the adverb “now” (atta), introducing Joshua’s last call for a present response, an appeal to the people to exercise their freedom of choice. A covenant renewal ceremony follows, during which two witnesses are set up: the people themselves and another stony memorial. Still echoing the end of Deuteronomy, the dialogue between Joshua and the people sets a tension between two trajectories: one toward conformity, stability, and unity, and another toward disloyalty, uncertainty, and disintegration. At this crossroads, each individual decision rests. Joshua makes his choice clear in the center of the chapter: “ ‘As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord’ ” (Josh. 24:15).
The book concludes with three graves (Josh. 24:29–33). The note about the final resting place of Joseph’s remains brings closure to a cycle that began in Genesis. Like the death of Aaron and Moses in Deuteronomy, the deaths of Joshua and Eleazar mark the end of an era. In the uncharted waters of this new age, Israel can trust in God’s unshattered commitment to His promises.
Part II: Commentary
At Shechem Again
In the Bible, geography is also theology. God’s providence in bringing Israel to Shechem for this covenant renewal is not coincidental. Centuries before, Jacob was at Shechem when God appeared to him, instructing him to go to Bethel (Gen. 35:1). In preparation for the journey, Jacob urged his household to “ ‘put away the foreign gods that are among you, purify yourselves, and change your garments’ ” (Gen. 35:2, NKJV). The people complied, handing over their foreign gods and the ornamental rings, which then were buried under an oak. As a result, the terror of God was upon the inhabitants of Canaan until Jacob arrived in Bethel to build an altar in honor of Yahweh (Gen. 35:3–7). In Bethel, God reaffirmed His promise to Jacob in familiar terms: “ ‘I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body. The land which I gave Abraham and Isaac I give to you; and to your descendants after you I give this land’ ” (Gen. 35:11, 12, NKJV).
Likewise, Joshua promotes a spiritual revival, reaffirming God’s commitment to His promises. Standing on the buried idols, he reminds Israel about the danger of idolatry and the importance of faithfulness. At this point, the children of Israel are at the same crossroads. Shechem is a place of decision, a place to look into the future without forgetting the past. Such a choice would determine not only the individual but also the collective destiny of Israel. The removal of the foreign gods in Shechem cements the singular identity of Jacob’s household. The issue in Joshua’s time was whether Israel would remain Israel or not.
I or We?
One of the worldview differences between modern Western society and the society in the biblical world is the relationship between individual and corporate personalities. In temporal terms, individual choices were always seen in connection with the whole community. This notion is evident in Joshua 24:6, in which God says, “ ‘ “Then I brought your fathers out of Egypt, and you came to the sea” ’ ” (NKJV, emphasis added), even though many in the audience were not born yet when the Exodus took place.
Wheeler Robinson was the first scholar to apply the concept of “corporate personality” to the biblical text. The concept, which comes from English law, refers to “the fact that a group or body can be regarded legally as an individual, possessing the rights and duties of an individual.”—J. W. Rogerson, “Corporate Personality,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), p. 1156. Robinson uses the term in two senses: corporate responsibility and corporate representation. Although criticized for lacking precision and using (now) outdated anthropological principles, Robinson’s idea should not be entirely ignored. In biblical studies, his concept has been appropriately updated as “corporate solidarity,” which refers to “the oscillation or reciprocal relation between the individual and the community that existed in the Semitic mind. The act of the individual is not merely an individual act, for it affects the community and vice versa. The individual is often representative of the community and vice versa.”—G. K. Beale, The Right Doctrine From the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), p. 37.
Corporate solidarity is not only an undeniable reality behind the biblical text—and still alive within many societies that emphasize interdependence, conformity, and strong family identity today—but also a basic presupposition of biblical typology. In fact, it is at the center of the gospel. On the negative side, although we are not responsible for Adam’s sin, his failure opened the door to evil, whose influence no one except Christ was able to contain in a comprehensible way. As Paul says, “Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12, NKJV). On the positive side, Christ’s victory as the new Adam, the representative of the new humanity, brings the influence of good and the possibility of victory to all: “One died for all, then all died” (2 Cor. 5:14, NKJV). Paul complements this notion by saying: “Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life” (Rom. 5:18, NKJV).
