|
Joshua: NOT a liar
Joshua proclaims to all Israel that God has faithfully done everything he said he would do (in relation to conquering all of Canaan for the Jews). Yet, even a superficial reading of the Book of Joshua clearly shows areas unconquered. One prominent example is the Jebusite stronghold, which was only conquered much later, by David, then to gain fame as great Zion.
Taking everything Joshua said literally, makes Joshua look like a liar he wasn't. Instead of calling Joshua a liar, it should be considered that the culture of the Middle East used hyperbole to a large extent. Those today who've lived there say this usage is still common, a feature. Thus, Joshua's words should be understood in the context of the language usage of that time. Anything else would be inaccurate. No one of that time would have taken his words literally. They would have read between the lines, ignoring a literal interpretation. Joshua was doing his very best speaking (in line with language usage of that day) to magnify (make larger than real) the Lord. Everyone then understood he was not attempting to be literally accurate. Anyone reading the Bible today should take hyperbole into consideration, to understand the Bible as accurately as possible. I'm a Canadian. If God would ever speak to my physical ears, my guess is he would use the English of Canada and not an Aussie bent. I might not perceive an Australian version of English. When he spoke to those in Bible lands, did he use the language they understood? If so, did he use the language as they used it, ie. with hyperbole, or was it modified? |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Joshua spoke truth and God is true. The example you are using, ie deliverance from the inhabitants, was conditional upon the people obeying. Not sure what you are meaning about hyperbole. It kinda appears that you are misunderstanding the context.
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Joshua isn't a liar. The issue is the biblical narrative presents a complex fulfillment: Joshua declared God fulfilled His promise by giving Israel all the land Joshua 21:43-45, meaning it was legally theirs and they had rest. However, they didn't fully remove all inhabitants due to their own incomplete obedience and military shortcomings. Therefore leaving some Canaanites in the land, with the understanding that full, continuous possession depended on their ongoing faithfulness. It was all their land, through their disobedience they failed to claim it. Joshua records the tribes, particularly Manasseh, Joshua 17:12-13 and Ephraim, Judges 1:27-28, couldn't fully remove the Canaanites, who remained in their cities, leading to forced labor and covenant compromise. This is the situation Joshua warned them about, emphasizing the need for full conquest and obedience to God's commands to avoid idolatry and sin.
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Casual reading of the Book of Joshua may lead some to think that Jos contradicts himself, as demonstrated earlier. None should think so.
Any explanations given as to why are viable, until shown wrong. The Bible does not itself give a reason why. The fact that those of the Middle East used hyperbole extensively, has not yet been shown to be a fable. An example: The kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar was said to be over all the earth. No one ever should suggest that it extended anywhere other than just the Middle East. Either people should ignore what the Word plainly says or they should say they believe the writer used hyperbole. All the earth definitely should not be taken literally. Hyperbole is a good explanation of a seeming contradiction. We have two examples of hyperbole. Are there others? Of course, because the writers used the language styles they grew up in - hyperbole - which exists to this day. God's word faithfully portrayed reality of that day. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
You are correct, the Bible uses hyperbole as in all the world or all the earth statements. Yet, in the case of Joshua, God gave them all the land. Joshua affirms that fact. Yet, with a little bit of reading we understand that while the parent may have given their children their house in their will. The children not claiming ownership of the house does not negate the fact the house was legally owned by the children.
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
If anyone were to call Joshua a liar, they would also have to call Solomon a liar. Because in 1 Kings 8:56 Solomon confirms the words of Joshua; "Blessed be the LORD, that hath given rest unto his people Israel, according to all that he promised: there hath not failed one word of all his good promise, which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant."
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Also the Prophet Nehemiah makes the same claims in Nehemiah 9:8.
"And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous:" The Bible testifies that Joshua was telling the truth. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Very good scriptures all could agree are true.
