“Now the Lord said to Joshua: ‘Do not be afraid, nor be dismayed; take all the people of war with you, and arise, go up to Ai. See, I have given into your hand the king of Ai, his people, his city, and his land. And you shall do to Ai and its king as you did to Jericho and its king.’” Joshua 8:1-2
Investigating what the Bible claims Joshua and the army of Israel did in Canaan involves a lot of detailed work. That’s because the Bible claims Israel defeated 31 kings during the 14th century BC. As an atheist journalist in 1971, that looked like evidence that could be verified or denied using the tools of both history and archaeology. What did I find?
The 12th Chapter of the Book of Joshua lists the 31 kings that Israel supposedly defeated during its military campaign in Canaan.
“And these are the kings of the country which Joshua and the children of Israel conquered on this side of the Jordan, on the west, from Baal Gad in the Valley of Lebanon as far as Mount Halak and the ascent to Seir, which Joshua gave to the tribes of Israel as a possession according to their divisions, in the mountain country, in the lowlands, in the Jordan plain, in the slopes, in the wilderness, and in the South—the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: the king of Jericho, one; the king of Ai, which is beside Bethel, one; the king of Jerusalem, one; the king of Hebron, one; the king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one; the king of Eglon, one; the king of Gezer, one; the king of Debir, one; the king of Geder, one; the king of Hormah, one; the king of Arad, one; the king of Libnah, one; the king of Adullam, one; the king of Makkedah, one; the king of Bethel, one; the king of Tappuah, one; the king of Hepher, one; the king of Aphek, one; the king of Lasharon, one; the king of Madon, one; the king of Hazor, one; the king of Shimron Meron, one; the king of Achshaph, one; the king of Taanach, one; the king of Megiddo, one; the king of Kedesh, one; the king of Jokneam in Carmel, one; the king of Dor in the heights of Dor, one; the king of the people of Gilgal, one; the king of Tirzah, one—all the kings, thirty-one.” Joshua 12:7-24
The first thing I noticed was the historical specificity of the list. It was not a general, sweeping statement about Joshua and the army of Israel defeating “all the kings of the land” or something along that line. The list was so specific that each one could be investigated.
Journalists, like historians and archaeologists, work with specifics. That’s necessary to the job. If I arrive at the scene of a crime and ask questions about what happened, I expect to get specific answers to specific questions. Some people answer journalists’ questions in a general way, as in “somebody died.” Any experienced journalist knows they need more for a story than “somebody died.” Follow-up questions would include “who died?” “how did they die?” “did you see them die?” “do you know the dead person?” “do you know the person you say killed them?” etc. Journalists are interested in facts, corroboration of those facts, and reliable witnesses to those facts.
Archaeologists and historians have their own “process” during excavations and investigations that have some similarity to the journalistic process. I wondered what they had discovered about the truth claims in Joshua.
We’ve already addressed the information about Canaanite kings that archaeologists and historians found in the Tell el-Amarna letters. Many of the letters were from city-state kings and leaders in Canaan asking Egypt for help in dealing with a conquering force known as the ‘Habiru’ (also spelled Hapiru) during the approximate time the Bible claims Joshua was leading Israel into Canaan.
Another archaeological artifact that affects the investigation is known as the Merneptah Stele. It contains an inscription from Pharaoh Merneptah (reigned during the latter part of the 13th century BC) mentioning the defeat of Israel, along with Egypt’s defeat of other Canaanite cities (e.g. Gaza, Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yanoam). One thing significant about this stele is that the Egyptian king confirmed that Israel was already an established people group in Canaan in the 13th century BC. That fits with the story timeline about Israel in the books of Joshua and Judges. Interestingly, the hieroglyphs that refer to Israel include a symbol used for “foreign” or semi-nomadic people without a king and capital city. That also fits with the Bible history that Israel was ruled by judges until the middle to latter part of the 11th century BC when Saul became the nation’s first king.