Individual Freedom
In the context of the temporal blessings and curses of the covenant, God never dealt with His people individually. The New Testament image of the church as the body of Christ is rooted in this social understanding. In the Old Testament, the sum of individual decisions always affected the people as a whole. This concept is evident in Daniel’s prayer, in which he seeks forgiveness for sins he had not personally committed (Daniel 9).
However, Scripture clearly affirms the value of individual freedom. According to Ezekiel, “ ‘the soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ ” (Ezek. 18:20, NKJV; compare with Deut. 24:16). From an eternal point of view, God will deal individually with us. We can face the consequences of the sins of others but not their guilt.
Joshua’s final speech presents this tension between collective and individual identity. While in a collective sense he mentions God’s acts of redemption in the past and alludes to God’s acts of judgment in the future, his appeal is individual. This individual freedom should be understood within the confines of the covenant. In fact, freedom without form is a vacuum. People can decide whether to marry, but once they agree to marry, they are bound within the limits of the marriage covenant. In practical terms, unchecked freedom turns into bondage.
In biblical language, it’s important to note that being freed from slavery is referred to as redemption, not freedom. When Israel left Egypt, it wasn’t just about being able to choose whether or not to serve but rather about having the freedom to choose whom they would serve. In fact, “Joshua’s challenge cements the case that those who become Israel are those who are chosen and rescued by Yahweh. Those who remain Israel are those who choose and serve Yahweh.”—Mark Ziese, Joshua (Joplin, MO: College Press, 2008), p. 383. In this sense, “freedom is the state that emerges after God has acted to remove all hindrances—social, spiritual (sin and death), economic, and institutional—that block our creational purpose. This purpose is to know, love, worship, and enjoy God forever.”—Esau McCaulley, “Freedom,” in Douglas Mangum, ed., The Lexham Theological Wordbook, Logos Edition (Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2014).
Freedom is the most powerful gift God gives to His creatures. However, as human history shows, it is also the most dangerous one because it can be misused with dire consequences. God is, essentially, love, and there is no love without freedom. Therefore, the point is not whether we have freedom but how we will use this amazing gift. This question is addressed at the end of the book of Joshua.
Part III: Life Application
The Challenge of Freedom
It’s not easy to be free. This idea is demonstrated in the history of Israel, whom God led into the wilderness to learn the essence of freedom. Although this period was prolonged, the desert school was not meant to last more than a year and a half—roughly the time between the Exodus and the arrival in Kadesh Barnea (Exod. 19:1, Num. 10:11, Deut. 1:2).
Why do we need to learn how to use freedom?
If you are a parent, consider how you may teach your kids to use their free will. Discuss your ideas.
How can difficult circumstances boost our learning?
Idolatry Today
Consider the following definition of an idol proposed by Martin Luther in his comment on the first commandment in his Large Catechism: “Confidence and faith of the heart alone make both God and an idol. . . . Whatever your heart clings to and confides in, that is really your God.”—Luther, Luther’s Large Catechism; trans. by John Nicholas Lenker (Minneapolis, MN: Luther Press, 1908), p. 44. Idolatry was a basic feature of the culture in biblical times. Indeed, it was a continuous threat to God’s people that eventually led Israel and Judah to captivity.
Although, as a Seventh-day Adventist, you don’t worship the statues of gods, how can idolatry still be a threat to your faith?
The End
Like Deuteronomy, the book of Joshua ends with a reference to burial places. It seems odd to conclude a book that is predominantly about victories with this kind of detail.
Why do you think the book concludes in this manner?
What message is God conveying about the nature of leadership and His continuous control over history?
How might this message affect your perspective on leadership and the divine oversight of the church?
Notes
Adjust My Preferences
Welcome! Please set your reading preferences below.
You can access this panel later by clicking the
preference icon
in the top right of the page.
Key Text: Joshua 24:15
Study Focus: Joshua 24; Gen. 12:7; Deut. 17:19; Deut. 5:6; 1 Kings 11:2, 4, 9; 2 Tim. 4:7, 8.
