What was the purpose of the altar mentioned in Joshua 22:24? Canonical Setting Joshua 22 describes the return of the warriors from Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh to their lands east of the Jordan after aiding their western brothers in the Conquest. Before they crossed back, they built a large altar “by the Jordan, a prominent altar in view of the sons of Israel” (Joshua 22:10). Text of Joshua 22:24 “Instead, we did this out of concern that in the future your descendants might say to ours, ‘What have you to do with the LORD, the God of Israel?’” Immediate Purpose Stated by the Builders 1. A pre-emptive safeguard against future exclusion (v. 24). 2. A perpetual covenantal witness that the eastern tribes serve the same LORD (vv. 27, 34). 3. Explicitly not for burnt offerings or sacrifices (v. 26). Historical–Cultural Background of Israelite Altars • Altars normally functioned for sacrifice (Genesis 8:20; Exodus 20:24). • Deuteronomy 12 centralized sacrificial worship “at the place the LORD will choose” to prevent syncretism. An altar elsewhere for offerings would have violated Torah. • “Witness-altars” as covenant memorials occur earlier: Jacob and Laban’s heap at Mizpah (Genesis 31:45-48) and Joshua’s stone memorial at Gilgal (Joshua 4:5-7). Legal Precedent Respected The eastern tribes cite Deuteronomy 12:13-14 to clarify intent. Thus their structure functions legally like the Gilgal stones, not cultically like the bronze altar at Shiloh. This satisfied Phinehas and the western chiefs (Joshua 22:30-31). The Hebrew Concept of ‘Witness’ The altar is named “Ed” (עֵד, witness) in several manuscript traditions (v. 34 MT margin). In covenant contexts, “witness” denotes a physical token reminding both parties and later generations of binding oaths (cf. Deuteronomy 31:26; Isaiah 55:4). Sociological Perspective: Boundary Marker Without Schism Rivers often create sociopolitical fault-lines. By erecting a massive, visible monument on the west bank, the eastern tribes mitigated future stigmatization, preserving national identity and worship unity despite geographic separation. Archaeological Corroboration of Memorial Altars • The stepped-stone altar on Mt. Ebal (excavated by Adam Zertal, 1980s) matches Late Bronze dimensions and cultic features that align with Joshua 8:30-35. • The twelve-stone circles at Gilgal (Khirbet el-Mafjar) give precedent for large non-sacrificial memorials commemorating covenant events. Such finds illuminate how ancient Israel used megalithic structures as theological signposts rather than continuous cult sites. Theological Significance 1. Unity of the covenant people across spatial divides. 2. Fidelity to the central sanctuary command while still giving testimony. 3. Foreshadowing the New-Covenant truth that believers, though scattered, are “one body” in Christ (Ephesians 4:4-6). 4. Christ as the ultimate “witness” (Revelation 1:5) and “altar” (Hebrews 13:10) guarantees inclusion of all who trust Him, whether “near or far” (Ephesians 2:17). Practical Application Believers today build no stone altars, yet memorial practices—Lord’s Supper, baptism, testimonial gatherings—serve the same protective purpose: reinforcing identity in the gospel and forestalling drift from orthodox worship. Summary Answer The altar of Joshua 22:24 was erected not for sacrifice but as a monumental testimony (“Ed”) to future generations that the tribes east of the Jordan share in the worship of Yahweh with their western brethren. It functioned as a covenant witness, preserving national and theological unity while fully honoring the Mosaic law’s restriction of sacrificial worship to the divinely chosen sanctuary. |
    |