Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary

Joshua 5:9

Then the Lord said to Joshua, "Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you." So the name of that place is called Gilgal to this day.
New American Standard Version

Bible Study Resources

Concordances:
Nave's Topical Bible - Gilgal;   Revivals;   Thompson Chain Reference - Gilgal;  
Dictionaries:
American Tract Society Bible Dictionary - Circumcision;   Gilgal;   Bridgeway Bible Dictionary - Circumcision;   Gilgal;   Easton Bible Dictionary - Circumcision;   Fausset Bible Dictionary - Bochim;   Ebal;   Gilgal;   Joshua;   Joshua, the Book of;   Holman Bible Dictionary - Circumcision;   Crimes and Punishments;   Joshua, the Book of;   Reproach;   Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible - Circumcision;   Egypt;   Gilgal;   Jericho;   Morrish Bible Dictionary - Circumcision;   Gilgal;   The Hawker's Poor Man's Concordance And Dictionary - Reproach;   People's Dictionary of the Bible - Journeyings of israel from egypt to canaan;   Smith Bible Dictionary - Gil'gal;  
Encyclopedias:
Condensed Biblical Cyclopedia - Conquest of Canaan;   International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - Gilgal;   Joshua, Book of;   Well;   The Jewish Encyclopedia - Circumcision;   Egypt;  

Adam Clarke Commentary

The reproach of Egypt - Their being uncircumcised made them like the uncircumcised Egyptians; and the Hebrews ever considered all those who were uncircumcised as being in a state of the grossest impurity. Being now circumcised, the reproach of uncircumcision was rolled away. This is another proof that the Israelites did not receive circumcision from the Egyptians; for they could not have considered those in a state of abomination, from whom they received that rite by which they conceived themselves to be made pure. The Israelites had this rite from Abraham; and Abraham had it from the express order of God himself. See Genesis 17:10; (note), and the note there.

The place is called Gilgal - A rolling away or rolling off. See the note on Joshua 4:19, where the word is largely explained.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliographical Information
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/joshua-5.html. 1832.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

The reproach of Egypt - i. e. “reproach proceeding from Egypt.” The expression probably refers to taunts actually uttered by the Egyptians against Israel, because of their long wanderings in the desert and failures to acquire a settlement in Canaan (compare Exodus 32:12; Numbers 14:13-16; Deuteronomy 9:28; Deuteronomy 32:27). These reproaches were now to end, for they had actually entered Canaan, and the restoration of the covenant was a pledge from God to accomplish what was begun for them.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliographical Information
Barnes, Albert. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/joshua-5.html. 1870.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

And the Lord said unto Joshua,.... Out of the tabernacle:

this day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you; either the reproach of being reckoned office same religion with the Egyptians, they now having observed the command of the Lord, and thereby declared themselves to be his servants and worshippers, which sense Ben Gersom mentions; or else the reproach with which the Egyptians reproached them, that they were brought out from them into the wilderness for evil, to be destroyed there, they now being safely arrived in the land of Canaan; which tense he seems to approve of, and so Abarbinel: or rather by it is meant the reproach of being bondmen, and slaves, as they were in Egypt, having now entered upon their inheritance, they as free men, the sons of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were heirs unto; and perhaps it was this sense of the phrase led JosephusF3Antiqu. l. 5. c. 1. sect. 11. to give a wrong interpretation of the word "Gilgal", which he says signifies "liberty": and adds,"for, having passed the river, they knew they were free from the Egyptians, and from troubles in the wilderness;'though the more commonly received sense is, that this reproach is to be understood of uncircumcision, which was the reproach of the Egyptians, they at this time not using circumcision they afterwards did, when some of the nations thereabout used it, who descended, from Abraham, as the Midianites, Ishmaelites, Arabians, and Edomites:

wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day; which signifies "rolling"F4A גלל "volvit, devolvit", Buxtorf. ; so that when it is met with before, it is so called by anticipation.

Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rights Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Bibliographical Information
Gill, John. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/joshua-5.html. 1999.

Geneva Study Bible

And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the f reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.

(f) By bringing you into this promised land, contrary to the wicked opinion of the Egyptians or the foreskin by which you were like the Egyptians.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/joshua-5.html. 1599-1645.

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

the Lord said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt — The taunts industriously cast by that people upon Israel as nationally rejected by God by the cessation of circumcision and the renewal of that rite was a practical announcement of the restoration of the covenant [Keil].

