A commentary of M. John Calvin, upon the book of Joshua finished a little…A commentarie of M. Iohn Caluine, vpon the booke of Iosue finished a little…

20 Did not Achan the son of Zerah trespass grievously in the execrable thing, and wrath fell on all the Congregation of Israel? And this man alone perished not in his wickedness.

20 Did not Achan the sonne of Zerah trespasse grieuously in the execrable thing, and wrath fell on all the Congregation of Israel? And this man alone perished not in his wickednesse.

10 And they came, &c.) This history is very worthy to be remembered, that when the two tribes and the half were determined to set up a monument of their common faith and brotherly concord, yet through unadvised zeal, they took such a way, as was was worthily suspected to their brethren. But the ten tribes, when they thought that the worship of God had been defiled through ungodly boldness and rashness, being kindled with an holy anger, they took arms to be revenged upon their blood, and were not pacified, before they had received a full answer and satisfaction. For the end of the setting up of that altar, of it self was good and right. For the purpose of the sons of Reuben, and Gad, and Manasseh, was to testify, that although they were divided and parted asunder, by ⟨p. 94⟩the river, yet in religion they were all one, and maintained a mutual consent in the doctrine of the law: for there was nothing less in their mind, than to change any thing in the worship of God. But yet it was no small offence that they committed, without asking the advise of the Priest, and their brethren, to take in hand such a strange piece of work: and secondly, because the form it self of their monument was such, as might be taken in evil part. We ¹know how severely the law forbiddeth two altars, because God would be worshipped in one only place. Wherefore, seeing upon the very sight of it, it came into every mans mind, that they had set up a second altar, who would not have condemned them of sacrilege, as though they had invented a strange and counterfeit worship contrary to the law of God? Therefore, seeing their work might have been thought to be ungodly, they ought surely in so great and weighty a matter, to have made their brethren partakers of their purpose: especially, they ought not to have neglected the judgement of the high Priest, seeing they should have enquired the will of God at his mouth. Wherefore they were worthy to be reprehended, because that (as though they had been alone in the world) they did not consider what offence might grow by the strangeness of the example. Wherefore, let us learn to attempt nothing unadvisedly, although the thing of it self be not evil, but rather let us always remember that admonition of S. Paul, that we must not only consider