Joshua 5:4 · Bible study
Joshua 5:4 Commentary: Why the New Generation Needed Circumcision
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why the wilderness generation remained uncircumcised, and what the mass circumcision at Gilgal reveals about covenant renewal after judgment.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The verse explains that the mass circumcision at Gilgal was necessary because the entire generation of military‑aged males from Egypt had died in the wilderness.
- Key words: “reason” (דָּבָר, davar, word/matter), “circumcised” (מָל, mal), “died” (מֵתוּ, metu), “way” (דֶּרֶךְ, derekh).
- Main debate: Whether circumcision was completely omitted for 38 years after the rebellion at Kadesh Barnea, or only for those born after the first wilderness Passover (Numbers 9).
- Theological theme: Covenant judgment and renewal, the sign of belonging was suspended during the period of divine displeasure and restored when a faithful generation entered the land.
- Best use: Preaching and teaching on how God both disciplines and restores His people, and how covenant signs (now baptism, Communion) mark a new beginning.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
Now this is why Joshua circumcised them: All those who came out of Egypt—all the men of war—had died on the journey in the wilderness after they had left Egypt.
WEB World English Bible 2000
This is the reason Joshua circumcised them: all the people who came out of Egypt, who were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness along the way, after they came out of Egypt.
KJV King James Version 1769
And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: all the people that came forth out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came forth out of Egypt.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And this is the thing for which Joshua circumciseth them : all the people who are coming out of Egypt, who are males, all the men of war have died in the wilderness, in the way, in their coming out of Egypt,
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And this is the cause why Joshua circumcised [them]: all the people that had come out of Egypt, the males, all the men of war, had died in the wilderness on the way, after they came out of Egypt.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Now this is the cause of the second circumcision: All the people that came out of Egypt that were males, all the men fit for war, died in the desert, during the time of the long going about in the way:
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Esta es la causa por la cual Josué los circuncidó: todo el pueblo que había salido de Egipto, los varones, todos los hombres de guerra, habían muerto en el desierto por el camino, después que salieron de Egipto.
Esta é a causa pela qual Josué os circuncidou: todo aquele povo que havia saído do Egito, os homens, todos os homens de guerra, haviam morrido no deserto pelo caminho, depois que saíram do Egito.
Voici la raison pour laquelle Josué les circoncit. Tout le peuple sorti d’ Égypte, les mâles, tous les hommes de guerre, étaient morts dans le désert, pendant la route, après leur sortie d’ Égypte.
Und das ist die Sache, darum Josua sie beschnitt: Alles Volk, das aus Ägypten gezogen war, die Männer, alle Kriegsleute, waren gestorben in der Wüste auf dem Wege, da sie aus Ägypten zogen.
Dit nu was de oorzaak, waarom hen Jozua besneed: al het volk, dat uit Egypte getogen was, de manspersonen, alle krijgslieden, waren gestorven in de woestijn, op den weg, nadat zij uit Egypte getogen waren.
Questo fu il motivo per cui li circoncise: tutti i maschi del popolo uscito dall’Egitto, cioè tutti gli uomini di guerra, erano morti nel deserto durante il viaggio, dopo essere usciti dall’Egitto.
A tać była przyczyna, dla czego je obrzezał Jozue: Wszystek lud, który wyszedł z Egiptu, płci męskiej, wszyscy mężowie wojenni, pomarli byli na puszczy, w drodze, gdy wyszli z Egiptu.
Вот причина, почему обрезал Иисус [сынов Израилевых, которые тогда родились на пути, и которые из вышедших из Египта не были тогда обрезаны, всех их обрезал Иисус]: весь народ, вышедший из Египта, мужеского пола, все способные к войне умерли в пустыне на пути, по исшествии из Египта;
約書亞 行割禮 的緣故，是因為 從埃及 出來的 眾 民，就是一切 能打仗 的男 丁，出了 埃及以後，都死 在曠野 的路上。
And this is the reason why Joshua did so: all the males of the people who came out of Egypt, all the fighting-men, had been overtaken by death in the waste land on the way, after they came out of Egypt.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Joshua 5:4
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
The commentators agree on the basic fact: Joshua circumcised the new generation because the entire exodus generation of military-aged males had died in the wilderness. Adam Clarke observes that while circumcision was practiced at Sinai, it fell into disuse during the wilderness wanderings due to the people's unsettled state and God's temporary suspension of the covenant sign (see Numbers 14:28, 32). Barnes adds that the sentence at Kadesh placed the nation under a ban, and the omission of circumcision was both a consequence and a token of that ban. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown concur that the true cause was a suspension of the covenant with the unbelieving race. Matthew Henry notes simply that the old generation died for their disobedience, and the children now received the sign as they entered the land. Keil and Delitzsch link the circumcision to the coming Passover, which could not be celebrated without it. Thus, while the precise timing of the omission may be debated, there is strong agreement that the mass circumcision at Gilgal re‑established the covenant that had been interrupted by judgment.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: The passage unambiguously explains that Joshua circumcised the people because the exodus generation of fighting men had died, leaving a new generation that had never received the covenant sign.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Who was circumcised at Gilgal? | All male Israelites who had been born in the wilderness during the 38, 40 years after the exodus from Egypt were circumcised by Joshua. | Some hold that those under 20 at the exodus (who survived) were already circumcised and did not need the rite; others think the entire nation except Joshua, Caleb, and the leaders underwent circumcision that day. |