No one has yet called Jos a liar. But everyone has danced around the apparent contradiction, saying nothing of it, pretending it has not happened. What is the purpose of putting on the blinders? Why doesn't anyone talk about the elephant in the room? Plz, in light of those scriptures, could someone comment on the following scripture. Apparently the Lord himself here doesn't agree with the insinuations that everything that was promised was received/possessed/dwelt in. Jos says they have, in 21.43 saying all the promised land was received, possessed and dwelt in - contradicting the following verses. This is a far cry from saying the legal owners have not got their legal right because of disobedience. I am not blind. I can read the text of both verses. Jos13 Now Joshua was old, advanced in years. And the Lord said to him: “You are old, advanced in years, and there remains very much land yet to be possessed. 2 This is the land that yet remains: all the territory of the Philistines and all that of the Geshurites, 3 from Sihor, which is east of Egypt, as far as the border of Ekron northward (which is counted as Canaanite); the five lords of the Philistines—the Gazites, the Ashdodites, the Ashkelonites, the Gittites, and the Ekronites; also the Avites; 4 from the south, all the land of the Canaanites, and Mearah that belongs to the Sidonians as far as Aphek, to the border of the Amorites; 5 the land of the Gebalites, and all Lebanon, toward the sunrise, from Baal Gad below Mount Hermon as far as the entrance to Hamath; 6 all the inhabitants of the mountains from Lebanon as far as the Brook Misrephoth, and all the Sidonians Those who say the Jews have possessed, dwelt-in the land God legally gave them are contradicting God who says here they didn't. Stop contradicting God. And then there's the little matter of the Philistines whose territory wasn't dispossessed of them, even in the time of the great warrior King David. God gave Abraham the land. It was legally his, then. The Jews will not possess/dwell-in the whole of that which was promised/given until the Lord comes. Only then will all be possesssed and dwelt in. Saying Jos uses hyperbole makes a better explanation than contracting God or the facts, in my opinion. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
Therefore he was presenting the facts available. But everyone has danced around the apparent contradiction, saying nothing of it, pretending it has not happened. What is the purpose of putting on the blinders? Why doesn't anyone talk about the elephant in the room? Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Joshua 21:43 and other biblical verses are thought to be blatant contradictions among mainstream scholars and atheists. Yet, there is no contradiction, but rather a difference in perspective between God's provision and the Israelites' full realization of it, which depended on their continued obedience and action. This theme follows the tribes all the way to the time of Jesus Christ.
Joshua 21:43-45 is primarily a declaration of God's perfect faithfulness in fulfilling every one of His promises to the house of Israel. He had delivered the land into their hands and given them rest from their major enemies, as He had sworn. The military power of the Canaanites was broken, and no one could stand against Israel at that time. The scripture affirms that God had given the land as an inheritance and that Israel took possession of it. In this sense, the land was legally theirs by divine decree. The grant of the land was a standing authorization to occupy the entire promised territory. The immediate occupation and enjoyment of the land's blessings, however, was conditional on their ongoing obedience to the Mosaic covenant. In the first chapter in the book of Judges the entire chapter details how various tribes failed to drive out the Canaanites in their allotted territories (e.g., Judah could not drive out the Jebusites, Manasseh could not take certain cities). These remaining inhabitants often became a snare or a thorn in their sides later on due to Israel's failure to fully obey God's command to dispossess them. Keep in mind, it was Judeans, and the Manasites who slacked in their occupation of the lands, not God. Jesus is the author and finisher of our faith, yet we need to yield to allow God’s love to bring us to maturity. Keep in mind Exodus 23:29-30 describes God's promise to the Israelites that He would drive out the inhabitants of the Promised Land gradually, not all at once in a single year, to prevent the land from becoming desolate and overrun by wild beasts. Here we see God had already indicated that the process would be "little by little" to prevent the land from becoming desolate, “requiring continuous effort” and “total obedience” on Israel's part. We have no contradiction, but rather a reflection of the tension between divine promise and human responsibility. With God's point of view, the entire promised land had been delivered to Israel in principle and power; His promises had "all come to pass" because the opportunity for full possession was available. The Bible writer’s viewpoint emphasizes a distinction between the legal possession granted by God and the practical, “conditional” realization of that inheritance, which ultimately depended on the Israelites' actions and obedience. James sums it up, you say you have faith? “I’ll show you my faith by my actions!” James 2:14-26 True, and living overcoming strong faith isn't just about believing something intellectually; it's demonstrated through tangible good behavior, compassion, and obedience, proving it's genuine and not just dead or ecclesiastically religious. James challenges the early Apostolic church to "show me your faith without your actions, and I will show you my faith by my actions," emphasizing that actions are the evidence of authentic trusting belief, like Abraham offering Isaac. The Bible proves that Israel had been going through the motions since day 1. They wanted to replace Moses with a golden calf to lead them back to ecclesiastical slavery. Instead of trusting God who will sustain them through a burning oven heated seven times hotter. Joshua and Caleb never faltered at God’s say so, they trusted the promises and were willing to act on those promises. Therefore Joshua made the true statements that which remind us that God is True, but every man a liar. God promise us but we are the ones who won’t allow “our” story to be written! |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Dom, we agree, you and I, that the Book of Jos shows:
1. God promised the Jew Canaan. 2. that the land was legally theirs. 3. They possessed and dwelt in (only part of) the land. 4. Jos said God fulfilled all, everything he had promised. Jos21.43-45 5. But God said they didn't dwell in all the land. Jos13.1-6 4 contradicts 5, apparently. No one with the ability to read should say there is not an apparent contradiction. The reason I started the thread is to give an explanation why the seeming contradiction should not be seen to be a contradiction. Anyone saying (correctly) that there are conditions of obedience or a complex fulfillment which prevented the complete fulfillment does not yet smooth over this apparent contradiction. Saying the hyperbole 'all the earth' is an expression for 'the then known world' ignores the fact that the example in which it was used, the Kingdom of Babylon, did not conquer Greece. This would then indicate that Greece was not part of the world that was known. As such, the putting forward of this as an explanation does not help properly understand hyperbole. Quoting Joshua 17:12-13 and Judges 1:27-28 and 1 Kings 8:56 (which correctly support what Jos said in Jos21.43-45) does nothing to smooth over the apparent contradiction of 4. contradicting 5. This is not helpful with the apparent contradiction. This thread's purpose is to explain an apparent contradiction. The use of hyperbole is yet the only explanation put forth to smooth over the apparent contradiction. Plz, someone, put forward another or explain why hyperbole isn't a viable explanation. Silence, meaning no response, would indicate that the best explanation has been put forward so far. Until then, we are left seeing an apparent contradiction. I have not yet said Jos is a liar. I don't plan to, either. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
OK, I think I understand what you want.
