Or and paid homage
5:13 The episode begins with Joshua “by Jericho.” The more natural reading of the Hebrew is “in Jericho,” although this has problems. Medieval rabbinic commentators took it to mean that the city’s outskirts qualified to describe one as being “in” the city. One modern suggestion grants the Hebrew its natural force and then understands the episode to be a vision. While classical Hebrew has language to express “in the region of” more precisely, it still seems simplest to follow the typical English rendering “by Jericho,” which falls within the semantic range of the Hebrew preposition. This grammatical point bearing on location takes on significance in the light of the commander’s claim in verse 15: “The place where you are standing is holy.” This “place” would seem not to be Jericho itself, despite the initial implication of the natural sense of the Hebrew.
Even the wording that Joshua “lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold” bears some suggestive associations, although it is at first blush a fairly innocuous phrase. Of the fourteen times this full phrasing is found in the OT, nine of them anticipate divine disclosures. Familiarity with this biblical diction raises anticipation about just what, or who, awaits Joshua’s encounter. This sense is further heightened when the figure is described as having a “drawn sword in his hand.” To “draw the sword” is a biblical Hebrew idiom for an armed warrior, including times in which swords are drawn in the heat of battle. But on only two other occasions in the OT is a figure encountered with a “drawn sword in his hand.” One appears in the exodus story, as this is the description of the angel of the Lord who intercepts Balaam on his way to confer with Balak, king of Moab, in Numbers 22:23, 31—a truly terrifying figure in the context of that story. The other is found in the Chronicler’s version of David’s census (1 Chron. 21:16; cf. 21:30). David, like Joshua, “lifted [up] his eyes and saw” a figure who held “in his hand a drawn sword,” and David recognized it as “the angel of the Lord,” who was working destruction in Jerusalem. With these wider resonances in mind, then, a reader would be alerted to the potentially ominous, possibly supernatural nature of this figure who now encounters Joshua. Joshua, however, sees “a man.”
Even so, his reaction might be surprising: “Joshua went to him.” No graphical description of this “man” is given, and speculation is futile—but he does have a drawn sword, and at this point Joshua is an intruder. But Joshua emerged as Moses’ assistant for a reason. The first time he appears in the exodus narrative is in the battle with Amalek, in which it appears that he is well able to wield a sword himself (Ex. 17:8–13). Here, while it is possible to see in Joshua an element of impetuosity in going up to this man, this can also be seen as the assured approach of one who has known the Lord’s assistance in more threatening situations than this. In any case, Joshua approaches and challenges the man: “Are you for us, or for our adversaries?” The binary for us/against us choice Joshua offers in this question is in keeping with other brief speeches he makes while serving Moses (Ex. 32:17; Num. 11:28; 14:7–9, together with Caleb). Significantly, the question is posed in terms of supporting Joshua’s people or those opposed to them. But this choice will be resisted, as the man’s response immediately makes clear.
5:14 “No” is the simple and unexpected reply—unexpected because it requires a third option Joshua’s question does not anticipate. In other words, Joshua’s question has been fundamentally misplaced. The commander’s reply makes clear that his identity transcends any form of loyalties on the human level. His presence and presumed power cannot be coopted by any group. This matter is of fundamental importance for understanding properly not only this episode but the book as a whole; it will be further explored in the Response below.
Rather than offering a self-identification in terms of any human allegiance, the figure provides a title that places his status in an entirely different light. Several military generals in the OT hold the title sar sebaʾ, which finds different renderings in the ESV, as in other English versions; “commander of the army” is by far the most frequent. Only in these verses in the whole OT is the “army of the Lord” mentioned. What kind of army is this? The closest parallel to this language is found in Exodus 12:41, where the sebaʾot (pl. “armies” or “hosts”) of Yahweh depart from Egypt. That, of course, is the company of Israelites, leaving their bondage to return to the land of their ancestors. So one possibility is that this figure is claiming supreme rule over the people, or “army,” that Joshua is designated to lead. Another possibility arises in connection with the later designation “Lord of Hosts” (Hb. yhwh sebaʾot), used first at Shiloh (1 Sam. 1:3) and associated with the ark of the covenant (1 Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2). This may suggest, then, a “host” or “army of heaven,” although (perhaps surprisingly) in the OT sebaʾot on its own most frequently refers to objects of illicit worship (e.g., Deut. 4:19; 17:3; 2 Kings 23:4–5; Jer. 19:13) rather than the “angel armies” celebrated in contemporary worship songs (but cf. Ps. 148:2). Either of these possibilities—one natural, one supernatural—could be understood as the “army” under the command of the figure now confronting Joshua, and perhaps there is no need to decide between them.