In Mosaic fashion, the book of Joshua concludes with a speech in which Joshua urges the people to take a stand. After a long and intense life, Joshua is ready to complete his mission. In the first part of the address, Joshua’s words are Yahweh’s, recounting what God has done for Israel since Abraham’s call (Josh. 24:1–13). By using 19 verbs in the first person, God reinforces the passive role of Israel in this enterprise, in contrast with the repeated use of the second person “you/your” to describe Israel.
The second part of the speech begins with the adverb “now” (atta), introducing Joshua’s last call for a present response, an appeal to the people to exercise their freedom of choice. A covenant renewal ceremony follows, during which two witnesses are set up: the people themselves and another stony memorial. Still echoing the end of Deuteronomy, the dialogue between Joshua and the people sets a tension between two trajectories: one toward conformity, stability, and unity, and another toward disloyalty, uncertainty, and disintegration. At this crossroads, each individual decision rests. Joshua makes his choice clear in the center of the chapter: “ ‘As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord’ ” (Josh. 24:15).
The book concludes with three graves (Josh. 24:29–33). The note about the final resting place of Joseph’s remains brings closure to a cycle that began in Genesis. Like the death of Aaron and Moses in Deuteronomy, the deaths of Joshua and Eleazar mark the end of an era. In the uncharted waters of this new age, Israel can trust in God’s unshattered commitment to His promises.
Part II: Commentary
At Shechem Again
In the Bible, geography is also theology. God’s providence in bringing Israel to Shechem for this covenant renewal is not coincidental. Centuries before, Jacob was at Shechem when God appeared to him, instructing him to go to Bethel (Gen. 35:1). In preparation for the journey, Jacob urged his household to “ ‘put away the foreign gods that are among you, purify yourselves, and change your garments’ ” (Gen. 35:2, NKJV). The people complied, handing over their foreign gods and the ornamental rings, which then were buried under an oak. As a result, the terror of God was upon the inhabitants of Canaan until Jacob arrived in Bethel to build an altar in honor of Yahweh (Gen. 35:3–7). In Bethel, God reaffirmed His promise to Jacob in familiar terms: “ ‘I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body. The land which I gave Abraham and Isaac I give to you; and to your descendants after you I give this land’ ” (Gen. 35:11, 12, NKJV).
Likewise, Joshua promotes a spiritual revival, reaffirming God’s commitment to His promises. Standing on the buried idols, he reminds Israel about the danger of idolatry and the importance of faithfulness. At this point, the children of Israel are at the same crossroads. Shechem is a place of decision, a place to look into the future without forgetting the past. Such a choice would determine not only the individual but also the collective destiny of Israel. The removal of the foreign gods in Shechem cements the singular identity of Jacob’s household. The issue in Joshua’s time was whether Israel would remain Israel or not.
I or We?
One of the worldview differences between modern Western society and the society in the biblical world is the relationship between individual and corporate personalities. In temporal terms, individual choices were always seen in connection with the whole community. This notion is evident in Joshua 24:6, in which God says, “ ‘ “Then I brought your fathers out of Egypt, and you came to the sea” ’ ” (NKJV, emphasis added), even though many in the audience were not born yet when the Exodus took place.
Wheeler Robinson was the first scholar to apply the concept of “corporate personality” to the biblical text. The concept, which comes from English law, refers to “the fact that a group or body can be regarded legally as an individual, possessing the rights and duties of an individual.”—J. W. Rogerson, “Corporate Personality,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), p. 1156. Robinson uses the term in two senses: corporate responsibility and corporate representation. Although criticized for lacking precision and using (now) outdated anthropological principles, Robinson’s idea should not be entirely ignored. In biblical studies, his concept has been appropriately updated as “corporate solidarity,” which refers to “the oscillation or reciprocal relation between the individual and the community that existed in the Semitic mind. The act of the individual is not merely an individual act, for it affects the community and vice versa. The individual is often representative of the community and vice versa.”—G. K. Beale, The Right Doctrine From the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), p. 37.
