Commentary - Joshua 17:1-6

Bird's-eye view

In Joshua 17:1-6, we are in the thick of the land allotment, which is the peaceful fruit of the strenuous warfare that occupied the first half of the book. This section deals with the inheritance for the tribe of Manasseh, Joseph's firstborn. The passage is notable for two main reasons. First, it distinguishes between the portion of Manasseh that settled east of the Jordan, a result of their martial prowess, and the portion to be settled in the heart of Canaan. Second, and more significantly, it revisits the case of Zelophehad's daughters, a landmark instance from the book of Numbers where God established the right of daughters to inherit property in the absence of male heirs. Their bold and faithful claim before Joshua and the leadership demonstrates the lasting authority of God's revealed will and the importance of every family receiving its promised portion in the land. This is not just about surveying lines on a map; it is about the covenant faithfulness of God being worked out in the lives of His people, down to the last detail.

The passage serves as a practical outworking of God's law, showing that His commandments are not abstract principles but are to be applied diligently and fairly in the real world. The leaders of Israel, Joshua and Eleazar, honor the word of the Lord given through Moses, and in so doing, they establish a precedent for justice and equity within the covenant community. This is a picture of a well-ordered society under God, where promises are kept, the vulnerable are protected, and the inheritance is secured for future generations.

Outline

Context In Joshua

This passage sits within the third major section of Joshua, which details the allocation of the conquered land (Josh. 13-21). After dealing with the tribes east of the Jordan and the large allotments for Judah and Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh), the narrative zooms in on the specific arrangements for Manasseh west of the Jordan. This follows the account of Ephraim's inheritance in chapter 16. The two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, received a joint inheritance, but their specific territories are detailed separately. This chapter's focus on Manasseh, and particularly the issue with Zelophehad's daughters, highlights that the process of settling the land was not a simple administrative task. It required careful attention to God's prior revelation and a commitment to seeing His justice established for all members of the covenant community, not just the powerful clans.

Key Issues

Beginning: The Land is an Inheritance

Throughout the Old Testament, the land of Canaan is never spoken of as a mere commodity. It is not real estate to be bought and sold on a whim. It is an inheritance (nachalah), a gift from Yahweh to His covenant people. This concept is central. An inheritance is tied to family, to lineage, and to promise. It is received, not earned. The distribution of the land by lot was a constant reminder that God was the one assigning the portions. This is why the potential loss of a family's land was such a tragedy in Israel, and why the laws surrounding it, like the Jubilee, were so important. The land was a tangible sign of God's faithfulness to Abraham and a foretaste of the ultimate rest and inheritance that God's people would receive in Christ.

The story of Zelophehad's daughters is a powerful illustration of this principle. They were not grasping for property; they were fighting for their family's name and their place in the covenant promise. To lose the land was to be cut off from the story of redemption that God was writing with His people. Their appeal was based on the conviction that God's promise was for them too, and that He had made provision for them within His law.

The Rights of the Firstborn

The passage begins by noting that the lot was for Manasseh, "for he was the firstborn of Joseph" (Josh 17:1). While Reuben was Jacob's firstborn, he forfeited the rights of primogeniture through his sin (Gen 49:4), and the double portion was given to Joseph, whose two sons were elevated to the status of tribal heads. Of these two, Manasseh was the firstborn. However, Jacob famously crossed his hands, giving the greater blessing to the younger, Ephraim (Gen 48:14). Here in Joshua, we see this playing out. Ephraim's lot is described first (Josh 16), and they become the more dominant tribe. Yet Manasseh's status as firstborn is still honored. He receives a massive territory, spanning both sides of the Jordan. This shows us that God's sovereign choices (blessing Ephraim) do not simply erase His established patterns (honoring the firstborn). Both realities hold true in the outworking of His plan.

