Download Click here to or print the Joshua Study Guide!

All Scripture citations are according to The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®)
Copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. All rights
reserved. ESV Text Edition: 2011.
Introduction to the Book of Joshua
The book of Joshua contains the story of the nation of Israel entering the Promised Land.
After Moses‘ disobedience in the desert, God told him that he would not enter the land. Instead,
Joshua would lead the people into the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Deut. 1:3738; 31:1-8). Joshua is abruptly introduced in the book of Exodus; he leads God‘s people in their
wars and is the assumed successor to Moses (Exod. 17:8-14). Most famously, he was one of the
Israelite spies sent into Canaan who trusted that God could and would deliver the land of those
fearsome people into Israel‘s hands. Thus from their generation, only Joshua and Caleb entered
the land after forty years of desert wanderings (Num. 14).
It is not mere redundancy that requires all this talk of land. One of the major themes of
the book of Joshua is God‘s provision for his people through the gifting of this land. The very
geography of Israel was a testament to his faithfulness in the desert and beyond. Thus, even those
sections of text which may read as dry and dull to us, for the original audience of the text, would
have contained significant details about their families‘ inheritances as apportioned by their God.
The land is also the means of God‘s blessing on his people. Through the land he will bless them
with provision and in the land he will give them peace, if they trust him enough to keep his
covenant with them. The theme of living in the land links Joshua closely with Judges, 1-2
Samuel, and 1-2 Kings.
The covenant between God and his people also emerges as an important theme, not only
in Joshua but throughout the Bible. God had made certain promises to Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, and he would keep them—first by delivering the fledgling nation out of the oppressive
clutches of Egyptian slavery, then by giving them their own land, and many years later by
providing a messiah who could become the means for the people to truly live as God‘s holy
priesthood throughout all the nations of the earth. Their continued obedience in the land would
result in God‘s gracious blessings; failure to obey his laws would result in judgment. Once again,
the land evidences God‘s faithfulness to his covenant and his intentions to provide for his people.
The worst of the curses which could be brought in punishment against Israel, then, was the loss
of land suffered in exile.
Biblical scholars date the Israelite conquest of Canaan sometime between the fifteenth
and thirteenth centuries (1400s-1200s) B.C.1 As with the rest of the Bible, however, even those
books that are presented as history are not simply histories. The book of Joshua seeks to say
something about the Lord God and his interactions with Israel, and through that to say something
to the people of God in every generation. That is, the book of Joshua is Scripture through which
God continues to speak to his people.
Joshua can be outlined quite simply by dividing it into halves. The first half (chapters 112) concerns primarily the conquest of the land. How did the people come to live in this place?
This section will contain the narratives of Rahab, the conquests of Jericho and Ai, and the
Gibeonite deceit. The second half (chapters 13-24) considers Israel in the largely-conquered
land. How was the land divvied up? Why did some tribes in Israel live across the river and have
their own altar? What do all the stacks of stones mean? How does Israel continue to live in the
land?
1
Most standard commentaries on Joshua and many Old Testament introductions deal with the historical issues in
detail.
Discussion:
1. What are some things you would like to better understand about the Book of
Joshua in terms of its content and message?
2. Why is the land of Canaan so central to the Old Testament story?
3.
As we think about the book of Joshua, why is it important to keep in mind
what God did in Exodus?
Lesson 1: “Strength and Courage to Lead” (Joshua 1:1-11)
Moses casts a long shadow across the Old Testament and into the New Testament
because he led the Lord‘s people out of Egypt and delivered God's Law to them. In a faith
focused rightly on Jesus, Christians sometimes forget the prominence of Moses in our heritage.
This Moses was described as being ―very meek, more than all people who were on the face of
the earth‖ (Num. 12:3). He was raised as a prince in Egypt but fled to Midian and became a
shepherd after killing an Egyptian. His encounter with the Lord at the burning bush was the first
of many and cemented his call as the leader of the slave people Israel. For forty years after that,
Moses led the people in the desert, in good times and in bad.
This servant of God, along with the rest of his generation, was prohibited from entering
the Promised Land because of disobedience in the desert. So, instead of Moses, Joshua would
lead the people into the land. Joshua was no stranger to the nation, having been Moses‘ assistant
for a number of years in the desert. He was present at some of the most formative moments in the
desert: in battle against the Amalekites (Exod. 17:8-16); on Mount Sinai with Moses while the
nation asked Aaron for a new god (Exod. 32); and especially in trusting with Caleb that the Lord
could deliver Canaan into the hands of the fledgling nation Israel (Num. 13-14).
The introduction in Joshua 1:1-11 presents this Joshua as Moses‘ rightful successor. He
had been chosen by God to lead Israel. The Lord‘s choosing was confirmed when he began to
speak directly to Joshua saying, ―Just as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not leave
you or forsake you‖ (Josh. 1:5). Over and over in these verses, Joshua is called upon to be strong
and courageous; the nation of Israel receives the same call. Why must they be strong and
courageous if the Lord had already promised them the land?
The descendants of Abraham experienced both a promised reality and a call to action in
order to attain the Promised Land. The land was theirs because God had declared it, but they
could not obtain it without following the Lord in whatever he would command. Today we speak
of faith and works: faith ushers the believer into a new relationship and reality with God, while
works affirm the new relationship and reality, beckoning the believer deeper into relationship
with God. Today we sometimes use the words justification (God declaring us right before him by
grace through faith) and sanctification (being conformed to the will and purpose of God) to
discuss the tension Israel was experiencing. Israel‘s new reality was possession of the land, and
the work they would do by obeying the Lord would ensure that the new reality was totally
realized.
Although many other commands would follow, the Lord emphasized in the beginning of
Joshua‘s leadership the need for him to be strong and courageous. The Lord admonished Joshua
to ―do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the
right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go‖ (v. 7). In the
following verse, the Lord explains how it is possible to obey the law at all times: ―This Book of
the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you
may be careful to do according to all that is written in it‖ (v. 8). Only through meaningful
internalization of the Law (or Torah, God's life-giving instruction and guidance for Israel) could
Israel keep it faithfully. These words in Joshua are very similar to those which follow the Shema
(the Hebrew word for ―hear‖), a prayer found in Deuteronomy which has been repeated daily by
Jews since the exodus: ―Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love
the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these
words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your
children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and
when you lie down, and when you rise‖ (Deut. 6:4-7).Obeying the law as summarized in these
verses was the key to being strong and living courageously. Only by putting complete faith in the
Lord could Joshua expect to be prosperous and successful in the conquest of the land.
Following the Lord‘s instructions, Joshua spoke to the officers of Israel and gave his first
command as the leader of the people: ―Pass through the midst of the camp and command the
people, ‗Prepare your provisions, for within three days you are to pass over this Jordan to go in
to take possession of the land that the LORD your God is giving you to possess‘ ‖ (Josh. 1:11).
Already he displayed courage and strength, for Joshua knew that the land was not empty or
lacking enemies. Powerful opposition like the city of Jericho and the nation of Philistines were
living in the land, waiting for Israel, ready to destroy them if they did not continue to obey the
Lord.
Joshua‘s faithful example of strength and courage set the tone for future leaders of Israel.
As seen throughout the book, when the people obeyed the Lord, he blessed them with success in
whatever work he called them to. When they rebelled through fear or greed, severe consequences
followed. The Lord did not call Joshua to strength and courage for Joshua‘s own sake; the nation
of Israel needed a leader who was following only the Lord so that they could remain faithful to
him.
Discussion:
1. How does the call to being strong and courageous still apply today?
2. How does the church experience the tension between God‘s promises and
our work towards those promises?