Gilgal — No trace either of the name or site is now to be found; but it was about two miles from Jericho [Josephus], and well suited for an encampment by the advantages of shade and water. It was the first place pronounced “holy” in the Holy Land (Joshua 5:15).

Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text scanned by Woodside Bible Fellowship.
This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-Brown Commentary is in the public domain and may be freely used and distributed.
Bibliographical Information
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/joshua-5.html. 1871-8.

Wesley's Explanatory Notes

And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.

The reproach of Egypt — That is, uncircumcision, was both in truth, and in the opinion of the Jews, a matter of great reproach, and although this was a reproach common to most nations of the world, yet it is particularly called the reproach of Egypt, either, 1. because the other neighbouring nations, being the children of Abraham by the concubines, are supposed to have been circumcised, which the Egyptians at this time were not, as may be gathered from Exodus 2:6, where they knew the child to be an Hebrew by this mark. Or2. because they came out of Egypt, and were esteemed to be a sort of Egyptians, Numbers 22:5, which they justly thought a great reproach; but by their circumcision they were now distinguished from them, and manifested to be another people. Or3. because many of them lay under this reproach in Egypt, having wickedly neglected this duty there for worldly reasons; and others of them continued in the same shameful condition for many years in the wilderness.

Gilgal — That is, rolling.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.
Bibliographical Information
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/joshua-5.html. 1765.

John Trapp Complete Commentary

Joshua 5:9 And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.

Ver. 9. This day have I rolled away the reproach, &c.] That is, the uncircumcision of your flesh, {see 1 Samuel 17:26 Genesis 34:16 Philippians 3:4-5} together with all that filth and guilt which you have contracted by conversing with those superstitious and wicked Egyptians. "Righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people." [Proverbs 14:34] God had now restored to Israel the sweet seal of his covenant, pardoning them what was past; and they had herein bound themselves to abandon their sins, and to obey God’s precepts. So doth the baptized Christian; {see Colossians 2:11-13} who should therefore never step out of doors, saith Chrysostom, or lie down in his bed, or go into his closet, but he should remember those two words, Abrenuncio, Credo, I forsake the devil, &c. I believe in Christ: I bear his badge, I wear his livery.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". John Trapp Complete Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/joshua-5.html. 1865-1868.

Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible

Ver. 9. And the Lord said unto Joshua, This day, &c.— Among many conjectures respecting the sense of these words, most interpreters have agreed to understand by the reproach of Egypt, uncircumcision, which rendered the Israelites like the Egyptians, and had rendered the Egyptians abominable in their sight while they were under their yoke. Spencer gives the words another meaning; understanding by the reproach of Egypt, that slavery which had subjected the Israelites to the Egyptians; and he thinks that circumcision took away this reproach, because it shewed, that those to whom it was administered were the children of Abraham, and the lawful heirs of that patriarch to whom the land of Canaan had been promised. But, says Mr. Saurin, however ingenious this thought may be, we must not be dazzled by it. The Israelites, who had been slaves in Egypt, were there circumcised. If, therefore, we are to understand, by the reproach of Egypt, the slavery under which the Israelites groaned in Egypt, and if circumcision had had the power to take away that reproach, it might have been said they were out of slavery in Egypt while in bondage there, since they were then circumcised; which implies a contradiction. Theodoret, who thinks that the Israelites had neglected circumcision in Egypt, entertains an idea nearly similar to Spencer's. He says, that the Hebrews, formerly slaves in Egypt, became lords of the country of Canaan, when, by receiving circumcision, they took upon them the mark by which they might be known as the posterity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to whom God had given that country. Other interpreters incline to the opinion of Rabbi Levi Ben Gershom, who supposes, that the Israelites were a laughing-stock to the Egyptians, who mocked them on seeing them wander and perish in the dry desarts of Arabia, without being able to enter the land of Canaan, the possession of which they had boasted was assured to them; and that God removed this opprobrium by making them resume the token of his covenant, as a declaration of their taking possession of that country. But, considering every thing, we incline to the first explanation as the most simple. Some learned writers, by the reproach of Egypt, seem principally to understand indifference for religion, a propensity to idolatry, and a neglect of circumcision, which the Israelites had contracted in Egypt. The authors of the Universal History give this general elucidation of the subject: "This mark of their (the Israelites) obedience was so pleasing to God, that he told them he had now removed, or rolled away from them the reproach of Egypt; i.e. that he did no longer look upon them as uncircumcised Egyptians, but as his own people." The Israelites considered uncircumcision as a disgrace; they found and they left the Egyptians uncircumcised; so that uncircumcision could not be better described, than by calling it the reproach of Egypt. But, say some, why is not uncircumcision called the reproach of Canaan, as well as of Egypt, since the Canaanites were uncircumcised as well as the Egyptians? To this we may reply: I. That the neighbouring nations mixed among the Canaanites, being the seed of Abraham by his concubines, had probably the rite of circumcision; whereas the Egyptians had it not, since they knew a child to be a Hebrew because he was circumcised. Exodus 2:6. II. The Israelites came from Egypt; uncircumcision was a blot which they seem to have brought from thence; they might be looked upon as uncircumcised Egyptians, inasmuch as they did not apply the seal of the covenant made with their fathers, and, as it were, the voucher for their right to the land of Canaan. III. It was evidently in Egypt that their forefathers had begun to neglect circumcision, which they continued to do during their stay in the desart.

