23. So Joshua took the whole land, (120) etc Although it was far from being true that Joshua had actually acquired the whole land, yet he is truly said to have obtained it as God had declared to Moses, the latter clause restricting the meaning of the general sentence. For it had been expressly added that the conquest which God had promised would be made gradually, lest it should afterwards become necessary to war with the ferocious wild beasts of the woods, if they pressed forward into a desert waste. Therefore, we are at liberty to say, that though the Lord had not yet placed his people in possession of the promised land, yet he had virtually performed what he had agreed to do, inasmuch as he gave a commodious habitation, and one which was sufficient for the present time. And the words used imply that other district, which had not yet come into their full and actual possession, are included; for it is said that that which they had acquired was distributed according to families. And, in short, we afterwards see in the division that the lands were divided into lots which were not actually subdued by the people till Joshua was dead, nay, till many ages after. (121) The meaning of the words, which is now plain, is simply this, that while Joshua was still alive, a certain specimen of the promise was exhibited, making him feel perfectly secure in dividing the land by lot. (122)
(120) The Latin text of the 23 verse, (Joshua 11:23), beginning thus, “ Accepit itaque Josue totam terram prorsus ut dixerat Jehova Mosi;” “Joshua, therefore received the whole land entirely, as the Lord had said to Moses,” removes the apparent inaccuracy, but it is only by a sacrifice of the literal meaning, which is perfectly rendered by the English version. “So (And) Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the Lord said unto Moses.” This is certainly superior to the Latin, which endeavors to obtain by a gloss that which the English equally well obtains by a literal rendering. In the commentary, the words of the 23 rd verse, (Joshua 11:23), as quoted, are, Et cepit Josue . This makes it not improbable that the Accepit of the text is only a misprint of Et cepit — Ed.
(121) French, “ Or en la division nous verrons puis apres, que les regions qui furent assujetties a l’empire de peuple apres la mort de Josue, voire plusieurs siecles depuis, furent mises en sort pour voir a qui elles escherroyent;” “Now, in the division, we shall afterwards see that the countries which are subjected to the dominion of the people after the death of Joshua, nay, several ages after, were put into the lot, in order to see to whom they should fall.”
(122) Latin, “ Exhibitum fuisse certum specimen promissionis ut secure licuerit terram sorte dividere.” French, “ La promesse fut tellement ratifice, et si bien eprouvee par effect, qu’il leur fut loisible de diviser la terre par sort;” “The promise was so far ratified and proved by fact, that they were able to leisure to divide the land by lot.” — Ed.