Joshua’s immediate reaction is one of prostration. This action may be offered as an act of worship to God, as understood by the ESV here, or as an act of homage to a human recipient; Saul and David both receive such obeisance (e.g., 1 Sam. 24:8; 2 Sam. 14:4, 22). Prior to this moment, however, the strongest resonance to Joshua’s behavior comes in Moses’ reaction to the revelation of God’s divine name and character in Exodus 34:8. The strong sense here, then, is that Joshua recognizes a “man” deserving of worship. Although Joshua himself was “exalted” by God before the people in Joshua 4:14, here he is wholly subservient. The deferential form of his request for direction is further indication that any sense of Joshua’s maintaining the initiative—as his challenge in 5:13 implied—has been set aside before this “commander.”
5:15 Just as Joshua’s initial challenge failed to correspond to reality, so too his request for orders is ignored as he is informed about quite different matters. Any lingering doubt about the divine status of the commander is dispelled in his further response to Joshua. The language is familiar—it is very nearly identical to part of God’s declaration to Moses in Exodus 3:5. This is an emphatic signal that Joshua’s experience in this moment has its counterpart in Moses’ meeting with God at the burning bush. For Moses, that was a first encounter with a deity otherwise unknown to him, at least by name. Joshua, however, has known this God and served in his presence for many years, so what purpose does this encounter serve for him? It cannot be one of commission, as in Moses’ case, for such commissioning has already occurred in Joshua 1 and was anticipated by his appointment in Numbers 27:12–23. It should probably be understood instead as direct confirmation to Joshua of the theological information brought by the spies after their foray into Jericho (Josh. 2:24). The commander is to Joshua the visible corroboration that the Lord is with them in this place. If the assurance the Lord gives to Gideon when he’s about to attack the Midianites is an echo of this moment (Judg. 7:9–14), it may say something about any lingering uncertainty in Joshua’s mind about what awaits him and the rest of God’s people. At a number of points in these opening chapters Joshua displays some uncertainty about the next step to take. While he has been “exalted” (Josh. 4:14) in the presence of the people, this direct, immediate encounter with the commander of the Lord’s army offers weighty reassurance. The final words of the verse confirm that Joshua’s attitude is not merely subservient but obedient.
The one minor difference in the wording between this encounter and that of Moses in Exodus 3:5 is worth observing. Moses is told that “the place” on which he is standing is “holy ground;” in Joshua’s case the word “ground” (Hb. ʾadmat) is absent, and “the place” itself is said to be “holy.” This is, admittedly, a small difference. But what made the “ground” holy in the case of Moses was the divine presence itself at the bush that burned and was not consumed. Any such limitation is lifted in Joshua’s case: “the place” that is “holy” here is the land that lies before them, promised by God to their ancestors and now given to this generation under Joshua’s leadership. This has deep significance for the events about to befall Jericho, narrated in Joshua 6.
The strong connection between this verse and Exodus 3:5 brings to completion a widely noted structural boundary to the literary shaping of the wider account of the exodus. It is launched with Moses’ meeting with God at the burning bush, marked by the keeping of Passover, and continued by the deliverance of Israel at the crossing of the Red Sea. As the wilderness generation finally completes the exodus, this sequence is reversed: Israel crosses into the Promised Land through the miraculously dry Jordan, enjoys a first Passover, and ends with Joshua’s meeting with God in the person of the “commander of the army of the Lord.”
This is not, of course, the end of the story. Its natural continuation is found in Joshua 6:2, in which further, and now explicit, direction will be given to Joshua about what should happen next.