| Why was circumcision omitted in the wilderness? | The omission was connected to God’s judgment on the exodus generation for their unbelief at Kadesh Barnea (Numbers 14). | Barnes describes a temporary ban on the covenant sign; Clarke emphasizes the unsettled state of travel; others point to the practical impossibility of performing the rite during constant movement. The precise theological reason (suspension vs. neglect) is debated. |
| Did any people who came out of Egypt survive to be circumcised at Gilgal? | The men of war (those 20 and older at the exodus) died in the wilderness, but women and those under 20 at the exodus remained. | Gill notes that Joshua, Caleb, Eleazar, and many under 20 at the exodus were still alive but already circumcised; Matthew Henry considers the possibility that some of these had to be circumcised if they had not been previously. The exact number varies among interpreters. |
| The connection to the Passover | The mass circumcision enabled the celebration of the Passover, which required all participants to be circumcised (Exodus 12:48). | Some argue the Passover was the primary reason for circumcision at that moment; Keil & Delitzsch note the approach of Passover made it desirable; others see the renewal of the covenant as the main point, with Passover as the seal. |
Historical & Cultural Context
After crossing the Jordan, Israel camped at Gilgal, just east of Jericho. The surrounding Canaanite kings were paralyzed with fear (Joshua 5:1). At this moment, strategically safe from attack, God commanded Joshua to “circumcise again the sons of Israel a second time” (v. 2). The expression “second time” does not mean the entire nation was being circumcised twice, but that an earlier practice (circumcision at Sinai, linked to the first Passover in the wilderness) was now being renewed.
The original command for circumcision came to Abraham (Genesis 17). Every male descendant was to receive the sign on the eighth day. In Egypt, the Israelites kept this practice (Joshua 5:5). But after the exodus and the rebellion at Kadesh Barnea (Numbers 14), the generation that refused to enter the land was doomed to die in the wilderness. The covenant sign appears to have been suspended during those thirty‑eight years of wandering. Several factors likely contributed: the constant movement and unsettled life (Jamieson‑Fausset‑Brown), the judgmental ban (Barnes), and God’s intention to renew the covenant only when the new generation reached the land (Keil & Delitzsch). Now that Israel had entered the promised land, the covenant was revived. Circumcision was necessary before the Passover, which ratified the covenant relationship (Exodus 12:48).
The location “hill of the foreskins” (v. 3) probably refers to a low rise near Gilgal, named for the event. After they healed, the Lord said, “Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you” (v. 9), likely referring to the disgrace of having been uncircumcised, a condition that marked them as out of covenant with God while in the wilderness.
Textual Notes
The supplied commentary excerpts and lexical data note no significant textual variants for Joshua 5:4 itself. The verse is well‑attested in the Masoretic Text and ancient versions (Septuagint, Vulgate, Syriac). Minor differences appear in pronoun and verb forms in the surrounding narrative (e.g., the Keri reading “they were passed over” in verse 1), but these do not affect the interpretation of verse 4.
Reception History
Throughout church history, Joshua 5:4 has been read as a case study in covenant discipline and restoration. Early Christian writers like Origen saw the mass circumcision as a type of spiritual circumcision, the cutting away of the old life before entering the promised rest (cf. Colossians 2:11, 12). Augustine linked it to baptism, noting that the new generation received the covenant sign after the judgment on the fathers. During the Reformation, both Protestant and Catholic exegetes emphasized that God’s covenant remains faithful even when human disobedience interrupts its signs. The Wesleyan tradition (Adam Clarke) drew a direct line from circumcision to baptism and from Passover to the Eucharist, arguing that visible signs of the covenant are necessary for communion with God. In modern evangelical preaching, the passage is often cited to illustrate that God does not discard His people, but renews them after seasons of discipline, preparing them to possess what He has promised.
Preaching This Verse
Three‑point outline
- The old generation died because of disobedience, The men of war perished in the wilderness as God swore (Numbers 14). Their unbelief and rebellion excluded them from the promised rest (Hebrews 3:17, 19).
- The new generation needed a fresh start with the covenant sign, Circumcision was the mark of belonging to God’s people. Entering the land demanded that the covenant be visibly renewed (Joshua 5:5, 7).
- God’s timing was precise, After crossing the Jordan, before the battle of Jericho, and before the Passover celebration, God commanded circumcision (Joshua 5:2, 10). He prepared His people for both worship and warfare.
Five‑point outline
- Why this was the “second time”, A renewal of the practice begun at Sinai (Numbers 9:1, 5).
- Who was affected, The generation born in the wilderness, never circumcised (Joshua 5:5).
