Joshua 16:5-10 · Bible study
Joshua 16:5-10 Commentary: Ephraim's Inheritance
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Explore the borders of Ephraim's allotment, the significance of place names, and the tribe's failure to drive out the Canaanites from Gezer.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The boundaries and failure of Ephraim's inheritance, showing both fulfillment and disobedience.
- Key words: border (gevul), inheritance (nachalah), separate cities (mivdalah), not drive out (lo horishu), forced labor (mas).
- Main debate: Are these border descriptions historically accurate but partially corrupted, or are they intentionally symbolic of incomplete possession?
- Theological theme: Incomplete obedience to God’s command leads to long-term spiritual problems.
- Best use: Teaching on the danger of compromise and the importance of full obedience to God’s instructions.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
5This was the territory of the descendants of Ephraim by their clans: The border of their inheritance went from Ataroth-addar in the east to Upper Beth-horon
6and out toward the Sea. From Michmethath on the north it turned eastward toward Taanath-shiloh and passed by it to Janoah on the east.
7From Janoah it went down to Ataroth and Naarah, and then reached Jericho and came out at the Jordan.
8From Tappuah the border went westward to the Brook of Kanah and ended at the Sea. This was the inheritance of the clans of the tribe of Ephraim,
9along with all the cities and villages set apart for the descendants of Ephraim within the inheritance of Manasseh.
10But they did not drive out the Canaanites who lived in Gezer. So the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites to this day, but they are forced laborers.
WEB World English Bible 2000
5This was the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families. The border of their inheritance eastward was Ataroth Addar, to Beth Horon the upper.
6The border went out westward at Michmethath on the north. The border turned about eastward to Taanath Shiloh, and passed along it on the east of Janoah.
7It went down from Janoah to Ataroth, to Naarah, reached to Jericho, and went out at the Jordan.
8From Tappuah the border went along westward to the brook of Kanah; and ended at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim according to their families;
9together with the cities which were set apart for the children of Ephraim in the middle of the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.
10They didn’t drive out the Canaanites who lived in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwell in the territory of Ephraim to this day, and have become servants to do forced labor.
KJV King James Version 1769
5And the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families was thus: even the border of their inheritance on the east side was Ataroth–addar, unto Beth–horon the upper;
6And the border went out toward the sea to Michmethah on the north side; and the border went about eastward unto Taanath–shiloh, and passed by it on the east to Janohah;
7And it went down from Janohah to Ataroth, and to Naarath, and came to Jericho, and went out at Jordan.
8The border went out from Tappuah westward unto the river Kanah; and the goings out thereof were at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim by their families.
9And the separate cities for the children of Ephraim were among the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.
10And they drave not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell among the Ephraimites unto this day, and serve under tribute.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
5And the border of the children of Ephraim according to their families was thus: the border of their inheritance eastward was Ataroth-addar, unto Beth-horon the upper;
6and the border went out westward at Michmethath on the north; and the border turned about eastward unto Taanath-shiloh, and passed along it on the east of Janoah;
7and it went down from Janoah to Ataroth, and to Naarah, and reached unto Jericho, and went out at the Jordan.
8From Tappuah the border went along westward to the brook of Kanah; and the goings out thereof were at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim according to their families;
9together with the cities which were set apart for the children of Ephraim in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages.
10And they drove not out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer: but the Canaanites dwell in the midst of Ephraim unto this day, and are become servants to do taskwork.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
5And the border of the sons of Ephraim is by their families; and the border of their inheritance is on the east, Atroth-Addar unto Beth-Horon the upper;
6and the border hath gone out at the sea, to Michmethah on the north, and the border hath gone round eastward to Taanath-Shiloh, and passed over it eastward to Janohah,
7and gone down from Janohah to Ataroth, and to Naarath, and touched against Jericho, and gone out at the Jordan.