Inheritance and Warfare

A fascinating detail is given for why Machir, Manasseh's firstborn, received Gilead and Bashan on the east side of the Jordan: "because he was a man of war" (Josh 17:1). This is a straightforward statement of cause and effect. The Transjordan territories were conquered and held by martial strength. This is not a contradiction of the land being a gift from God, but rather a description of the means God uses. God gives the victory, but He gives it to men who fight. Faith is not passivity. The men of Manasseh, along with Reuben and Gad, saw a land good for grazing, and they had the strength and courage to take it and hold it. God honored their strength and gave them their request, on the condition that they would then cross the Jordan and fight for their brothers. This is a robust faith, one that is willing to put on a helmet and pick up a spear to take hold of the promises of God.

The Justice of Female Inheritance

The centerpiece of this passage is the claim of Zelophehad's daughters. Their father had died without sons, which in that patriarchal culture would normally mean the end of his family line and the absorption of his property into the larger clan. But these five women, Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah, refused to let their father's name be extinguished. Back in Numbers 27, they had brought their case to Moses, who brought it before the Lord. And the Lord declared their cause just, establishing a new ordinance in Israel: if a man dies with no sons, his inheritance passes to his daughters.

Now, a generation later, they stand before the new leadership, Joshua, Eleazar the priest, and the leaders. They are not making a novel claim; they are calling the leadership to be faithful to what God has already commanded. "Yahweh commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brothers" (Josh 17:4). This is a courageous and dignified appeal to the settled authority of God's Word. It shows that God's law is not just for men, and it provides for the protection and dignity of women. Joshua's immediate compliance demonstrates that true leadership is submission to God's commands. He did not debate the issue; he simply obeyed the word of the Lord.

Key Words

Kleros, "Lot" or "Inheritance"

The Greek translation of the Old Testament uses kleros for the Hebrew word for "lot." The casting of lots was a method of discerning God's will, removing the decision from human squabbling and placing it in God's sovereign hands (Prov 16:33). The land was divided by lot to show that God Himself was the one assigning each tribe its portion. In the New Testament, this word is used for our spiritual inheritance in Christ (Col 1:12). We have been given a portion, an inheritance, not by chance, but by the divine will of God.

Nachalah, "Inheritance" or "Possession"

This Hebrew word, nachalah, is crucial. It signifies a permanent, hereditary possession passed down through a family. It is not just property, but a patrimony. Israel itself is called God's nachalah (Deut 9:26), His special possession. The land of Canaan was the nachalah of the tribes. The claim of Zelophehad's daughters was a claim to their rightful nachalah, ensuring their father's name and legacy continued within the people of God.

Context: Ancient Near Eastern Inheritance Laws

In the broader context of the Ancient Near East, inheritance laws were almost exclusively patrilineal. Property and status passed from father to son. While some legal codes, like the Code of Hammurabi, made limited provisions for daughters (often in the form of a dowry), the direct inheritance of landed property by daughters was highly unusual, especially if there were other male relatives in the extended family. The law given by God in response to the daughters of Zelophehad was therefore remarkably progressive. It placed a high value on the nuclear family line and provided a level of legal and economic protection for women that was exceptional in its cultural setting. This demonstrates that biblical law, far from being oppressive, was a source of justice and stability, reflecting the righteous character of the Lawgiver.

Application

There are several points of direct application for us here. First, we must have the same high view of God's Word that Zelophehad's daughters and Joshua had. They based their claim on what God had commanded, and he based his judgment on the same. Our lives, our families, and our churches must be governed by "thus saith the Lord." We do not have the authority to set aside what God has commanded.

Second, we see that God's justice extends to everyone. These five women were not from a powerful clan, and they had no male representative to plead their case. Yet they had standing before God and His appointed leaders. This should encourage us to seek justice for the vulnerable and to ensure that our communities are places where the rights of all are protected, not because it is culturally fashionable, but because it is the biblical thing to do.

Finally, this entire business of earthly inheritance is meant to point us to a greater reality. We who are in Christ have been given an inheritance that is "imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you" (1 Pet 1:4). Like the daughters of Manasseh, we receive this inheritance not because of our own strength or merit, but because of a promise. Our names are written in the Lamb's book of life, and our portion is secure in Him. We should therefore have the same boldness and confidence as these women, not in demanding our rights before men, but in laying hold of the promises of God in Christ.