- Why it had been neglected, Judgment on the fathers’ rebellion (Numbers 14:33), and possibly the practical difficulty of traveling (Barnes).
- What it accomplished, It restored the covenant, allowed the Passover, and removed the “reproach of Egypt.”
- What it teaches us, God keeps His covenant even after discipline, and He provides a clean start for those who enter His promises.
Illustration hooks
- Family heirlooms: A family stops passing down a treasured tradition for a generation because of estrangement, then renews it at a reunion. The sign of belonging is restored.
- Renovation before moving in: Before taking possession of a new home, you paint over old marks, fix what’s broken, and make it yours. Israel needed visible restoration before possessing the land.
- Military ID tags: Soldiers without identification cannot be assigned to a unit. The new generation needed the “ID” of circumcision to be recognized as God’s army.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Why did God allow an entire generation to skip the covenant sign? Was He angry for forty years?
- Why now, when they were about to fight? Wouldn’t this make them vulnerable?
- What is the “reproach of Egypt,” and does it affect us today?
Leading a Discussion
This passage shows that the covenant sign of circumcision was neglected during the wilderness wanderings and restored at Gilgal before the conquest. The reason was not merely practical but theological: the exodus generation was under judgment, and the covenant was suspended. Now, with the entry into the land, God renews His relationship with the people.
Discussion questions
- Read Joshua 5:2, 9. Why does the verse say “circumcise again the sons of Israel the second time”? What does “second time” refer to?
- According to verse 4, who had died, and why does this explain the need for circumcision now? (Use Numbers 14:28, 32 for background.)
- Look at Joshua 5:5, 6. Which group was circumcised, and which was not? What caused the difference? (Consider the oath in Numbers 14.)
- How might the people have felt about the long delay of the covenant sign? Would they have understood it as punishment, or as preparation?
- In verse 9, God says He rolled away “the reproach of Egypt.” What reproach was that? How did circumcision remove it?
- Read Deuteronomy 2:14 and Hebrews 3:16, 19. How do these passages reinforce the connection between unbelief and the wilderness judgment?
- What does this story teach us about God’s pattern of discipline followed by renewal? How might this apply to times when we feel “uncircumcised” in our own walk with God?
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)
| Numbers 14:22 | because all those men who have seen my glory and my signs, which I worked in Egypt and in the wilderness, yet have tempted me these ten times, and have not listened to my voice; |
| Numbers 26:64 | But among these there was not a man of them who were counted by Moses and Aaron the priest, who counted the children of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai. |
| Numbers 26:65 | For Yahweh had said of them, “They shall surely die in the wilderness.” There was not a man left of them, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun. |
| Deuteronomy 2:14 | The days in which we came from Kadesh Barnea until we had come over the brook Zered were thirty-eight years, until all the generation of the men of war were consumed from the middle of the camp, as Yahweh swore to them. |
| Deuteronomy 2:16 | So, when all the men of war were consumed and dead from among the people, |
| I Corinthians 10:5 | However with most of them, God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. |
| Hebrews 3:17 | With whom was he displeased forty years? Wasn’t it with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? |
| Hebrews 3:19 | We see that they weren’t able to enter in because of unbelief. |
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 highlights that God temporarily set aside circumcision in the wilderness because of Israel's unsettled condition. Once they entered the promised land and prepared to celebrate Passover, the rite became necessary. He draws a parallel to Christian practice, where baptism is required before receiving the Lord's Supper.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes argues that the omission of circumcision in the wilderness was not accidental but a direct consequence of the ban placed on Israel after Kadesh, which temporarily abrogated the covenant. God waited to restore the covenant until He had given visible proof of His power through victories over Sihon and Og, and then recalled the people to circumcision and the Passover at this most opportune moment, just before they faced war.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Notes highlight that Joshua circumcised all the males because the original fighting men who came out of Egypt had died in the wilderness. A new generation had grown up without circumcision during the journey, so Joshua performed
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes that the adult males who came out of Egypt, all the men of war aged twenty and up, had died during the wilderness journey except for a few like Joshua and Caleb. Yet a large number who were under twenty at the Exodus were still alive and now needed circumcision, which is why Joshua performed it.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB argues that circumcision was omitted in the wilderness not merely because of constant travel, but because the covenant was temporarily suspended with the unbelieving generation condemned to die. Their children, however, would later receive the covenant anew since they were destined to enter the promised land.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch argue that circumcision was omitted in the wilderness not from neglect but because God temporarily suspended the covenant with the rebellious exodus generation. The sign was withheld until that generation died off, then restored to their sons as the covenant was renewed for entry into Canaan.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry focuses on the meaning behind the circumcision. He sees it as God rolling away the shame of Egypt, both the literal disgrace of being uncircumcised like the Egyptians and the deeper reproach of their slavery and unbelief in the wilderness. With this act, Israel was renewed as a covenant people ready to enter the land.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley restricts the phrase "out of Egypt" to only those Israelites who were over twenty years old at the exodus and who later rebelled in the wilderness. This generation, condemned to die before entering Canaan, is the specific group meant, as confirmed in Joshua.