3. What are ways we can intentionally internalize God's word so that we may
keep it faithfully?
Lesson 2: Fighting for the Next Generation (Joshua 1:12-18; 22)
The Israelite tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of the tribe of Manasseh had been granted
their inheritance on the east side of the Jordan River, across from the rest of Israel. This was a
source of some anxiety for the entire nation—what if these tribes refused to help the rest of the
nation conquer their inheritance? What if those tribes didn‘t want to follow Moses‘ successor
Joshua any further and decided to reject the Lord as well?
Joshua spoke specifically to these three tribes following his more general exhortation for
the nation and her leaders to be strong and courageous. The families of the Transjordan tribes (as
Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh came to be known) would be allowed to stay behind
in their inheritance, but the fighting men had to accompany their brothers so that all of the tribes
of Israel could receive their inheritances in the land. Although they already had possession of
their own lands, the Reubenites, Gadites, and half-tribe of Manasseh were required to help the
others possess the land of Canaan before any of them could rest in their land.
These men affirmed their allegiance to both Moses and Joshua, closing with echoes of
Joshua‘s speech: ―‗Just as we obeyed Moses in all things, so we will obey you. Only may
the LORD your God be with you, as he was with Moses! Whoever rebels against your
commandment and disobeys your words, whatever you command him, shall be put to death.
Only be strong and courageous‘ ‖ (Josh. 1:17-18). Thus, in the beginning of the conquest of
Canaan, all of the tribes were unquestionably united despite the geographic separation caused by
the Jordan flowing between their lands. They all accepted that they would follow Joshua because
he was following the Lord and so all embraced the call to be strong and courageous.
By chapter 22, much had changed. In some cases, the people had been successful in
following the Lord faithfully by obeying Joshua‘s commands; at other times, they chose to take
matters into their own hands, bringing about dreadful, deadly consequences. By the time all of
the tribes had begun to settle into their lands, the entire nation was weary and wary of further
disasters. Yet, Joshua affirmed that the three tribes beyond the Jordan had been faithful to God‘s
commands, which were given by Moses, and to all that Joshua himself had instructed them to do.
They were allowed to go home.
Despite Joshua‘s endorsement, a mysterious altar threatened the unity of Israel and both
sides of the Jordan. The altar was built on the west (Canaan) side but by the Reubenites, Gadites,
and half-tribe of Manasseh. Who was this massive altar built to honor? Fearing that these tribes
had chosen to worship a god besides the Lord, the other tribes prepared to make war on the
Transjordan tribes in order to wipe out the perceived disobedience. Before attacking, however,
the priest Phinehas and chiefs from the ten tribes went to speak to their brothers. ―‗Have we not
had enough of the sin at Peor from which even yet we have not cleansed ourselves, and for
which there came a plague upon the congregation of the LORD, that you too must turn away this
day from following the LORD?‘‖ they asked (Josh. 22:17-18; cf. Num. 25). ―‗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‘‖ (v. 20; cf. Josh. 7). Their
fears were legitimate—rebelling against the Lord had already resulted in massive loss of life and,
if the rebellion was not snuffed out immediately, it would finally result in the destruction of
Israel and the end of the future they had hoped for in the land.
The future, however, was the exact reason that the three tribes had erected the altar. The
offending tribes explained,
Therefore we said, ―Let us now build an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice, but
to be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we do
perform the service of the LORD in his presence with our burnt offerings and sacrifices
and peace offerings, so your children will not say to our children in time to come, ‗You
have no portion in the LORD.‘ ‖ (Josh. 22:26-27)
Precedent for a monument for the purposes of remembrance is found throughout the Old
Testament; in Joshua, the leaders of the people gathered stones from the middle of the Jordan to
serve as reminders of the Lord‘s providing a way into the land (Josh. 4).
If the ten tribes had acted without sending a delegation, they would have unnecessarily
slaughtered their brothers. Though the ten tribes feared a deadly sin, the Transjordan tribes
intended only to emphasize their loyalty both to the Lord and to the larger nation. Phinehas and
the others with him commended the tribes for their foresight, even though they had acted in a
way which was frightening to the larger nation. ―The people of Reuben and the people of Gad
called the altar Witness, ‗For,‘ they said, ‗it is a witness between us that the LORD is God‘ ‖
(Josh. 22:34). In this way, the tribes solidified their identity as one nation so that future
generations would continue to worship the Lord together and take care of one another as they
had during the conquest of the land.
Discussion:
1. What sort of unity does God call his people to, both in Israel‘s past and
Christians‘ present?
2. How do leaders in churches today demonstrate concern about the sins of the
people in healthy or unhealthy ways?
3. Why is sin within the community of God the concern of all the people, not
just those who have sinned?
Lesson 3: The Hospitality of Strangers (Joshua 2:1-24)
Only two characters are named in Joshua 2: ―Joshua the son of Nun‖ and ―a prostitute
whose name was Rahab‖ (v. 1). The two unnamed spies sent by Joshua into the land to look
around went to Jericho, an important stronghold without which Israel could not hope to conquer
the rest of the land. The spies found themselves not only in the home of, but also under the
protection of, one who until now would have been considered most unlikely.
The human protagonist of this account is this woman Rahab. The spies stayed at her
house, a wise decision given the sorts of information that likely passed through her residence and
place of employ. Perhaps the spies were inept in addition to young, because immediately the
king was told, ― ‗Behold, men of Israel have come here tonight to search out the land‘ ‖ (v. 2).
Being appropriately concerned about this threat and thereby confirming what Rahab would later
say about the fear of the Israelites (see v. 9), the king sent a message straight to Rahab to find out
where the men were. After all, prostitutes were visited by all kinds of people, locals and
foreigners alike, and might have helpful information.
Rahab had a choice: she could disclose the spies‘ position and stay in good standing with
the king of Jericho, or she could lie and risk being found out by her own countrymen. Rahab‘s
nationality, gender, and disreputable career might predispose the reader to think that the spies
were a lost cause, never to return to Joshua. However, Rahab surprises the reader and reveals
herself to be a trickster. She admits that they came to her, but then sends the king‘s men on a
false trail saying, ―‗And when the gate was about to be closed at dark, the men went out. I do not
know where the men went. Pursue them quickly, for you will overtake them‘ ‖ (v. 5). The gate
was not yet closed when the men came, so off they went in a pursuit worthy of Inspector
Clouseau in the Pink Panther movies, bumbling in the dark after an unseen enemy. In reality,
Rahab had already hidden the spies, anticipating that once word got around that they had visited
her, the two would be in great danger.
Why would she hide them? Rahab was aware of the Lord and felt appropriate fear
because his people approached her home with the intention of destroying it. ― ‗For we have heard
how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea before you when you came out of Egypt,
and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites who were beyond the Jordan, to Sihon and
Og‘ ‖ (v. 10). This woman rehearses Israel‘s history, much as the nation herself was called to do.
Rahab also introduces the idea of the ban: people and places which were ― ‗devoted to
destruction‘ ‖ (v. 10). Both the knowledge of the Lord and of the ban caused Rahab to bargain
for her and her family‘s lives.
Rahab‘s request for clemency put the spies in a difficult position. They knew that Israel
had been called to put to death all of the current occupants of Canaan, which would include those
in Jericho. Yet, Rahab had just saved their lives. Furthermore, the gates to the city were closed
and, since their presence was known in the city, the two spies could not expect to sneak out
safely without her help. Furthermore, she had confessed that ― ‗the LORD your God, he is God in
the heavens above and on the earth beneath‘ ‖ (v. 11), words which only a Yahweh worshipper
would say. In the end, it was an easy decision. Without hesitation, the two agreed to spare her
and her family if she would keep their secret from the king.