Corporate solidarity is not only an undeniable reality behind the biblical text—and still alive within many societies that emphasize interdependence, conformity, and strong family identity today—but also a basic presupposition of biblical typology. In fact, it is at the center of the gospel. On the negative side, although we are not responsible for Adam’s sin, his failure opened the door to evil, whose influence no one except Christ was able to contain in a comprehensible way. As Paul says, “Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12, NKJV). On the positive side, Christ’s victory as the new Adam, the representative of the new humanity, brings the influence of good and the possibility of victory to all: “One died for all, then all died” (2 Cor. 5:14, NKJV). Paul complements this notion by saying: “Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life” (Rom. 5:18, NKJV).
Individual Freedom
In the context of the temporal blessings and curses of the covenant, God never dealt with His people individually. The New Testament image of the church as the body of Christ is rooted in this social understanding. In the Old Testament, the sum of individual decisions always affected the people as a whole. This concept is evident in Daniel’s prayer, in which he seeks forgiveness for sins he had not personally committed (Daniel 9).
However, Scripture clearly affirms the value of individual freedom. According to Ezekiel, “ ‘the soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself’ ” (Ezek. 18:20, NKJV; compare with Deut. 24:16). From an eternal point of view, God will deal individually with us. We can face the consequences of the sins of others but not their guilt.
Joshua’s final speech presents this tension between collective and individual identity. While in a collective sense he mentions God’s acts of redemption in the past and alludes to God’s acts of judgment in the future, his appeal is individual. This individual freedom should be understood within the confines of the covenant. In fact, freedom without form is a vacuum. People can decide whether to marry, but once they agree to marry, they are bound within the limits of the marriage covenant. In practical terms, unchecked freedom turns into bondage.
In biblical language, it’s important to note that being freed from slavery is referred to as redemption, not freedom. When Israel left Egypt, it wasn’t just about being able to choose whether or not to serve but rather about having the freedom to choose whom they would serve. In fact, “Joshua’s challenge cements the case that those who become Israel are those who are chosen and rescued by Yahweh. Those who remain Israel are those who choose and serve Yahweh.”—Mark Ziese, Joshua (Joplin, MO: College Press, 2008), p. 383. In this sense, “freedom is the state that emerges after God has acted to remove all hindrances—social, spiritual (sin and death), economic, and institutional—that block our creational purpose. This purpose is to know, love, worship, and enjoy God forever.”—Esau McCaulley, “Freedom,” in Douglas Mangum, ed., The Lexham Theological Wordbook, Logos Edition (Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2014).
Freedom is the most powerful gift God gives to His creatures. However, as human history shows, it is also the most dangerous one because it can be misused with dire consequences. God is, essentially, love, and there is no love without freedom. Therefore, the point is not whether we have freedom but how we will use this amazing gift. This question is addressed at the end of the book of Joshua.
Part III: Life Application
The Challenge of Freedom
It’s not easy to be free. This idea is demonstrated in the history of Israel, whom God led into the wilderness to learn the essence of freedom. Although this period was prolonged, the desert school was not meant to last more than a year and a half—roughly the time between the Exodus and the arrival in Kadesh Barnea (Exod. 19:1, Num. 10:11, Deut. 1:2).
Idolatry Today
Consider the following definition of an idol proposed by Martin Luther in his comment on the first commandment in his Large Catechism: “Confidence and faith of the heart alone make both God and an idol. . . . Whatever your heart clings to and confides in, that is really your God.”—Luther, Luther’s Large Catechism; trans. by John Nicholas Lenker (Minneapolis, MN: Luther Press, 1908), p. 44. Idolatry was a basic feature of the culture in biblical times. Indeed, it was a continuous threat to God’s people that eventually led Israel and Judah to captivity.
Although, as a Seventh-day Adventist, you don’t worship the statues of gods, how can idolatry still be a threat to your faith?
The End
Like Deuteronomy, the book of Joshua ends with a reference to burial places. It seems odd to conclude a book that is predominantly about victories with this kind of detail.
Notes