8From Tappuah the border goeth westward unto the brook of Kanah, and its outgoings have been at the sea: this is the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Ephraim, for their families.
9And the separate cities of the sons of Ephraim are in the midst of the inheritance of the sons of Manasseh, all the cities and their villages;
10and they have not dispossessed the Canaanite who is dwelling in Gezer, and the Canaanite dwelleth in the midst of Ephraim unto this day, and is to tribute--a servant.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
5And the border of the children of Ephraim was according to their families; the border of their inheritance eastwards was Ataroth-Addar as far as the upper Beth-horon;
6and the border went forth westwards to Micmethath on the north; and the border turned eastwards to Taanath-Shiloh, and passed by it eastwards to Janohah,
7and went down from Janohah to Ataroth and Naarath, and touched upon Jericho, and went out to the Jordan.
8From Tappuah the border went westwards to the torrent Kanah, and ended at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Ephraim according to their families,
9with the cities that were set apart for the children of Ephraim in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Manasseh, all the cities and their hamlets.
10But they did not dispossess the Canaanites that dwelt at Gezer; and the Canaanites dwell in the midst of Ephraim to this day, and serve under tribute.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
5And the border of the children of Ephraim was according to their kindreds: and their possession towards the east was Ataroth-addar unto Beth-horon the upper.
6And the confines go out unto the sea: but Machmethath looketh to the north, and it goeth round the borders eastward into Thanath-selo: and passeth along on the east side to Janoe.
7And it goeth down from Janoe into Ataroth and Naaratha: and it cometh to Jericho, and goeth out to the Jordan.
8From Taphua it passeth on towards the sea into the valley of reeds, and the goings out thereof are at the most salt sea. This is the possession of the tribe of the children of Ephraim by their families.
9And there were cities with their villages separated for the children of Ephraim in the midst of the possession of the children of Manasses.
10And the children of Ephraim slew not the Chanaanite, who dwelt in Gazer: and the Chanaanite dwelt in the midst of Ephraim until this day, paying tribute.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Joshua 16:5
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree the border description is fragmentary, many place names are now lost (Barnes, Matthew Henry). The Cambridge Bible notes that the border is not traced with the same completeness as that of Judah.
All note that Ephraim received additional “separate cities” within Manasseh’s territory because its own lot was too small for its population (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Keil & Delitzsch, Wesley).
There is consensus that verse 10 records a disobedience: Ephraim did not expel the Canaanites from Gezer, contrary to God’s command (Deuteronomy 7:1-5; 20:16-18). Instead, they subjected them to forced labor (Gill, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown). Commentators see this as the beginning of a pattern of incomplete conquest that would trouble Israel throughout the book of Judges.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Literal geographical record: The place names are accepted as real locations, even if many are now lost; Keil and Delitzsch treat them as precise boundaries.
- Textually corrupt: Barnes and Matthew Henry argue the abrupt style suggests lost text; this view focuses on the obscurity of the places.
- Theological narrative: The border description serves to highlight the completeness of God’s gift, while the failure at Gezer emphasizes the human failure; many modern commentators see a deliberate contrast.
What is clear: The passage teaches that God gave Ephraim a specific inheritance in fulfillment of His promise, but the tribe’s incomplete obedience to the command to drive out the Canaanites had lasting consequences.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Historical reliability of border descriptions | The text reflects ancient practices of land division and many place names were real locations. | Some scholars (Barnes, Matthew Henry) suggest the text is fragmentary and words may have fallen out. Others (Keil) see the description as sufficient for the original audience. |
| Additional cities in Manasseh | Ephraim received enclaves within Manasseh’s territory due to the tribe’s large population. | Some view this as a divine provision; others as a practical adjustment that may have caused later tensions (mentioned in Joshua 17). |
| Failure to drive out Canaanites | This was disobedience to God's clear command in Deuteronomy. | Commentators differ on the motive: lack of faith (Gill), military weakness, or economic pragmatism (using them as laborers). |
| Meaning of 'to this day' | The phrase indicates the situation persisted at the time of writing. | Scholars debate whether the writing is contemporary (early monarchic) or from a later Deuteronomistic editor. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The land allotment follows the conquest of Canaan under Joshua. The tribe of Ephraim, descended from Joseph’s younger son, received a fertile central region stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. The borders referenced include locations significant in earlier battles: Beth-horon (where Joshua defeated the Amorites, Joshua 10:10-11), Jericho (the first conquered city, Joshua 6), and Gezer (a royal Canaanite city, Joshua 10:33).
