Joshua 19:9

Jos 19:9 Out of the portion of the children of Judah [was] the inheritance of the children of Simeon: for the part of the children of Judah was too much for them: therefore the children of Simeon had their inheritance within the inheritance of them.

Ver. 9. Out of the portion.] See Jos 19:1.

Was too much for them.] More than came to their share, or more than they could man or manage.

Had their inheritance within the inheritance of them.] And so Jacob’s prophecy was fulfilled; {Gen 49:7} an argument of the divinity of the Scriptures.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But this large portion was given them by God’s providence to declare their increase in time to come.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

9. Out of the portion of the children of Judah, etc The praise of moderation is due to the tribe of Judah for not contending that the abstraction of any part of the inheritance already assigned to them was unjust. They might easily have obtruded the name of God, and asserted that it was only by his authority they had obtained that settlement. But as it is decided by the common consent of all the tribes that more has been given to them than they can possess without loss and injury to the others, they immediately desist from all pretext for disputing the matter. And it is certain that if they had alleged the authority of God, it would have been falsely and wickedly, inasmuch as though their lot had been determined by him in regard to its situation, an error had taken place with regard to its extent, their limits having been fixed by human judgment wider than they ought. Therefore, acknowledging that it would have been wrong to give them what would occasion loss to others, they willingly resign it, and give a welcome reception to their brethren, who must otherwise have remained without inheritance, nay, submit to go shares with them in that which they supposed they had acquired beyond controversy.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

9. of the children of Simeon] In this “Negeb” or “land of the south,” Simeon now took up his abode. Like Reuben on the east of Jordan, the tribe was destined to have little influence on the subsequent history, to be divided in Jacob and scattered in Israel (Gen_49:5-7). In the prophecy of Moses he is not even mentioned (Deuteronomy 33), nor are we told what part he took at the time of the division of the kingdom. “As time rolled on, the tribe gradually crossed the imperceptible boundary between civilisation and barbarism, between Palestine and the Desert, and, in ‘the days of Hezekiah’ (1Ch_4:28-43), they wandered forth to the east to seek pasture for their flocks, and ‘smote the tents’ of the pastoral tribes who had ‘dwelt there of old;’ and roved along across the ’Arabah till they arrived at the ‘Mount Seir’—the range of Petra—and ‘smote the rest of the Amalekites, and dwelt there unto this day.’ ” Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 161. “It is startling to find that a tribe professing to be” of the “sons of Israel,” and holding no connection with the Arabs of the district, is still to be found in the country around Petra, literally fulfilling an ancient prediction:—“They of the South (= the Negeb) shall possess the mount of Esau.” See Pusey’s Commentary on Oba_1:19.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the third lot came up for the children of Zebulun,

according to their families,.... Who, though younger than Issachar, has his lot before him, agreeably to the order in which his blessing is predicted, both by Jacob and Moses, Gen 49:13;

and the border of their inheritance was unto Sarid; or "by Sarid", as Masius, who takes this to be the southwest border of Zebulun, being near Carmel; in which he seems to be right.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Great. The land measurers, it seems, had been under a mistake, (Menochius) which was corrected by the ancients. Distributive justice was to be observed.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

9. Too much for them — This may mean that it was more than Judah could subdue and retain, or that it exceeded their necessities, or that it was too large relatively. It reflects great honour upon Judah that they should, without selfish remonstrances and murmurings, submit to this diminution of their lot. The national feeling must have been yet strong in this patriotic tribe, for States are always tenacious of their boundaries.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Therefore the children of Simeon had their inheritance. Of the later history of the children of Simeon we find a little recorded in 1Ch_4:39-42, and some suppose that the event recorded there is a fulfilment of the prophecy in Oba_1:19. Dr. Pusey mentions a tribe still existing in the south, professing to be of the sons of Israel, and holding no connection with the Arabs of the neighbourhood, and supposes them to be the descendants of the five hundred Simeonites who took possession of Mount Seir in the days of Hezekiah. No border seems to have been given of Simeon.

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY Ver. 9. Brotherhood.

I THE IDEA OF BROTHERHOOD MUST BE RECOGNISED IN ORDER THAT TRUE PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE MAY BE ESTABLISHED. Justice does not imply equality. To deal equally with all is often unjust, since different men have different needs. It would have been unjust to have given equal portions to Judah and Simeon. In the family, justice does not require the treatment of all the children alike, but the treatment of each according to his disposition and requirements. But in order to do this there must be mutual understanding and sympathy Therefore these are necessary for the administration of justice. Rude social equality will not regenerate society. The idea of brotherhood must come first and bring with it the thoughtfulness and sympathy, without which we cannot be just to one another. Note: Providence is often more just than it appears, because it does not aim at establishing a mechanical equality, but studies the individual condition of each man, and acts according to special requirements of special cases which may be entirely unknown to us.

II THE IDEA OF BROTHERHOOD MUST BE REALISED IF MEN WOULD SEE THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE. Judah had too much. Few men are willing to admit that they have too much, and hence they often wrong others and greedily hold what they do not need. Until men feel their brotherhood with others they will not see the measure by which to judge whether or no they have more than their due share of the advantages of life. Selfishness magnifies a man"s needs and deserts, and minimises the requirements and merits of others. To be just we must conquer selfishness with brotherliness.

III THE IDEA OF BROTHERHOOD MUST TAKE POSSESSION OF MEN BEFORE THEY CAN PRACTISE THAT MUTUAL ACCOMMODATION WHICH IS REQUIRED BY JUSTICE. The children of Simeon had their inheritance within the inheritance of the children of Judah. This could only be enjoyed peaceably so long as the two tribes lived on terms of brotherly kindness. Justice will not be obtained under a system of jealous competition in a selfish race for wealth. This leads to the weak and unfortunate losing, and the strong and fortunate gaining, more than is fair. The idea of brotherhood will prevent men from taking unfair advantage of one another, will establish the principle of cooperation in place of that of competition, and will substitute the mutual benefits of the family for the selfish profits of a state of internecine warfare.

IV THE IDEA OF BROTHERHOOD CAN ONLY BE FULLY REALISED UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. Revolutions which have dispensed with Christianity have boasted of their power to realise this idea, but the attempt to do so has too often led through bloodshed to despotism. Christianity realises it

(1) by pointing to a common fatherhood,

(2) by joining to one brother, Christ,

(3) by exalting brotherly charity to the first rank among the Christian graces. W.F.A. (1Co_13:13)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Was too large for them. It was more than was their due.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.