The spies required her to tie a ―scarlet cord in the window through which you let us
down‖ (v. 18) and make sure her entire family was with her in the house. Otherwise, she, not
Israel, would bear responsibility for their deaths. The spies would be released from their promise
if she did not follow through. With that warning, Rahab tied the scarlet cord in the window in
anticipation of the coming fall of Jericho, and the men went on their way.
For three days the men hid in the hills, as Rahab had told them to do, before returning to
Joshua. They initially said nothing of Rahab, opting instead for the truncated assertion
―‗Truly the LORD has given all the land into our hands. And also, all the inhabitants of the
land melt away because of us‘ ‖ (v. 24). She was not named, but this summarized Rahab‘s
speech concerning Israel and what the Lord would do for that nation. This foreign woman risked
her life for the Lord and his people, believing that he would do for them all that he said. Because
of this, she would become a full participant in the nation of Israel, an ancestor of Jesus himself
(Matt. 1:5). Yet all that would have to wait until Jericho fell.
Discussion:
1. Was it right for Rahab to lie to the king‘s man about the spies‘ whereabouts?
2. Were the spies justified in exempting Rahab and her family from the
destruction of Jericho even though the Lord had called for the entire city and
its inhabitants to be destroyed?
3. What significance should we draw from the fact that the one who saved the
spies and confessed that the Lord is God was a female, foreigner, and
prostitute?
Lesson 4: Stepping into God’s Future (Joshua 3:1-17)
God is always the hero of any biblical story. His people sometimes do great things in
faith, but any power they demonstrate is only because of God‘s power made manifest for his
purposes. The text of Joshua 3 emphasizes God as the hero of Israel‘s story. As he had delivered
the people out of Egypt by cutting a path for them through the Red Sea, so he would deliver them
into the land with another path across the Jordan River.
The people were still encamped on the east side of the river at Shittim, maybe waiting for
the spies to return from Jericho, when Joshua woke up early in the morning, eager to get to the
Jordan River. As far as he was concerned, only the river stood between Israel and control of the
land. After all, God had promised to be with him, and Joshua had been appointed by Moses as
God‘s choice for his replacement as leader of Israel. Nothing could stand between him and God‘s
promises. Even so, the people were about to go into a land they did not know. How could they be
sure that God would be with them? How could they even be sure they would survive the journey
that seemed finally so near its goal?
Joshua‘s instructions to Israel affirmed that they would succeed in crossing the flooded
Jordan River because God would accomplish it for them. The Ark of the Covenant, which
contained Moses‘ staff and the tablets with the Ten Commandments, would be ―‗carried by the
Levitical priests‘‖ (Josh. 3:3). The Levites had been specially chosen by God to be the tribe of
priests within his holy nation (Num. 3:6-13). No one else in Israel was to touch the ark; in fact,
when crossing the river, the nation was to be especially careful not to walk too closely to it. God
would be present among them. For this reason, the people had to consecrate themselves much as
they had at the Red Sea. Although no instructions are given for this specific consecration, similar
rituals were likely involved: washing clothes, keeping their distance from God‘s holiness, and
abstaining from sex (see Exod. 19:10-15). These guidelines were meant to heighten the nation‘s
awareness that they were God‘s holy people, about to be in the presence of their holy God.
Everything that Joshua told the people in preparation for crossing the river served both
as instruction and assurance of their success both at the river and later in the land:
―Here is how you shall know that the living God is among you and that he will without
fail drive out from before you the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Hivites, the Perizzites, the
Girgashites, the Amorites, and the Jebusites. Behold, the ark of the covenant of the Lord
of all the earth is passing over before you into the Jordan. Now therefore take twelve men
from the tribes of Israel, from each tribe a man. And when the soles of the feet of the
priests bearing the ark of the LORD, the LORD of all the earth, shall rest in the waters of
the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan shall be cut off from flowing, and the waters coming
down from above shall stand in one heap‖ (Josh. 3:10-13).
It was necessary to cross the river in order to be in the Promised Land, and the manner in which
the people would cross the water would be a sign of their continuing success. The flooded river
would stop and God would guide his people.
In verses 14-17, the action begins to slow down. Three days of preparation are over; now
the nation will pass through the river. The moment the priests who were carrying the Ark of the
Covenant touched the river‘s edge with their feet, the Jordan River stopped flowing near the
town of Adam, its waters piling up in a heap. As the waters were stopped and piled up by God,
the people passed into the Promised Land. They walked on dry ground, just as their ancestors
had when they passed through the Red Sea. As long as the priests stood in the middle of the
river, the people could pass by to the land of their inheritance. Their hero who had brought the
people out of Egypt under Moses‘ leadership showed his continuing care for them now under
Joshua‘s leadership at the Jordan River. Surely such great signs and wonders would inspire
unwavering faith and obedience in the people.
Discussion:
1. How does realizing that God is the hero of each story change our
perspectives on our own trials and triumphs?
2. In what ways can we prepare and sanctify ourselves as we carry out God's
will?
3. What are stories in our own lives or the lives of those we know where God
removed barriers or helped us through barriers to accomplish his purposes?
Lesson 5: The First Restoration Movement (Joshua 4-5:12)
Across the United States, historical markers have been erected in order to explain the
significance of a site or building. Birthplaces and deathbeds, sites of battles, and other events of
note are posted so that those who do not know the history of a place can learn what happened
there. Israel had similar practices, naming important places and dedicating monuments as
reminders. The altar where Isaac was to be sacrificed was renamed by Abraham ―The LORD will
provide‖ after he was told to spare the boy (Gen. 22:14). Abraham‘s grandson Jacob dreamed of
angels and that God would give him the land where he slept. The stone he used as a pillow that
night became part of a pillar at the place he called Bethel, meaning ―House of God‖ (Gen. 28:1022).
The same thing happened when Israel crossed over into Canaan. The Lord told Joshua to
choose twelve men to take twelve stones from the middle of the river. These stones would be set
up in the place where Israel would spend their first night in the land. Then, when future
generations asked what the stones meant, the story would be told: ―the waters of the Jordan were
cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD‖ (Josh. 4:7). God is the hero, and the stones
from the middle of the river would stand as a memorial to what he had done to bring the people
into the land.
Ironically, when the Transjordan tribes built a memorial altar, the other ten tribes were
ready to wipe them out (Josh. 22). Both monuments were to be memorials for the children to
come who hadn‘t witnessed these events, yet the second nearly resulted in an unnecessary
genocide. What was the difference? Up to this point, Israel under Joshua‘s leadership has been
obedient to the Lord. Not far off is a day when disobedience will creep back in, to disastrous
consequences. Because of this, the ten tribes would rather kill their brothers and sisters than risk
idolatry. Yet, both the stones of Joshua 4 and the altar of Joshua 22 are signs of God‘s care for all
of Israel. For the moment, the monument of twelve stones stood for all the children of Israel, a
reminder of God‘s wonders among the people.
The repetition found in chapter 4 slows down the narrative. Over and over, it seems, we
are reminded that the people cross the river. The repetition emphasizes the importance of their
movement from one side to the other. The repetition of the erecting of the monument emphasizes
the importance of God‘s power over the Jordan River; it was not just done for Israel‘s sake but
also ―so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the LORD is mighty, that you
may fear the LORD your God forever‖ (v. 24). Rahab‘s speech proved that the people in the land
already did fear the Lord; the wonders at the Jordan River would only provide further reason to
tremble before him and his conquering nation. In fact, the kings of the Amorites and Canaanites
―heard that the LORD had dried up the waters of the Jordan for the people of Israel until they had
crossed over, [and] their hearts melted and there was no longer any spirit in them because of the
people of Israel‖ (5:1).