The “sea” refers to the Mediterranean, Ephraim’s western boundary. The “separate cities” (mivdalah) within Manasseh show that tribal boundaries were not absolute, adjustments were made to accommodate a larger population (Keil & Delitzsch).
The failure to drive out the Canaanites from Gezer reflects a broader pattern: Israel often made conquered peoples tributaries rather than exterminating them. The Hebrew word mas (“forced labor,” H4522) indicates a corvée system common in the ancient Near East. This practice led to spiritual compromise, as warned in Judges 2:1-3. This passage thus shows both the fulfillment of God’s promise of land and the seeds of future conflict from half-hearted obedience.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Joshua 16:5-10. Barnes suggests that “some words have, in these verses, fallen out of the text” due to the abrupt and imperfect character of the border description. The Cambridge Bible similarly observes that the border is not traced with the completeness given for Judah, and many place names are now unknown. These judgments arise from the internal evidence of the passage rather than from manuscript variations.
Reception History
Early church interpreters, such as Origen, read these boundary lists allegorically, seeing each place as representing a virtue or spiritual stage. Reformation commentators (Calvin, Matthew Henry) treated the passage as literal history, emphasizing the lesson of incomplete obedience. Matthew Henry noted that the description is “short and intricate” yet certain in its purpose. Modern scholarship has focused on the historical geography and the literary structure, noting the tension between the ideal of complete conquest and the reality of ongoing Canaanite presence. The passage is often cited in discussions of Israel’s failure to fully possess the land and the danger of compromise with surrounding cultures.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Precision of boundaries shows God’s faithfulness. God gave each tribe a specific inheritance; the long list of place names underlines that the promise to Abraham was fulfilled in detail.
- Separate cities illustrate God’s provision. Ephraim received enclaves in Manasseh because the tribe needed more room, God supplies for the needs of his people even within existing structures.
- Failure at Gezer warns against compromise. The Canaanites remained because Ephraim did not fully obey. Half-hearted obedience becomes a long-term problem.
Five-point outline
- The boundaries: specific places given by God.
- The separate cities: interdependence among tribes.
- The failure: disobedience at Gezer.
- The result: Canaanites as forced laborers, a compromise.
- The warning: incomplete conquest foreshadows Israel’s later struggles.
Illustration hooks
- A property survey that reveals a disputed boundary, showing how careful God is with his promises.
- A father giving land to his children, explaining why some boundaries overlap for practical reasons.
- A homeowner who finds a pest infestation and tries to control it rather than remove it, only to have it return.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why didn’t the Ephraimites just drive out the Canaanites? Was it laziness, fear, or something else?
- What does this passage say about the danger of living alongside ungodly influences?
- How do we sometimes settle for a “forced labor” arrangement with sin instead of fully removing it?
Leading a Discussion
This section of Joshua records the boundaries of Ephraim’s inheritance and ends with a troubling note: the tribe did not drive out the Canaanites from Gezer. As you read, notice the detail given to borders and the blunt honesty about failure. The passage invites us to consider how we handle God’s commands, do we obey completely, or do we keep compromises?
Discussion questions
- Which specific places in the border description stand out to you, and why might the writer include so many?
- Joshua 16:9 mentions cities “set apart” for Ephraim inside Manasseh’s territory. What does this arrangement suggest about the relationship between the two tribes?