The name of the place is called Gilgal WWhich signifies, to roll away, cut off, remove. There is no doubt respecting it. Josephus, however, who is followed by Theodoret, translates Gilgal, not a rolling away, but liberty; (Hist. Jud. l. v. c. 1.) as if this place had been so named because when the Israelites arrived there they might look upon themselves as perfectly delivered from the servitude of Egypt, and freed from the troubles they had undergone in Arabia. As to the expression, unto this day, see note on ch. Joshua 4:9. Le Clerc explains it, "till the day that this book was written."

REFLECTIONS.—Safely arrived at last within the borders of the promised land, the divided waters of Jordan close, and nothing remains, but to cast out the inhabitants and possess the country. In order to which we are told, 1. What terror and dismay seized on the neighbouring kings. Who can stand before those from whose presence the swellings of affrighted Jordan retire and open a safe way for their march! Their hearts melted therefore like wax, and they gave themselves up for lost. Note; God often makes his enemies know how vain it is to contend with him; and by his secret terrors, even in the midst of life and health, brings them into the pangs of death. 2. The people halted at their first station, and Joshua, at the divine command, issues orders for a general circumcision of the people. Now, when God's goodness has triumphed over their perverseness, on admitting them into the land, he commands them to receive the seal of the covenant in token of the fulfilment of the promises made to Abraham. 3. The people readily consent; they had seen so much of God's interposition, that they were not afraid of their enemies, and were happy to lay themselves under the bonds of the covenant, that, with God's promises thus sealed to them, they might go forth more confidently to vanquish their foes. They were owned of God, as his covenant-children, and no longer to be branded as wanderers in a wilderness; but now are entered as possessors into the long-expected inheritance. Note; (1.) The reproaches cast on God's people shall shortly be wiped away, and confusion cover their enemies. (2.) The Israel of God must circumcise the foreskin of their hearts, and cut off every corrupt and vile affection. (3.) Nothing can so infallibly assure us of inheriting the kingdom of glory, as the experience of the mortification of sin in our souls, through the work of our divine Joshua.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Coke, Thomas. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/joshua-5.html. 1801-1803.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible

The reproach of Egypt, i.e. uncircumcision, which was both in truth, and in the opinion of the Jews, a matter of great reproach, Genesis 34:14 1 Samuel 14:6 17:26. And although this was a reproach common to most nations of the world, yet it is particularly called the reproach of Egypt; either,

1. Because the other neighbouring nations, being the children of Abraham by the concubines, are supposed to have been circumcised, which the Egyptians at this time were not, as may be gathered from Exodus 2:6, where they knew the child to be an Hebrew by this mark. Or,

2. Because they came out of Egypt, and were esteemed to be a sort of Egyptians, Numbers 22:5, which they justly thought a great reproach; but by their circumcision they were now distinguished from them, and manifested to be another kind of people. Or,

3. Because many of them lay under this reproach in Egypt, having wickedly neglected this duty there for worldly reasons; and others of them continued in the same shameful condition for many years in the wilderness.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Poole, Matthew, "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/joshua-5.html. 1685.

Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible

Joshua 5:9 a.

‘And YHWH said to Joshua, “This day I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you.” ’

The general idea was that circumcision had now finally made them a circumcised nation, as a free people within the covenant, in their own land. They were now YHWH’s people in YHWH’s land.