Having been consecrated on the far side of the river, Israel now had to reaffirm their
covenant with the Lord. All of the men of the nation (with the exception of Joshua and Caleb)
were uncircumcised; their circumcised fathers had left the job undone before dying in their
wanderings outside of the Promised Land. The men would be circumcised before the Passover
celebrations in their own land, not in the land of their slavery. Although they would be left
vulnerable to attack while they healed as their enemies had been in Genesis 34, Israel‘s
faithfulness in keeping the sign of the covenant would allow them to be blessed by the Lord.
When the men had healed, ―the LORD said to Joshua, ‗Today I have rolled away the reproach of
Egypt from you‘‖ (v. 9), referring to the guilt of their parents‘ disobedience and faithlessness in
the desert. Gilgal sounds like the Hebrew verb to roll, thus reminding the people that in that
place, the Lord had rolled away the guilt of the previous generation who had come out of Egypt.
The Passover celebration itself, while arising from the exodus story, offers a contrast to
that story. In Egypt, the people ate in haste, preparing for flight. They ate the food of the land
they were in: bitter herbs in Egypt (Exod. 12:8), but they eat ―parched grain‖ in Canaan (Josh.
5:11). Because the Passover was a memorial, likely the bitter herbs and other elements of the
first Passover were also present; the account in Joshua, however, focuses on the Lord‘s provision
in the new land. The bitter slavery and exile in the desert were both over. No longer would the
people eat manna from heaven; the Promised Land would provide all the produce they need. The
people obeyed the Lord by crossing the river, building memorials for their children, committing
anew to God‘s covenant, and keeping the Passover. They were restored to him and ready to
begin the conquest of the land.
Discussion:
1. What are aids or monuments that Christians today use to remember the
Lord‘s mighty works throughout history?
2. How do Christian holidays and feasts help to shape the faith of future
generations?
3. In what ways does the Lord provide for his people today?
Lesson 6: If These Walls Could Speak (Joshua 5:13-6:27)
Joshua and Israel must now fight for the land. Against incredible odds and with strange
tactics, this people fresh out of the wilderness will take down the mighty fortified city of Jericho.
Or, more properly speaking, their God will take down the city. The city itself will become holy,
not in the sense that it will be a temple site but because everything and everyone in it will be
given over to the Lord. Joshua knew the city was given to destruction and that no one from the
city would be spared except only Rahab and her family. Its riches would go to the Lord, and
every living person and animal in Jericho would be killed.
The commander of the army of the Lord came to Joshua. When Joshua asked whose side
he was on, Israel‘s or their enemies, the commander came back with the shocking answer:
―Neither!‖ Instead he asserted that he was the commander in the Lord‘s army, so he was on
God‘s side. Israel could not presume God was on their side. God was not at their beck and call.
They had to put themselves on God's side by aligning their will and lives with his purposes.
This commander came holding a sword and told Joshua, ―Take off your sandals from
your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy‖ (5:15). Joshua‘s experience parallels
Moses‘ own once again. Moses had been confronted by the Lord at a burning bush and told to
remove his sandals, for that place was also holy (Exod. 3:5). Neither the bush nor this patch of
ground was holy on their own; only the Lord‘s presence could accomplish such a feat. The fact
that Joshua worshipped the one who spoke to him suggests that the Lord himself was the
commander; he had put the city under a ban, and all that was dedicated to the Lord.
God commands the ban, in Hebrew called herem, to be carried out against Jericho. In
some instances, like in Jericho, the ban meant that everything—―men and women, young and
old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys‖ (Josh 6:21)—was to be destroyed. At other times, plunder could
be taken from the city, but it was always the Lord‘s decision who and what was put under the
ban. Disobedience to his instructions resulted in dire consequences.
This is an uncomfortable concept for many Christians and for non-Christians as well.
Why should God decide that an entire city must be destroyed, complete with a curse (6:26)?
Perhaps the answer is God‘s sovereignty, which does not strike the modern reader as a
satisfactory answer. However, because he is Lord of all, he has every right to decide who lives
and who dies and even how they die. Another answer concerns the purity of the nation of Israel.
Throughout the Old Testament, Israel struggled with the worship of foreign gods, and doing so
prevented them from bearing witness to the one, true God. Finally, we should recognize that the
ban is limited to particular people, in a particular place, at a particular time. The ban is enacted
only against Canaan and a group called the Amalekites as judgment for their wickedness (see
Gen. 15:16; Exod. 17:8-16; Deut. 9:4-5; 25:17-19). There is no ―go and do likewise‖ for
believers of any subsequent generation.
It is not bad for Christians to be uncomfortable, bothered, or even angry about the Lord‘s
ban on Jericho and other cities and nations to come. Still, when we too neatly define what God
will or will not do, we often assume he is in our image instead of the other way around. An
answer that too neatly explains away the death of an entire city or civilization—whether in the
Old Testament or as supposed judgments today—assumes that our Lord is small enough for
human minds to grasp. Let us never be guilty of such a thing! Instead let us remember the great
importance of obeying our sovereign Lord.
Jericho was about to fall because the Lord would give Israel victory over the city which
was already ―shut up inside and outside because of the people of Israel‖ (6:1). The military tactic
of the nation would be something like a siege. For six days they would circle the city with priests
carrying the Ark and seven priest blowing rams‘ horns. During this time, the Israelites would
remain silent. The nation obeyed Joshua in all these things, because the Lord had instructed him.
Each day, Joshua woke up early, the priests took up the ark, and they walked around the city
blowing their horns with the whole nation following.
On the seventh day, the Lord began delivering to them the land of their rest. Seven times
that day the people circled the city, and ―at the seventh time, when the priests had blown the
trumpets, Joshua said to the people, ‗Shout, for the LORD has given you the city. And the city and
all that is within it shall be devoted to the LORD for destruction. Only Rahab the prostitute and all
who are with her in her house shall live‘‖ (vv. 16-17).
Again the people obeyed Joshua in all that he said. When the trumpet was blown, they
shouted and the wall of Jericho ―fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every
man straight before him, and they captured the city‖ (v. 20). Furthermore, as God had
commanded, ―they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old,
oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword‖ (v. 21). Only Rahab and her family were
spared, in keeping with the promise made by the spies. So Jericho fell. God had given Israel their
first victory in the land, a sign of the conquest to follow and possession of the land, as long as
Israel remained on the Lord‘s side.
Discussion:
1. Why is it significant that Rahab and her family were saved from Jericho‘s
destruction?
2. How should we understand the ban, and how can we explain it to others?
3. Why is it important to realize that the question is not whether God is on our
side but whether we are on his?
Lesson 7: How Much Will Your Sin Cost Me? (Joshua 7:1-26)
Individualism runs rampant in the United States of America. Although family and friends
may help a person make a decision, most decisions are seen as ultimately being the responsibility
of that individual. The consequences of others‘ decisions are seen as their own responsibilities,
not something to be suffered by others. In such a culture, the idea of corporate sin—that which
affects an entire community—seems unjust. Why should all suffer for the sins of one or even a
few? Israel saw the world very differently. Their identity was found in being the twelve tribes of
Israel, not primarily as this or that individual person. Because of this, the idea of one person‘s sin
resulting in punishment for the entire community was not viewed as unjust. Instead, that person
and their sin became the entire community‘s sin problem.
