Assessing the Success of the Conquest of the Promised Land
The conquest of the Promised Land was one of the most prominent and dramatic events in humanity’s history. This process was a struggle to gain independence from the Babylonian Empire and obtain the right to live freely in Israel. For many years, there have been disputes between those who believe the conquest to have been successful and those who do not consider it such. Joshua and the Judges offer two different approaches to answering whether the conquest of the Promised Land was a success.
Contrasting Perspectives in Joshua and Judges
According to Joshua, conquest was possible through several quick victories, enabling him to occupy the land quickly. Meanwhile, the Judges argue that the conquest was gradual and slow, including many retreats, and remained incomplete for a long time. Rather than looking for contradictions between these two opinions, combining the evidence from both positions seems relevant to receive a complete picture of the events. Hence, to resolve the discrepancy between the two positions, viewing them together and merging the facts is necessary to obtain a complete understanding of the issue.
The first point to consider while analyzing the issue is the origin of the Promised Land. Soon after the Jews left Babylon, conquering the Promised Land began. It was a long and painful process involving many changes and several stages. The first stage was the conquest of the West Bank of Jordan and the restoration of authority over the cities of Judah (Moseley, 2019).
During this phase, the Jews overcame many enemies and gained key regional positions. However, the real conquest of the Promised Land began with the invasion of the city of Jerusalem. This city served as a symbol of Jewish religious affiliation and was a decisive factor in the conquest.
The scriptures say that God promised the Promised Land to the Jewish people when He said, “Cross the Jordan River into the land that I am giving them” (Joshua 1:2). Therefore, Joshua’s position on the conquest is frequently backed by this and other quotes from the scripture. Hence, he considered the conquest the fight for what God had promised to his people.
The Book of Joshua describes the process of conquering the Promised Land as a series of successful defeats occurring throughout harsh circumstances. Each tribe participating in the fight demonstrated its faithfulness and obedience to God. Joshua emphasizes the formidability of the obstacles they were forced to meet. He mentions that the army of their enemies had many warriors, being “an army with as many men as there are grains of sand on the seashore” (Joshua 11:4).
Joshua further emphasizes that God promised his people the land and helped them defeat the enemy. In Joshua 11:6, it is said that “The Lord said to Joshua, ‘Do not be afraid of them. By this time tomorrow, I will have killed all of them for Israel.” Hence, Joshua’s position is that the Lord wanted Joshua to conquer the city and helped them do so. Joshua (11:8) mentions, “The fight continued until none of the enemy was left alive”. Hence, he pointed out the strength and power of his people supported by God, but it was only one side of the story.
While the Book of Joshua is relatively optimistic about conquering the Promised Land, the Book of Judges is more of an eye-opener. It presents a more subjective picture of the situation. In chapter 18 of the Book of Judges, it is mentioned that “In those days Israel had no king.”
Hence, the Judges emphasize that numerous tribes possessed different pieces of land, but the city of Jerusalem was not fully conquered. Although some of the tribes conquered some parts of the territory, none of them succeeded in gaining a complete victory. Therefore, it is evident that the Judges showed a more objective picture than Joshua, who only presented the positive side.
The Book of Judges (18:1) explains that the lands “had not yet come into an inheritance among the tribes of Israel.” Further, the Judges point out that people’s sins and the lack of social and religious principles led to the lengthy and unsuccessful fight over the Promised Land. Since most of the tragic events concerned with the sin of omission occur after Joshua’s death, it is possible to understand why Joshua had a somewhat subjective description of the conquest in his book.
Reconciling the Differences Between Joshua and Judges
To resolve the discrepancy, I would view Joshua and the Judges as supplementary rather than antithetical evidence. Joshua presents a more optimistic picture of the conquest and says that he was able to gain full possession of the Promised Land. Meanwhile, the judges explained that the possession was incomplete and took place gradually. The Book of Judges is more reasonable and objective in reflecting the facts.
Reference
Moseley, J. A. (2019). The history of Joshua, the Judges, and Samuel: Israel’s coming to the Promised Land. Independently Published.