“The reproach of Egypt” may signify:

· That attitude of disobedient Israel which clung to Egypt (Exodus 16:3; Exodus 17:3; Numbers 11:5; Numbers 20:5; Numbers 21:5; Deuteronomy 1:27). Thus they were now seen as a new nation with any desires for Egypt removed from them.

· That they were now at last really a free and sanctified people in a free and sanctified (because YHWH’s gift to His people) land, within the covenant of YHWH which had now been renewed, with their slave past and Egyptian ‘unclean’ connections and religious influence behind them (compare Hosea 9:3).

· It may refer to that reproachful charge that was seen as originating with the Egyptians, and could now be seen as totally refuted, that YHWH had led the Israelites out of Egypt only to destroy them in the wilderness (compare Exodus 32:12; Numbers 14:13-16; Deuteronomy 9:28).

· Or it may refer to a tendency on the part of some Israelites not to have circumcised their infants because of Egyptian influence (who circumcised at puberty) and to the fact that many of the youngsters of the mixed multitude who came from Egypt had never been circumcised.

Joshua 5:9 b.

‘For this reason the name of the place is called Gilgal to this day.’

The name Gilgal means ‘a rolling’. Thus it is here seen as referring to the rolling away of the reproach of Egypt. This is almost certainly the taking of an old name and giving it a new meaning, for there were already a number of Gilgals in Canaan, or it may less probably mean that this was a new name given for this reason, used earlier because it had become the name of the place at the time of writing.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible ". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/joshua-5.html. 2013.

Whedon's Commentary on the Bible

9.I rolled away the reproach of Egypt — The reproach which Egypt has cast upon you; for Egypt is here subjective and not objective. Compare Isaiah 51:7; Ezekiel 16:57; Ezekiel 36:15. Many are the explanations of this reproach. Some say it was Egyptian bondage; others, the state of being uncircumcised, which implies, what cannot be proved, that the Egyptians were circumcised; still others, that the Hebrews were unfit for war. But we find the reproach in Exodus 32:12: “Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth?” They had been exposed to this reproach for forty years, for God had been destroying them during that time. But with the restoration of covenant relations, whereof circumcision was the sign, the reproach of Egypt is rolled away from them. The malicious taunt is now no longer true. [

Called Gilgal — The place may have been called Gilgal before this event, and there were other places in the land of the same name; but as the word Gilgal means a wheel or circle, and is so easily associated with the idea of rolling, the Israelites naturally gave it the symbolical meaning here stated, because their renewal of the covenant by circumcision had rolled away the reproach of Egypt.]

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Whedon's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/joshua-5.html. 1874-1909.

Joseph Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments

Joshua 5:9. The reproach of Egypt — That is, uncircumcision, which was both in truth, and in the opinion of the Jews, a matter of great reproach. And although this was a reproach common to most nations of the world, yet it is particularly called the reproach of Egypt, either, 1st, Because the other neighbouring nations, being the children of Abraham by the concubines, are supposed to have been circumcised, which the Egyptians at this time were not, as may be gathered from Exodus 2:6, where they knew the child to be a Hebrew by this mark. Or, 2d, Because they came out of Egypt, and were esteemed to be a sort of Egyptians, (Numbers 22:5,) which they justly thought a great reproach; but by their circumcision they were now distinguished from them, and manifested to be another people. Or, 3d, Because many of them lay under this reproach in Egypt, having wickedly neglected this duty there for worldly reasons; and others of them continued in the same shameful condition for many years in the wilderness. The name of the place is called Gilgal — That is, rolling.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Benson, Joseph. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". Joseph Benson's Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rbc/joshua-5.html. 1857.

George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary

Egypt. The people of that country adopted circumcision only after this period, (Calmet) and it never became general among them. They were therefore held in abhorrence, like the rest of the uncircumcised nations, among the Jews, Genesis xxxiv. 14., and 1 Kings xiv. 6. Theodoret (q. 4,) looks upon circumcision as a symbol of the liberation from the servitude of Egypt, where, he says, history informs us, that many of the Hebrews had neglected this rite. --- Galgal is interpreted liberty, by Josephus; but moderns render it "a rolling away," (Calmet) or revolution. Hebrew, "I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you." (Haydock) --- Those Israelites who remained at the other side of the river, were ordered to be circumcised at the same time with their brethren. But they could not partake in the solemnity of the Passover, as they were at a distance from the ark. (Salien)

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Haydock, George Leo. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/joshua-5.html. 1859.