Another important note before we move on is that Joshua 12 is specifically about kings that Israel conquered – “And these are the kings of the country which Joshua and the children of Israel conquered …” Atheists, agnostics and other non-Christians often accuse Bible believers of being wrong concerning the burning of all of the 31 cities mentioned in the list. Joshua 12 is about conquered kings, not cities burned. According to the Book of Joshua, Israel burned three cities during its conquest of Canaan: Jericho (Joshua 6:24), Ai (Joshua 8:28), and Hazor (Joshua 11:11). British archaeologists John Garstang and Kathleen Kenyon confirmed the burning of ancient Jericho. Archaeologists prior to 1971 did not confirm the burning at what was believed to be the Ai site (Et Tell), but other archaeologists since that time did find evidence of the burning of ancient Ai at what is now believed to be the ancient Ai site (Khirbet el-Maqatir), located about half-a-mile west of Et Tell. Israeli archaeologist Yigael Yadin excavated the Hazor site during the 1950s and 1960s and confirmed the burning of ancient Hazor.
Another question I had about the historical accuracy of the Old Testament concerned Israel’s supposed King David. Was he a real person? We’ll see what archaeology tells us as we continue our investigation into Convince Me There’s A God.
“Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.”
Mark, your archeological data is very out of date.
When considering the historicity of the narratives of Joshua, the first thing to re-emphasize is that these are not accounts written by eyewitnesses or by anyone who knew an eyewitness. They were written some 600 years later, and were based on oral traditions that had been in circulation among people in Israel during all those intervening centuries. Moreover, they are clearly molded according to theological assumptions and perspectives. Biblical scholars have long noted that there is almost nothing in the accounts that suggest that the author is trying to be purely descriptive of things that really happened. He is writing an account that appears to be guided by his religious agenda, not by purely historical interests. That is why, when read closely, one finds so many problems with the narratives.
Internal discrepancies. As we have seen, parts of Joshua stress that Joshua was fantastically successful in conquering the land: “Joshua defeated the whole land” (10:40); “Joshua took all that land” (11:16); “Joshua took the whole land” (11:23). If it were true that Joshua took “all” the “whole” land – why are there so many parts of the land that the text admits were not taken? The Deuteronomistic historian later has to acknowledge that when “Joshua was old…the LORD said to him ‘very much of the land still remains to be possessed’” (13:1). And so we are told that Jerusalem had not yet been taken (15:63); or parts of Ephraim (16:10); or parts of Manasseh (17:12-13). At the end of the book Joshua has to persuade the people to drive out the natives living in the land (23:5-13).
Tensions with other Accounts. A similar problem arises between Joshua and other books of the Deuteronomistic history. In ch. 11, for example, the Israelite forces completely annihilate the city of Hazor: “they put to the sword all who were in it, utterly destroying them; there was no one left who breathed, and he burned Hazor with fire.” If that were true, why is it that in the next book, Judges, the Canaanites still very much live in and control Hazor, under their king Jabin, whose powerful army afflicted and oppressed the Israelites (Judges 4)?
General Implausibilities. A number of the stories in Joshua are so chock-full of the miraculous that historians simply cannot deal with them as historical narratives (see the excursus in ch. 1). None of the miracles is more striking than the account in ch. 10, where the Israelite armies are having such a huge success, routing the coalition of kings aligned against them that Joshua cries out to the sun to stop its movement in the sky. And the sun stands still at high noon for twenty-four hours before moving on again, giving the Israelites ample time to complete the slaughter. As readers have long ntoed, it would be a miracle indeed if the earth suddenly stopped rotating on its axis for a day and then started up again, with no disturbance to the oceans, land masses, and life itself!
External Verification and Archaeology. For biblical scholars, just as significant is the surviving physical evidence (or rather lack of it) for the conquest. Archaeologists have long noted that there is scant support for the kind of violent destruction of the cities of Canaan – especially the ones mentioned in Joshua. Think for a second: if one were to look for archaeological evidence, or other external verification, to support the historical narratives of Joshua, what would one look for?
References to the invasion and conquest in other written sources outside the Bible.
Evidence that there were indeed walled cities and towns in Canaan at the time.
Archaeological evidence that the cities and towns mentioned actually were destroyed at the time (Jericho, Ai, Heshbon, etc.).
Shift in cultural patterns: that is, evidence of new people taking over from other peoples of a different culture (as you get in the Americas when Europeans came over bringing with them their own culture, different from that of the native Americans).