In Joshua 6, everything seemed wonderful for Israel. Jericho was defeated, the city razed,
and the inhabitants destroyed in obedience to the Lord‘s command. For the first time under
Joshua‘s leadership, however, a significant sin occurred: ―the people of Israel broke faith in
regard to the devoted things, for Achan the son of Carmi, son of Zabdi, son of Zerah, of the tribe
of Judah, took some of the devoted things‖ (7:1). The Lord‘s holy ban was not honored and so
―the anger of the LORD burned against the people of Israel‖ (ibid.).
Joshua, however, did not know this. Israel had been rebellious under Moses, but in the
land under Joshua‘s leadership there had been no major sin problems. In his ignorance, Joshua
sent spies to Ai, just as he had done to Jericho, expecting a similar result. Indeed, the spies felt
confident of victory at Ai and told Joshua on their return, ―‗Do not have all the people go up, but
let about two or three thousand men go up and attack Ai. Do not make the whole people toil up
there, for they are few‘‖ (v. 3). Between the small size of Ai and the Lord‘s many guarantees of
success given Israel‘s obedience, the spies gave Joshua what seemed like very sensible advice.
Unlike at Jericho, however, Israel did not experience victory. Although only thirty-six men were
killed, ―the hearts of the people melted and became as water‖ just like their enemies‘ hearts had
done when they were entering the land (v. 5). Israel understood that, even though few people
were dead, the Lord had not given them the city Ai. Was he no longer keeping his promises to
them? Had they been abandoned so soon in the Promised Land?
Because of this defeat, Joshua immediately went into mourning, tearing his clothes and
laying in front of the ark. With him were the elders; all of them put dust on their heads, a sign of
mourning, and hoped that the Lord would reveal why they had been unsuccessful at Ai. For the
first time, Joshua questioned whether Israel belonged in the Promised Land. ―‗Alas, O
Lord GOD, why have you brought this people over the Jordan at all, to give us into the hands of
the Amorites, to destroy us? Would that we had been content to dwell beyond the Jordan! […]
For the Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land will hear of it and will surround us and cut
off our name from the earth. And what will you do for your great name?‘‖ (vv. 7, 9). With this
speech, Joshua expressed his fears but also reminded the Lord that his name was on the line.
Would the Canaanites cease to fear the Lord because of this defeat?
The Lord did not immediately reveal the individual who had caused this problem,
asserting instead that all of Israel was guilty. Because the ban had not been honored, they were
now separated from the Lord, no longer under his protection. Until the sin was dealt with, they
could not expect his help. However, they did not have to figure out how to appease the Lord on
their own. He instructed Joshua to tell the people that someone had violated the ban by keeping
things from Jericho. The consequence was: ― ‗You cannot stand before your enemies until you
take away the devoted things from among you‘ ‖ (v. 13). Through a winnowing process, Achan
was found out, and he had little choice other than to confess. Just as Eve had seen something
good in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:6), so Achan saw good things in Jericho and coveted them—
an act expressly forbidden to Israel (Exod. 20:17, Deut. 5:21). He took and hid ―‗a beautiful
cloak from Shinar, and 200 shekels of silver, and a bar of gold weighing 50 shekels‘‖ (Josh.
7:21). A search of his tent revealed that this was all as he said.
In the Valley of Achor—that is, the Valley of Trouble—the people of Israel utterly
destroyed Achan and his household for transgressing the Lord‘s ban and his covenant.
Furthermore, the place where they were burned was ―raised over [Achan] a great heap of stones‖
as a reminder of what transgression cost Achan and the nation of Israel (v. 26). Though a
troubling outcome, this story reminds us of how seriously God takes faithfulness to his
commands and how the effects of unfaithfulness negatively affect the whole community.
Therefore, sin must be dealt with in the community. However, in our context, dealing with sin
would look more like Paul's command to remove the offender from the community, both for the
purity of the community and with the hope of restoring the sinner (see 1 Cor. 5).
Discussion:
1. How can the seemingly private sin of one person have destructive
consequences within an entire community?
2. What responsibility do God‘s leaders in congregations today have to
discipline members of the church community? What are the goals of such
discipline?
3. How can leaders in the church today know the difference between
appropriate discipline and excessive punishment or leniency?
Lesson 8: The Blessings or Curses from Life’s Choices (Joshua 8:1-35)
In the first campaign against Ai, Joshua and Israel assumed the Lord‘s favor because to
that point he had been on their side. However, they had forgotten—it‘s not a matter of the Lord
on the people‘s side but of the people being on the Lord‘s side. After repenting of Achan‘s sin
and doing all that the Lord told them in order to be purified, Israel was once again on the Lord‘s
side, and they defeated Ai.
Unlike at Jericho, God permitted the people to take plunder from Ai. Only the people of
Ai were under the ban. Also unlike Jericho, the battle at Ai was about the strategy that the Lord
would give to Joshua, not about his divine intervention making walls fall at the sound of the
trumpets. Rather than marching around the city and making the nation‘s presence abundantly
known until the Divine Warrior showed up, only the fighting men would go up against Ai, and
even then they would hide, setting a trap rather than an outright attack. Joshua and the rest of the
nation would approach the city, as though they were very foolish indeed for mounting yet
another frontal attack, given the obvious failure of their last venture. The king of Ai and all the
inhabitants would be drawn from the city, at which point the fighting men in hiding would rush
in and set the city on fire and join the rest of the nation.
Just as at Jericho, the Lord gave Israel‘s enemy into their hands. The king of Ai and his
people took the bait and followed Israel into the wilderness. In echoes of Moses‘ outstretched
arm at the Red Sea, Joshua is told by the Lord, ―‗Stretch out the javelin that is in your hand
toward Ai, for I will give it into your hand‘‖ (Josh 8:18). Moses‘ arm was a symbol the Lord‘s
saving arm when the waters parted for Israel and of the Lord‘s judgment when the waters closed
over Pharaoh and his armies. Likewise, Joshua‘s outstretched arm meant the capture of the city
and the destruction of all of the people of Ai, including the hanging of the king of Ai from a tree.
The Lord‘s arm accomplished both the crossing at the Red Sea and the final victory at Ai; he did
these things for his people who had promised to abide by his covenant. As a memorial of the
Lord‘s continued faithfulness, Israel ―took [the king‘s] body down from the tree and threw it at
the entrance of the gate of the city and raised over it a great heap of stones, which stands there to
this day‖ (v. 29). Yet again, a monument was raised to remind the nation what had happened in
that place.
At the end of this day of victory, it was not enough simply to obey the Lord and do as he
had commanded. Joshua recognized the importance of reminding the people continuously that
they were the Lord‘s people, called by him to be in covenant. They were not in charge; they were
the Lord‘s special nation. Thus ―Joshua built an altar to the LORD, the God of Israel, on Mount
Ebal, just as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded the people of Israel, as it is written
in the Book of the Law of Moses, ‗an altar of uncut stones, upon which no man has wielded an
iron tool‘‖ (vv. 30-31). This command is found in Moses‘ instructions in Deuteronomy 27:1-7,
followed by the imperatives to offer sacrifices on the altar, to rejoice in the Lord, and to ―‗write
on the stones all the words of this law very plainly‘‖ (v. 8).
Joshua followed these instructions to the tee. Both burnt offerings and peace offerings
were made on the altar, as Moses commanded. In front of all of Israel, Joshua copied the law on
stones as Moses had said. Interestingly, ―sojourner as well as native born‖ were included in this
important religious ceremony (Josh. 8:33). The priests carried the Ark of the Covenant ―to bless
the people of Israel‖ (ibid.). The law was read to remind the nation of the Lord‘s covenant and
the very serious nature of being his people. They could be blessed in the land for their obedience
and faithfulness, but the Lord also stipulated curses for disobedience and faithlessness (Lev. 26;
Deut. 27-28). His favor, though unearned, did not come free of responsibilities and potential
consequences. ―There was not a word of all that Moses commanded that Joshua did not read
before all the assembly of Israel, and the women, and the little ones, and the sojourners who
lived among them‖ (v. 35). As always, Joshua was very thorough in his obedience, modeling for
the entire nation the importance of following the words of the Lord.
