Joshua 22 20

Joshua 22:20 kjv

Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? and that man perished not alone in his iniquity.

Joshua 22:20 nkjv

Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? And that man did not perish alone in his iniquity.' "

Joshua 22:20 niv

When Achan son of Zerah was unfaithful in regard to the devoted things, did not wrath come on the whole community of Israel? He was not the only one who died for his sin.'?"

Joshua 22:20 esv

Did not Achan the son of Zerah break faith in the matter of the devoted things, and wrath fell upon all the congregation of Israel? And he did not perish alone for his iniquity.'"

Joshua 22:20 nlt

Didn't divine anger fall on the entire community of Israel when Achan, a member of the clan of Zerah, sinned by stealing the things set apart for the LORD ? He was not the only one who died because of his sin."

Joshua 22 verses

Joshua 22 20 Meaning

Joshua 22:20 serves as a sharp reminder from Phinehas and the leaders of Israel to the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh about the devastating consequences of an individual's sin affecting the entire community. It references the historical event of Achan's trespass, where his act of taking devoted things resulted in divine wrath falling upon all Israel, causing military defeat and collective suffering, before he and his family faced their judgment. The verse emphasizes that disobedience to God, especially regarding sacred commands, has far-reaching effects beyond the transgressor, leading to communal judgment and shared hardship.

Joshua 22 20 Context

Joshua chapter 22 recounts a critical moment when the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, having completed their service in conquering Canaan alongside the other tribes, returned to their own inheritance east of the Jordan River. Before they departed, they built a large, imposing altar by the Jordan. The other Israelite tribes (west of Jordan) immediately misinterpreted this altar as an act of apostasy, believing it was for idolatry, which was forbidden and would provoke God's wrath.

Phinehas, the high priest's son, and ten tribal leaders were dispatched to confront them. Their urgent concern was to prevent an impending judgment from God upon the entire congregation. In Joshua 22:20, Phinehas directly appeals to the well-known, devastating precedent of Achan's sin (detailed in Joshua chapter 7). He uses this past event to highlight the grave danger posed by what they perceived as a similar corporate trespass against God. The point was to impress upon them that one act of disobedience could bring suffering and death upon everyone, reinforcing the strong concept of corporate solidarity within the Israelite covenant community.

Joshua 22 20 Word analysis

• Did not: Rhetorical question (הֲלֹא - ha-lo') implying a strong affirmative. It assumes shared knowledge and agreement, making the point undeniable and persuasive. It’s an urgent call for reflection based on a communal memory.
• Achan (עָכָן - ‘Akhan): A specific individual from the tribe of Judah, known from Joshua chapter 7. His name became synonymous with corporate punishment due to personal sin. His inclusion here highlights the direct link between the verse's warning and a concrete historical tragedy.
• the son of Zerah: Identifies Achan precisely. The lineage specifies his identity, solidifying the reference to the historical account.
• commit a trespass (מָעַל - ma'al): This verb signifies acting unfaithfully, particularly in relation to holy or consecrated things, often involving a violation of divine trust or sacrilege. It's more than a mere transgression; it implies a violation of an agreement or sacred duty. Achan acted with covenant treachery.
• in the accursed thing (בַּחֵרֶם - ba-cherem): Refers to something devoted to destruction, specifically items from Jericho (spoils) that God had declared off-limits (herem). Taking cherem was an extreme violation of God's sovereignty and holiness, making the object taboo and belonging solely to God, often for utter destruction.
• and wrath (וְקֶצֶף - və-qetsef): Signifies divine anger, indignation, or displeasure, often resulting in swift and severe judgment. This indicates God's active, righteous response to disobedience.
• fell on (עַל - ‘al): Implies that the wrath was specifically directed at and impacted the designated target. It suggests a powerful, almost tangible, imposition of judgment.
• all the congregation (כָּל־הָעֵדָה - kol-ha-edah): Emphasizes the collective nature of the judgment. The entire community, Israel as a whole, suffered the consequences, despite only one person committing the sin. This underscores the Old Testament concept of corporate solidarity, where the actions of a few, or even one, can affect the destiny of all.
• of Israel: Explicitly names the covenant people upon whom God's judgment came.
• And that man perished (וְהוּא אִישׁ אֶחָד לֹא מֵת - və-hu’ ‘ish ‘echad lo’ met): The emphasis is on Achan as a single individual. This clause serves to juxtapose his singular act of sin with its broad consequences. The phrase "perished" implies a violent, often God-ordained, death.
• not alone in his iniquity (לְבַדּוֹ בַּעֲוֹנוֹ - lĕvad·dow ba·‘ă·wō·nō): This is a critical nuance. While Achan physically died, along with his family, the statement means that the repercussions of his iniquity extended beyond him alone, bringing defeat and loss of life to others in the wider Israelite army (the "congregation") at Ai (Jos 7:4-5), illustrating the ripple effect of sin.

