Transcript No Slide Title

Outline of Joshua
 Introduction—speeches by Yahweh and Joshua 1:1-
18
 Comprehensive conquest of the land 2:1-12:24


Crossing the Jordan chaps 3-5 “What do these stones
mean to you?”
Victories at Jericho (5:13-6:27), Ai (7:1-8:29), and
Gibeon (9:3-27)

Altar at Shechem inscribed with blessings and
curses 8:30-35 (cf. Deut 11:29-30; 27:1-8)

Battle reports
 Kings of the south 10:28-43
 Kings of the north 11:1-23
 Entire land—list of kings 12:1-24
Outline continued
 Israel’s settlement in the land—boundary and province lists












Reuben, Gad and ½ Manasseh in Trans-jordan 13:8-33
Judah 14:1-15:63 (15:20-63 is a list of provinces within Judah)
Joseph tribes 16 Ephraim;17:1-13 western Manasseh
Benjamin 18:11-28
Simeon 19:1-9
Zebulun 17:10-16
Issachar 17:17-23
Asher 17:24-31
Naphtali 17:32-39
Dan 19:40-48
Cities of refuge and Levitical cities 20:1-21:42
Yahweh gave entire land 21:43-45

But see 13:1-7; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12-13; 19:47 that admit that not all the
land was taken
Outline continued
 Final episodes 22:1-24:33



Reuben, Gad, and half
Manasseh go home—
altar to link them with
Cis-Jordan ch. 22
Joshua’s farewell
discourse 23:4-16
Covenant making at
Shechem 24:1-28


Intermarriage and
apostasy would lead
to loss of the land
Death of Joshua (24:2930) and Eleazar (24:33);
burial of Joseph (24:32)
Josh 21:43-45
Joshua 23:15 But just as all the good things that the LORD your God promised
concerning you have been fulfilled for you, so the LORD will bring
upon you all the bad things, until he has destroyed you from this good land
that the LORD your God has given you.
23:16 If you transgress the covenant…and go and serve other gods…then the anger of the LORD
will be kindled against you, and you shall perish quickly from the good land he has given to you.
Joshua: the Conquest Model
 apparently faithful to the
Bible—some advocates
of this theory tried to
force evidence to
reinforce the Bible’s
reliability/authority
 What caused the
destruction: Israelites?
Philistines? natural
catastrophes, such as
prolonged drought?
William Foxwell Albright
More on conquest model
 archaeological
“confirmation:” Lachish,
Bethel, Hazor, Tell Beit
Mirsim show destruction
layers
 40 cities mentioned in
Joshua—only a few
seem to attest 13c
destruction—but there
was some military
action in 13 c BCE
Hazor, in northern Israel
Conquest Model: Problems
 Jericho--no city from
1300-1100 BCE
 Ai--gap between 24001200 BCE
 Gibeon--no Late Bronze
city 1550-1200
 also Hebron, Heshbon,
Dibon (latter two in
Transjordan), Hormah
(Num 21:3), and Arad
did not exist at the time
of Joshua
Jericho
Conquest Model: Presuppositions
 Radical discontinuity
between Israel and its
Canaanite neighbors
 Cultural change is caused by
invasion of new people
 No booty for soldiers (Achan
stoned for infidelity)
 Relationship between this
theory and
imperialism/colonialism in
Europe and USA?
Stoning of Achan
Problems with the conquest model:
 Yahweh as a divine warrior
 The land was taken from




Canaanites.
Archeology shows continuity in
material culture before and after
Israelite presence
A number of cities simply were
not destroyed.
Are the historical problems with
this model good news or bad?
“If Jericho was not razed, is your
faith vain?”
Peaceful Immigration Model
 Israel settled in areas between older





cities—nomadic ideal
Israel possessed Shechem (8:3035; chap. 24), but no conquest
account of this city.
Arameans and Philistines also
wandered in.
Little continuity of this model with
the biblical tradition; stories of
conquest are etiological (Ai = “ruin”)
Move into land is without
theological significance; emphasis
in Bible is on promise of land to
matriarchs and patriarchs
Embarrassing Holy Wars were not
fought
Albrecht Alt
Martin Noth
Peaceful Immigration Model:
Presuppositions
 Early Israel was nomadic




