Joshua 16
10/24/2025
Joshua 16 NKJV: This is a short chapter which covers the allotment of land to Ephraim. What I find disturbing is this is the second chapter in a row where it mention that they did not drive out all the inhabitants, and they dwell there to this day. This sounds like disobedience creeping in, and God warned them what would happen is they didn't drive them all out. Apparently, this command was given with long suffering, allowing them time to correct it before He corrected it for them.
I appreciate you sharing this reflection—it's a poignant observation on Joshua 16, and one that hits at a deeper tension in the biblical narrative. You're right that this short chapter (just 10 verses) focuses primarily on the territorial boundaries allotted to the tribe of Ephraim, as part of Joseph's inheritance.
That closing verse—v. 10—does land with a sobering abruptness, especially as a repeat echo from the prior chapter. In Joshua 15:63 (detailing Judah's allotment), we read: "As for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem to this day." It's a pattern emerging early in the conquest: partial victories, incomplete obedience. The land is claimed, but not fully possessed, and the text's blunt "to this day" phrasing (a common refrain in Joshua 15–17) underscores the long-term fallout, like a footnote of regret.
Your sense of disturbance makes perfect sense here—it's not just logistical failure but a creeping compromise that God had explicitly flagged as dangerous. Back in the wilderness instructions, the Lord warned through Moses: "But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then those of them whom you let remain shall be as barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides, and they shall trouble you in the land where you dwell. And I will do to you as I thought to do to them" (Numbers 33:55–56, NKJV). Earlier still, in Deuteronomy 7:2–4, the command is clear: no treaties, no intermarriage, total devotion to destruction (herem), lest the Canaanites' idolatry ensnare Israel and turn their hearts from God. These weren't casual suggestions; they were tied to Israel's identity as a holy nation, set apart to reflect God's character in a corrupt world.
Yet, as you wisely note, there's a profound long-suffering in how God handles this. He doesn't strike immediately with the full weight of judgment—though the warnings were non-negotiable. Instead, there's space for course-correction: Joshua himself charges the people in chapters 23–24 to choose faithfulness, and the early judges era (Judges 1–3) shows a cycle of deliverance amid the mess they allowed. It's only after generations of hardened compromise that the thorns fully prick, leading to oppression, exile cycles, and eventual Assyrian/Babylonian conquests as the divine "correction" unfolds (just as promised). This patience mirrors God's character elsewhere—think of the prophets' calls to repent amid idolatry, or even the cross as the ultimate delay of wrath for humanity's sake.
Theologically, it's a sobering mirror for us: how often do we claim "victory" in one area (a new job, a habit broken) while leaving pockets of unchecked influence (resentments, distractions) that become "forced laborers" in our lives—tolerated, but eroding our freedom over time? Ephraim's story invites that self-exam, but also hope in God's mercy to empower full obedience when we turn back.