Words-group by words-group analysis:

• "Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing": This phrasing serves as a rhetorical recall of a devastating national trauma. It assumes the audience's intimate familiarity with the story of Achan in Joshua 7, particularly the nature of his ma'al (treachery/sacrilege) and the forbidden cherem. This question implicitly links the potential (misperceived) "treachery" of the eastern tribes' altar to a past, proven catastrophic example of sacrilege against God's direct command concerning holy things.
• "and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel": This highlights the direct, immediate, and corporate consequence of Achan's sin. God's divine anger (qetsef) was not confined to Achan but manifested as a communal judgment, famously resulting in Israel's defeat at Ai. This serves as a stark warning: God's justice encompasses the entire covenant community, holding them responsible for internal purity.
• "And that man perished not alone in his iniquity": This powerful statement emphasizes that Achan's physical death, although part of the divine judgment, was not the only consequence. The broader suffering, defeat, and death among the Israelite soldiers at Ai preceded his personal execution and were a direct result of his singular sin. It underscores the profound theological truth of corporate solidarity in Old Testament covenant relations: the sin of one can have catastrophic ramifications for many.

Joshua 22 20 Bonus section

• The phrasing "Did not...?" is an appeal to a shared and painful memory, making it particularly effective as a rhetorical tool. It means, "Surely you remember, do you not?"
• The reference to Achan is a polemic against complacency regarding the covenant and divine commands. It serves as a sharp reminder that God's holiness demands complete obedience and that violations have tangible, severe consequences for the entire community, not just the individual perpetrator. This concept contrasts with any notion that sin is a purely personal matter, emphasizing the interconnectedness of God's people under His covenant.
• While Joshua 7 shows Achan's family also perishing with him, the primary thrust of "perished not alone" in Joshua 22:20 specifically references the defeat at Ai, where "about thirty-six men" of Israel died, a direct outcome of God's anger at the collective because of Achan's sin. This underscores the shared suffering aspect that transcended his immediate household.

Joshua 22 20 Commentary

Joshua 22:20 is not merely a historical reference but a theological linchpin in the narrative of Israel's journey in the land. It stands as a vivid example of God's unwavering holiness and His strict adherence to covenant terms. Phinehas's invocation of Achan's story underscores several profound truths. First, it clarifies that individual sin, particularly an act of sacrilege like taking the cherem, carries devastating corporate consequences. God views Israel as a single body; one rotten part can infect the whole, demanding purification through judgment. Second, it illustrates the concept of divine wrath, showing that God is not indifferent to disobedience but actively judges sin that violates His sanctity and the covenant. Third, the rhetorical question serves as a powerful call to repentance and prevention. By reminding the two-and-a-half tribes of Achan, Phinehas implies that their perceived disobedience could trigger another nationwide disaster. It is a cautionary tale about accountability, corporate responsibility, and the urgent need to maintain covenant fidelity to avoid incurring God's disfavor.