according to this model; but
early Israelites actually
raised crops and livestock;
had sophisticated ceramics
camel not domesticated until
1200
Hence those who entered
the land from Transjordan
were not true nomads.
Caricature of Bedouin life by
armchair European scholars
Amphictyony?
Peasants’ Revolt Model for Early
Israel
 Amarna (14c) Palestine
ruled by city kings in
class conscious society.
Forced labor; taxes
 These kings
complained about
lawless “Apiru” or
“habiru”
 Israelites in the book of
Exodus described as
“mixed multitude”
(12:38)
Peasants’ Revolt
 Fugitives from Egypt
galvanized Palestinian
peasants into full-scale revolt
(70 families became 250,000
people; treaty with
Gibeonites)
 archaeological continuity
between Late Bronze and
Iron ages explained
 Rahab the prostitute (lower
class); Rahab is saved
because of her fidelity. cf.
Judg 1:22-26 (an informer
from Bethel helps them find
way into the city)
Rahab and two Israelite spies
Marc Chagall
Results of Peasants’ Revolt
 democratization of
housing
 equality of land
distribution
 hostility to kingship and
hierarchy of every kind;
harboring of runaway
slaves encouraged
 but this model is least
like biblical picture and
is a caricature of
Canaanite life.
Four Room House
Theological implications of Revolt
Model
 The battles in early Israel
were not imperialism or
invasion but a mighty blow
for justice
 Connection of Yahweh with
justice is central and
original, not peripheral or
secondary
 unity of Israel is ideological
or theological, that is,
covenantal, not ethnic
More Theological Implications of
Revolt Model
 Yahweh is the one who puts down the mighty
from their thrones (See Magnificat, Song of
Hannah)
 “Conquest” was more political than religious
 Crimes against property are not capital
crimes in the Bible; no class distinctions in
biblical law
 People of Israel were largely indigenous
Revolt Model: Weaknesses
 Was covenant unity so early?
 Why does the Bible indicate that the majority of




people came from outside the land
Are the Apiru really Hebrews?
Israelites settled in hill country because they were
unable to defeat royal strongholds
Egalitarian villages also exist outside the confines of
premonarchic Israel, i.e., in Transjordan
Philosophies of Mendenhall (quietistic Lutheran) and
Gottwald (strong Marxist influence)
Gradual emergence model
 Many new, unwalled





settlements in hill country.
Merneptah stela (right)
Collar-rim storage jars
Similar, but poorer pottery
to previous centuries
No pig bones
Israel originated in
Plundered is Thehenu [Libya], Khatti is at peace;
Canaan
CANAAN is plundered
Ashkelon is conquered; Gezer is seized; Yanoam is
non-existent. Israel is laid waste, his
seed is no more.
KHARU has become a widow because of Egypt
Gradual emergence continued
 How does this model square with the
biblical account?
 Why did people migrate to highlands from
lowlands?
 What ideology, if any, lies behind this
model? (anti-Zionist? Denigration of Bible?)
 This model offers no explanation for the
most distinctive qualities of Israel, such
as the God who liberates people from
slavery or even the background of Yahweh
Hill country population explosion
 14th century 12,000; 12th century 55,000; 10th
century 75,000
 This growth leads us to infer there was some
migration from outside, not just the settling
down of nomads.
 This migration from outside explains not only
the population growth, but also why these hill
country people became Yahwists.
Hyperbole and reality
 A Blitzkrieg Joshua 1-12; Num 21:21-35;
32:39-42
 Entry of Hebrew tribes slow and variegated;
much land remains to be conquered Josh
13:1-7; Judg 1:1-2:5
 Peaceful settlement (Num 32:1-38) and
coexistence (Judg 1:21 Benjaminites did not
drive out Jebusites from Jerusalem)
 Military action by some Israelite tribes
(Judges 5)
Joshua 24
 Joshua and his household were Yahweh
worshippers (as for me and my household
we will serve Yahweh), who had embraced
Yahwism in the desert. Two Egyptian texts
from the 14th and 13th centuries mention a
place yhw’ in southern Transjordan
 The group Joshua met in Canaan were
“Israel” who originally worshipped other gods
(the gods your ancestors served in the
region beyond the River)
An Alternate Scenario
 Early “Israel” was mainly composed of
various groups of hill country, indigenous
villagers
 A small group of “Hebrews” joined these
villagers after having picked up Yahwism in
the desert areas south-east of Canaan. They
entered peacefully, but also took part in
military attacks. Not every attack leaves
archeological evidence
 No single model can do justice to the
emergence of Israel in Canaan.
Theology in Joshua
 Deut 31:7 The promise of the
gift of the land is to be
carried out through Joshua
 Joshua 2-12 this promise
was fulfilled to a “T.” Hence
the land is Yahweh’s great
gift
 Josh 21:45 None of the
promises failed
 Josh 23:15-16 But judgment
is certain if covenant
transgressed, or if Israel
would serve other gods
Theology in Joshua
 24:31 Israel
served Yahweh all
days of Joshua
 Judg 2:10-11 The
next generation
did what was evil
in the eyes of
Yahweh
Group or ethnic identity
 Possession of the land—also reports of
unoccupied lands
 Obedience to the commands of Moses—also
disobedience to commands
 Annihilation of peoples—peoples remain
 Only the covenant in which the people
choose the God who has chosen them is life
as a defining characteristic of the people
24:1-27
Translations of Josh 21:45
 Not a word of the LORD’s promises to the
house of Israel went unfulfilled; they all came
true NEB
 All of the good promises that the LORD had
given Israel came true. NLT
 The LORD kept every one of the promises
that he had made to the people of Israel. TEV
 Not one of all the good promises that the
LORD had made to the house of Israel had
failed; all came to pass. NRSV
Joshua 10:20
 When Joshua and the men of Israel had slain them
with a very great slaughter, until they were wiped out,
and when the remnant which remained of them had
entered into the fortified cities, all the people returned
to Joshua at the camp of Makkedah.
 Historical texts will be ideologically slanted, but
ideological texts will commonly contain historical
material
 “Joshua” may be a metaphor for Josiah, but that does
not mean that all the data are untrue