These words were not just meant for him, or even just the priests. The entire nation was
held accountable for faithfulness to the covenant. The women and children were specifically
mentioned to reiterate the importance of every single person in the nation. Even more, the
sojourners—foreigners—were also responsible for the purity and faithfulness of the nation.
Rahab and her family would be included in this number. Even those who were not native to
Israel were called to live before the Lord as full participants in his nation, being careful to keep
his laws, offer him sacrifices, and rejoice with the entire nation when he blessed them.
Discussion:
1. Why is it dangerous simply to assume that the Lord is on ―our‖ side?
2. What is the relationship between God's grace and obedience to God, both for
Israel and for us?
3. What does the continuing concern for the sojourners within Israel say about
the Lord‘s concern for people outside of his chosen nation?
Lesson 9: Still Willing to Stand and Fight (Joshua 14:6-15)
Waiting for promises to be fulfilled can be one of the most difficult calls in a person‘s
life. Fears about one‘s own mortality creep in. Fears that the one who promised was a liar also
seem more justifiable the longer a promise takes to come to fruition. Fears that the promise was
misunderstood and the results disappointing are similarly understandable. The generation of
Israelites who left Egypt may have had such fears, but it was their own unfaithfulness that kept
them out of the Promised Land.
Most Israelites who entered the Promised Land were born in the wilderness and never
experienced life in Egypt. Only those who were children when Israel left Egypt and two of the
adults who left, Joshua and Caleb, would join the new generation in the land. Joshua 14:6-15
focuses on Caleb, and his story invites reflection on why he was spared alongside Joshua from
the Lord‘s judgment against the faithless Israelites in the wilderness.
Caleb, who was the son of Jephunneh, represented the tribe of Judah among the twelve
spies sent into Canaan by Moses (Num. 13). In accordance with Moses‘ instructions, the spies
searched out the land and brought back fruit from the land with them at the end of their forty
days. Ten spies had wonderful things to say about the land itself, but were dismayed by the
strength of the people already living in the land.
Moses spoke to Israel about these people. They were a stronger nation, living in great big
cities that stretched to heaven. In Israel's mind, it was foolhardy to believe that they, freed slaves
who had been wandering in the desert, could defeat this nation of warriors. Yet, Moses reassured
Israel, telling them that ―he who goes over before you as a consuming fire is the LORD your God.
He will destroy them and subdue them before you. So you shall drive them out and make them
perish quickly, as the LORD has promised you‖ (Deut. 9:3). By their own strength, Israel would
certainly fail in this endeavor. The only reason the smaller, weaker nation would defeat the
nation of warriors was because the Lord would give them the victory.
However, at the time when Caleb and the other spies returned, the cowardly, faithless
spies‘ words about really big, fortified cities and really big people (the Anakim) caused ―‗the
heart of [Israel to] melt‘‖ (Josh. 14:8), just as Israel‘s reputation had caused the heart of the
people of Jericho to melt. Thus, Israel searched for leaders to take them back to Egypt,
demonstrating their fear and lack of faith in the Lord who had delivered them out of slavery and
specifically promised them victory over those fearsome people. Caleb and Joshua reminded them
of the Lord‘s promises: ―‗And do not fear the people of the land, for they are bread for us. Their
protection is removed from them, and the LORD is with us; do not fear them‘‖ (Num. 14:9).
Despite this, the people feared, so the Lord promised they would not enter the land; only Joshua,
Caleb, and the children of the Israelites would enter.
With this history in mind, Caleb approached Joshua, the man who had taken Moses‘
place leading Israel. Already much of the Promised Land had been conquered, and ―the land had
rest from war‖ for a time (Josh. 11:23). So Caleb reminded Joshua, ―‗You know what
the LORD said to Moses the man of God in Kadesh-barnea concerning you and me. I was forty
years old when Moses the servant of the LORD sent me from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land,
and I brought him word again as it was in my heart‘‖ (14:6-7). Forty-five years later, Caleb
believed that the Lord was going to do as he had promised so long ago. ―‗I am still as strong
today as I was in the day that Moses sent me; my strength now is as my strength was then, for
war and for going and coming‘‖ (v. 11). Caleb‘s strength had not waned with age, nor had his
faith that God could defeat giant people in giant cities. Still, note that while he trusts God, he
does not presume God will fight for him: ―It may be that the LORD will be with me, and I shall
drive them out just as the LORD said‖ (v. 12, emphasis added). Caleb lets God be God even as he
trusts in the promises God made.
Just as Moses would have done, Joshua gave Caleb a blessing to take his inheritance.
―Therefore Hebron became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite to this
day, because he wholly followed the LORD, the God of Israel‖ (v. 14). Caleb does indeed take the
land, because of his whole-hearted devotion to God.
Following his conquest of the territory allotted to him, ―the land had rest from war‖ (v.
15). Rest was the ultimate promise of the Promised Land. This was not a lazy rest or an uneasy
rest; the rest the Lord gave Israel in the land was complete. He helped them conquer their
enemies and kept new enemies from rising. He sent rain in its season so the crops could grow
and the people could flourish in the land that Caleb and Joshua had seen and believed that the
Lord would give them. This rest meant God‘s protection of and provision for Israel in the land.
Discussion:
1. What events in his lifetime gave Caleb the confidence that, even 45 years
later, the Lord would do all that Moses had promised for Caleb?
2. What promises has the Lord made to us that still seem to be a long way from
fulfillment, and how can the church remain faithful while waiting for the
Lord to fulfill all of his promises?
3. In what ways do Christians now enjoy ―rest‖ and in what ways do we still
await it?
Lesson 10: Come Stand with Me (Joshua 23-24)
The impending death of a person ―old and well advanced in years‖ (Josh. 23:1) has a way
of making that person want to share what is important with those he or she loves. On his or her
deathbed, this person has stories to tell to family, warnings to give friends, admonitions to speak
to medical staff and any and all who will listen. Endings like death are appropriate times to speak
of the past and present and even to look to the future.
Joshua‘s final speech before his own death looks to the past, present, and future. He talks
about what God has done to bring Israel into the Promised Land they now occupy. He tells Israel
what they needed to know to continue living in the Promised Land: how to keep the covenant,
and why, and the consequences if they kept it and if they didn‘t. His speech certainly relies
heavily on law—not bowing to foreign gods, primarily—but the law is not his argument for why
to obey the Lord. It is the expression of how to obey the Lord. Instead, why Israel must continue
to obey the Lord relies heavily on her own story.
The story Joshua tells Israel comes from the Lord‘s lips. ―Thus says the LORD, the God of
Israel, ‗Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrate . . . Then I took your father Abraham
from beyond the River and led him through all the land of Canaan‘‖ (24:2-3). Israel‘s father
Abraham came to serve only the Lord, despite how his family beyond the River had worshipped
other gods. The Lord ―gave him Isaac‖ (v. 3) and gave Isaac his sons Jacob and Esau, with an
inheritance for Esau. Jacob, however, went to Egypt.
The story then comes once again to Moses. He and Aaron were sent to Israel in their
Egyptian bondage, and the Lord ―plagued Egypt‖ (v. 5). Once again, the exodus story is told:
how Israel crossed the sea but the Egyptians were drowned; how Israel lived in the wilderness
and, even though it was a punishment to wander, the Lord continued to care for his people; how
the Lord brought the people to the Promised Land and gave it to them. Nothing—not kings, not
curses—could keep the people from possessing the land while the Lord fought for them.