- Compare verse 10 with Deuteronomy 20:16-18. What command was given to Israel concerning the inhabitants of the land?
- The Hebrew verb horishu (Hiphil of יָרַשׁ) means “they dispossessed” or “caused to possess.” The negative here (לֹא הוֹרִישׁוּ) indicates a deliberate failure. In what ways might the Ephraimites have justified keeping the Canaanites as forced laborers?
- How does the phrase “to this day” affect the way you read the account? What does it tell us about the timing of the narrative?
- What areas of your own life might you be leaving “unconquered”, tolerating something God has told you to remove?
- How can this passage encourage us to trust God’s complete provision rather than settling for half measures?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Joshua 16:2 | It went out from Bethel to Luz, and passed along to the border of the Archites to Ataroth; |
| Joshua 18:13 | The border passed along from there to Luz, to the side of Luz (also called Bethel), southward. The border went down to Ataroth Addar, by the mountain that lies on the south of Beth Horon the lower. |
| Joshua 17:7 | The border of Manasseh was from Asher to Michmethath, which is before Shechem. The border went along to the right hand, to the inhabitants of En Tappuah. |
| Joshua 18:1 | The whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled themselves together at Shiloh, and set up the Tent of Meeting there. The land was subdued before them. |
| Numbers 33:48 | They traveled from the mountains of Abarim, and encamped in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho. |
| Joshua 3:16 | the waters which came down from above stood, and rose up in one heap a great way off, at Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan; and those that went down toward the sea of the Arabah, even the Salt Sea, were wholly cut off. Then the people passed over near Jericho. |
| Joshua 6:1 | Now Jericho was tightly shut up because of the children of Israel. No one went out, and no one came in. |
| Joshua 6:26 | Joshua commanded them with an oath at that time, saying, “Cursed is the man before Yahweh who rises up and builds this city Jericho. With the loss of his firstborn he will lay its foundation, and with the loss of his youngest son he will set up its gates.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke points out that the failure to fully drive out the Canaanites from Gezer, which lasted until Solomon's day, does not discredit Scripture. He compares this to ancient English towns that have changed location or vanished entirely over time, arguing that such changes do not undermine the truth of biblical geography.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes suggests that the abrupt and imperfect wording of these verses points to missing words in the original text. He also proposes that the separate cities given to Ephraim within Manasseh’s territory were likely needed because Ephraim’s allotted land proved too small for the tribe.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator observes that Ephraim’s border description is less complete than Judah’s, with no northern boundary given. He notes that separate cities were allotted to Ephraim from within Manasseh’s territory, likely because Ephraim’s assigned land proved too small for its population.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill observes that the Ephraimites kept the Canaanites in Gezer as forced laborers instead of driving them out, which he interprets as disobedience driven by greed for tribute. This failure, he notes, matches the prophet Hosea's later portrayal of Ephraim as a people who loved profit and would not surrender it.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB traces the detailed border lines of Ephraim's territory, noting that the land west of those lines was still unconquered. He highlights the first mention of Israel's fatal neglect of the divine command to exterminate the Canaanites, who instead remained among them as tribute servants.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch carefully trace Ephraim's borders by identifying each place name, noting which locations are still known and which remain undiscovered. They correct earlier scholars, rejecting Knobel's identification of Michmethah with Kabate as too far north. Their point is that the biblical boundary descriptions are precise enough to follow, even when specific sites are lost.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that scholars trying to map Ephraim's border are at a loss because the description is brief and complex. The land has changed so drastically over time—cities destroyed, rivers shifted, mountains eroded—that even modern travelers cannot clear up the difficulties.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley notes that the biblical geographical details, now obscure, were perfectly clear to the Israelites since they described the actual land they received. He specifies that "east side" means northeast, "toward the sun" refers to the Mediterranean west, and "to Jericho" means the territory, not the city. The "separate cities" were additional towns from Manasseh