William Garden Blaikie's commentary on the Book of Joshua, part of The Expositor's Bible series, is distinguished by its homiletic tone and moral earnestness. Rather than offering verse-by-verse exegesis, Blaikie crafts extended reflections that treat the narrative as a source of ethical and spiritual lessons. His treatment of the Gibeonite deception illustrates this approach: he moves quickly from the historical account to a sustained critique of the Gibeonites' 'grossest superstition' and 'elaborate system of fraud,' using rhetorical questions to heighten the moral stakes.

Rhetorical Force and Moral Framing

Blaikie's prose is marked by a series of emphatic, exclamatory sentences that build a sense of outrage. In the Gibeonite passage, he writes: 'What a strange conception of God! What blindness to His highest attributes... What amazing infatuation!' This triple exclamation drives home his condemnation of the Gibeonites' deceit. He contrasts their 'timidity' with 'true faith,' which he describes as 'often blind, but in the deepest darkness it knows that it is on the right track.' The repetition of 'blind' in 'blind faith' versus 'blind fear' creates a pointed antithesis. Blaikie also employs aphoristic statements, such as 'A lying tongue is but for a moment,' to encapsulate his moral judgment. These rhetorical choices reveal a preacherly voice that prioritizes moral clarity over historical nuance.

Characterization of Joshua and the Princes

Blaikie presents Joshua and the princes as figures of integrity, even when they are deceived. He notes that they 'had such respect for the sanctity of an oath that, even when they discovered that they had been grossly deceived, they would not resile from it.' This characterization emphasizes their adherence to principle over expediency. Blaikie adds that the princes took this stance 'in opposition to the congregation,' highlighting a tension between leadership and popular opinion. He refrains from praising Joshua's decision as unambiguously correct, however, calling it 'a high, perhaps a mistaken sense of honour.' This qualification suggests Blaikie's willingness to acknowledge ambiguity, even as he upholds the moral lesson. The episode becomes a case study in the dangers of over-confidence and neglect of divine guidance, which Blaikie identifies as the root of the trouble: 'They had trusted in their own hearts when they ought to have sought guidance from above.'

Contrast Between Faith and Fear

A central theme in Blaikie's commentary is the contrast between faith and fear. He develops this through the Gibeonite narrative, where the deceivers act out of 'timidity' and 'blind fear,' while Joshua and the princes ultimately act on 'true faith.' Blaikie defines true faith as 'resting on eternal truth' and acting 'for eternity,' whereas fear 'trembles and stumbles, in perpetual dread of exposure and humiliation.' This dichotomy is reinforced by the Gibeonites' short-lived success: their fraud 'lived just three days' before discovery. Blaikie uses this temporal contrast to underscore the futility of deceit. He also extends the lesson to the reader, warning that 'timidity is a poor adviser' and that 'all it can do is to turn the next corner.' The language is concrete and proverbial, typical of Blaikie's homiletic style. The passage thus functions as a moral sermon on the superiority of faith over fear, grounded in the biblical text.

Use of Biblical Quotation and Allusion

Blaikie weaves biblical quotations into his prose to reinforce his arguments. In the Gibeonite section, he cites Psalm 89:14: 'justice and judgment are the habitation of His throne, mercy and truth go before His face.' This quotation serves as a standard against which the Gibeonites' actions are measured. He also alludes to Proverbs 12:19 ('A lying tongue is but for a moment') without explicit citation, assuming his readers' familiarity with the text. These references are not merely decorative; they anchor Blaikie's moral judgments in scriptural authority. Additionally, he uses the phrase 'the name of the Lord God of Israel had been invoked' to explain why the princes felt bound by their oath, drawing on the biblical emphasis on the sanctity of oaths. Blaikie's allusions are selective and purposeful, shaping the reader's interpretation of the narrative. They reveal his assumption that the Bible is a coherent moral guide, not merely a historical record.

Blaikie's commentary rewards readers who approach it as a series of moral essays rather than a technical commentary. His focus on character and motive, his rhetorical intensity, and his use of contrast make the ancient narrative immediate. Readers interested in homiletic method or Victorian theological prose will find particular value in his treatment of the Gibeonite episode.