The Lord then renewed the covenant with the people, a covenant to which he had been
and would continue to be faithful, if only Israel would remain faithful to him. For instance, the
land was currently at peace, yet Canaanite nations still existed in the Promised Land among the
people. The conquest was not yet complete, but the Lord would defeat the remaining enemies as
well, if the people would be faithful. So again they are warned against the gods of the nations
and called to cling to God alone. This was not an idle warning; if they were not already
worshipping foreign gods on the sly, they were at least entertaining the thought, having not
totally destroyed idols from their midst. Joshua‘s admonition—―Be very careful, therefore, to
love the LORD your God‖ (23:11)—was the key to keeping the covenant.
How can a people learn to love the Lord? The difficulty is in trying to love an entity who
is incomprehensible to humans and who is not visible or physically present the vast majority of
the time. Even on this side of the cross, we do not see the Lord in flesh and blood, although in
the church we have the distinct advantage of being Christ‘s body with the Holy Spirit living
within us. For Israel and for the church today, learning to love the Lord requires us to
continuously repeat his saving stories. This means not only telling the events of Jesus‘ life, death,
and resurrection, but also of Israel‘s creation, captivity, and emancipation. These stories are our
stories; the Lord‘s salvation long ago is part of our salvation this very day.
Because of this, Joshua‘s final exhortation to Israel still calls to the church, even across
the centuries that separate us: ―Now therefore fear the LORD and serve him in sincerity and in
faithfulness . . . And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will
serve . . . But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD‖ (24:14-15, emphasis added).
Israel asserted three times that they would serve the Lord alone (vv. 16-18, 21, 24). Yet Israel
stumbled, even as early as the time of the judges. She forgot her story; despite the monuments,
despite ―the Book of the Law of God‖ (v. 26), despite her promises, Israel forgot and served
other gods and faced the consequences of her faithlessness.
Let the church thus take heed: swearing allegiance to the Lord against the gods of the
nation—wealth, status, fame, nationalism, among many other possible gods—is not a onetime
promise. We must continually renew the call to fear and serve the Lord. We must constantly
rehearse and affirm the promise ―as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD‖ (v. 15). God
calls his people each day to choose him, his purposes for them. As Moses told Israel in the
desert, in what Jesus would call the greatest commandment, ―Hear, O Israel. The LORD our God,
the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and
with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall
teach them diligently to your children . . .‖ (Deut. 6:4-7). In hearing and telling the story of the
Lord‘s salvation, may his people the Church learn to better love him each day and serve the Lord
alone.
Discussion:
1. What role do the biblical stories and modern testimonies about the work of
God in our lives have in building faith and encouraging faithful living
among God‘s people?
2. What gods in the United States today tug at Christians‘ hearts for our
allegiance, and how do we resist that pull?
3. What will help us daily to choose faithfulness to God?
Resources for Further Study of Joshua
Popular Level
John Goldingay, Joshua, Judges, and Ruth for Everyone (Westminster John Knox Press, 2011).
Richard S. Hess, Joshua, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary (IVP Academic Press, 2008).
J. Gordon Harris, Cheryl A. Brown, and Michael S. Moore, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Understanding
the Bible Commentary Series (Baker Books, 2000).
More in Depth
David M. Howard, Jr., Joshua: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture,
New American Commentary (Broadman and Holman, 1988).
Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., The NIV Application Commentary: Joshua (Zondervan, 2009).
Marten H. Woudstra, The Book of Joshua, New International Commentary on the Old Testament
(Eerdmans, 1981).
Some Reflections on the Ban in Joshua
Adapted from: Phillip G. Camp, Living as the Community of God: Moses Speaks to the Church
in Deuteronomy (Crosslink, 2014). Used with permission of the publisher.
One of the most difficult problems for many in Joshua and other parts of the Old
Testament is the issue of the ban,1 where Israel is commanded to kill all of the members of the
several nations within Canaan, including the women and children (Deut. 20:16–18; see also
2:32–35; 3:3–7; 7:1–5, 16; 25:17–19). Joshua 11:12–15 reports that Israel carried out the
commandment during the conquest. However, because Israel later makes covenants with the
inhabitants of the land (Judg. 2:1–5), disobeying God's command, the ban is not fully carried out.
Still, the fact that they were commanded to do so does not sit right with most of us in our day
because of our sense of the "rules" of warfare in which combatants and noncombatants are
distinguished. Moreover, the command may become more troubling for us, because the Bible
constantly refers to God as gracious and compassionate (e.g., Exod. 34:6; Ps. 86:15; Pss. 103:8,
111:4, 145:8; Joel 2:13; John 4:2; James 5:11) and in light of Jesus' command to love our
enemies (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27, 35). To say that Israel stopped short of carrying the ban out fully
does not really resolve the situation, since that comes as a result of disobedience to the command
of God.
How then are we to understand this unsettling command, especially in light of the sixth
commandment: Do not kill (Exod. 20:13; Deut. 5:17)?2 Some explanations are inadequate. It will
not do to separate the God of the Old Testament from the God of the New Testament. The God
we worship as Father, Son and Holy Spirit is the God of the Old Testament. Nor will it do to say
that the aim of this command is to keep Israel from profiting from warfare so that Israel loses a
primary motivation for warfare. In most cases, the ban does not cover property and possessions
but only the people. Israel is usually allowed to keep the plunder (cf. Deut. 2:32–35; 3:3–7;
6:10–11).3 To make the ban symbolic or spiritualized (e.g., saying that this is really about
removing spiritual impediments), or to deny it ever actually happened also does not sufficiently
resolve the problem.4 Certainly, there is a spiritual aspect to the command, but even if it did not
literally happen, there would still be the problem of Israel claiming that their God commanded
them to do this and recording in their history the fact that they carried it out at times in obedience
to that command.
Scholars have also noted that similar language of total destruction appears in other
ancient Near Eastern texts.5 For example, in the Mesha Stele (aka the Moabite Stone), a ninth
century B.C. inscription by a Moabite king, the king claims that his god (Chemosh) told him to
take the Israelite city of Nebo. Mesha says, "I took it and slew all in it, seven thousand men and
women, both natives and aliens, and female slaves; for I had devoted it to Ashtar-Chemosh. I
took from thence the vessels of YHWH and dragged them before Chemosh."6 The word
translated "devoted" in this text is the Moabite cognate of the word translated as "ban" in the Old
Testament. This usage suggests that the practice was not unique to Israel. Other nations carried
out the ban as well, though Israel does seem unique in seeing the ban as a means to prevent
worship of other gods. While "they did it, too" is not a satisfying response, especially when
Israel is at odds with the nations is many other ways, it does contextualize the practice in a
certain time and place.
But maybe "they did it, too" is not quite right either. Some scholars who examine the
rhetoric of ancient Near Eastern warfare argue that the "all" language is hyperbolic. That is, the
totality of the language is not literal but an over-the-top expression to suggest total victory.
