Why did the tribes build an altar in Joshua 22:11, and was it justified? Text and Immediate Context “Now the sons of Israel heard it said, ‘Behold, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh have built an altar at the frontier of the land of Canaan, in the region of the Jordan, on the side belonging to the sons of Israel.’” (Joshua 22:11) The event takes place after these eastern tribes—having fulfilled their military pledge to help conquer Canaan (Joshua 1:12-18; 22:1-8)—return to their inheritance east of the Jordan (Numbers 32). On the west bank, near the Jordan, they erect “an imposing altar” (22:10). This triggers national alarm, because Deuteronomy 12:5-14 centralizes sacrifice “at the place the LORD your God will choose.” Who Built It and Why Their Situation Was Unique Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh had lands separated from the main body of Israel by the Jordan. Ancient boundary lines often bred cultural drift; the tribes feared future generations might be told, “You have no share in the LORD” (Joshua 22:24-25). To pre-empt that, they raised a monumental replica of the true altar as a visible covenant marker. Legal-Theological Parameters 1. One Sanctuary for Sacrifice—Deuteronomy 12:13-14 forbids duplicate sacrificial sites. 2. Memorial Structures Permitted—Genesis 31:45-49 records Jacob and Laban erecting a heap as a “witness” (Heb. ʿēd). Joshua himself set up twelve stones at the Jordan (Joshua 4:4-7). Such memorials were lawful so long as they were non-cultic. 3. Prohibition of Idolatrous Altars—Exodus 20:24-26 allows earthen altars to the LORD but condemns pagan forms (Deuteronomy 16:21). Construction Details The Hebrew phrase mizbeach gādôl (“great altar”) implies massive scale, matching Iron-Age monumental stonework found at Gilgal-Argaman and Tel Gelmon, where archaeologists unearthed footprint-shaped ceremonial enclosures dated c. 1400–1200 BC (Zertal, 1986). Such structures served as tribal rally points rather than primary worship centers. Nationwide Alarm and Mediation Hearing the report, Israel gathered at Shiloh “to go to war” (Joshua 22:12). Prudently, they first dispatched Phinehas son of Eleazar and ten tribal chiefs. Phinehas, famed for zeal against apostasy at Peor (Numbers 25), symbolizes covenant integrity. The Eastern Tribes’ Defense “No! We did it for fear that in the future your children might say to our children, ‘What have you to do with the LORD, the God of Israel?’ … Therefore we said, ‘Let us build an altar, not for burnt offering or sacrifice, but as a witness between us and you’” (22:24-27). They explicitly renounce using it for offerings, placing themselves under divine curse if they betray that pledge (22:22-23). Resolution and Ratification Phinehas declares, “Today we know that the LORD is among us, because you have not committed this trespass” (22:31). The whole assembly blesses God and abandons thoughts of war (22:33). The altar is named “A Witness between us that the LORD is God” (22:34). Was the Altar Justified? 1. No Sacrifices Intended—Thus Deuteronomy 12 remained unbroken. 2. Covenant Witness Function—Parallels Gideon’s “The LORD Is Peace” altar (Judges 6:24) and Samuel’s Ebenezer stone (1 Samuel 7:12). 3. National Endorsement—After investigation, the priesthood and civil leaders accept it, providing de facto divine and communal approval. 4. Absence of Subsequent Condemnation—Later biblical history never cites this altar as sin, unlike Jeroboam’s altars at Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:28-33). Therefore, within Torah parameters, the action was justified as a memorial, not cultic competition. Theological Implications • Unity Preserved—Visible testimony resisted geographic fragmentation, prefiguring New-Covenant unity where Christ “has made the two one” (Ephesians 2:14). • Covenant Memory—Memorials safeguard faith transmission (Psalm 78:4-7). Behavioral science confirms that tangible symbols strengthen collective identity and moral continuity. • Conflict Resolution—Dialogue before combat exemplifies Proverbs 18:13; Matthew 18:15 principles. Archaeological and Historical Corroboration • Mount Ebal Altar—Excavated by Zertal (1980-90), radiocarbon and scarab data align with Joshua’s period (Joshua 8:30-35), reinforcing early Israelite altar tradition. • Shiloh Excavations—Tel Shiloh’s Late Bronze to Iron I cultic remains (Finkelstein, 2013) confirm centralized worship contemporaneous with Joshua 22 narrative. • Boundary-Stone Customs—Ancient Near-Eastern treaties (e.g., Sefire steles, 8th cent. BC) set up witness monuments inscribed “lest a later generation forget,” mirroring the tribes’ rationale. Practical Lessons for Today 1. Guard Gospel Unity—Churches separated by geography or culture must erect “witnesses” (confessions, communion) that proclaim one altar: the cross (Hebrews 13:10). 2. Investigate Before Judging—Rash discipline fractures fellowship; thoughtful inquiry preserves it (Galatians 6:1). 3. Teach the Next Generation—Like that altar, parents must create visible reminders of God’s acts (Deuteronomy 6:6-9). Conclusion The eastern tribes built the altar as a covenantal witness to future fidelity, not as a rival sanctuary. After thorough examination by priestly and tribal authorities, the act was found lawful and laudable. Scripture, archaeology, covenant law, and later history converge to vindicate their motive and method, underscoring that true worship and national unity alike rest on obedient remembrance of the LORD. |
    |