You want someone to say hyperbole only is the answer. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
While the Bible often used hyperbolic language to describe a plethora a different events, where "all" could mean "all the earth" or refer to the totality of the victory in a rhetorical sense, not in a literal way. The claim of "totally destroying" the enemy, was concerning a victory in battle. Still, the scripture has to be interpreted to mean God gave the Israelites the right to all the land and made it available to them. Yet, their actual, physical occupation of every single part was a separate matter contingent on their obedience to the Word of the Law. This must be understood, or no future lessons could be drawn from the story The Israelites had conquered the main centers of power, and the remaining Canaanites were subjugated and forced to pay taxes to Israel, Judges 1:1-2. The complete dispossession of the remaining inhabitants could have been achieved with continued assistance from God, but the Israelites failed to obey what God wanted them to do. Hyperbole? Yes, but no one accepts that as an explanation alone. Bible fact must accompany the rhetorical style within the text. Therefore when interpreting scriptures, we have to keep in mind the historical and rhetorical context of the Bible truth. This is crucial for accurate interpretation, rather than applying just a rhetorical or historical alone.
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1 View Post Sort of. I see it as the best explanation until a better is offered. Quote:
Apparently, your take is that Joshua doesn't ever appear to contradict the Lord. Am I right? The Bible gives the appearance that they, God and Jos, do not agree. Your take sees no apparent contradiction between Jos21.43-45 and Jos13.1-6, right? Most readers see Jos 21.43 So the Lord gave to Israel all the land of which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they took possession of it and dwelt in it. as apparently contradicting Jos13.1there remains very much land yet to be possessed. At least someone, me, tries to offer an explanation of an apparent contradiction, while you apparently deny any explanation of a contradiction is needed. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
|
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
Is this a mumbo jumbo way to say you are agreeing with me, Dom? What does the mumbo quoted here add to the discussion: "The claim of "totally destroying" the enemy, was concerning a victory in battle."? Relevance, plz. Hyperbole is the rhetoric used to describe an apparent contradiction. This rhetoric and hyperbole is its own context. There is no other context in the main point of this thread. What historical context are you referring to here? The Jews weren't historically known as warriors when slaves in Egypt. Yesterday is history, but we're not talking about yesterday when talking about history, are we? The facts you refer to are the facts I refer to. Jos's words, God's words and an apparent contradiction between them and conquest facts. Main centers conquered, you say? Historians might disagree with you, but then, you've not been specific. Vaqueness allows for saying things like all the main centers. Even so, this fails to include all, like Jos hyperbolized. You're slipping Dom. Twice you've agreed with me. About hyperbole. Let's not make agreeing with me a habit, ok? What rhetorical context are we talking about? Oh, right! The context that those of the Middle East used hyperbole much. That just what I've been saying. Agreeing with me again, Dom? Tut, tut. Again Dom avoids the main thrust of a thread. In this case an apparent contradiction between God's words and Jos's words. These are the facts. These are historical words. Obfuscation using mumbo jumbo does not a Biblical defence make, nor a Biblical discussion. Dom has failed again. My saying that hyperbole is the reason makes an attempt to explain that which Dom fails to tackle - historical words. Hyperbole? he asks, and answers Yes but says that it was not hyperbole alone. But he fails to say what the other is. That which he describes as historical context and rhetoric do not explain what this unstated is. We're used to this non-attempt-to-tackle. |
Re: Joshua: NOT a liar
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I believe God promised, Joshua understood they were all given the promise. They owned all the land in the promise it was their’s legally. They were at rest, and their enemies while not removed totally paid taxes as tribute. You don’t believe that. To you, Joshua he’s just a big embellisher. :lol Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.