Furthermore, in light of the ancient Near Eastern parallels, it may be that phrases such as "men
and women" or "young and old" were not meant literally but were stereotypical ways of talking
about the people of a town. In practice, however, it was the leaders and soldiers, in fortresses
and military installations, who were targeted. The original readers would have caught onto such
idiomatic usages, where we as modern readers miss them and so read them literally.7
Though they will not resolve the theological dilemma completely, the following
considerations should also be kept in mind. First, the basis for this command is theological rather
than social, ethnic, or political. The command is given so that these people will not lead Israel
into worship of their gods and thus into violating the first two commandments (Deut. 7:16;
20:17–18). God is making the land a holy space where he will dwell among his people. So the
land must be free from influences that would draw the Israelites to other gods and so contaminate
the space, preventing them from living out God's purposes for them. Therefore, the command
does not arise from a claim of ethnic or moral superiority; in fact, Deuteronomy expressly denies
that Israel receives the land because it is more righteous than the nations already in the land (9:4–
6). Indeed, God tells Israel that if any of their towns become like the Canaanite nations by
serving their gods, the ban will be directed against those Israelite towns (Deut. 13:12–18).
Second, the Bible makes it clear that the inhabitants of the land are being judged for their
own wickedness (Gen. 15:16; Lev.18:1–27; 20:1–24; Deut. 9:5; 12:29–31). As with many other
nations in the Bible, including Israel, judgment takes the form of conquest. The fact that women
perish in the conquest would then be understood as judgment upon them as well for participation
in the larger societal wickedness. This does not, however, resolve the issue of the killing of
children, whom we tend to assume—at least at some early age—could not be accountable for
evil deeds. The problem is mitigated somewhat when we recall that in the ancient world, identity
(and thus responsibility and culpability) was viewed more corporately than individually (note the
effects of Achan's sin on all Israel in Josh. 7). And the problem is mitigated if, indeed, the
totality language is hyperbolic in keeping with ancient Near Eastern practice.
Third, the ban applies to a particular people (the Canaanite nations), in a particular time
(the period of the conquest), and a particular place (within the boundaries of the land given to
Israel).8 Thus, there is no "go and do likewise." Even within Israel, there was no general "go and
do likewise" as indicated in the discussion of Deuteronomy 20:10–15, where terms of peace are
offered and where women and children are spared when Israel fights cities outside Canaan.9
Therefore, the ban cannot be used to justify attacks on "pagans," such as the crusaders' attacks on
Muslims or American settlers' attacks on native Americans, or in a war on terror against Islamic
extremist (though in these cases this misguided biblical justification can serve as religious cover
for ulterior motives, such as gaining plunder, taking land, or accomplishing political and
ideological ends). Furthermore, since the people of God today, the church, are dispersed among
the nations and not geographically bounded as Israel was, the ban no longer serves the function
of creating sacred space. And since God has nowhere designated the location for a Christian
nation, no nation can use the ban as justification for war, conquest, or genocide.
Fourth, Israel's willingness to kill even women and children in obedience to their God,
when they obey God in this regard, demonstrates their level of commitment to their covenant
with God. That someone would go this far seems fanatical to us, but it may reveal our own lack
of seriousness about our covenant with God—that there are certain things we simply would not
do if God commanded us to do so. Of course, our level of covenant commitment normally
dissolves at a much lower threshold. And while we, from our "enlightened" and "civilized"
standpoint, may critique Israel for their brutality in the name of their God, we so-called Christian
nations have killed and brutalized the innocent for far lesser gods: political ideology, greed,
territory, security, etc. Indeed, in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, we have devised means
to kill on a scale never imagined prior, and have relegated the noncombatant women and children
who die to the sterile-sounding realm of "collateral damage."
Fifth, the biblical text itself implies that Canaanites who submit themselves to the God of
Israel could be spared the ban. Rahab, who knows the Lord's reputation and hides the spies from
Israel, is the prime example. She and her family are spared in the conquest of Jericho (Josh. 2:8–
21; 6:22–25). The Gibeonites provide another example. They deceive the Israelites into thinking
they are from a distant land, because they have heard about what Israel did at Jericho and Ai and
what God had done in Egypt. Israel is critiqued for not inquiring of God before entering a
covenant with the Gibeonites, but once they enter that covenant, they are bound to protect them
(Judg. 9–10; cf. 2 Sam. 21). One wonders what would have happened had other Canaanites
shown humility toward and faith in Yahweh.
Sixth, again, the idea of "all"—meaning, every single person, including all women and
children—has to be heard against the backdrop of the ancient Near Eastern context. If the use of
such language is conventional and hyperbolic—that is, not intended as literal—then the extent of
the dilemma is lessened.
Admittedly, all of these explanations cannot completely undo our discomfort with the
ban, especially with the idea or claim of the killing of children. If, in fact, children were put to
death, our faith that the little children belong to God and that the innocent are ultimately
eternally safe with God may provide comfort as well. Still, perhaps at this point, the best we can
do is to admit our discomfort and accept in faith what we cannot bear in thought: that God did,
indeed, command this for purposes that the Bible somewhat explains even if not to our total
satisfaction. Also, we bear in mind that the overwhelming testimony of the Scripture is that God
is merciful and compassionate, as is especially shown in the giving of his own Son on behalf of
all peoples and nations. Finally, it is worth remembering as well that we do not get to shape God
into our image or ideal (which is idolatry!) even when we find biblical portrayals of him
troubling.
1
In Hebrew, cherem or herem. There has been a great deal written on this issue, and what follows in this excursus
is indebted to the following: Jeph Holloway, "The Ethical Dilemma of Holy War," Southwest Journal of Theology
41 (1998): 44–69; David M. Howard Jr., Joshua, The New American Commentary, (Nashville: Broadman &
Holman, 1998), 180–187; Paul Copan, Is God A Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God (Baker,
2011), 158–197; Wright, Deuteronomy, 112–115; idem, Old Testament Ethics, 472–480. A more popular version of
this discussion is in Wright's The God I Don't Understand, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 73–108. Another
helpful resource in struggling with this issue is C.S. Cowles, et al., Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and
Canaanite Genocide (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003).
2
Several English versions translate the 6th commandment as "You shall not murder," but a more literal translation is
"You shall not kill."
3
The only times that Israel is commanded to destroy everything, people and property, are at Jericho (Josh. 6–7),
and, at least by implication, when Saul fights the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15; cf. Exod. 17:8–16; Deut. 25:17–19). Ai
and Hazor were the only other cities burned, and, in these conquests, the people were killed but Israel was permitted
to keep the plunder (Josh. 8:1–29; 11:1–15).
4
The dominant view among biblical scholars is that the archaeological evidence does not support the biblical
portrayal of the conquests of Jericho and Ai, a conclusion that is strongly rejected by more conservative scholars.
For a summary of the perspectives with relevant bibliography, see Tremper Longman III and Raymond Dillard, An
Introduction to the Old Testament, second ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 123–127. For those who deny the
historicity of the conquest accounts, some then explained that ban was never carried out but was invented at a much
later time for theological purposes; e.g., to support Josiah's religious reforms or to provide an explanation and give
hope to those in exile. See, e.g., Carolyn Pressler, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Westminster Bible Companion (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox, 2002), 49–53.
5
See, e. g., Eugene E. Carpenter, "Deuteronomy" in Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary, vol. 1,
ed. John H. Walton (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 437.
6
The translation is according to Readings from the Ancient Near East: Primary Sources for Old Testament Study,
ed. Bill T. Arnold and Bryan E. Beyer (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 162. Mesha appears in the Bible in 2 Kings 3.
7
See Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God (Grand Rapids: Baker Books,
2011), 169–185.
8
In the case of the Amalekites, the fight against them extends into the period of the monarchy in Israel, where Saul
(1 Sam. 15) was to destroy them, and David does destroy all but 400 who escape (1 Sam. 30:17). In the days of
Hezekiah, king of Judah, the Simeonites wipe out the remainder of the Amalekites, fulfilling the ban against them (1
Chron. 4:41–43).
9
Cf. also Deut. 25:17–19; 2 Kings 8:12; Amos 1:13.