E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes

rolled away = Hebrew gallothi. Hence Gilgal = rolling.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "E.W. Bullinger's Companion bible Notes". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/joshua-5.html. 1909-1922.

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged

And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.

Rolled away the reproach of Egypt - the taunts industriously cast by that people upon Israel as nationally rejected by God by the cessation of circumcision (cf. Exodus 32:12; Psalms 39:8; Ezekiel 16:57; Ezekiel 34:15) (Rosenmuller, in loco). But other texts seem to warrant the phrase being taken in a passive sense: that which exposes Egypt to reproach; namely, uncircumcision (cf. 1 Samuel 17:26); but see the note at Genesis 17:11, where it is shown that the rite of circumcision was to some extent practiced in Egypt. Gesenius renders the words, 'the stain resting on Israel ever since their departure out of Egypt.' But this rendering is not consistent with the view we have taken of the last clause of Joshua 5:2. Rosenmuller's interpretation, referring to the stigma arising from the lack of circumcision, is the best; and the renewal of that rite was a practical announcement of the restoration of the covenant (Keil).

Gilgal, [ Gilgaal (Hebrew #1537), a circle, a rolling away (Golgotha comes from the same root; the rolling away of the reproach of God's people), or generally with the article, ha-Gilgaal (Hebrew #1537). Septuagint, Galgala]. The word Gilgal was not at first applied to a city, though it was in later times (1 Samuel 7:16). It was the first place pronounced "holy" in the Holy Land (Joshua 5:15) (Robinson's 'Biblical Researches,' 2:, p. 287).

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/joshua-5.html. 1871-8.

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(9) This day have I rolled away. . . .—Compare Isaiah 25:8, “He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke (or reproach) of His people shall He take away from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it “; Colossians 2:11, “In whom (Christ) also we are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him”; and 1 Corinthians 15:54. “When this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, . . . then . . . Death is swallowed up in victory.”

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/joshua-5.html. 1905.

Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.
I rolled away
24:14; Genesis 34:14; Leviticus 24:14; 1 Samuel 14:6; 17:26,36; Psalms 119:39; Jeremiah 9:25; Ezekiel 20:7,8; 23:3,8; Ephesians 2:11,12
Gilgal
That is, rolling.
4:19
Reciprocal: Deuteronomy 11:30 - Gilgal;  Joshua 12:23 - Gilgal;  Joshua 15:7 - Gilgal;  1 Samuel 13:4 - to Gilgal;  2 Samuel 19:15 - Gilgal;  2 Kings 2:1 - Gilgal;  Nehemiah 12:29 - the house;  Micah 6:5 - Shittim

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/joshua-5.html.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

9.And the Lord said unto Joshua, etc The disgrace of Egypt is expounded by some as meaning that the want of circumcision rendered them similar to the Egyptians, in other words, profane and marked with a stigma; as if it had been said that they were again made the peculiar property of God when they were anew stamped with this mark, to distinguish them from the nations that were unclean. Others understand it actively, as meaning that they would no longer be scorned by the Egyptians, as if God had deceived them. This I have no hesitation in rejecting as too far fetched. Others understand that they would no longer lie under the false imputation of worshipping the gods of that nation. I rather understand the meaning to be, that they were freed from an invidious charge, by which they were otherwise overborne. It was disreputable to have shaken off the yoke and revolted from the king under whose government they lived. Moreover, as they gave out that God was the avenger of unjust tyranny, it was easy to upbraid them with using the name of God as a mere color for their conduct. They might, therefore, have been regarded as deserters, had not the disgrace been wiped off by the appeal to circumcision, by which the divine election was sealed in their flesh before they went down into Egypt. It was accordingly made plain by the renewal of the ancient covenant that they were not rebels against legitimate authority, nor had rashly gone off at their own hand, but that their liberty was restored by God, who had long ago taken them under his special protection.

From the removal of disgrace the place obtained its name. For those who think that the prepuce cut off was called Gilgal, because it was a kind of circle, abandon the literal meaning, and have recourse to a very unnecessary fiction; while it is perfectly obvious that the place was called Rolling Off, because God there rolled off from his people the disgrace which unjustly attached to them. The interpretation of liberty, adopted by Josephus, is vain and ridiculous, and makes it apparent that he was as ignorant of the Hebrew tongue as of jurisprudence.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliographical Information
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Joshua 5:9". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/joshua-5.html. 1840-57.